Tellurian

Archive for the ‘al Qaeda’ Category

Clinton Suggests Link to al Qaeda Offshoot in Deadly Libya Attack :

In Africa, al Qaeda, Libya, Madame Secretary Hillary Clinton on September 27, 2012 at 12:26 am

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday suggested there was a link between the Qaeda franchise in North Africa and the attack at the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed the American ambassador and three others. She was the highest-ranking Obama administration official to publicly make the connection, and her comments intensified what is becoming a fiercely partisan fight over whether the attack could have been prevented.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton meeting with President Mohamed Magariaf of Libya.

Mrs. Clinton did not offer any new evidence of a Qaeda link, and officials later said the question would be officially settled only after the F.B.I. completed a criminal inquiry, which could take months. But they said they had not ruled out the involvement of Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb — an affiliate of the international terrorist group with origins in Algeria — in an attack the administration initially described as a spontaneous protest turned violent.

(…)

Mrs. Clinton made her remarks at a special United Nations meeting on the political and security crisis in the parts of North Africa known as the Maghreb and the Sahel, particularly in northern Mali, which has been overrun by Islamic extremists since a military coup helped lead to the division of that country this year.

Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb has long operated in the region, she said, and was now exploiting a haven in Mali to export extremism and terrorist violence to neighbors like Libya.

“Now with a larger safe haven and increased freedom to maneuver, terrorists are seeking to extend their reach and their networks in multiple directions,” Mrs. Clinton told leaders assembled at the meeting, including President François Hollande of France and the United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon. “And they are working with other violent extremists to undermine the democratic transitions under way in North Africa, as we tragically saw in Benghazi.”

Mr. Ban called the meeting to lay the groundwork for a possible international military intervention — to be led by African troops — to help the new military government in Mali re-establish control over a part of the country that Mr. Hollande noted was the size of France and is now under the grip of Islamist extremists imposing their vision of law and order.

“We cannot stand by and allow terrorists to take over an entire territory,” Mr. Hollande said.

Top militia leaders in Benghazi have dismissed the possibility that Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb played a role in the attacks or had a foothold in eastern Libya. Benghazi residents have said they believe the brigade that conducted the attack could not have managed the assault on its own, because it included more than 100 heavily armed fighters.

Mrs. Clinton’s connection of the turmoil in the Sahel with the violence in Benghazi, which killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, echoed remarks made last week by Matthew G. Olsen, the director of the National Counterterrorism Center. He said that intelligence analysts were investigating ties between local Libyan militias and Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, but had not yet come to any conclusions.

A senior administration official said that Mrs. Clinton intended to underscore the rising threat that the Qaeda affiliate and other extremist organizations pose to the emerging democratic governments in countries like Tunisia and Libya, adding that the group clearly intended to make contact with extremists in Benghazi and elsewhere. The final determination of the group’s role, the official said, would await the investigation by the F.B.I.

Mrs. Clinton has also ordered a review of diplomatic security that is being led by Thomas R. Pickering, a veteran diplomat and former undersecretary of state.

It was not clear whether Mrs. Clinton’s remarks foreshadowed any possible retaliation against those who carried out the attack, whether they operated in sympathy with, or on orders from, Al Qaeda leaders. But she reiterated the administration’s vow to bring those responsible to justice, telling the conference that American intelligence and law-enforcement agencies were working not only with Libya but with other nations in the region to investigate the attack.

The cooperation with other nations beyond Libya in the investigations also seemed to indicate that the attack’s planning and execution might have crossed international borders and not simply have been a local, spontaneous eruption of violence in response to an amateurish Internet video denigrating the Prophet Muhammad.

(…)

From the start, Libyan officials have sought to blame foreigners, even as they move to crack down on extremist militias that took part in the uprising against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi last year and clearly had a role in the attack. Mr. Magariaf said at least 40 suspects had been questioned, but there was no definitive conclusion about those involved. “It was a preplanned act of terrorism directed against American citizens,” Mr. Magariaf said in remarks broadcast on NBC’s “Today” show Wednesday.

The White House press secretary, Jay Carney, defended the administration’s evolving version of events. “Over the course of the past two weeks, this administration has provided as much information as it has been able to,” Mr. Carney told reporters traveling on Air Force One to Ohio on Wednesday. “We made clear that our initial assessment and interim reports were based on information that was available at the time.”

Read the story in it’s entirety here: NYT

Advertisements

Obama Turns to Bill Clinton for Foreign Policy Cred

In Afghanistan, al Qaeda, Barack Obama, Bin Laden, foreign policy, Hezbollah, Muslim Brotherhood, Romney on May 2, 2012 at 7:08 am

President Obama’s foreign policy is in complete disarray.  He has misunderstood and underestimated the need for the War on Terror from the word “go,” and as a result, his administration has now simply decided the war is over–as if they honestly believe that telling our enemies we’re packing up and going home will settle everything.

Yet Obama needs a nail on which to hang his hat, so he’s out on the campaign trail summing up his foreign policy thus—Osama bin Laden is dead. But this approach has hit with such a thud that Obama has been forced to jet around the world for fancy photo ops and parade around Bill Clinton to convince the Democrat base that the current Commander-in-Chief is actually up to the task. Clinton is a strange choice, however, *since he is best remembered as the president who refused to kill bin Laden.* ( *pre 9/11 )

So now we have Obama  trying to represent himself as a foreign policy success story, while actually fleeing from records of weakness and appeasement. (especially with Iran and Pakistan)

And from his not-so-lofty perch, he is working to distract the public from Obama’s utter failure by asserting that Republican candidate Mitt Romney would never have okayed the bin Laden kill. Their basis for this assertion is a statement Romney made on the campaign trail in 2007. And it’s important to note it’s a statement they’re taking out of context in order to suit their intentions:

“I wouldn’t want to over concentrate on bin Laden. He’s one of many, many people who are involved in this global jihadist effort. He’s by no means the only leader. It’s a very diverse group – Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood and, of course, different names throughout the world. It’s not worth moving heaven and earth and spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person. It is worth fashioning and executing an effective strategy to defeat global, violent jihad, and I have a plan for doing that.”

To be honest, the fact that Obama would seize upon this quote is as embarrassing as it is telling.  Obama does not understand the immensity of the War on Terror or the commitment necessary to see such a war through. Thus, when Romney says, in effect, the war is bigger than one man—Osama bin Laden—he’s not saying “I would not okay a kill on bin Laden.” Rather, he’s saying, the war is too big to be orchestrated solely for the apprehension or death of one man. Moreover, Romney understands the war continues beyond bin Laden’s death, which is something that Obama has missed.

In other news, security measures have recently been beefed up around U.S. airports because of “concerns… that terrorists will ingest explosives and try to detonate them on a commercial flight.” But rest easy, folks;  Obama gave the order to kill Bin Laden so the war is over.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/05/02/obama-turns-to-bill-clinton-for-foreign-policy-cred