There is no question that American Ambassador to Libya Chris
Stevens was murdered in Benghazi. The question I have been
dealing with in two previous posts is whether or not Stevens was
placed in Benghazi so he would be killed much like Israel's King
David ordered his general to have Uriah the
Hittite assigned to a place in a battle where his death was
virtually certain.
I don't expect to prove who was responsible if Americans
assigned Stevens to Benghazi to be killed. Such proof might
require the investigative skills of a real life Sherlock
Holmes.
Ian
Fleming once observed: "Once is happenstance. Twice is
coincidence. Three times is enemy action." Prior to the
2008 presidential primaries two known homosexuals who were
acquainted with Barack Obama died
violent deaths. In November, 2011, Larry Sinclair
who wrote a book claiming to have had an affair with Obama, was
killed by a hit and run driver. Chris Stevens who was
murdered by terrorists at Benghazi was also a known homosexual.
[Correction: Larry Sinclair is alive. A rumor about his death was posted on the Free Republic possibly as part of a pattern of intimidation reported by Kevin Dujan who had scheduled a radio interview with Larry Sinclair to discuss Sinclair's allegations about Obama being homosexual and using drugs.]
Stevens wouldn't be the first high American official whose
assassination was approved by someone in the United States
government. Military historian Robert Wilcox in his book "Target
Patton" claims that in December, 1945, OSS
head "Wild Bill" Donovan ordered OSS marksman Douglas
Bazata to kill Gen. George Patton because Patton was
threatening to expose what Patton considered allied collusion with
the Soviets that cost American lives. The World War II era OSS
was the predecessor of the CIA.
Some believe Ambassador Stevens might have been killed because
he was about to blow the whistle on a questionable "gun
running" scheme to send old Libyan government weapons to
Syrian "Contras" [or whatever Syrian rebels are called] or some
other group. A problem with this explanation is that an attack
on Stevens in Benghazi would draw attention to whatever the CIA was
doing there. The fact the CIA facility was located so
close to the consulate could indicate that the "intelligence"
officials involved weren't very intelligent. If the CIA
had an operation going in Libya, locating it in the same city as a
diplomatic facility would severely hamper keeping the operation
secret. The attack on the CIA compound indicates the
terrorists suspected what the CIA was up to. Their abuse
of Stevens' body indicates they knew he was homosexual.
Those who don't understand government would likely say if the
government wanted Stevens dead, President Barack Obama would have
ordered the killing. However, unless the situation was
similar to the murder of the Archbishop of
Canterbury, Obama probably wasn't involved. Archbishop
Thomas Becket was killed in 1170 by followers of King Henry II of
England who believed the King wanted him killed.
President Harry Truman probably did not know about the killing of
General Patton.
Then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton could have been
responsible, but I doubt she's intelligent enough to come up with
such a plot. It would be more likely that she went along with
a plan developed. by someone else. Her behavior
before and after the incident implies she is guilty of
something. Her use of a private
email service implies she was doing something improper, if not
illegal. Her attempt to avoid responsibility for the incident
by inventing a easily disproved story about a riot caused by an
anti-Muslim video implies she was covering up something,
particularly considering that she came up with the story so soon
after the incident.
Clinton's use of a private email server could have allowed
terrorists to monitor her email. If so they would have known
the United States wouldn't protect its diplomats in Benghazi.
They might have also learned Stevens was homosexual which could have
provided an added incentive to want to kill him.
If the murder of Stevens was part of a pattern that included the
murders of Obama's homosexual acquaintances, the person in
charge was probably someone associated with Obama's financial
backers. They might have assigned someone to "protect
their investment" by eliminating those who could pose a threat to
Obama's election chances by raising the homosexual
issue.
Before I started this series I thought it was more likely that
Stevens' death was the result of incompetence. Now, I
think it is more likely someone wanted him to be killed.
I believe the test Sen. Saw Erwin used for President Richard Nixon
and Watergate applies to Secretary of State Clinton and
Benghazi. If she knew Stevens was likely to be killed she is a
crook. If she didn't she is incompetent.
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Sunday, April 17, 2016
Were Benghazi Deaths Result of Incompetence or Murder One?
After I published the previous post suggesting the Benghazi massacre
demonstrated Hillary Clinton's incompetence I received an email
asking about the possibility that Clinton or someone intended for
Ambassador Chris Stevens or another American to be murdered.
I'm still inclined to believe the best explanation is incompetence,
but I recognize the incident could have involved premeditated
murder.
The death resembles an ancient murder from Israeli history. King David of Israel had gotten Bathsheba, the wife of one of his soldiers named Uriah the Hittite, pregnant. When an attempt to cover up the situation failed, David sent orders for Uriah to be placed in the hottest part of the battle and have the army pull back so he would be killed. David then married Bathsheba so that most people would think her baby was the result of the marriage. Ambassador Stevens was also placed in a situation in which death was virtually certain.
A potential problem with this scenario is that Clinton had no apparent motive for killing Stevens. However, President Barack Obama could have had a motive if claims about his and Stevens personal lives are accurate. I'm not sure whether or not the claims are true, but believe that those who read this blog deserve the opportunity to make up their own minds.
There are claims that both Barack Obama and Chris Stevens. The claim that Stevens was homosexual seems to be more accepted than claims that Obama is even though the claims that he is homosexual have been made by those who describe themselves homosexuals. Larry Sinclair wrote a tell all book claiming to have had an affair with Obama. Homosexual blogger Kevin Dujan claims that Obama is homosexual.
The mother of Trinity Church choir director Donald Young believes his murder was to protect Obama from Young claiming to have had a homosexual relationship with Obama. There also has been a claim that Trinity Church had a program to help homosexual men avoid exposure. The killing of accuser Larry Sinclair by a hit and run driver is a disturbing coincidence that could support a claim that Chris Stevens was sent to Benghazi to die.
I'm a commentator rather than an investigative reporter. The death of Ambassador Chris Stevens certainly needs further investigation. I still believe the Benghazi incident indicates Hillary Clinton is incompetent, possibly in more ways than one. A competent politician certainly wouldn't have gotten involved in a situation in which she could be accused of murder.
Conservative organizations have been claiming that Obama is blocking an indictment of Clinton for her violation of security regulations by using a private email service. Perhaps Obama is worried she might expose his involvement in the death of Stevens.
The death resembles an ancient murder from Israeli history. King David of Israel had gotten Bathsheba, the wife of one of his soldiers named Uriah the Hittite, pregnant. When an attempt to cover up the situation failed, David sent orders for Uriah to be placed in the hottest part of the battle and have the army pull back so he would be killed. David then married Bathsheba so that most people would think her baby was the result of the marriage. Ambassador Stevens was also placed in a situation in which death was virtually certain.
A potential problem with this scenario is that Clinton had no apparent motive for killing Stevens. However, President Barack Obama could have had a motive if claims about his and Stevens personal lives are accurate. I'm not sure whether or not the claims are true, but believe that those who read this blog deserve the opportunity to make up their own minds.
There are claims that both Barack Obama and Chris Stevens. The claim that Stevens was homosexual seems to be more accepted than claims that Obama is even though the claims that he is homosexual have been made by those who describe themselves homosexuals. Larry Sinclair wrote a tell all book claiming to have had an affair with Obama. Homosexual blogger Kevin Dujan claims that Obama is homosexual.
The mother of Trinity Church choir director Donald Young believes his murder was to protect Obama from Young claiming to have had a homosexual relationship with Obama. There also has been a claim that Trinity Church had a program to help homosexual men avoid exposure. The killing of accuser Larry Sinclair by a hit and run driver is a disturbing coincidence that could support a claim that Chris Stevens was sent to Benghazi to die.
I'm a commentator rather than an investigative reporter. The death of Ambassador Chris Stevens certainly needs further investigation. I still believe the Benghazi incident indicates Hillary Clinton is incompetent, possibly in more ways than one. A competent politician certainly wouldn't have gotten involved in a situation in which she could be accused of murder.
Conservative organizations have been claiming that Obama is blocking an indictment of Clinton for her violation of security regulations by using a private email service. Perhaps Obama is worried she might expose his involvement in the death of Stevens.
Can Old Lady Clinton Understand Benghazi Significance?
The thing that most bothers me about Hillary Clinton's comments
about Benghazi is that she doesn't seem to understand why people are
concerned about her mishandling of the Benghazi situation.
She doesn't seem to understand that her mishandling of the situation
allowed al Qaeda to win a major victory at Benghazi by killing the
top U.S. official in Libya. Clinton doesn't seem to
understand why her use of a private email server threatened national
security.
The Obama administration had been claiming a victory every time it killed an al Qaeda leader including killing Osama bin Laden . An intelligent Secretary of State would have wanted to prevent the enemy from being able to kill any American ambassador. Clinton foolishly decided to make it as easy as possible for al Qaeda to kill Ambassador Chris Stevens. Her handling of the situation would have made more sense if she had wanted him to die.
Clinton's attempt to make a diplomatic facility at Benghazi permanent was the biggest American battlefield mistake since the Battle of Hamburger Hill in the Vietnam War. The war on terror has made much of the world a potential battle field. The enemy can attack any where, at any time even in San Bernardino California.
In May, 1969, the commanding general of the 101st Airborne made a foolish decision to try to take a well defended but worthless piece of real estate that became known as Hamburger Hill. The Americans suffered heavy casualties and failed to take the hill which the enemy then abandoned.
Clinton had ample warning that the ambassador would be in eminent danger in Benghazi. The consulate had already suffered two minor attacks. There had been attacks on the Tunisian consulate and the U.N. Special Envoy's convoy. The International Red Cross closed its office after it was attacked. The British government withdrew its diplomats from Benghazi after an attack on its ambassador's convoy.
Clinton's critics have focused on the inadequate security at the Benghazi consulate and ignored the fact that the facility shouldn't have been defended in the first place. A competent Secretary of State would have followed the example of the International Red Cross and the British government and abandoned a building that wasn't worth the loss of American lives.
Clinton's use of a less secure private email server may have made it possible for al Qaeda leaders to learn the United States wouldn't defend the consulate
The advice of the old gambler in the Kenny Rogers song "The Gambler" applies to war as well as poker
"You've got to know when to hold 'em
Know when to fold 'em
Know when to walk away
And know when to run."
The United States should have walked away from Benghazi. There is no shame in walking a way from a battle that cannot be won. In the early years of World War II the British army walked away from France and the United States army walked away from the Philippines because the locations couldn't be defended at that time.
The Obama administration had been claiming a victory every time it killed an al Qaeda leader including killing Osama bin Laden . An intelligent Secretary of State would have wanted to prevent the enemy from being able to kill any American ambassador. Clinton foolishly decided to make it as easy as possible for al Qaeda to kill Ambassador Chris Stevens. Her handling of the situation would have made more sense if she had wanted him to die.
Clinton's attempt to make a diplomatic facility at Benghazi permanent was the biggest American battlefield mistake since the Battle of Hamburger Hill in the Vietnam War. The war on terror has made much of the world a potential battle field. The enemy can attack any where, at any time even in San Bernardino California.
In May, 1969, the commanding general of the 101st Airborne made a foolish decision to try to take a well defended but worthless piece of real estate that became known as Hamburger Hill. The Americans suffered heavy casualties and failed to take the hill which the enemy then abandoned.
Clinton had ample warning that the ambassador would be in eminent danger in Benghazi. The consulate had already suffered two minor attacks. There had been attacks on the Tunisian consulate and the U.N. Special Envoy's convoy. The International Red Cross closed its office after it was attacked. The British government withdrew its diplomats from Benghazi after an attack on its ambassador's convoy.
Clinton's critics have focused on the inadequate security at the Benghazi consulate and ignored the fact that the facility shouldn't have been defended in the first place. A competent Secretary of State would have followed the example of the International Red Cross and the British government and abandoned a building that wasn't worth the loss of American lives.
Clinton's use of a less secure private email server may have made it possible for al Qaeda leaders to learn the United States wouldn't defend the consulate
The advice of the old gambler in the Kenny Rogers song "The Gambler" applies to war as well as poker
"You've got to know when to hold 'em
Know when to fold 'em
Know when to walk away
And know when to run."
The United States should have walked away from Benghazi. There is no shame in walking a way from a battle that cannot be won. In the early years of World War II the British army walked away from France and the United States army walked away from the Philippines because the locations couldn't be defended at that time.
Wednesday, April 6, 2016
Donald Trump's Abortion Answer Wasn't Wrong, the Question Was
Donald Trump was correct when he said a woman who had an outlawed
abortion would likely be punished. However, the most likely
way of ending abortions would be through regulation of those
providing medical treatment. Chris Matthews question
implied that abortion would become a criminal offense. In that case
the woman as a participant in the "crime" would be subject to
prosecution probably as an accessory, an accomplice or a
"co-conspirator". The courts might not allow prosecution unless the
woman was potentially subject to prosecution. In such a legal
environment prosecutors might use the offering of immunity from
prosecution to abortion recipients in exchange for testimony against
the abortion provider.
In American medicine medical procedures that can pose a treat to health generally have to be approved by government. The most likely way to prohibit abortions would be through prohibiting specific medical procedures. This approach at the federal level wouldn't necessarily require congressional action because the executive branch has authority to prohibit medical procedures.
The deaths associated with the most popular form of abortion in which the doctor basically pokes around in the woman to pull out the baby, sometimes in pieces, could justify prohibiting the procedures on the grounds that it poses too significant a threat to the woman's health. The procedure sometimes causes fatal bleeding because the doctor cannot tell if he has caused bleeding. There is an alternative procedure available for late term pregnancies which poses less of a threat. Removing the baby using a cesarean section allows the doctor to easily monitor the situation and catch any source of bleeding. Requiring use of this procedure for premature ending of a pregnancy would have the benefit of the child being removed alive. This approach to ending a late term pregnancy should give both sides what they want. The woman would be allowed to end her pregnancy and the child would be born alive.
In American medicine medical procedures that can pose a treat to health generally have to be approved by government. The most likely way to prohibit abortions would be through prohibiting specific medical procedures. This approach at the federal level wouldn't necessarily require congressional action because the executive branch has authority to prohibit medical procedures.
The deaths associated with the most popular form of abortion in which the doctor basically pokes around in the woman to pull out the baby, sometimes in pieces, could justify prohibiting the procedures on the grounds that it poses too significant a threat to the woman's health. The procedure sometimes causes fatal bleeding because the doctor cannot tell if he has caused bleeding. There is an alternative procedure available for late term pregnancies which poses less of a threat. Removing the baby using a cesarean section allows the doctor to easily monitor the situation and catch any source of bleeding. Requiring use of this procedure for premature ending of a pregnancy would have the benefit of the child being removed alive. This approach to ending a late term pregnancy should give both sides what they want. The woman would be allowed to end her pregnancy and the child would be born alive.
Sunday, April 3, 2016
Teddy, Truman and Trump
I've thought for some time that America might need a president
like Theodore Roosevelt or Harry Truman. They were strong
larger than life leaders who played a major role in making the
United States a strong world power. Donald Trump is
the only current candidate who comes close to the personality of
those two.
Teddy Roosevelt inherited the presidency after the assassination of President William McKinley. The United States had won a war with Spain, but European powers who had designs on Latin American countries that owed money to them didn't regard the United States as a major power. Roosevelt told them to stay out and he would deal with Latin American debtor nations. Latin American nations complained about Roosevelt's Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, but his actions prevented European nations from dividing up Latin America the way they were dividing other parts of the world. Roosevelt's heavy handed approach to Latin America also produced a canal through Panama.
Roosevelt negotiated an end to a war between Japan and Russia and earned a Nobel Peace Prize. He ended a west European conflict over control of Morocco that might have become a major war.
Roosevelt pushed Congress to give the United States one of the world's largest navies.
Harry Truman inherited the presidency upon the death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt as World War II was ending. He faced the task of rebuilding a world devastated by years of Depression and war. He set up the Marshall Plan to help west European countries rebuild their economies so that the communist political political groups couldn't use the situation to gain control of those countries. He helped the Japanese switch from being a military power to a nation focused on economic goals. Truman helped establish the United Nations and a system of regional treaties as he made the United States the principle super power. He kept the country from slipping back into a Depression.
Teddy Roosevelt was the original Bull Moose. He was out spoken and belligerent with strong opinions. In 1912, he was so upset with his successor that he ran against him on the "Bull Moose" party ticket.
Harry Truman wasn't a tall man but he would stand up to anyone from Kansas City political strong man Boss Pendergast to the leader of the Soviet Union Joseph Stalin. When one of the nation's greatest generals, Douglas MacArthur challenged Truman's decision on how to handle the Korean War, Truman didn't hesitate to say "you're fired." Critics sometimes complained about his crude language.
Donald Trump is clearly the only "Bull Moose" in the race. He shares Harry Truman's pen chant for using language that some consider crude. Donald Trump is a real larger than life person like Teddy Roosevelt and Harry Truman were. To borrow an old Flip Wilson tag line "what you see is what you get". He tells voters what he thinks rather than sticking to a prepared script like most of the phonies who run for office. Like Roosevelt and Truman he won't let special interests push him around.
It isn't necessary for presidents to enter office with specific plans for handling all problems. We need a president who knows how to select qualified subordinates. Richard Nixon was one of the 20th Century's most intelligent presidents, but he was forced to resign because he chose the wrong people to assist him in the White House. The War on Terror is going badly in part because President Barack Obama chose an inept Secretary of State named Hillary Clinton. Trump's business success demonstrates he knows how to make good decisions. The United States is facing a difficult war because of poor presidential decisions. We need a strong leader who will take charge and make the nation great the way Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Harry Truman did.
Teddy Roosevelt inherited the presidency after the assassination of President William McKinley. The United States had won a war with Spain, but European powers who had designs on Latin American countries that owed money to them didn't regard the United States as a major power. Roosevelt told them to stay out and he would deal with Latin American debtor nations. Latin American nations complained about Roosevelt's Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, but his actions prevented European nations from dividing up Latin America the way they were dividing other parts of the world. Roosevelt's heavy handed approach to Latin America also produced a canal through Panama.
Roosevelt negotiated an end to a war between Japan and Russia and earned a Nobel Peace Prize. He ended a west European conflict over control of Morocco that might have become a major war.
Roosevelt pushed Congress to give the United States one of the world's largest navies.
Harry Truman inherited the presidency upon the death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt as World War II was ending. He faced the task of rebuilding a world devastated by years of Depression and war. He set up the Marshall Plan to help west European countries rebuild their economies so that the communist political political groups couldn't use the situation to gain control of those countries. He helped the Japanese switch from being a military power to a nation focused on economic goals. Truman helped establish the United Nations and a system of regional treaties as he made the United States the principle super power. He kept the country from slipping back into a Depression.
Teddy Roosevelt was the original Bull Moose. He was out spoken and belligerent with strong opinions. In 1912, he was so upset with his successor that he ran against him on the "Bull Moose" party ticket.
Harry Truman wasn't a tall man but he would stand up to anyone from Kansas City political strong man Boss Pendergast to the leader of the Soviet Union Joseph Stalin. When one of the nation's greatest generals, Douglas MacArthur challenged Truman's decision on how to handle the Korean War, Truman didn't hesitate to say "you're fired." Critics sometimes complained about his crude language.
Donald Trump is clearly the only "Bull Moose" in the race. He shares Harry Truman's pen chant for using language that some consider crude. Donald Trump is a real larger than life person like Teddy Roosevelt and Harry Truman were. To borrow an old Flip Wilson tag line "what you see is what you get". He tells voters what he thinks rather than sticking to a prepared script like most of the phonies who run for office. Like Roosevelt and Truman he won't let special interests push him around.
It isn't necessary for presidents to enter office with specific plans for handling all problems. We need a president who knows how to select qualified subordinates. Richard Nixon was one of the 20th Century's most intelligent presidents, but he was forced to resign because he chose the wrong people to assist him in the White House. The War on Terror is going badly in part because President Barack Obama chose an inept Secretary of State named Hillary Clinton. Trump's business success demonstrates he knows how to make good decisions. The United States is facing a difficult war because of poor presidential decisions. We need a strong leader who will take charge and make the nation great the way Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Harry Truman did.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
