Dangerous Times: Benghazi Revealed Collusion with Al Qaida By James Lewis


Is Obama no more than the American errand boy of the Jihadis and their sponsors?

All scandals have layers of meaning. Watergate was about a second-rate burglary, but more importantly, it was about Richard M. Nixon’s abuse of presidential power.

However, much of that message was ruined by the fact that Lyndon B. Johnson abused power as much as Nixon did. Because Nixon is still a convenient whipping boy for the left, we never hear about LBJ’s sins.

Twenty years before Watergate, Nixon was engaged in a brutal battle with the Stalinist left of the 1950s. Watergate “gave the left a sword,” as Nixon famously said. The Washington Post assaulted the Nixon presidency in collusion with Mark Felt (Deep Throat), who hated Nixon for passing him up for FBI director.

Watergate was therefore a major battle in the long war between the radical left and mainstream America.

Like Watergate, Benghazi has several layers. But the most revealing one is the active collusion between this administration and Al Qaida.

Al Qaida is a Saudi-inspired and Saudi-funded terror gang. Almost all of the terrorists on 9/11 were Saudis. Those facts are always covered up, but they are crucial to understanding the Jihad War.

In Benghazi we ran arms from Libya to Al Qaida rebels in Syria. The Saudis are funding that rebellion.




Jacob H. Schiff, his son-in-law Felix M. Warburg and Judge Joseph M. Proskauer must all be turning over in their graves at the news that Israel-hater Alice Walker will be a guest at the 92nd Street Y. Nurtured by these “visionary Jewish leaders,” the Y claims to be “a proudly Jewish institution that reaches out to people of every race, ethnicity, religion, age, and economic class.” Warburg, for example, who lived from 1871-1937 was “devoted to Palestine with all his heart and soul. His interest in what he affectionately called ‘that little country of love’ antedated Hitler.” He would be crushed to hear the venomous words coming from Alice Walker.

And yet, almost 140 years from its inception, the 92nd Street Y has invited the author of The Color Purple, who believes that “Israel egregiously mistreats the Palestinian people” and that “Israel is the greatest terrorist in that part of the world.” Moreover, Walker thinks that “in general, the United States and Israel are great terrorist organizations themselves.”

What makes an allegedly intelligent writer engage in such patently twisted lies when, in fact, it is the Arab world that promotes terrorism, that engages in apartheid, supports a legal system that discriminates as well as suppresses and oppresses women and engages in slavery in the 21st century?

Yet this wordsmith finds no words to highlight these evils emanating from the Arab world.

Walker has written that [she] wants “the Israeli government to be made accountable for its behavior towards the Palestinians,” and she demands that “the people of the United States …cease acting like they don’t understand what is going on. All colonization, all occupation, all repression basically looks the same, whoever is doing it [.]” Yet, Arab imperialism and imposition of dhimmitude on non-Muslims somehow get a free pass.

Walker has been a strong supporter of the Free Gaza flotilla in 2011 and 2012. This Free Gaza Movement demands that Israel return to pre-1967 borders and that Israel’s creation in 1948 was a “catastrophe” for the Arab world.

More Justice Department Chicanery: Thomas Perez and ‘Disparate Impact’ Posted By Hans von Spakovsky

http://pjmedia.com/blog/more-justice-department-chicanery-thomas-perez-and-disparate-impact/?print=1 One of the administration’s favorite legal theories, “disparate impact,” may get taken up again by the Supreme Court. Will the administration try to engineer some kind of payoff to take the issue away from the Court — again? In June 2012, the town of Mount Holly, N.J., petitioned the Supreme Court to review the […]




Iran’s global extravaganza of state-sponsored terrorism is getting some well-deserved attention this week, with the release of the State Department’s annual Country Reports on Terrorism, plus the sentencing of dual national Iranian-American Manssor Arbabsiar (for conspiring with Iran’s Qods Force to try to bomb the Saudi ambassador in Washington), plus the massive indictment issued by Argentine prosecutor Alberto Nisman (whose investigation of the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center, AMIA, in Buenos Aires, has uncovered Iranian terror networks throughout Latin America).

But spare a thought, also, for Iran’s partner in proliferation and exemplar of evil — North Korea. The State Department roster of State Sponsors of Terrorism is weirdly short, with just four countries listed: Cuba, Iran, Sudan, and Syria. Why isn’t North Korea on the list?
The short answer is that from 1988-2008, the U.S. did indeed list North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism — a distinction that North Korea had richly earned, with its career of bombings, abductions, and weapons traffic and training for fellow terror-sponsoring states. The Bush administration removed North Korea from the list in late 2008, in a desperate last-ditch attempt to salvage the ill-conceived, duplicitously conducted, and utterly failed 2007 nuclear freeze deal piloted by special envoy Chris Hill.


http://unitedpatriotsworldwide.com/vinienco/2013/05/31/meet-70-year-old-israeli-woman-stands-muslim-thugs/ Meet the 70-Year-Old Israeli Woman who Stands Up to Muslim Thugs Crackdown in Chechnya after Boston Attack Crackdown in Chechnya after Boston Attack: The Chechen leader that Russian President Vladimir Putin picked to snuff out Islamic extremism has a motto he shares with visitors via a billboard of himself at Grozny airport: “Happiness is serving the […]

Israeli government downs the al-Dura myth Posted by: Nidra Poller

Israeli government downs the al-Dura myth http://www.d-intl.com/?lang=en/ French court has again postponed verdict in scandalous case PARIS. There is abundant concrete evidence that two men hacked a British soldier to death in Woolwich on May 22. There were eyewitnesses to the attempted beheading. The immediate aftermath was filmed from every angle by multiple devices. One […]



We Israelis owe a debt of gratitude to UK Foreign Secretary William Hague. Were it not for his cogent clarifications last Friday, we’d have never known why we aren’t too popular with enlightened British opinion-molders and with the ever morally superior denizens of the EU.

But thanks to Her Majesty’s top diplomat, who has just graced us with a brief visit, we’re no longer benighted. He has opened our eyes and made us see the light from London.

Israel, he told us via Sky News, has lost support in Britain and elsewhere in Europe due to settlement activities of which the UK “disapproves” and which it “condemns.”

No other problems cloud London’s sky. It’s just all about settlements.

Presumably, before we started annoying virtuous nations with Jewish construction beyond the 1949 armistice lines, all was hunky-dory. We were the toast of the Free World and loved to bits by the Brits.

Much of that love was already evident on our first imperiled day as a sovereign state within a nightmarishly untenable mini-patchwork of territory. Already then, in Israel’s scariest neonatal hours, Britain played a proactive role in Arab plans to throw us into the sea.

The best-trained Arab army, the Jordanian Arab Legion, was established and organized on official orders from London by Maj.-Gen. Frederick G. Peake (a.k.a. Peake Pasha). In 1939, Peake was replaced by Lancashire-born Lt.-Gen. John Bagot Glubb (a.k.a. Glubb Pasha), who remained the legion’s commander until 1956. Glubb led the 1948 Arab Legion’s invasion of Israel and engineered the legion’s conquest of east Jerusalem, in direct contravention of the UN Partition Resolution.

British aircraft bombed and strafed Israel’s underdog fledgling forces. We won’t mention Britain’s pre-state refusal of asylum to desperate Jewish refugees fleeing Nazi Europe nor Britain’s hunt on the high seas postwar for Holocaust survivors and their incarceration for years under appalling conditions in Cyprus prison camps.

We won’t focus on the turning over of strategic positions to Arab marauders at the conclusion of the British Mandate over this land. We won’t dwell on the arming of Arab militias.

There’s plenty more but suffice it to say that an abundance of such British affection was showered on Israel before it could plausibly have been denigrated as a menacing ogre; before Israel survived the genocidal onslaught upon it and won its War of Independence; before Israel was forced to defend itself in the Six Day War and found itself in Judea and Samaria; before Jews dared return to parts of Jerusalem and the so-called West Bank from which Britain had earlier assisted to expel them; and before all this was maligned as criminal occupation and illegal settlement.

With so much British love, no wonder we Israelis failed to gauge the ill-will we aroused when we crossed the lines of our exhaustion, drawn in green in 1949 – following the war that Britain helped wage against us. Our blindness persists. Many of us just obstinately fail to be convinced that it’s only settlements.

Our unfounded paranoia leads us to suspect that there’s a powerful predisposition against Jews and their state. But thanks to Hague’s elucidation we now know that it’s our sins that cast us as this peaceful planet’s baddies.

By fluke, shortly before Hague dispensed his conventional wisdom to Sky, the competition at the BBC had released yet another of its international popularity polls. As expected, once again, Israel ranked abysmally low, right near the bottom of the positivity scale.

Some 26,000 respondents from 25 countries were asked to rank a list of states according to their “mainly positive” or “mainly negative” influence in the world.

Germany topped the list with 59 percent of respondents viewing it positively, followed by Canada (55%), the UK (55%) and Japan (51%).

Only North Korea, Pakistan and Iran scored lower than Israel. Twenty-one percent of respondents viewed Israel’s influence as mainly positive, while 52% saw the Jewish state’s influence as negative.




Deborah Turness, the former editor of British ITV News, has been hired as NBC News’ new president. However, The New York Times reports that “Ms. Turness’s job will be smaller than her predecessor’s because she will not have oversight of MSNBC.”

“This change implies that Comcast is putting distance between the traditionally nonpartisan NBC News and the more opinionated, controversial MSNBC,” reports Brian Stelter for the Times.

Nonpartisan? Accuracy in Media wishes this were true. But unfortunately, Turness’s hiring is in fact a partisan move and is likely to further tilt NBC News’ Middle East reporting against Israel. “[S]he was familiar to top brass at NBC News because it has a partnership with ITV,” reports Joe Flint for the Los Angeles Times: “The two share reporters and resources in Africa and the Middle East.” This is important because ITV news is notoriously pro-Palestinian, and anti-Israel. In addition, according to Flint, Turness has become “something of a celebrity” in London media circles, and in 2011, she “was the only journalist who attended the 2011 state banquet held for President Obama at Buckingham Palace.”

This recent piece for American Thinker by Moshe Phillips, president of the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans for a Safe Israel (AFSI), highlights the “Israel-bashing” engaged in by ITV News and Turness herself. “Most alarmingly, Turness and two ITV colleagues won an Amnesty International UK Media Award in 2008 for their controversial, one-sided news report “Too Young to Die—Children of the Frontline” about Palestinian Arab children,” writes Phillips of Turness. “‘Too Young to Die’ was over four and a half minutes. The Israel spokesperson, Miri Eisin, was given approximately 14 seconds on camera.”

Phillips makes the point that there was no “attempt in the piece to show any evenhandedness.”

Is this the type of even-handed reporting that can be expected from NBC News under Turness’ leadership?



Into the Fray: President’s embrace of “Arab Peace Initiative” at WEF speech disconcerting.
History is made of biographies of men and women who failed to forecast the future. – Shimon Peres, Amman, May 26, 2013

My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British prime minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honor. I believe it is peace for our time. – Neville Chamberlain, September 30, 1938

The Arab Peace Initiative is a meaningful change and a strategic opportunity. It replaces the strategies of war with the wisdom of peace….History will judge us not by the process of negotiations, but by its outcome. – Shimon Peres – Amman, May 26, 2013

To: Shimon Peres, President of Israel

Dear Sir,

I confess I was appalled by your speech at the World Economic Forum in Amman earlier this week. There were many elements in it I found disconcerting, but what I found particularly disturbing was your approving embrace of the so-called “Arab Peace Initiative” (API).

Devious, deceptive, disastrous

There are of course, numerous reasons why Israel should firmly reject the API as a devious, deceptive and disastrous blueprint for its demise. But this in itself is not why I find your endorsement of it so galling.

Rather it is because no one other than yourself has, in the past, better elucidated why this is so.

Indeed, you can hardly be unaware of the fact that the adoption of the API entails Israel undertaking measures that are the diametric opposite of those you once prescribed.

After all, no one other than yourself has set out a more compelling rationale why implementing the measures it calls for would provide the Arabs an opportunity to emaciate Israel, compress it back into indefensible borders and make its survival dependent solely on their discretion – creating, in your own words, “compulsive temptation to attack Israel from all directions.”


http://washingtonexaminer.com/jed-babbin-obamas-empty-warnings-to-china-wont-stop-hacking/article/2530906 A news report earlier this week said that Chinese cyberspies had stolen the designs for many of the United States’ most advanced weapon systems. In response, the article said, the Obama administration had “…escalated its warnings to the Chinese government to stop what Washington sees as rampant cybertheft.” Those warnings have very clearly fallen […]