"Al-Qaeda snatched missiles" in Libya

Only Obama knows what was behind his insane rush to Libya to fight for the sharia alongside al qaeda. But it is heart dropping. And the consequences just keep on coming.

JAKE TAPPER, guest-anchoring "This Week," to Gates:

"Do you think we'll be gone [from the Libya operation] by the end of the year - will the mission be over by the end of the year?"

GATES: "I don't think anybody knows the answer."

CLINTON: "I think this a watershed moment in international decision-making. We learned a lot in the 1990s: We saw what happened in Rwanda. It took a long time in the Balkans, in Kosovo, to deal with a tyrant. ... What has happened since March 1st, and we're not even done with the month, demonstrates really remarkable leadership."

TAPPER: " Do you think Libya posed an actual or imminent threat to the United States?"

GATES: "No, no. It was not -- it was not a vital national interest to the United States, but it was an interest: ... the engagement of the Arabs, the engagement of the Europeans, the general humanitarian question that was at stake ... [Y]ou had a potentially significantly destabilizing event taking place in Libya that put at risk potentially the revolutions in both Tunisia and Egypt."

TAPPER: "What do say to the people in Ivory Coast or Syria, who say, 'Where's OUR no-fly zone? We're being killed by OUR government, too."

Worse still? You ain't seen nothing yet. As for 2012 -- anyone, and I mean anyone, other than this traitor. America cannot survive 6 more years of this wrongheaded and strangely motivated  incompetence. The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War on America

'Al-Qaeda snatched missiles' in Libya hat tip Van ews.com.au

AL-QAEDA'S offshoot in North Africa has snatched surface-to-air missiles from an arsenal in Libya during the civil strife there, Chad's President says.

Idriss Deby Itno did not say how many surface-to-air missiles were stolen, but told the African weekly Jeune Afrique that he was "100 per cent sure" of his assertion.

"The Islamists of al-Qaeda took advantage of the pillaging of arsenals in the rebel zone to acquire arms, including surface-to-air missiles, which were then smuggled into their sanctuaries in Tenere," a desert region of the Sahara that stretches from northeast Niger to western Chad, Deby said in the interview.

"We have the same information," about heavy weapons, including SAM 7 missiles, a military source from Niger said.

"Islamists," what an asinine word. Enough already with this stupidity.

Comments

[Beagle]

"Islamist" conveys the idea of political Islam, but it could suggest to some that Islam isn't inherently political, legal, and military. Yet it's all three, and more! Several years ago I dug a three-word definition of Islam out of an old 'Orientalist' tome: "portable, theocratic state." Traditional Islam as practiced from the 7th-21st Centuries has been more theocratic 'Islamist' than not.

[Alena Hennessy]

GATES: "I don't think anybody knows the answer."
this pretty much says all we need to know about anything with this administration! They don't know what the intended consequences are of the bombings, they don't know who we are siding with against Qhadafi, and they don't know when it will end

[lhm]

Hook, line and sinker ... Canada's Conservative gov't bought into Obomba's agenda and is now playing "a leading cover role" in Libya?? We haven't even exited from Afghanistan yet and with our upcoming Federal election on May 2nd, the Canada's military role in Libya is not being addressed at all? Nice timing and who has the most to gain ... EU countries, Britain and France ... all for Libya's oil and all elitists who don't even like North Americans so lacking in "culture". Most of Europe has an agenda to destroy Isreal as well (Palestinian/Gaza conflict). Wonder how much pressure was put on Canada to particpate in this? Floundering in all directions...something stinks about this whole Libya operation and other uprisings in the ME. Let the ME countries sort out their own internal civil conflicts, holding elections doesn't necessarily guarantee democracy. How stupid can our political leaders get?

[aprilnovember811]

I love how the Military just follows the impostor president in whatever he wants to do. Perfect Obots. They throw the United States Constitution right out the window. Anything for dear leader. I can't even look at this misfit Gates. They're supposed to be protecting the country from all enemies foreign and domestic. What do they do? They follow the orders of an impostor president and help the very people we're supposed to be at war against. They are going to get us all killed.

[Poosh]

""Islamists," what an asinine word. Enough already with this stupidity."

What do you mean? Islamic Imperialists? Is a better word? That's the same as Islamists. I don't understand.

[Poosh]

what the hell are you talking about? Are they meant to engage in a military coup or something?

[dented]

This whole thing is just too insane for me to handle. The more my mind churns over all the deceit and lies behind these corrupt war-mongers and this traitorous war they have dragged us all into, aiding and abetting Al Qaeda, the more my head feels like it is going to implode.

[Frank]

There are only three possible reasons for the intervention:

1) The intervention is a sincere humanitarian effort, in which case we will have a "no fly zone" over Iran soon, and then in Yemen, and everywhere in the Mideast where a govn't does a Q-Duck on its own people.

2) It is done to topple Q-Duck and replace him with a Sharia government.

3) The intervention is done to prolong civil war in Libya.

[Frank]

Orwell noted abuse of language (words or phrases) is the main tool of propagandists, done for purposes of hiding truth (Peoples' Democratic Republic, final solution, Pacification e.g.).

Orwell knew logical thinking is about precise definitions of a term or words in a phrase.

"Islamist" is ambiguous. Islamist(s) is an imprecise word without a clear definition (unlike genocide e.g.). "Islamic Imperialists" or "Islamic Sharia Imperialist(s)" is a more precise use of language than Islamist(s). Islamist(s)is not precise in its meaning so that everyone knows exactly what it means.

I agree ""Islamists," what an asinine word" as someone noted.

[Poosh]

However the discourse around the war on terror understood Islamists to be in the same vane as "fascist". You are right but when you use phrases like "Islamic Imperialists" on the standard news cycles you cause problems as racists etc and bigots will latch onto it. Scum will go around saying "all Muslims are imperialists" and so forth, the discourse will be contaminated.

There are plenty of idiots on this website who throw around "muslim" all over the place in a bigoted way, thinking all muslims believe and obey the fascist elements of their religion when (obviously) this is not true.

That being said the discourse has been so perverted into denying the religious agenda behind the war on terror, that I now think Islamic Imperialists should now be used in discourse - purely because our enemies (including liberals) have perverted and controlled the discourse. So maybe I am now agreeing with Pamela and perhaps seeing where she is coming from.

The more I think of it, the more this makes sense.

[Poosh]

I think from the British prospective, there is an element of "it's payback time, bitch". With the hope that our military intervention will be remembered out the new government will be a positive one.

A risk which looks increasingly like one that will bear bad fruits.

[jus screamin']

robert "dove" gates - what a contemptible, friggin, damnable WALLFLOWER - P.O.S.

[Frank]

A good example of the ambiguity of a term is the word "innocent" in the the oft repeated phrase from some Muslims and Muslim apologists:"Islam forbids killing the innocent."

What does the word "innocent" mean to a Muslim as per Muslim dogma?

"Innocent" means only Muslims to a true Muslim. "Innocent" does not apply to the set of all human beings, but only to the subset of humans termed "Muslim.".

Exact definitions of a term or the words of a phrase matter.

"Islamist(s) is still an ambiguous term.

[Frank]

"You are right but when you use phrases like "Islamic Imperialists" on the standard news cycles you cause problems as racists etc and bigots will latch onto it."-poosh

Who fucking cares what they think, poosh? The point is to get everyone to make a precise definition to the term "Islamist(s)." The effort to do that will either end in a term the vast majority (on all sides) agree upon (as in the term "genocide' e.g.) or else all will agree that it will remain an ambiguous term.

As of now: Pamela is right: the term is ambiguous.
---------------

So many of the terms used ("racist" e.g.)in political discourse re Islam are meaningless and an Orwellian abuse of language.

For example: a "racist" is a person who asserts that one race is superior to another. What does race have to do with Islam? Most Arabs are Semite Caucasians, the Muslim Persians of Iran are "Aryans" (which is what "Iran" mens). The Muslims of the Caucasus are not Muslims because they are Caucasians. The Muslims of the Caucasus are Muslims because they are Muslims.

The term "racist" when used to apply to critics of Islam is absurd. i think the people who use the term use it in the sense that Orwell warned re propaganda: they use "racist" to mislead and deceive.

[Dagny Taggart]

What...no H/T? Just kidding. We all work for the same cause- saving America. Thanks for all you do, and for providing this wonderful platform. As always, Dagny

[Doug]

It's very obvious that you have no understanding about the Constitutional limits placed on the President for going to war. Obama has broken OUR law by his actions. This rush to obey a UN directive does not sit well with Constitutional Patriots. The UN can go pound sand!!!

You also need to wrap your head around what is termed "The Nuremburg Defense". It basically means that when you knowingly follow an unconstitutional or illegal order you are as guilty of the crime as the one who issued the order. Military leaders must obey their oath to the Constitution first over and above any orders.

[Conservative Blogs Central]

Tip

"Iron Dome" Defense System Implemented

http://conservativeblogscentral.blogspot.com/2011/03/iron-dome-defense-system-implemented.html

[Bill]

The primary responsibilitary of the military is to, yes, defend the constitution, and yes, is designed to over-ride despotic, tyrannical regimes such as the one we currently have in power. The other unresolved issue is whether our leader was ever constitutionally eligible to be commander in chief, in the first place. This administration has been a case study in a confused and undocumented if not sloppy assumption that all rules were followed according to constitutional guidelines, which we now find are way outside the parameters of constitutional authority.

[Xavier823]

The military is not to blame. The congressmen are the ones who can put the breaks on this whole Libya debacle. Obama has only a certain amount of time to commit troops after which he has to get the okay from congress.

[Petrakore]

"There are plenty of idiots on this website who throw around "muslim" all over the place in a bigoted way, thinking all muslims believe and obey the fascist elements of their religion when (obviously) this is not true."

Poosh, you highly offend me with that ridiculous statement! Us "idiots" to whom you so rudely refer, throw around "muslim" in a truthful way. Get used to it or go away. Apparently there is much about the writings in the Koran that you are not familiar with or you have simply chosen to ignore the nasty commandments written therein that ALL muslims are demanded to honor.

The Koran calls Jews 'apes' and 'pigs'. Doesn't that seem a bit bigoted to you? Do you honestly believe there are no muslims who believe just this thing in public and private no matter where they are living in the world? Do you honestly believe there are muslim parents and imams who are teaching their children to NOT be bigoted towards Jews?

If you know something all the rest of us "idiots" have missed about muslims and their ideology and how lovey dovey they really are to non-muslims around the world (and through-out history), by all means prove it!

Explain to me and my fellow "idiots" why we are not supposed to be bigoted against a people who ascribe to an ideology that wants us to ascribe 100% to their evil way of thinking or else they will kill us?

[Mac-101]

This is just so stupid it's hard to comprehend. If these clowns runin our foreign policy are not out to have fundamental Islamist take over the ME so they can destroy Israel, the only other option I can think of is that the Western Govs are blackmailed and are being threatened to have several cities NUKED if they do not comply. Just a thought. Other that that they are ALL traitors, not only against their countries but against ALL of Western Civilization!

[socal]

The really cool thing is that we have apparently joined with Al-Qaeda in this war against Gadaffy. Unreal!! So this is the BEST and BRIGHTEST America has to offer... hahaha

[Bill]

Truly this wave of "intervention" is highly destabilizing, and the net result is a domino effect of radical islamic states popping up across the entire region, with our one friend, Israel being totally surrounded. This administration has had its hand in this dangerous outcome, and I find it hard to believe military experts did'nt see this coming. NATO is in disarray over this, we have ceded any real moral leadership, and as a result our world will be even less safe as a result. The word "democracy" is the one word being thrown around in an ever positive light, but in this case it is a death sentence.

[Poosh]

http://tundratabloids.com/2011/03/norway-socialist-left-party-to-vote-on-motion-calling-for-bombing-israel-if-it-acts-against-hamas-in-gaza.html

[Dagny Taggart]

Bravo, Doug!

[Dagny Taggart]

Absolutely!

[Jeff]

Awesome norwegian leftists, now supporting hamas !

you can't invent such freaks in a 1000 years.

[John K]

"America cannot survive 6 more years of this wrongheaded and strangely motivated incompetence"

I used to wonder the same, but now I wonder if we can survive 2 more years. Alarming and dangerous developments are unfolding too rapidly.

[Poosh]

It is not an orwellian abuse of lanaguage in *all cases* some racists simply use 'Muslim' as a blanket term for a specific race, and they steal the discourse in order to spread their racism. Many critics of Islam are labeled racist falsely but SOME who attack Islam (often in an arbitrary manner) ARE racist. We have to be aware of this and careful. Anyway, I said bigots as well, and that would include bigots (scum) who blanket hate and despise all Muslims because they cannot appreciate the nuances. I'm sure there are members hear who have Muslim friends who view the Koran with a bag of salt.

[Poosh]

Who do think, exactly, you are talking to?

"against a people" < think about that phrasing.

Is it so difficult to ask for some of the posters here to appreciate that there are plenty of Muslims who do not believe or follow the crap in the Koran? Or who have never paid attention to it but still classify themselves as Muslims? Pamela Gellar states this all the time and it seems to be ignored by some people ("most Muslims are peaceful" she says over and over). When you start using terms like Islamic Imperialism (which I actually agree with now) there is an element of risk involved: bigots and racists, scum, will absorb and appropriate that term, they will internalise the FALSE notion that "all Muslims are imperialists who want to take over my country". I am just asking people to appreciate the dangers involved with the language, the risk of the words we use. This isn't exactly difficult to grasp. Idiots, as I call then, who think every single Muslim is 'out to get them' or that all Muslims are craving to conquer in the name of the Sharia, have not correctly read or appreciated what Pamela Geller writes or what the anti-islamist discourse concerns. They have - because they are bigots - decided that "all muslims" believe this stuff, which is a conclusion only reached by someone who WAS a bigot prior to the discourse.

[Poosh]

I suspect the ambiguity is not present in the original arabic, however, when translated to English and shown to a Western audience, it will mysteriously become the word 'innocent'.

[vlparker]

Unfortunately, there are people on the right like Palin and Bolton who support this lunacy in Libya. So we are now helping Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood take control of Libya and Egypt, which will make them that much stronger everytime we have to fight them. This is so stupid a relatively intelligent 3rd grader could figure it out. Many of our politicians on both sides of the aisle are INSANE. It's nice that there are a few sane voices left in Congress. Let's hope they continue to gain power in Washington. Qaddafi hasn't pursued his nuclear program in years and Mubarek was a buffer against the Muslim Brotherhood. The leaders of the US are participating in suicide.

[cornell]

100% agree with Ihm. Canada should pull out of this sorry mess.

[Poosh]

" Qaddafi hasn't pursued his nuclear program in years"

As a direct result of The War In Iraq.

[vlparker]

Yeah, I know. What happened to Saddam scared the hell out of Qaddafi.

[Jeff]

Its Stupid American policy of blowing up tax payers money
fighting useless wars that has nothing to do with national security.

And allowing Islamo-fascist free run to immigrate and spread their
Islamic social cancer in western societies.

Arming jihadis in pak-afganistan is just one of the best examples
of stupidity that comes back to bite america in the b***.

[Petrakore]

Poosh,
How the heck am I supposed to know who 'Poosh' really is? Except you dare to come to Pamela's website and write that you believe many of us who bother writing our comments here are 'idiots' and bigoted towards muslims because we have been doing our homework since 9/11 and keep up with all the news regarding muslim related stories around the world. None of which ever seem to be light-hearted, flowery or full of love for their fellow man.

You have completely avoided tackling the questions I posed to you! Did you not read the recent story posted here on Pamela's website regarding the muslims in Ethiopia attacking a community, burning down 50 Christian churches and dispersing from 3,000 to 10,000 Christians?
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/03/ethiopia-on-the-frontlines-of-jihad-thousands-of-christians-displaced-after-devout-muslims-torch-chu.html

Did you not read this quote from that article:

"The violence against Christians in Ethiopia is alarming because Ethiopian Muslims and Christians used to live together peacefully. Besides, it’s extremely disconcerting that in Ethiopia, where Christians are the majority, they are also the victims of persecution," Jonathan Racho, ICC's Regional Manager of Africa and South Asia, told FoxNews.com."

Get that. "...used to live together peacefully."

You are welcome to continue convincing yourself that there are so many good and kind and peaceful muslims in the world who will never, ever want to hurt your pretty whiddle neck or burn down the church or synagogue you worship at or torch your car or, well...need I go on? And you can continue to pick nits about this whole "islamic Imperialism" argument until the Kaliph comes home to roost.

Continue your studies Poosh. You'll come around soon enough.

[John Nosser]

The use of the word "Islamists" is bad because the meaning of the word is violated by the way it is used, which is a direct result of its overuse. A linguist would define the meaning as an adherent or proponent of Islam. The misuse of the word reflects its lack of clarity. A prime example of this is the phrase used by the writer of the article above. He wrote, "The Islamists of al-Qaeda" so he is clearly confused about the meaning of the word "Islamist." I think simply "The Terrorists of al-Qaeda" would have been a better choice of words, and someone may think of something even better. Hopefully everyone already knows that Al-Qaeda is made up of pious violent Muslim murderers. What ever word or words writers and others use to describe these psychopathic cult killers, it ought to be something that everyone can understand. Especially these liberal writers who seem to be on the bottom of the food chain.

[Jeff]

Islamist are doing their duty as per koran , so they should not be called
terrorists or extremists.

Its when dhimmis protest they are termed terrorists / extremists/bigots.

[lawrence]

you're right . Something does indeed "stank"in the middle eastI'm thinking that the bamster is somehow in league with al qaeda via the Saudis . For the most part all this strife in the 'ME' is occuring simultaneously . This is not coincidence .This guy's a muslim and a commie . Saints preserve us .

[lawrence]

Not all military folk have been blindly following the bamster . But if it's only 1 or a 100 who are up front opposing this affrontery to our republic , they make themselves of this massive , bloated and if you're on their radar they will smash you like a bug either by killing you murdering you . Groups or individuals faced with that type of calamitous contact with an opposing force is suicide . I'm sure you're not recommending that our brave men and women of the forces should throw themselves over a cliff . The best small entities can do initially is sabotage . Stay off the radar .

[AuntieMadder]

"It is not an orwellian abuse of lanaguage in *all cases* some racists simply use 'Muslim' as a blanket term for a specific race, and they steal the discourse in order to spread their racism."

Which race is Muslim? There are three races: black, white and Asian. Pick.