► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Libyan War’

Qaddafi sends delegation to Israel

by Phantom Ace ( 7 Comments › )
Filed under Headlines, Israel, Libya at July 11th, 2011 - 7:17 pm

Col. Mumar Qaddafi has sent a delegation to Israel. Their goal was to meet Leftist opposition leader Tzipi Livni. They wanted to meet her because she has been backing the rebels. They came to improve Qaddafi’s image in Israel and to begin to establish relations between Israel and Libya.

A delegation of four Libyan officials met with opposition leader Tzipi Livni on Thursday and sent her a message from their country’s dictator, Muammar Gaddafi, Channel 2 reported Sunday night.

According to the report, the delegation wanted to meet with Livni, because she had expressed support for the rebels who are trying to overthrow Gaddafi. They received visas from the Israeli embassy in Paris after gaining approval from Israeli security services. Once in Israel, the delegation immediately asked to meet with Livni, who obliged.

[….]

“I met with them, because I was curious,” Sheetrit said. “They don’t have roles in the Gaddafi regime. They wanted to come to Israel and change the image of Libya. They said there isn’t fighting on the streets there and that life goes on. They hope the situation will get better and that there will be relations between Israel and Libya in the future.”

Qaddafi and Israel do have common enemies. Hizballah, AL-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood are enemies with both. Col. Qaddafi should have reached out to Israel sooner.

Andrew McCarthy answers back the Interventionists

by Phantom Ace ( 18 Comments › )
Filed under Al Qaeda, Headlines, Islamists, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Libya, Progressives, Tranzis at July 1st, 2011 - 1:32 pm

The Wilsonians have control over the GOP’s foreign policy establishment. If anyone challenges them, they silence that individual. The GOP Trotskyites use the term isolationists against those who challenge them. Andrew McCarthy has stood up to them. They have smeared an attacked him. He has been called isolationist and other terms the Wilsonians use to keep Conservatives in line. He is not backing down and takes the fight to them.

Republicans like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Condoleezza Rice supported propping Qaddafi up with U.S. aid, including aid to his military. If Max was offended by that arrangement, if he inveighed against these U.S. government officials for supporting an incorrigibly anti-American homicidal dictator, I guess I missed it. Nevertheless, one of the reasons the Bush and Obama administrations regarded Qaddafi as a key ally was the fact that he was providing us with intelligence against Islamist operatives in his country — particularly, in eastern Libya — which, by percentage of population, was sending more jihadists to kill American troops in Iraq than any other country.

Many of these anti-American Islamists are part of the “rebels” — the polite name for the Libyan mujahideen who are Qaddafi’s opposition. Eastern Libya is their stronghold. They are supported by the Muslim Brotherhood, whose chief jurisprudent, Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, has issued a fatwacalling for Muslims to kill Qaddafi, with the goal of toppling him and setting up a sharia state that would be just as anti-American as Qaradawi is. Furthermore, John Rosenthal has reportedhere on NRO in recent days that even Libya’s National Transitional Council admits that the rebels include Islamic extremists (though its spokesman lowballs them as “no more than 15 percent” of the rebels — as if that would make us feel better if it were true). As Mr. Rosenthal has also recounted, French analysts who have studied the “rebels” conclude that only a small minority of them are “true democrats” — in fact, the “rebels” are thoroughly infiltrated by al-Qaeda and its affiliates.

[….]

For now, we must assume the concerns we have expressed about the “rebels” cannot be answered. With no vital U.S. interests at stake, and with our country engaged in multiple military excursions while teetering on the financial brink, pro-interventionists have made a mockery of domestic and international law.

[….]

The Obama administration has steadfastly refused to do this, and the pro-interventionists have cheered the president on — despite the facts that (a) there is no international authorization for a war against Qaddafi, (b) the president has shamefully claimed that we are only in Libya to protect civilians even as U.S.-backed NATO forces wage war on his military and seek to kill him; (c) while ignoring Congress, the Obama administration consulted closely with the United Nations and the Arab League; and (d) the “responsibility to protect” doctrine that is guiding the Obama administration in Libya (see Stanley Kurtz’s essential essay, here) is a transnational progressive nostrum that ought to be anathema to conservatives and those who see American power as reserved for American interests.

I hope Andrew McCarthy and other real Conservatives keep up the good fight. Jacksonianism is back and the Wilsonian name calling will not make it go away. We are broke and this interventionist attitude must be defeated.

House votes 295-123 to end Libya War; Update: Vote to defund the war fails.

by Phantom Ace ( 8 Comments › )
Filed under Al Qaeda, Democratic Party, Headlines, Islamic Supremacism, Islamists, Libya, Military, Muslim Brotherhood, Republican Party at June 24th, 2011 - 1:17 pm

The House GOP finally grew a pair and voted 295-123 against continuing the Libyan War. They were joined by 70 honest Liberal Democrats.

WASHINGTON – The House on Friday overwhelmingly rejected a measure giving President Barack Obama the authority to continue the U.S. military operation against Libya, a major repudiation of the commander in chief.

The vote was 295-123, with Obama losing the support of 70 of his Democrats one day after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton had made a last-minute plea for the mission.

While the congressional action had no immediate effect on American involvement in the NATO-led mission, it was an embarrassment to a sitting president and certain to have reverberations in Tripoli and NATO capitals.

The vote marked the first time since 1999 that either House has voted against a military operation. The last time was over President Bill Clinton’s authority in the Bosnian war.

I salute the House for letting the world know, the American public doesn’t support a war for AL-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. This is a symbolic blow to the Progressive-Islamic Axis

Update: The vote to defund teh war failed. The vote was 180 to 238. 89 Republicans defected, clearly too many in teh GOP still subscribe to Wilsonianism.

Now Dissent is unpatriotic

by Phantom Ace ( 117 Comments › )
Filed under Al Qaeda, Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Islamic Terrorism, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Libya, Muslim Brotherhood, Progressives at June 24th, 2011 - 8:30 am

When Bush was President Progressives complained bitterly about the Iraq war. When challenged on their opposition, they said dissent was patriotic. Some Conservatives would say that the Left supports Saddam (many actually did). Progressives would cry foul and claim you were questioning their patriotism. Well fast forward to 2011 and times have changed.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Jamaican Foreign Minister Kenneth Baugh, St. Kitts and Nevis Deputy Prime Minister Sam Condor. At the press conference she was asked about opposition in Congress to the Libya war. Hillary answered and accused those who oppose the war of being unpatriotic and traitors.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, again, I am going to be testifying tomorrow at great length, probably longer than anyone cares to listen about all of these issues – Brad’s question, your question I’m sure will be fodder for the testimony. But I have to take issue with your underlying premise. I think that there is very clear progress being made in the organization and the operational ability of the opposition, the Transitional National Council, the military efforts on the ground. I don’t think there’s any doubt in anyone’s mind that Qadhafi and the people around him have their backs against the wall. The kind of support that we saw forthcoming for the Libyan opposition at the recent Libyan Contact Group meeting in Abu Dhabi was very heartening. Money is flowing, other support is available.

So I know we live in a hyper-information-centric world right now, and March seems like it’s a decade ago, but by my calendar, it’s only months. And in those months, we have seen an international coalition come together unprecedented between not only NATO, but Arab nations, the Arab League, and the United Nations. This is something that I don’t think anyone could have predicted, but it is a very strong signal as to what the world expects to have happen, and I say with all respect that the Congress is certainly free to raise any questions or objections, and I’m sure I will hear that tomorrow when I testify.

But the bottom line is, whose side are you on? Are you on Qadhafi’s side or are you on the side of the aspirations of the Libyan people and the international coalition that has been created to support them? For the Obama Administration, the answer to that question is very easy.

So who’s side are Americans  like me on? You really want to go there Hillary? Look who you and Barack Hussein Obama’s side you are on in Libya.

A new report from two French think tanks concludes that jihadists have played a predominant role in the eastern-Libyan rebellion against the rule of Moammar Qaddafi, and that “true democrats” represent only a minority in the rebellion. The report, furthermore, calls into question the justifications given for Western military intervention in Libya, arguing that they are largely based on media exaggerations and “outright disinformation.”

The sponsors of the report are the Paris-based International Center for Research and Study on Terrorism and Aide to Victims of Terrorism (CIRET-AVT) and the French Center for Research on Intelligence (CF2R). The organizations sent a six-member expert mission to Libya to evaluate the situation and consult with representatives on both sides of the conflict. From March 31 to April 6, the mission visited the Libyan capital of Tripoli and the region of Tripolitania; from April 19 to April 25, it visited the rebel capital of Benghazi and the surrounding Cyrenaica region in eastern Libya.

he report identifies four factions among the members of the eastern Libyan National Transitional Council (NTC). Apart from a minority of “true democrats,” the other three factions comprise partisans of a restoration of the monarchy that was overthrown by Qaddafi in 1969, Islamic extremists seeking the establishment of an Islamic state, and former fixtures of the Qaddafi regime who defected to the rebels for opportunistic or other reasons.

There is a clear overlap between the Islamists and the monarchists, inasmuch as the deposed King Idris I was himself the head of the Senussi brotherhood, which the authors describe as “an anti-Western Muslim sect that practices an austere and conservative form of Islam.” The monarchists are thus, more precisely, “monarchists-fundamentalists.”

Read the rest: Al-Qaeda and the Libyan Rebellion

So who am I backing? Well Hillary, I do lean towards Qaddafi. He gave up his WMDs, compensated the victims of Pan Am 103 and was helping us against Al-Qaeda. You, Obama and the “International Community” are backing Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. You are supporting the same people who attacked us on 9/11. You were Senator of NY on the day of the attack. You pretended that you cared for the families that lost love ones. Can you look at them in the eye now? Can you explain why you back the people who killed their loved ones?

Obama and Hillary are the unpatriotic traitors. They are assisting Islamic forces to take over Libya. Them and their supporters are the traitors.