Category Archives: Insurgency

Benghazi: GOP Report 100+ Witnesses, No Video to Blame

Posted on by

The full 800 page report is here.

During the first attack, the only focus the White House and the State Department was to concoct a blame, no one cared at the terrifying moments about a response or rescue while Panetta delivered the orders for a military response. Exactly how many lives were at risk at the time is still somewhat unknown, but rather estimated…simply put all their lives were in peril.

It shows that the State Department assessment of the situation in Benghazi in 2011 and 2012 noted rising crime levels, rampant firearm ownership, and a high risk of militia violence in the security vacuum left by the toppling of Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddafi. The precarious security situation, according to the report, was exacerbated by inadequate security at the Benghazi outpost, which was plagued by equipment failures, a lack of manpower and relied on an often-disorganized local militia for protection. Read more here from CNN and their summary.

*****

EXCLUSIVE –  The claim that the fatal 2012 Benghazi terrorist attacks were sparked by an anti-Muslim video was crafted in Washington by Obama administration appointees and reflected neither eyewitness nor real-time reports from the Americans under siege, according to the final report of the GOP-led Benghazi Select Committee.

The GOP report, released Tuesday, followed by less than a day a report by the Democrats on the panel saying that security at the Benghazi, Libya facility was “woefully inadequate” but former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton never personally denied any requests from diplomats for additional protection. More from FNC.

House Republicans’ Report Sheds New Light on Benghazi Attack

NBC: After a more than two-year investigation into the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, House Republicans are set to release a lengthy report Tuesday recounting the events that led to the deaths of four American diplomats.

It sheds new light on the breakdown in the U.S. military’s response to the attack and offers new details about why U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens was at the compound in the Libyan city with only two State Department bodyguards, months after the British and others had evacuated the area.

NBC News obtained the first 175-page section of the full 800-page House Select Committee on Benghazi report that will be released later Tuesday. The Democratic minority released its own report Monday.

One section of the report seems to allege that U.S. officials fundamentally misunderstood who their allies were at the time. The Republican majority’s report found that 35 Americans were saved not by a “quasi-governmental militia” as previous reports concluded, or even a group the U.S. saw as allies. Instead, the report determines that the Americans were saved by the “Libyan Military Intelligence,” a group composed of military officers under the Moammar Khaddafy regime, the Libyan dictator who the U.S. helped topple just one year earlier.

The February 17 Martyr Brigade, “recommended by the Libyan Government and contractually obligated to provide security to the Mission Compound,” had fled, the report found. “In other words, some of the very individuals the United States helped remove from power during the Libyan revolution were the only Libyans that came to the assistance of the United States on the night of the Benghazi attacks,” the report states.

Last fall, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified before the Benghazi committee that Stevens had originally chosen to serve in Benghazi because “he understood America had to be represented there at that pivotal time.”

In previously unreported details, the Republican majority of the committee found that Stevens traveled to the U.S. mission that week to both fill a temporary staffing gap and to spearhead an effort to make Benghazi a permanent diplomatic post.

Witnesses told the committee Stevens was laying the groundwork for a visit by Secretary Clinton just one month later and “the hope was to establish a permanent consulate in Benghazi for the Secretary to present to the Libyan government during her trip.”

advertisement

Discussions were already underway in Washington for how to fund the upgrades, and one month before the end of the fiscal year there was pressure to assemble a package before available funds were lost.

The report highlights the military’s failure to carry out Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s order to deploy forces to Benghazi and the lengthy delay that prevented the military assets from arriving at the embassy in Tripoli until 2 p.m. the day after the Benghazi attack.

“What was disturbing from the evidence the Committee found was that at the time of the final lethal attack at the Annex, no asset ordered deployed by the Secretary had even left the ground,” the report states.

Previous accounts blamed the “tyranny of time and distance” plus the failure to have airplanes ready for the significant delay in moving military assets. But the report states conflicting orders from State Department and Pentagon officials over whether Marines should wear military uniforms or civilian attire also played a role.

In a newly revealed two-hour secure video conference on the night of the attacks led by White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough and attended by Clinton and others, State Department officials raised concerns about the diplomatic sensitivities of the attire to be worn by assets launched.

In an interview with the Committee, Patrick Kennedy, the under secretary or Management at State, described the department’s sensitivity as wanting to “make sure that the steps we were taking would enhance the security of our personnel, not potentially diminish the security of our personnel.”

According to one commander, the report states, as forces prepared to deploy, “during the course of three hours, he and his Marines changed in and out of their uniforms four times.”

Further, several witnesses told the committee that despite Panetta’s orders, the operating plan was not to insert any asset into Benghazi. “Their understanding was that the assets needed to be sent to Tripoli to augment security at the Embassy, and that the State Department was working to move the State Department personnel from Benghazi to Tripoli.”

Republicans on the committee were critical of high-level officials in Washington for mistakenly thinking that the attacks were over and the crisis had passed by the time the emergency video conference convened, which the report alleges contributed to the confusion.

The report also finds that then-Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral James Winnefeld, did not participate in the secure call because “he had left to return to his residence to host a dinner party for foreign dignitaries.” He received one update during the dinner on the attacks.

The section of the report devoted to the Benghazi assault concludes “the response to the attacks suffered from confusion and miscommunication circulating between agencies.”

A total of 107 witnesses were interviewed for the report, including 81 never before questioned by Congress and 9 eyewitnesses to the attacks, Republicans on the committee told NBC News. The committee also received and reviewed more than 75,000 new pages of documents.

Democrats on the House Select Committee on Benghazi had a sharply different view even before seeing the Republicans’ report. The minority version released Monday concludes that “the U.S. military could not have done anything differently on the night of the attacks that would have saved the lives of the four brave Americans killed in Benghazi.”

Ranking Member Elijah Cummings early Tuesday called the Republican report “partisan” but could offer no additional comment because “we haven’t read it because Republicans didn’t want us to check it against the evidence we obtained.”‎

Democrats also attacked Republicans over the committee’s process, including what they describe as “grave abuses,” such as excluding Democrats from interviews, concealing exculpatory evidence, withholding interview transcripts, leaking inaccurate information, issuing unilateral subpoenas, sending armed Marshals to the home of a cooperative witness, and even conducting political fundraising “by exploiting the deaths of four Americans.”

The Democrats chastised committee chairman Trey Gowdy who they said “personally and publicly accused Secretary Clinton of compromising a highly classified intelligence source.”

Democrats did acknowledge, as had been previously determined, that “security measures in Benghazi were woefully inadequate as a result of decisions made by officials in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security.” But their report concluded, “Secretary Clinton never personally denied any requests for additional security in Benghazi.”

Reacting to the GOP report early Tuesday, State Department deputy spokesman Mark Toner said: “We have made great progress towards making our posts safer since 2012. We have been working to respond to the extensive findings and recommendations of the independent Accountability Review Board, closing out 26 out of its 29 recommendations.”

A Select Committee spokesman dismissed the Democrats’ report as “rehashed, partisan talking points” aimed at defending Hillary Clinton.

NBC News was awaiting comment from the White House on the report released by the Republican majority on the committee.

 

Clinton, for her part, has repeatedly denounced the committee’s purpose. “There have been seven investigations led mostly by Republicans in the Congress and they were non-partisan and they reached conclusions that, first of all, I and nobody did anything wrong but there were changes we could make,” Clinton said during a TODAY town hall on Oct. 5, 2015. “This committee was set up, as they have admitted, for the purpose of making a partisan political issue out of the deaths of four Americans. I would have never done that.”

Fallujah Secure or Not?

Posted on by

Iraq: Flash Update on Recent Events – 25 June 2016

KEY FIGURES

85,374 individuals* displaced from Falluja and surrounding areas

23,559 individuals** displaced from Mosul and surrounding areas

3.3 million IDPs* in Iraq since January 2014

229,564 Iraqi refugees*** in the region

Funding

UNHCR’s overall appeal of USD 584 million for IDPs and Iraqi refugees in the region is only 21% funded

ANBAR CORRIDOR

▪ Conditions in the camps in Anbar Governorate are particularly difficult due to high temperatures and arid conditions. Suffocating heat is particularly an issue for new arrivals as many of the newly established sites are not connected to electricity. Families are not able to use their electric fans and the conditions inside the tents are unbearable, which poses a big risk especially to children and the elderly.

▪ UNHCR has continued to prepare further sites and erect tents in Al Khalidiya and Habbaniya Tourist City to accommodate the new arrivals. Since 23 May, UNHCR has installed 8 Rubb Halls and ovided 1,533 tents to provide temporary accommodation for over 9,500 persons displaced from Falluja.

▪ Since 23 May, UNHCR has distributed nearly 8,500 kits of core relief items (CRIs) such as blankets, mattresses and jerry cans to help some 50,000 people who fled Falluja.

MOSUL CORRIDOR

▪ The Governor of Erbil has granted a 114 dunam (250,000 square metres) piece of land where UNHCR and partners will be able to build a new 940-plot camp, capable of hosting an additional 6,000 IDPs. UNHCR has finalized the lay out of the camp and pending adequate funding, the camp will be completed within two months.

▪It is a priority to decongest the reception centre in Debaga camp, where there are currently 5,513 IDPs. More arrivals anticipated in the coming days as fighting in and around Makhmur district has intensified since 23 June. To make space for IDPs waiting in the reception centre, UNHCR is currently preparing plots for another 320 tents on the Stadium extension site, which will be completed over the next week. This will bring the total to 777 tents in the Stadium site including the extension and service area, which altogether will have a capacity to accommodate 4,000 persons (nearly doubling the current capacity which is full).

If Fallujah has been liberated by Iraqi forces, it did so with Iranian Shiite forces under the command of IRGC commander Quassam Soleimani. How does this square when Sunnis have fled? Is Iraq becoming an extension of Iran? Taking on Mosul will tell the full story if…if all forms of liberation hold in Fallujah.

   

A look at Iraq’s war against IS after Fallujah

BAGHDAD (AP) — Iraqi forces say they have completely liberated the city of Fallujah from the Islamic State group after a monthlong operation, marking one of their biggest victories since the extremists swept across large parts of the country in 2014.

But the IS group still controls parts of northern and western Iraq, including the country’s second largest city, Mosul. And the militants have shown they can still launch large-scale suicide bombings and other attacks. Here’s a look at what lies ahead for Iraq and the U.S.-led military coalition battling the extremists.

HOLDING FALLUJAH

Fallujah was the first Iraqi city to fall to IS, in January 2014, and the group’s last major stronghold in the sprawling Anbar province, a largely tribal Sunni region where distrust of the post-2003 Shiite-led government runs deep. A key task will be to prevent militants from returning to the city, as they did after two major U.S.-led assaults on Fallujah in 2004, when American soldiers saw their deadliest urban combat since Vietnam.

Iraqi authorities will also need to ensure that residents can return to their homes and rebuild, and that powerful Sunni tribes in the area stay on the government’s side. Those efforts could be complicated by the ballooning humanitarian crisis in Anbar and the presence of government-allied Shiite militias. The Iran-backed forces kept to the outskirts of Fallujah during the military operation, but could assert their power as the army moves on to other fronts.

___

A HUMANITARIAN CRISIS

An early test for whether the government can fully reintegrate Fallujah is already underway in sprawling desert camps outside the city, where thousands of civilians who fled the fighting are living out in the open, with little food, water or shelter. The U.N. estimates that 85,000 people have fled the Fallujah fighting. They may not be able to return for weeks or months while the army clears explosives left behind by the extremists.

Daytime temperatures approach 50 degrees Celsius (120 degrees Fahrenheit) in the camps, and aid workers have warned of a humanitarian crisis if more supplies are not quickly brought in.

___

THE LONG ROAD TO MOSUL

IS remains firmly in control of the northern city of Mosul, which was once home to a million people.

Iraqi leaders have pledged to liberate Mosul this year, but U.S. officials and analysts say that timetable may not be realistic. Iraqi forces are deployed in Makhmour, some 45 miles (75 kilometers) south of Mosul, but may need to seize an airfield on the other side of the Tigris River before launching an all-out assault on the city.

The U.S.-led coalition has trained more than 23,000 Iraqi troops since December 2014, but thousands more are needed for the operation to retake Mosul, according to coalition and Iraqi officials.

“Mosul can be a nastier fight than what we saw in Fallujah,” said U.S. Army Col. Christopher Garver, a spokesman for the American-led military coalition. “If that’s the Iraqi capital of the caliphate one would expect them to fight hard to maintain that.”

___

TURMOIL IN BAGHDAD

Victory in Fallujah has given a major boost to Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, but his government is still crippled by political gridlock that has brought thousands of people into the streets in recent months. Supporters of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr have twice stormed the Green Zone, the capital’s heavily guarded government district, while demanding wide-ranging political reforms.

Baghdad has also seen a series of deadly attacks in recent weeks despite the advances against IS in Anbar. That has raised fears that the extremists may fully revert to an earlier strategy of targeting security forces and the Shiite majority in order to stoke sectarian tensions.

A Hotel in Texas for Immigrants?

Posted on by

Immigration officials consider bid for new ‘hotel-like’ detention center

Stratton Oilfield Systems seeks to turn former Texas work camp into 500-bed facility with improved living conditions, which activists say would still be ‘prison’

 

Guardian: Federal immigration officials are moving forward with plans for a new 500-bed family detention center to house migrant women and children, even as many advocates and politicians have called for the closure of such facilities altogether.

Officials in Dimmit County, 45 miles from the Texas border with Mexico, say they’ll consider a bid on Monday from a firm who says their facility in a 27-acre former work camp for oil workers would provide dramatically better conditions than two other family detention centers in the state.

Those facilities have faced complaints of poor food, inadequate medical care and allegations of sexual abuse from detainees, activists and the US Civil Rights Commission.

“Our facility offers a community-based alternative that will allow children to live in a home setting, attend school, and access critical legal and social services,” Stratton Oilfield Systems said in a pitch to potential partners.

“They want to have it with no fence,” said Mike Uriegas, a commissioner in Dimmit County, who says he first met with Stratton Oilfield Systems two weeks ago. “They don’t want to appear like a prison or detention center.”

But Cristina Parker, Immigration Programs Director for Grassroots Leadership, said she and other advocates object inherently to the concept of a detention center for families fleeing violence, regardless of the purported conditions.

“If you are not free to leave, then it doesn’t matter how nice it is,” Parker said. “It’s a prison.”

The Obama administration’s use of family detention centers that hold children and mothers has become one of the most contested elements of America’s border protection program.

Advocates have called on the Obama administration to pursue alternatives for families who are waiting for courts to hear pending asylum and immigration claims.

“Our families have witnessed their loved ones killed before their eyes, they have been the victim of rapes and robberies simply because of who they are,” said Jonathan Ryan, executive director of the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services. “Our refugee families need protection, not jail.”

Related reading: SERCO, Global Corruption

Related reading: Orlando Terrorist, Omar/G4S and SERCO

Earlier this month, a nearby Texas county had considered a bid with British firm Serco, which has a history of immigration detention center scandals in the UK and Australia. Jim Wells County voted not to bid on the contract, after some officials voiced concern over past abuse allegations against the firm.

Uriegas said he and other officials are undecided on the Stratton bid and will learn more at a meeting on Monday, which immigration advocates also plan to attend. One group had already heard of the company.

Last July, Stratton’s vice-president, Shannon A Stratton, tried to pitch the same idea for the closed worker housing in a letter to Grassroots Leadership, an Austin-based organization that opposes the prison industry.

A glossy proposal accompanying Stratton’s letter showed hotel-like two-bedroom studios with a living room, kitchenette and full bathroom. Stratton noted a federal judge has said women and children should be released from other detention centers where they are being held in “deplorable” conditions.

“The Studios in Carrizo Springs offers an excellent solution and is distinctly different from the facilities that are so highly criticized in the media and by human rights groups,” Stratton wrote. “Families could be free to come and go while they await immigration hearings, receive education about their rights and responsibilities, and pursue permanent relocation and employment.”

“It shows they don’t quite know what is going on,” said Cristina Parker, immigration programs director for Grassroots Leadership. “They’re confused about other things too, because it is blanketly untrue that the families will be free to come and go.”

Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s other two family residential centers in Texas are surrounded by razor wire and high fences.

The proposal emerges just days after the US supreme court blocked Obama’s plan to spare millions of immigrants from deportation. He vowed afterward: “What was unaffected by today’s ruling, or lack of a ruling, is the enforcement priorities that we’ve put in place.”

 

The LEAVE Vote Won, What Brexit Means Now

Posted on by

Populism and Elitism finally lost…the people have spoken and the battle for independence is long and hard but ultimately sweet. Citizens are disgusted with being ruled by Belgium.

Related reading: Brexit spreads across Europe: Italy, France, Holland and Denmark ALL call for referendums

The dynamics have not been determined and are impossible to predicts.

Given the drop in the value of the UK currency, the U.S dollar has risen however, the markets are going to be volatile for several days. France and Germany are in precarious positions and France has become the 7th largest economy by the drop in the value of the pound.

The Bank of England is working earnestly to calm markets across the globe.

Watch Scotland:

How Could Scotland Protect its EU Links After Brexit? 

It is often presumed that Scotland will continue to be part of the EU, either through a UK-wide vote to remain in the EU referendum or by joining the EU after a successful second independence referendum, writes Kirsty Hughes. She argues, however, that it is possible that Scotland could find itself outside the EU following a vote to leave, and that it should consider how to develop a differentiated relationship with the EU distinct from England.

At issue going forward is Article 50:

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.

Prime Minister, David Cameron has resigned and will leave office by October. Cameron is expected to notify the EU this morning that the U.K. is invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, under which the two sides will have an initial two years to agree how their relations will look in future.

Markets were generally unprepared for “Brexit” after the last opinion polls, and more important Britain’s widely watched bookies, before the vote had pointed to a victory for the Remain camp. The Bank of England, the IMF, and OECD, as well as the Fed’s Janet Yellen, have all warned of a severe bout of volatility after a “Brexit” vote, with longer-lasting damage to the economy as a result of higher uncertainty, lower investment and more obstacles to trade. More here from Forbes.

 

Victory: Supreme Court Votes 4-4 on DACA, Obama Angry

Posted on by

The lower court decision stands. Obama said many times he did not have the authority and in the end, used executive action anyway. The Supreme Court, well 4 Justices stood with the Constitution and rule his action was not within his authority.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott had this response:

The Solicitor General, representing the Government in this case is Donald Verilli. As an aside, he resigned on June 2, and his last day is June 24th.

Now comes Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson on the Supreme Court decision:

Statement by Secretary Johnson on Today’s Supreme Court Decision

Release Date:
June 23, 2016

 

DHS: Like the President, I am disappointed by the Supreme Court’s 4-4 vote today in United States v. Texas.  The case concerns Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) and the expansion of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).  The 4-4 impasse leaves the court of appeals ruling in place and effectively prohibits us from implementing these important initiatives.

It is important to emphasize that this ruling does not affect the existing DACA policy, which was not challenged.  Eligible individuals may continue to come forward and request initial grants or renewals of DACA, pursuant to the guidelines established in 2012.

We are also moving forward on the other executive actions the President and I announced in November 2014 to reform our immigration system.  This includes our changes to the Department’s immigration enforcement priorities.  Through these priorities, we are more sharply focused on the removal of convicted criminals, threats to public safety and national security, and border security.  We have ended the controversial Secure Communities program.  We are expanding policies designed to help family members of U.S. citizens and permanent residents stay together when removal would result in extreme hardship.  And we have taken several actions to make it easier for international students, entrepreneurs, and high-skilled immigrants to contribute to the U.S. economy.

The President and I remain committed to fixing our broken immigration system.  We are disappointed by the 4-4 vote in the Supreme Court today, and the gridlock in Congress that has stood in the way of more lasting, comprehensive immigration reform.

 

*****

FNC: The judgment could have significant political and legal consequences in a presidential election year highlighted by competing rhetoric over immigration. As the ruling was announced, pro-immigration activists filled the sidewalk in front of the court, some crying as the ruling became public. Critics of the policy touted the decision as a strong statement against “executive abuses.”

“The Constitution is clear: The president is not permitted to write laws—only Congress is. This is another major victory in our fight to restore the separation of powers,” House Speaker Paul Ryan said in a statement, adding that the ruling rendered Obama’s actions “null and void.”

Obama, though, said the decision “takes us further from the country that we aspire to be.”

He stressed that earlier changes his administration made to immigration policy are not affected, but acknowledged his most recent 2014 changes cannot go forward and additional executive actions are unlikely.

While Obama accepted the ruling, he also made his own full-court press, saying the split decision underscores the importance of the current court vacancy and the appointment of a successor to the late Justice Antonin Scalia, to “break this tie.” So far, Senate Republicans have not considered Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland.

Meanwhile:

As Cubans rush through Texas, immigration policy questioned

From February to May, about 4,000 Cubans crossed over the Rio Grande River into Texas’ westernmost city. The number of Cubans coming to the U.S. has increased dramatically in the last few years. And it continues to rise, with about 77,000 Cubans entering between October 2014 and April 2016. Many are forgoing the typical route across the Florida Straits by boat to Miami and are traveling by foot, bus, boat and plane through Central America and Mexico to the Southwest border. More here.