Hey , I was wondering what happened to the press flack from Saddam's Iraq ! Lol
Guess Jay was separated at birth from the former infamous Iraq press specialist.....
Jay , take notes .... here are some classics , feel free to sample template , reframe as necessary as needed moving forward....
"There are no American infidels in Baghdad. Never!"
"My feelings - as usual - we will slaughter them all"
"Our initial assessment is that they will all die"
"I blame Al-Jazeera - they are marketing for the Americans!"
"God will roast their stomachs in hell at the hands of Iraqis."
"They're coming to surrender or be burned in their tanks."
"No I am not scared, and neither should you be!"
"Be assured. Baghdad is safe, protected"
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!"
"We are not afraid of the Americans. Allah has condemned them. They are stupid. They are stupid" (dramatic pause) "and they are condemned."
"The Americans, they always depend on a method what I call ... stupid, silly. All I ask is check yourself. Do not in fact repeat their lies."
"I can say, and I am responsible for what I am saying, that they have
started to commit suicide under the walls of Baghdad. We
will encourage them to commit more suicides quickly."
started to commit suicide under the walls of Baghdad. We
will encourage them to commit more suicides quickly."
"I can assure you that those villains will recognize, will discover in appropriate time in the future how stupid they are and how they are pretending things which have never taken place."
"We have destroyed 2 tanks, fighter planes, 2 helicopters and their shovels - We have driven them back."
"The authority of the civil defense ... issued a warning to the civilian population not to pick up any of those pencils because they are booby traps," he said, adding that the British and American forces were "immoral mercenaries" and "war criminals" for such behavior.
"I am not talking about the American people and the British people," he said. "I am talking about those mercenaries. ... They have started throwing those pencils, but they are not pencils, they are booby traps to kill the children."
"We have them surrounded in their tanks"
"The American press is all about lies! All they tell is lies, lies and more lies!"
"I have detailed information about the situation...which completely proves that what they allege are illusions . . . They lie every day."
"Lying is forbidden in Iraq. President Saddam Hussein will tolerate nothing but truthfulness as he is a man of great honor and integrity. Everyone is encouraged to speak freely of the truths evidenced in their eyes and hearts."
"Now even the American command is under siege. We are hitting it from the north, east, south and west. We chase them here and they chase us there. But at the end we are the people who are laying siege to them. And it is not them who are besieging us."
* * *
http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2013/08/false-flag-embassy-closures-used-to-divert-benghazi-coverup-bombshell-video-2691474.html
( Wag the press diversion ? )
False Flag: Embassy Closures Used To Divert Benghazi Coverup Bombshell? (Video)
By Susan Duclos
Is the Obama administration using the new “security threats, closing embassies across the world with travel alert statements and emails, for no other purpose than to divert attention away from the recent CNN bombshell exposing a rather large CIA presence and operation in Benghazi, Libya on 9/11/12 when a terrorist attack killed four Americans, including the US Ambassador to Libya?
That question leads to an even more concerning one: Was Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, all sacrificed to protect Obama’s secret CIA weapons operation in Libya?
The mainstream media has finally caught up with the alternative media and the rest of America in acknowledging that the events surrounding the Benghazi terrorist attack, are not only suspicious but possibly criminal.
The responses from the Obama administration after the attack, special forces being told to stand down and not help the Benghazi personnel during the attack, the hiding of the survivors and witnesses from Congress who was investigating the security failures, the lies told directly to Congress in that investigation, etc…
Hillary Clinton asked “what does it matter”in reference to the administration’s claim that a protest over a video caused the attack. Jay Carney in May told reporters “it was a long time ago.” Obama claimed the investigation was just “political.”
Last but not least, right before the CNN bombshell showing CIA operatives being intimidated into silence, Obama claimed Benghazi was a “phony scandal.”
It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career.
In exclusive communications obtained by CNN, one insider writes, “You don’t jeopardize yourself, you jeopardize your family as well.”
Another says, “You have no idea the amount of pressure being brought to bear on anyone with knowledge of this operation.”
Then the coverup is acknowledged by the MSM and a day later, the huge news which took over the headlines from CNN’s bombshell, is embassy closures, security threats, al-Qaeda, travel alerts and emails.
Anyone else think the timing is just a bit too coincidental?
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=223277
"And Phony Scandals" (Oh Really?)
http://beforeitsnews.com/terrorism/2013/08/idaho-picker-false-flag-alert-sunday-us-embassies-closing-across-the-world-due-to-terrorist-threat-2447152.html
( Is this a False Flag warning for Sunday , Monday , tuesday et al ? You decide ..... )
Idaho Picker False Flag Alert Sunday – US Embassies Closing Across The World Due To Terrorist Threat
Thursday, August 1, 2013 20:22
The mainstream media is right now pounding into our consciousness the fact that US Embassies will be closing throughout the world on Sunday, August 4th, 2013 due to a ‘credible’ terrorist threat. Strangely enough, it seems like all of the MSM reports on this ‘threat’ are being read from the same script. According to YouTube videographer The Idaho Picker in this video, we should be on the lookout for a false flag attack during this time period. Though I don’t agree with all of the points made in this video, we should ALWAYS be prepared for the worst, while enjoying the precious time that we do have left with family and loved ones, however long that may be.
This warning of a false flag is brought with special importance due to a conversation that I recently had with a very dear and close friend, someone who is not a ‘conspiracy theorist’ at all, who expressed to me the same feeling of deep concern over these US Embassy closings on Sunday. I hope that she and the Idaho Picker are wrong.
l
.jpg)
Keep in mind , the latest bs Al Qaeda threats hit only when the story below hit and even the media woke up and started covering Benghazi CIA Op ......
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) was on with Greta Van Susteren Thursday to discuss the Obama scandals.
This came after Jake Tapper at CNN broke the news that there were “dozens” of CIA operatives on the ground in Benghazi on 9-11 when the consulate came under attack and the agency is going to great lengths to make sure whatever it was doing, remains a secret.
Gowdy told Greta the Obama Administration is hiding the survivors, dispersing them around the country, AND changing their names.
“Including changing names, creating aliases. Stop and think what things are most calculated to get at the truth? Talk to people with first-hand knowledge. What creates the appearance and perhaps the reality of a cover-up? Not letting us talk with people who have the most amount of information, dispersing them around the country and changing their names.”
And, at the same time Obama is hiding the survivors around the country he’s calling Benghazi a ‘phony’ scandal.
Via Greta Van Susteren:
Via Greta Van Susteren:
http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/08/02/if-only-doj-hadnt-burned-aps-sources/
If Only DOJ Hadn’t Burned AP’s Sources …
The State Department announced a broad but vague warning today.
The Department of State alerts U.S. citizens to the continued potential for terrorist attacks, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa, and possibly occurring in or emanating from the Arabian Peninsula. Current information suggests that al-Qa’ida and affiliated organizations continue to plan terrorist attacks both in the region and beyond, and that they may focus efforts to conduct attacks in the period between now and the end of August. This Travel Alert expires on August 31, 2013.Terrorists may elect to use a variety of means and weapons and target both official and private interests. U.S. citizens are reminded of the potential for terrorists to attack public transportation systems and other tourist infrastructure. Terrorists have targeted and attacked subway and rail systems, as well as aviation and maritime services. U.S. citizens should take every precaution to be aware of their surroundings and to adopt appropriate safety measures to protect themselves when traveling.We continue to work closely with other nations on the threat from international terrorism, including from al-Qa’ida. Information is routinely shared between the U.S. and our key partners in order to disrupt terrorist plotting, identify and take action against potential operatives, and strengthen our defenses against potential threats.
There’s a part of me that thinks this might be credible and serious.
After all, between Iraq, Pakistan, and Libya, up to 1,750 men have just escaped prison, and extremists claim responsibility for the first two prison breaks. That’s a lot of men running around who might make mischief (though you’d think it would take a bit of time to organize after the breaks).
That said, there are aspects of this that remind me of the politicized alert surrounding the April 2012 thwarting of our own plot in Yemen (which was rolled out in May 2012, well after any threat had subsided). There’s John Pistole’s ostentatious boosting of AQAP bomb-maker Ibrahim al-Asiri as “our greatest threat.”
The use of a new explosive has been previously reported, but Pistole continued with less familiar details about Underwear 2 that reflect the growing sophistication of Asiri’s sinister craftsmanship. He said the device included redundancy, by mean of two different syringes to mix liquid explosive compounds–”a double initiation system,” apparently a response to a failure of Abdulmutallab’s initiation process. In essence, Pistole said, “they made two devices.”Finally, Pistole said, the new bomb was encased in simple household caulk in an effort to trap vapors that might alert any bomb-sniffing machines or dogs that did happen to be capable of identifying the explosive.“So you really have a twisted genius in Yemen,” Ross observed. “That is our greatest threat,” Pistole replied. “All the intel folks here [at the forum] know that is a clear and present danger.”
Similar sensationalized reporting preceded and followed the exposure of the UndieBomb 2.0 plot last year.
There’s the increased drone activity in Yemen. Who knows! Maybe, like last year, the plot has already been rolled up and we’re just waiting to confirm one of the several recent drone strikes have taken out our target?
And there’s the apparent disparate treatment of the threat, with the US issuing a broad alert across the Middle East but with the Brits focusing thus far only on their Yemeni Embassy.
The State Department just happened to announce its support for Yemen in conjunction with President Hadi’s visit this morning, of which security aid remains the largest part, not long before this alert went out. Last year the thwarted plot was designed to coincide with the approval of signature strikes in Yemen.
Last year, the many people the US deployed to prevent a threat that had already been rolled up may have been one of the sources that revealed the threat had already been rolled up. If this is kabuki, then perhaps the same thing would happen again: some guy sent to protect flights in the Middle East might complain that it’s just show. Perhaps someone like the AP could report that the threat has been thwarted and we can go back to worrying about climate change as the most urgent threat to “the homeland.”
Except for one thing. Since last year, DOJ went positively nuclear on the AP, which exposed the kabuki last year. Without warning, DOJ obtained records of 20 AP phone lines, identifying the sources of up to 100 journalists, for at least a 2 week period. We’ve heard not one peep about DOJ prosecuting anyone in the UndieBomb 2.0 leak (especially not CIA Director John Brennan, who made the leak far worse). But DOJ did make sure sources are going to be far warier about speaking with the guys who undermined the White House kabuki last year.
So as you wonder about the seriousness of a plot that feels like a lot of the vague warnings the Bush White House used to release, remember how useful it was back when reporters were allowed to do their jobs.
Will this be the defense regarding failure to provide adequate security to the dead Ambassador - he turned down military support twice ( blame the dead man defense , as dead men tell no tales ? )
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html#.UZVciyv71Xd
Ambassador Stevens twice said no to military offers of more security, U.S. officials say
In this July 4, 2012, file photograph, U.S Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens is seen during an interview with a team of Libya Hurra TV. Stevens was killed in an attack on U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012. | HANDOUT/MCT
- Story | In talking points controversy, an unanswered question: Why did CIA say a protest preceded Benghazi attack?
- Story | Obama lashes out over Benghazi ‘sideshow,’ GOP uncowed
- Story | Obama aides scramble to defend edits to Benghazi talking points
- Story | In hearing on Benghazi attack, new facts are few but politics plentiful
- On the Web | More Middle East coverage from McClatchy
By Nancy A. Youssef | McClatchy Foreign Staff
CAIRO — In the month before attackers stormed U.S. facilities in Benghazi and killed four Americans, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official in the region in response to concerns that Stevens had raised in a still secret memorandum, two government officials told McClatchy.
Why Stevens, who died of smoke inhalation in the first of two attacks that took place late Sept. 11 and early Sept. 12, 2012, would turn down the offers remains unclear. The deteriorating security situation in Benghazi had been the subject of a meeting that embassy officials held Aug. 15, where they concluded they could not defend the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi. The next day, the embassy drafted a cable outlining the dire circumstances and saying it would spell out what it needed in a separate cable.
“In light of the uncertain security environment, US Mission Benghazi will submit specific requests to US Embassy Tripoli for additional physical security upgrades and staffing needs by separate cover,” said the cable, which was first reported by Fox News.
Army Gen. Carter Ham, then the head of the U.S. Africa Command, did not wait for the separate cable, however. Instead, after reading the Aug. 16 cable, Ham phoned Stevens and asked if the embassy needed a special security team from the U.S. military. Stevens told Ham it did not, the officials said.
Weeks later, Stevens traveled to Germany for an already scheduled meeting with Ham at AFRICOM headquarters. During that meeting, Ham again offered additional military assets, and Stevens again said no, the two officials said.
“He didn’t say why. He just turned it down,” a defense official who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject told McClatchy.
The offers of aid and Stevens’ rejection of them have not been revealed in either the State Department’s Administrative Review Board investigation of the Benghazi events or during any of the congressional hearings and reports that have been issued into what took place there.
Stevens’ deputy, Gregory Hicks, who might be expected to be aware of the ambassador’s exchange with military leaders, was not asked about the offer of additional assistance during his appearance before a House of Representatives committee last week, and testimony has not been sought from Ham, who is now retired.
Both Hicks and Ham declined to comment on the exchange between Ham and Stevens. Hicks’ lawyer, Victoria Toensing, said Hicks did not know the details of conversations between Stevens and Ham and was not aware of Stevens turning down an offer of additional security.
“As far as Mr. Hicks knows, the ambassador always wanted more security and they were both frustrated by not getting it,” she said.
Some Republican lawmakers expressed surprise when told that Stevens had turned down such an offer.
“That is odd to me because Stevens requested from the State Department additional security four times, and there was an 18-person special forces security team headed by Lt. Col. Wood that Gen. Ham signed off on that the State Department said no to,” said Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., who has been among the most vocal critics of the Obama administration on Benghazi. “The records are very clear that people on the ground in Libya made numerous requests for additional security that were either denied or only partially granted.”
But a spokesman for Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, indicated that some lawmakers may have been aware of Stevens’ exchange with Ham.
“Decisions conveyed by Ambassador Stevens were made on behalf of the U.S. State Department,” the spokesman, Frederick Hill, said in an email. “There were certainly robust debates between State and Defense officials over the mission and controlling authority of such forces. The lack of discussion by the public ARB report about the role inter-agency tension played in a lack of security resources remains a significant concern of the Oversight Committee.”
One person familiar with the events said Stevens might have rejected the offers because there was an understanding within the State Department that officials in Libya ought not to request more security, in part because of concerns about the political fallout of seeking a larger military presence in a country that was still being touted as a foreign policy success.
“The embassy was told through back channels to not make direct requests for security,” an official familiar with the case, who agreed to discuss the case only anonymously because of the sensitivity of the subject, told McClatchy.
Still, the offer from Ham provided Stevens with a chance to plead for more assistance, an opportunity he apparently did not seize.
Congressional hearings into the Benghazi attacks – there were in fact two, one on a compound often referred to as the consulate, where Stevens and State Department computer specialist Sean Smith died, and a second hours later on a nearby CIA annex, where two security contractors, former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, were killed – have focused primarily on the events during the night of the attacks and subsequent statements by Obama administration officials.
There have been fewer questions, however, about the months leading up to the attack and how the State Department, the CIA and defense officials addressed a growing security problem. Among the questions that have not been probed is why the Benghazi mission, with its large CIA contingent, remained open when other Western countries, most notably Great Britain, had pulled out of Benghazi in the weeks preceding the attacks because of security concerns.
Officials have publicly referred to Ham’s phone call before. In his Feb. 7 testimony before the House Armed Services Committee, Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the military was aware of the Aug. 16 cable and that someone had turned down Ham’s offer.
Referring to the cable, Dempsey said: “I was aware of it, because it came in, in Gen. Ham’s report. Gen. Ham actually called the embassy to, to see if they wanted to extend the special security team there and was said – and was told no.”
Dempsey said the State Department never requested more from the military.
“We never received a request for support from the State Department, which would have allowed us to put forces on the ground,” Dempsey told the committee.
The Aug. 16 cable remains classified. But Fox News has quoted liberally from it, reporting that State Department officials convened a meeting a day earlier to discuss security, which the cable described as “trending negatively.”
“RSO (Regional Security Officer) expressed concerns with the ability to defend Post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound,” the cable said, according to Fox News.
The Accountability Review Board investigation, commissioned by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and released in December, placed blame for the Benghazi attack in large part on the State Department for not answering repeated calls for more security.
But the report also is peppered with references to Stevens and how well the embassy made the case to Washington for more security. In a news conference at the time of the release of the board’s finding, Adm. Mike Mullen, one of the board’s two chairmen and a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, referred to the failing of the embassy.
“As the chief of mission, he certainly had a responsibility in that regard, and actually he was very security conscious and increasingly concerned about security,” Mullen said. “But part of his responsibility is certainly to make that case back here, and he had not gotten to that point where you would, you might get to a point where you would be considering, ‘It’s so dangerous, we might close the mission.’”
The embassy Stevens oversaw in Tripoli “did not demonstrate strong and sustained advocacy with Washington for increased security” in Benghazi, the report stated.
Traditionally, State Department officials have depended on the State Department’s own Diplomatic Security Service, local police and military forces and security contractors to secure embassies around the world. U.S. military personnel at embassies consist usually of Marines whose job it is to guard the perimeter of a compound and to protect classified documents and equipment inside. It is rare that U.S. forces would be called upon to guard embassy personnel traveling outside embassy grounds.
Any increase in U.S. military force would have required State Department approval. It’s unknown if Stevens might have passed along Ham’s offer to the State Department and been turned down, or whether he believed that the security team Ham offered would not provide the kind of security he needed.
Officials familiar with the exchanges between Ham and Stevens said they did not know whether Ham offered any other support than the security team.
“It was a brief conversation,” the defense official said.
James Rosen and Jonathan S .Landay contributed from Washington.
Update: An earlier version of this story misspelled the name of Lindsey Graham and misidentified the Accountability Review Board.
No comments:
Post a Comment