The NY Times is surprised? Atlas was reporting in April of '11 that Libyan jihadists were smuggling weapons to Gaza. All of the sudden the NY Times is shocked! Shocked, I tell ya.
There is no oopsie, here as the morons at Hot Air would have you believe. This is Obama's foreign policy. Consistent and pro-jihad. Here's some of my year-and-half-old coverage....
Back in March 19 2011, I posted: President Hussein Backs Al Qaeda in Libya - Atlas Shrugs
March 26, 2011: Troops join Al Qaeda, Rebels in Libya - Atlas Shrugs
March 27, 2011: "Al-Qaeda snatched missiles" in Libya - Atlas Shrugs
July 21, 2011: Al-Qaeda Part of New Libyan Government Recognized by Obama
October 30, 2011: Al-Qaeda Flag Flies Above the Libyan flag in Libya
NYT: Obama admin approved secret weapons deals that ended up arming Islamists in Libya
The Obama administration secretly gave its blessing to arms shipments to Libyan rebels from Qatar last year, but American officials later grew alarmed as evidence grew that Qatar was turning some of the weapons over to Islamic militants, according to United States officials and foreign diplomats.No evidence has emerged linking the weapons provided by the Qataris during the uprising against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi to the attack that killed four Americans at the United States diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, in September.But in the months before, the Obama administration clearly was worried about the consequences of its hidden hand in helping arm Libyan militants, concerns that have not previously been reported. The weapons and money from Qatar strengthened militant groups in Libya, allowing them to become a destabilizing force since the fall of the Qaddafi government.[...]The Qatari assistance to fighters viewed as hostile by the United States demonstrates the Obama administration’s continuing struggles in dealing with the Arab Spring uprisings, as it tries to support popular protest movements while avoiding American military entanglements. Relying on surrogates allows the United States to keep its fingerprints off operations, but also means they may play out in ways that conflict with American interests.“To do this right, you have to have on-the-ground intelligence and you have to have experience,” said Vali Nasr, a former State Department adviser who is now dean of the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, part of Johns Hopkins University. “If you rely on a country that doesn’t have those things, you are really flying blind. When you have an intermediary, you are going to lose control.”