Hillary Clinton Testifies on Benghazi Debacle

Will Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s testimony before members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations cast a cloud over President Barack Obama’s second term?  Time will tell.  Meanwhile, the text of her testimony appears below:

Hillary Casts Cloud Over Obama by Political Graffiti

Hillary Casts Cloud Over Obama by Political Graffiti

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, Members of the Committee, thank you for this opportunity.

The terrorist attacks in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 that claimed the lives of four brave Americans — Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty — are part of a broader strategic challenge to the United States and our partners in North Africa. Today, I want to offer some context for this challenge and share what we’ve learned, how we are protecting our people, and where we can work together to honor our fallen colleagues and continue to champion America’s interests and values.

Any clear-eyed examination of this matter must begin with this sobering fact: Since 1988, there have been 19 Accountability Review Boards investigating attacks on American diplomats and their facilities. Benghazi joins a long list of tragedies, for our Department and for other agencies: hostages taken in Tehran in 1979, our embassy and Marine barracks bombed in Beirut in 1983, Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia in 1996, our embassies in East Africa in 1998, consulate staff murdered in Jeddah in 2004, the Khost attack in 2009, and too many others.

Click to read Hillary Clinton statement Sept. 11, 2012.

Click to read Hillary Clinton statement Sept. 11, 2012.

Of course, the list of attacks foiled, crises averted, and lives saved is even longer. We should never forget that our security professionals get it right 99 percent of the time, against difficult odds all over the world. That’s why, like my predecessors, I trust them with my life.

Let’s also remember that administrations of both parties, in partnership with Congress, have made concerted and good faith efforts to learn from the tragedies that have occurred, to implement recommendations from the Review Boards, to seek necessary resources, and to better protect our people from constantly evolving threats. That’s what the men and women who serve our country deserve. And it’s what we are doing again now, with your help. As Secretary, I have had no higher priority, and no greater responsibility.

As I have said many times since September 11, I take responsibility. Nobody is more committed to getting this right. I am determined to leave the State Department and our country safer, stronger, and more secure.

Taking responsibility meant moving quickly in those first uncertain hours and days to respond to the immediate crisis and further protect our people and posts in high- threat areas across the region and the world. It meant launching an independent investigation to determine exactly what happened in Benghazi and to recommend steps for improvement. And it meant intensifying our efforts to combat terrorism and support emerging democracies in North Africa and beyond.

Let me share some of the lessons we have learned, the steps we have taken, and the work we continue to do.

First, let’s start on the night of September 11 itself and those difficult early days. I directed our response from the State Department and stayed in close contact with officials from across our government and the Libyan government. So I saw first- hand what Ambassador Thomas Pickering and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen called “timely” and “exceptional” coordination. No delays in decision-making. No denials of support from Washington or from the military. And I want to echo the Review Board’s praise for the valor and courage of our people on the ground – especially the security professionals in Benghazi and Tripoli. The Board said our response saved American lives in real time – and it did.

DOS Travel Warning 8-27-12

Click to view Department of State travel warning pre-Benghazi.

You may recall that in that same period, we also saw violent attacks on our embassies in Cairo, Sanaa, Tunis, and Khartoum, as well as large protests outside many other posts where thousands of our diplomats serve.

So I immediately ordered a review of our security posture around the world, with particular scrutiny for high-threat posts. We asked the Department of Defense to join Interagency Security Assessment Teams and to dispatch hundreds of additional Marine Security Guards. I named the first Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for High Threat Posts, so Missions in dangerous places get the attention they need. And we reached out to Congress to help address physical vulnerabilities, including risks from fire, and to hire additional Diplomatic Security personnel.

Second, even as we took these steps, I also appointed the Accountability Review Board led by Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mullen so that we could more fully understand what went wrong and how to fix it.

I have accepted every one of their recommendations — and I asked the Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources to lead a task force to ensure that all 29 of them are implemented quickly and completely… as well as to pursue additional steps above and beyond those in the Board’s report.

Because of the effort we began in the days after the attacks, work is already well underway. And, as I pledged in my letter to you last month, implementation has now begun on all 29 recommendations. Our task force started by translating the recommendations into 64 specific action items. All of these action items were assigned to specific bureaus and offices, with clear timelines for completion. Fully 85 percent are on track to be completed by the end of March, with a number completed already.

We are taking a top-to-bottom look, and rethinking how we make decisions on where, when, and how our people operate in high threat areas, and how we respond to threats and crises.

As part of our effort to go above and beyond the Review Board’s recommendations, we are initiating an annual High Threat Post Review chaired by the Secretary of State, and ongoing reviews by the Deputy Secretaries, to ensure pivotal questions about security reach the highest levels. And we will regularize protocols for sharing information with Congress.

All of these actions are designed to increase the safety of our diplomats and development experts and reduce the chances of another Benghazi happening again.

Now, in addition to the immediate action we took and the Review Board process, we have been moving forward on a third front: addressing the broader strategic challenge in North Africa and the wider region.

Because Benghazi didn’t happen in a vacuum. The Arab revolutions have scrambled power dynamics and shattered security forces across the region. And instability in Mali has created an expanding safe haven for terrorists who look to extend their influence and plot further attacks of the kind we saw just last week in Algeria.

And let me offer my deepest condolences to the families of the Americans and all the people from many nations who were killed and injured in the recent hostage crisis. We remain in close touch with the Government of Algeria and stand ready to provide assistance if needed. We are seeking to gain a fuller understanding of what took place so that we can work together to prevent terrorist attacks like this in the future.
Concerns about terrorism and instability in North Africa are not new. Indeed they have been a top priority for our entire national security team. But after Benghazi, we accelerated a diplomatic campaign to increase pressure on al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and other terrorist groups across the region.

In the first hours and days, I conferred with the President of Libya and the Foreign Ministers of Tunisia and Morocco. Two weeks later, I met with regional leaders at the United Nations General Assembly and held a special meeting focused on Mali and the Sahel. In October, I flew to Algeria to discuss the fight against AQIM. In November, I sent Deputy Secretary Bill Burns to follow up in Algiers. And then in December, he co-chaired the Global Counterterrorism Forum in Abu Dhabi and a meeting in Tunis of leaders working to build new democracies and reform security services.

In all these diplomatic engagements, and in near-constant contacts at every level, we have focused on targeting al Qaeda’s syndicate of terror – closing safe havens, cutting off finances, countering extremist ideology, and slowing the flow of new recruits. We continue to hunt the terrorists responsible for the attacks in Benghazi and are determined to bring them to justice. And we’re also using all our diplomatic and economic tools to support the emerging democracies of the region, including Libya, to strengthen security forces and provide a path away from extremism.

The United States must continue to lead… in the Middle East and all around the globe. We have come a long way in the past four years. We cannot afford to retreat now. When America is absent, especially from unstable environments, there are consequences. Extremism takes root, our interests suffer, and our security at home is threatened.

That’s why Chris Stevens went to Benghazi in the first place. Nobody knew the dangers better than Chris, first during the revolution and then during the transition. A weak Libyan government, marauding militias, even terrorist groups… a bomb exploded in the parking lot of his hotel, but he didn’t waver. Because he understood that it was critical for America to be represented in that pivotal place at that pivotal time.

Our men and women who serve overseas understand that we accept a level of risk to protect this country we love. They represent the best traditions of a bold and generous nation. And they cannot work in bunkers and do their jobs.

It is our responsibility to make sure they have the resources they need to do their jobs and to do everything we can to reduce the risks they face.

For me, this is not just a matter of policy… it’s personal.

I stood next to President Obama as the Marines carried those flag-draped caskets off the plane at Andrews. I put my arms around the mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, sons and daughters.

It has been one of the greatest honors of my life to lead the men and women of the State Department and USAID. Nearly 70,000 serving here in Washington and at more than 275 posts around the world. They get up and go to work every day – often in difficult and dangerous circumstances thousands of miles from home – because they believe the United States is the most extraordinary force for peace and progress the earth has ever known.

And when we suffer tragedies overseas, the number of Americans applying to the Foreign Service actually increases. That tells us everything we need to know about what kind of patriots I’m talking about.    They ask what they can do for their country. And America is stronger for it.

Today, after four years in this job, after traveling nearly 1 million miles and visiting 112 countries around the world, my faith in our country and our future is stronger than ever. Every time that blue and white airplane carrying the words “United States of America” touches down in some far-off capital, I feel again the honor it is to represent the world’s indispensible nation. And I am confident that, with your help, we will continue to keep the United States safe, strong, and exceptional.

So I want to thank this committee for your partnership and your support of our diplomats and development experts around the world. You know the importance of the work they do day-in and day-out, and that America’s values and vital national security interests are at stake. It is absolutely critical that we work together to ensure they have the resources and support they need to face increasingly complex threats.

I know that you share our sense of responsibility and urgency. And while we all may not agree on everything, let’s stay focused on what really matters: protecting our people and the country we all love.

Now I am now happy to answer your questions.

###

I watched the testimony live on C-SPAN.  Updates to follow.

"Three Days In August" Promotional PhotoBob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August: A U.S. Army Special Forces Soldier’s Fight For Military Justice, a nonfiction book that’s available in paperback and ebook via most online booksellers, including Amazon.com. His second book, The CLAPPER MEMO, is coming soon.

It Was A Bad Week in ‘Clintonville’

By Paul R. Hollrah, Guest Blogger

President Bill Clinton

Bill Clinton is the stereotypical southern Democrat politician: smooth, personable, sly as a fox, everyman’s friend on the outside, but tough, manipulative, hard as nails, and totally corrupt on the inside.  He and his wife have been through many adventures and misadventures together, and when their final story is written a generation or two from now those who read it will shake their heads in disbelief… especially when they review the events of the week of April 30, 2012.

Unlike Barack Obama, Clinton was not corrupted by the power of the presidency; Clinton was already corrupt when he arrived at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.  In attempting to deflect charges of sexual harassment by an Arkansas state employee, Paula Corbin Jones, Clinton added a long list of offenses to his resume.  Because of his unwillingness to admit guilt, the American people found themselves led by a man who was guilty of rape, aggravated assault, perjury, subornation of perjury, conspiracy, obstruction of justice, contempt of court, evidence tampering, witness tampering, lying to federal investigators, Pendleton Act violations, and other offenses… almost all of which he committed while serving as president of the United States.

In attempting to shield himself from the charges lodged by Ms. Jones, Clinton called upon his family, his friends, and scores of political subordinates to “fall on their swords” for him.  In doing so, 71 aides and associates engaged in criminal conspiracy, 32 were guilty of obstruction of justice, and 30 perjured themselves.  Dozens more either lied to or interfered with federal investigators, suborned the perjury of others, or engaged in evidence or witness tampering.

Like his Democratic successor, Barack Obama, Clinton was blessed with a thoroughly corrupt Attorney General.  Between January 1993 and January 2001, Attorney General Janet Reno ignored prima facie evidence of criminal offenses on the part of White House functionaries, preventing FBI Director Louis Freeh and his agents from doing the job they were paid to do.  In all, 3 corporations and 111 individuals were shown to have committed felony crimes, 56 were indicted, 58 went unindicted, and only 40 were convicted.  Three resigned rather than face indictment and three were granted immunity in exchange for their testimony.

Leaving the White House in January 2001, Clinton left behind the worst pardon-selling scandal in American history.  A cocaine smuggler from California won a Clinton pardon after paying a $200,000 fee to Hillary’s brother.  Four Hasidic Jews were pardoned after defrauding the federal government out of $11 million by applying for funds for a school that didn’t exist (The Hasidic community of New Square, N.Y., later voted 1400 to 12 for Hillary in her New York senate race.)  When Hillary needed the Puerto Rican vote in her senate race, Clinton pardoned 14 Puerto Rican terrorists who claimed responsibility for more than 120 bombings in New York and Chicago that took 6 lives and injured some 130 people.  And, of course, everyone remembers Denise Rich and the pardon purchased for her fugitive ex-husband, financier Marc Rich.

In a March 11, 2001 op-ed column, liberal commentator Chris Matthews put the Clintons into perspective.  In discussing Hillary Clinton’s role in the blatant selling of pardons, Matthews said, “The junior senator from New York reminds me of the drug dealer’s wife in (the movie) ‘Traffic.’  She makes it her business not to know her husband’s.”

Matthews went on to remind us that Mrs. Clinton admitted to innocently “passing envelopes” from the pardon-seekers to the White House counsel’s office.  He said, “What convenience of mind!  She only ‘attended a meeting,’ only ‘heard rumors,’ only ‘passed envelopes.’  Admitting the fact of her behavior, she denies its purpose.  She admits what is provable, denies what is not.”

But Hillary Clinton was no slouch in her own right.  According to a May 27, 1994 story in the Washington Post, Mrs. Clinton deposited $1,000 in a commodity trading account in Arkansas in October 1978, during her husband’s term as Arkansas Attorney General.  She was allowed to use those funds to purchase ten cattle futures contracts which would have cost any other investor $12,000.  According to the Post, records of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange show that she was able to turn her initial ($1,000) investment into $6,300, overnight.

In just ten months of trading, Mrs. Clinton turned her $1,000 investment into nearly $100,000.   In doing so, she relied on the advice of James B. Blair, who served as outside counsel to Tyson Foods, Inc., the largest employer in Arkansas.  The Post also reported that a close examination of Mrs. Clinton’s trades “underscores Blair’s pivotal role” in her futures trading success.

In 2008, after being absent from the White House for eight years, Mrs. Clinton decided to fulfill her destiny by running for the Democratic presidential nomination.  And while she was initially seen as a shoo-in for the nomination, she could not have foreseen that she would be opposed by a charismatic young black man from the streets of Chicago… a totally inexperienced candidate, backed by the most corrupt, most ruthless, political operatives in American political history.

A documentary titled We Will Not Be Silenced, produced by former Steven Spielberg associate Bettina Viviano, tells the story of how the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination was stolen by the Obama organization.  Viviano tells of a telephone conference call with Bill Clinton during which Clinton referred to Obama as being “ineligible for the presidency,” and as the “non-citizen.”  She recalls Clinton saying, “He’s not legit.  That’s the end of it, period, end of story.”

Viviano reports that it was well known within the Clinton organization that, at the appropriate time, Clinton would publicly disclose Obama’s lack of “natural born” eligibility.  Click here to view Part 2 of the documentary.

But then, on Wednesday, Aug. 13, 2008, a man named Timothy Dale Johnson walked into the  Democratic Party state headquarters in Little Rock and shot the state chairman, Bill Gwatney, to death.  Gwatney was one of Bill Clinton’s closest friends and political allies.  This occurred just one day after Gwatney, a Clinton super-delegate, announced that the Arkansas delegation would cast all of their votes for Hillary on the first ballot at the Democratic National Convention, thus denying Barack Obama the 2008 nomination by acclamation.

Viviano is quoted as saying that she was told by a campaign staffer close to Hillary that the Gwatney assassination was a message: “Shut up, Bill, or you’re next.”  However, the campaign staffer insisted that Clinton was still prepared to speak out about Obama’s lack of Article II, Section 1 eligibility.  “And then,” Viviano said, paraphrasing the staffer, “they went in and said, ‘OK, it’s your daughter.  Now we’ll go after her…’ And then Bill never said anything.”

Bill and Hillary Clinton have been dutiful Obama supporters ever since… but in recent days things have begun to turn a bit sour.

On the day that Hillary Clinton, now Obama’s Secretary of State, arrived in Beijing for high level talks with the Chinese, it was learned that a blind Chinese dissident, Cheng Guangcheng, had escaped house arrest and had taken refuge in the U.S. Embassy.  What would Hillary do?  What grand strategy would the foreign policy geniuses at the White House devise to unravel the embarrassing situation in Beijing?  Would the Obama administration grant asylum, as has been long-standing practice, or would they push Cheng out the front door to an uncertain fate?

On Wednesday, May 2, Cheng Guangcheng left the American embassy in the custody of Chinese authorities.  Cheng has said that he wished to leave China to study in the United States.  Will he be allowed to do so?  If not, what will be his fate?  Will his wife be beaten to death?  If he and his family are harmed, their blood will be on the hands of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

But the diplomatic difficulties in Beijing were not the worst to befall the Clintons in what must have been one of the worst weeks in their political lives.  As Bill Clinton reveled in his role as “elder statesman” of the Democrat Party, the impeached former president was called upon to play a major role in a tasteless campaign ad in which Obama shamelessly “spiked the football,” taking personal credit for the killing of al-Qaeda leader Usama bin Laden.

In the ad, Clinton is seen complimenting Obama for approving the military raid on the bin Laden compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.  Then, looking straight into the camera, Clinton said, solemnly, “Suppose the Navy SEALs had gone in there, and it hadn’t been bin Laden.  Suppose they’d been captured or killed.  The downside would have been horrible for him…”

The downside would have been horrible for Obama?  What about the SEALS who put their lives on the line, and their superior officer, Admiral Bill McRaven, who put his long Navy career on the line?  In Obama’s world, they were only secondary players in the drama.  If the Obama ad is to be believed, the only real hero in the killing of Usama bin Laden was Barack Obama.

It is a political faux pas of major proportions and it will not soon be forgotten.  If there is one event or one line of dialogue that Obama will remember as he slinks out of the White House on Jan. 20, 2013, it will be Bill Clinton’s words: “The downside would have been horrible for him…”

We may never know what was running through Clinton’s mind as he uttered those words.  Was he fully aware that they could drive the final nail in the coffin of the Obama presidency?  Did he relish the occasion as pay-back time for what had been done to Hillary?  Whatever the truth of the matter, that simple 8-word sentence will forever be seen as a game-changer for both Barack Obama and Bill Clinton.  All in all, it was a very bad week in Clintonville.

Paul R. Hollrah

Paul R. Hollrah is a contributing editor for the National Writers Syndicate and the New Media JournalHis blog is found at OrderOfEphors.comHe resides in the lakes region of northeast Oklahoma.

Order a copy of Bob McCarty’s new book, Three Days In August: A U.S. Army Special Forces Soldier’s Fight For Military Justice.

World Too Dangerous for Well-Intentioned Amateurs

By Paul R. Hollrah, Guest Blogger

Sixty-six years and six months ago, the largest amphibious force ever assembled sailed across the stormy waters of the English Channel, bound for the heavily fortified beaches of Normandy, France.  Nearly half of the 156,000 invasion troops were Americans.  They and the troops of allied nations suffered massive casualties that day as they waded ashore under the withering fire of German infantry and artillery.  Nearly 2,500 American and 1,920 allied troops died in the invasion and tens of thousands more were wounded.

Between the Pearl Harbor attack Dec. 7, 1941, and the Japanese surrender Sept. 2, 1945, a period of 3 years, 8 months, and 26 days, the Unites States suffered 1,078,000 casualties, dead and wounded.  That was in a two-front war, of relatively short duration, but with relatively high casualty rates compared to more recent conflicts in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq.

It gives us pause to consider former New York mayor Ed Koch’s warning in a recent edition of the Jewish World Review.  He said, “There was a time when the U.S. military said it was capable of fighting 2 1/2 wars at the same time.  Today, as a result of being bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, we probably are unable to fight a third war, and our enemies know it.”

So how will the American people react to the very real prospect that we may be called upon to fight an open-ended war, on six fronts, simultaneously?  Although that prospect is now far from the American consciousness, who can deny that such an eventuality may be in our future?

The first attack of the third Islamic jihad began Nov. 4, 1979, when radical Iranian students occupied the American embassy in Tehran, taking 52 diplomats hostage and holding them for 444 days.  In subsequent years, radical Islam staged many additional attacks, but it wasn’t until Sept. 11, 2001, that jihadists made it clear that the major front in their war for worldwide domination had broadened to include the cities and towns of America:

  • On Dec. 25, 2009, Nigerian Muslim Umar Farouk Abdulmutalab, a passenger aboard a Northwest Airlines flight from Amsterdam to Detroit, attempted to detonate an explosive device hidden in his underwear.
  • On May 1, 2010, Pakistani immigrant Faisal Shahzad parked his 1993 Nissan Pathfinder on Times Square in New York.  Inside the SUV was a crude bomb made of propane and gasoline tanks, fireworks, 100 pounds of fertilizer, and a timing device.  The bomb failed to detonate.
  • In October 2010, authorities in England, Yemen and the U.S. uncovered a plot to ship explosive devices from Yemen to Jewish synagogues in Chicago.  One device was found in Great Britain, a second device was intercepted in Dubai.
  • On Nov. 26, the FBI and local police thwarted an attempt to detonate a car bomb at a Christmas tree lighting event in Portland’s (Ore.) Pioneer Courthouse Square.  The FBI and Portland police arrested the suspected bomber, 19-year-old Mohamed Osman Mohamud, a naturalized U.S. citizen of Somali descent.

The obvious question is, “How long will it be before these fumble-fingered terrorists perfect their bomb-making skills?”  These and the 9/11 atrocities, along with the Fort Hood massacre, are but the first of what radical Islam promises will be many years of terror attacks in a three-front war against the West.  And although leftist political sensibilities may soon cause us to withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, we cannot know when or how the domestic terror war will end.

For the first time in our history, we confront an enemy who does not distinguish between uniformed fighting forces and men, women and children in the civilian population; everyone is fair game.  And if so-called “moderate” Muslims continue to merely sit on their hands as interested spectators, then how can we escape the conclusion that it is not possible for a 21st century culture to coexist side-by-side with a 7th century culture?  Are the American people prepared to engage in a three-front war against Muslim extremists with a thirst for martyrdom and unlimited patience?

A fourth potential war front is now developing along our southern border where Mexican President Felipe Calderon appears unable to control drug-related violence on his side of the border.

The Mexican government reports that more than 31,000 people have been killed in drug-related violence since Calderon sent some 45,000 troops and federal police to battle the drug cartels in 2006.  According to the Houston Chronicle, at least 230 U.S. citizens have been killed in Mexico’s escalating wave of violence since 2003 – an average of nearly one killing a week.  The situation is such that Gov. Rick Perry (R-Texas) has suggested that it is time the United States used “every aspect of law enforcement that we have, including the military.”

What he fears, and what should be of major concern to all Americans is that, as violence grows in the Mexican border states the Mexican national police and the military will find their country to be all but ungovernable.  Anarchy will reign and both the peace-loving and the violence-prone will migrate northward in ever-growing numbers… the peace-loving looking for safety and security, the violence-prone looking for trouble.  And when the drug cartels and the Mexican military carry their fight across the border into Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California, the U.S. president, whether Democrat or Republican, will be forced to commit many thousands of U.S. troops to push them back.

When that happens, and as more and more U.S. and Canadian citizens are attacked and murdered in Mexican resort cities, our troops will find themselves pushing farther and farther south into Mexico to insure the safety of hundreds of thousands of North American expatriates.  We will quickly find ourselves engaged in war on a fourth front… a second Mexican War.  Are the American people prepared for that?

In addition to fighting wars against radical Islam in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the cities and towns of America, and fighting the Mexican drug cartels on our southern border and in Mexican border states, we may also find ourselves engaged in a shooting war against Iran on a fifth front in the Persian Gulf, in support of our allies in Israel and the Arab states of the region.  As Spengler writes in the Asian Times, “The difference between early 2008 and early 2010… is that Iran has had two years to enrich uranium, consolidate its grip on Syria, insert itself into Afghanistan, stockpile missiles with Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, and build up its terror capabilities around the world.  The window is closing in which Iran may be contained.”

For more than three decades, through Republican and Democrat administrations alike, we have failed to take the steps necessary to bring about regime change in Tehran.  Have we waited too long?  When the time is ripe, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will let us know.  But, ready or not, are the American people prepared for yet another armed conflict in the Middle East… one that would almost certainly cause us to lose a critical portion of our imported energy supplies?

And finally, we find ourselves today with 25,000 American troops stationed along the DMZ in South Korea, where the North Koreans threaten our Japanese allies and use South Korean population centers for artillery target practice.  While Barack Obama may have unlimited patience for North Korean provocations, the South Koreans do not.  Apologizing to his people for not taking retaliatory action, South Korean president Lee Myung-bak has threatened massive retaliation if the artillery barrages continue… with 25,000 U.S. troops serving as the first line of defense against a North Korean force of 1.1 million active duty troops and 8.2 million reserves.

All of this takes place at a time when North Korea’s only major ally, the People’s Republic of China, has chosen to send an unspoken message to the Obama regime by test firing a rocket from a nuclear submarine just miles off the coast of southern California.  So if the North Koreans continue with their provocations and the South Koreans retaliate with massive force, what of the 25,000 U.S. troops on the DMZ?  Is there anyone outside the Obama White House and the New York Times who thinks that the United States could push back militarily, when the money to fund those military operations would have to be borrowed from… guess who… the Chinese?

It has become standard fare for our national political leaders to begin major foreign policy speeches with the warning that “we live in dangerous times.”  Yes, we live in dangerous times and we have the scars to prove it, but we have never before lived in a world quite as dangerous as the one in which we now find ourselves.  So if we are incapable, as Ed Koch suggests, of fighting three wars simultaneously, how could we possibly wage war on as many as six fronts simultaneously… in the U.S., Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Mexico and Korea?

During the 2008 Democrat primaries, Hillary Clinton asked, rhetorically, who the American people would rather have answering the White House telephone at 3:00 a.m., she or Barack Obama.  As it turns out, with Obama sleeping next to that telephone, the rest of us find it more and more difficult to get a good night’s sleep.

Obama’s foreign policy initiatives… characterized mostly by inappropriate bows, national insults, snubs, diplomatic faux pas, outlandishly expensive grand tours, and big toothy grins… has been a complete failure.  His “kumbaya” style of foreign relations has caused us to lose not only the grudging respect of our enemies, but the trust and admiration of our allies, as well.

The world is far too dangerous a place to allow well-intentioned amateurs to play war games with our lives and with our precious freedoms.  It’s time we hired some adult leadership while we still can.

Hollrah is a senior fellow at the Lincoln Heritage Institute and a contributing editor for Family Security Matters and a number of online publications.  He resides in northeast Oklahoma.

Shock Jock Howard Stern Stands Up for Capitalism, Says ‘I will never vote for a Democrat Again!’

Never in the 3.5-year history of this blog have I mentioned Howard Stern’s name in a post.  Why?  Because, for the most part, I detest the man as a foul-mouthed purveyor of filth on the airwaves.  Today, however, I feature him out of the sheer hope — perhaps misplaced, but I’m willing to risk it — that liberal fans of Stern might follow his example and pledge to never vote for another Democrat candidate again.  In the one-minute video below, the radio “shock jock” tells a colleague, recalling a conversation he had with his liberal agent.  “I have vowed I will never vote for a Democrat again!  I don’t give a (expletive)!

“I don’t care if God becomes a Democrat,” he continued.  “I said, ‘I backed Hillary Clinton.  I backed Al Gore.  I backed John Kerry.  I am done with them.”

After going on to call Democrats on the Federal Communications Commission communists, he summed things up by saying, “This is gangsterism!”

Hat tip:  BigGovernment.com

How Will Obama Administration Officials Respond to Discovery of Rocket Launcher in Houston?

According to a news report out of Houston this morning, police there found an AT-4 shoulder-mounted rocket launcher like the one shown in the photo above, alleged to belong to a man by the name of Nabilaye I. Yansane, in a southwest Houston apartment complex.  Though I have yet to see comments by members of the Obama Administration in response to the news about this weapon, I have some ideas about what they might say:

“This was just an isolated incident.” — President Barack Obama

“Obviously, this was a mix-up.  The rocket launcher was probably left there by a careless veteran returning from Iraq or Afghanistan.” — Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano

“Arabs traditionally welcome the New Year by firing larger, more powerful fireworks than we do in the United States.” — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

“It’s probably something the guy picked up at an Army surplus store and doesn’t deserve any more attention than it’s already received from Fox News.” — Press Secretary Robert Gibbs

Unfortunately, I suspect all of the above comments will be proven reckless and wrong.  That said, should Americans be concerned about such a discovery?

According to a retired Navy SEAL friend of mine, the AT-4 is a one-time-use weapon capable of hitting a target from 300 yards, can bring down aircraft and can be remotely fired.  Best of all for the one using it, my combat-veteran friend says, it’s the weapon of choice — short of a Stinger missile, that is — for someone who wants to take out a hardened vehicle like those used for executive protection.

Developing…

Hat tip:  Jihad Watch

UPDATE 12/31/09 at 1:10 p.m Central: Remember the news story about the Continental Airlines pilot who, in June, reported a missile had flown past his aircraft while it was in the airspace above Liberty County, Texas.  Perhaps this rocket launcher is the one used in that incident.  Either way, troubling questions remain:  How did the rocket launcher end up in Houston and who is responsible?

RELATED 12/31/09 at 10:39 p.m Central: Police in the Fort Worth suburb of North Richland Hills, Texas, confirmed tonight that a device found in that city — and next to a Koran — contained explosives.  See this report for details.

RELATED #2 01/01/10 at 11:43 a.m. Central: Though a couple of days old, a Philadelphia television station reported that police in that city were investigating the discovery of a Molotov cocktail along with anti-Israeli books inside a Center City parking garage.

Uncle Jay Explains the News: August 17, 2009

Uncle Jay begins this week’s installment of Uncle Jay Explains the News by expressing thankfulness that “none of us were terminated by a ‘Death Panel’ during the past week.”

The word of the week, “decorum”, is looked at as it relates to health care town meetings, Dick Cheney’s soon-to-be-released book and Hillary Clinton’s long-standing grudge about her husband’s philandering.  He also draws attention to Rod Blagojevich pretending he’s a 22-year-old dancer, Miley Cyrus’ pole-dancing exploits, the combined IQ of Jon and Kate, Hillary Clinton’s long-standing grudge about her husband’s philandering exploits and Michael Vick’s new adventure with the Philadelphia Beagles Eagles.

Did President Obama Send Hillary to the Moon?

One year ago today, then-Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee became the first to suggest putting Hillary Clinton on a rocket ship to the moon.  Now, it appears as if the statement made by the former Arkansas governor during a televised debate, captured in the video (below left), might have been prophetic.

With the extremely low profile being maintained by the former first lady as President Barack Obama’s secretary of state, it wouldn’t be difficult to convince someone that Clinton has indeed been sent to the moon — or, at a minimum, is serving aboard the International Space Station — as part of a new initiative in foreign relations.  She is that scarce!

Gotta hand it to President Obama; he sure knows how to neutralize an opponent.