Report: Just Passed Senate Resolution DOES Allow for Boots on The Ground

By Gary P Jackson

The United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee just passed a resolution granting President the use of force against Syria. As By Stephen Dinan and David Sherfinski at the Washington Times is now reporting, this resolution is far more open-ended than is being reported, and is misrepresent of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, that led America down a dangerous path, and into the Vietnam War.

The resolution drafted by Sens. Robert Menendez and Bob Corker, the top Democrat and Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, grants Mr. Obama power “to use the armed forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in a limited and tailored manner against legitimate military targets in Syria” — but only in relation to that nation’s weapons of mass destruction.

The resolution puts a 60-day limit on Mr. Obama’s ability to conduct strikes, while allowing him one 30-day extension of that authority.

“Our negotiations have led to a much narrower authorization that provides for the appropriate use of force while limiting the scope and duration of military action, prohibiting boots on the ground, and requiring the Obama administration to submit their broader plan for Syria,” Mr. Corker said in a statement late Tuesday.

The committee was slated to meet at 11:30 Wednesday to amend and vote on the resolution, but it was delayed until 2 p.m., giving all sides more time to work on the measure.

“What could possibly be the meaning of ‘limited and tailored?’ I doubt if I’ve ever seen the word ‘tailored’ in a bill,” said Mr. Fisher, a veteran of four decades of studying legislation. “Even if the ‘intent’ of Congress is a limited war, war has its own momentum.”

Mr. Fisher pointed to the 1964 resolution that authorized a limited response to the Gulf of Tonkin, but that ended up being the start of an escalation of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam war. Mr. Fisher said he wasn’t drawing a comparison, but said it was instructive to look at what Congress thought it was authorizing and what eventually developed.

Read more here.

This is a disaster. Of course, even if we just send in missiles, we’ll have to send in “boots-on-the-ground” to make sure what we are bombing.

We have no clear goals in this battle, and absolutely none of our elected officials seem to grasp the fact, that while Assad is a murderous thug, his opposition is AL QADEA, America’s sworn enemies, and the enemies of all of mankind. We will be, in effect, joining forces with AL QAEDA, against Assad.

W.T.F. ?

Planned Well In Advance, Video Evidence: Al Qaeda Behind Attacks in Libya, No Protests Beforehand

By Gary P Jackson

Catherine Herridge and Seth Jones report that attacks in Libya were planned well in advance and carried out by Al Qaeda. Of great importance is the report that there were no protesters before the attack. The Obama regime, aided by it’s media allies have been lying, claiming this was some sort of “organic” protest movement because of that stupid You Tube video. We’ve always known better, now we’ve got a little more proof:

Catherine Herridge and Seth Jones expose Obama and his Bootlickers’ Libyan lies.

Video courtesy SarahNet.

Lapdog Media Protects Obama After Attacks in Libya and Egypt, Slams Palin and Romney Instead

By Stacy Drake

Follow Stacy on Twitter!

Following the news of the attacks on the U.S. Embassy in Egypt and the U.S. Consulate building in Libya, Governor Palin released a statement that sent some in the media into a tizzy. Most notably the seething Tommy Christopher over at Mediaite, who posted a piece titled (warning: he’s unhinged!) “Lying Sarah Palin Somehow Finds The Dick Humor In Libya Tragedy,” wrote:

As Republicans like Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich rush to politicize the violence in Egypt and Libya that has claimed five American lives so far, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has added an extra layer of awful human being by taking to her Facebook and Twitter accounts to crack wise about the violence, and to spread the same lies that Romney and Gingrich have.

First of all, what? Is that the kind of garbage Mediaite pays him to produce, or did Governor Palin hit a nerve in him so hard that he couldn’t possibly recover in time to form a coherent paragraph? Secondly, what lies is he talking about? He goes into that next, stating:

As we pointed out earlier, the statement by the U.S. Embassy in Cairo was not a “response” to the violence that had already claimed one American life when Palin released her statement, it was made before any of the protests began.

He only points to one example, and considering the word “lies” is plural, Tommy lied. Beyond that, however, he isn’t even being forthright with the one instance he did note. At the time that Governor Palin posted her statement, the apology posted from the embassy in Cairo was the only “response” released to the public about the situation itself, not the violence that took the life of four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens in Libya. But what does it matter when the State Department doubled-down on the apology the next day? As Joel B. Pollak noted over at Breitbart:

Clinton’s statements on the day’s events, released through the State Department’s website and Twitter feed, condemn “in the strongest possible terms” an attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya in Benghazi that left one American dead, but offer no condemnation of the attack on the U.S. embassy in Cairo.

Instead, Clinton reiterates an apology issued earlier today by the U.S. Embassy in Cairo–now deleted–which said: “We condemn the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.”

“The U.S. deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others,” Clinton said. “Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation,” she added.

So, how does Tommy Christopher justify calling it a lie when it was the official position of the Obama administration, before it wasn’t? He continues (emphasis):

But aside from being a liar, Palin proves herself to be a callous ghoul, leaping to stuff every unrelated political issue she can think of into her exploitation of tragic American death, and glibly cracking wise even as more Americans were yet to be killed in the unfolding situation, even throwing in a dick joke at the end, for good measure.

That was actually the opposite of a “dick” joke, but I wouldn’t expect Tommy Christopher to be an expert on the matter.

This is just more angry gibberish from Tommy, who then has the nerve to call Governor Palin a “callous ghoul” who is exploiting tragic death for political reasons. How rich is that after the entire episode from the leftist media who exploited the tragedy in Tuscon in an attempt to take out Governor Palin as a political threat to their leader?

Elspeth Reeve over at the Atlantic also defended Obama by lashing out at those who have pointed out his incompetence. Reeve listed Governor Palin in an article titled “Never Too Soon: Pundits Turn Murders in Libya into a Partisan Cudgel.” This one is really astounding considering Elspeth took a shot at the Governor after the massacre in Tuscon. I’m going to go ahead and assume that was for political purposes, and not to educate Americans on the many ways that their president can’t handle foreign policy.

It’s obvious from the behavior of many in the press that they feel obligated to come to Barack Obama’s defense during this ongoing crisis. It is election season after all, and their credibility is dependent on his success. They’ve been selling him to Americans for years and they aren’t going to stop now just because actual news is happening. The media these days is far more concerned with how information will affect polling data than they are about reporting the facts. Details, such as Obama ditching intelligence briefings for an entire week leading up to the anniversary of 9-11. Wynton Hall reported:

According to the White House calendar, there is no public record of President Barack Obama attending his daily intelligence briefing–known as the Presidential Daily Brief (PDB)–in the week leading up to the attacks on the U.S. embassy in Cairo and the murder of U.S. Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens and three American members of his staff…

The last time prior to the slayings that the White House calendar publicly confirms Mr. Obama attending his daily intelligence briefing was September 5th. (The White House did not provide an official public calendar for September 8-10.) Mr. Obama and Vice President Joe Biden met with Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta at 5:00 p.m. yesterday.

According to a recent study by the Government Accountability Institute, Mr. Obama has only attended 43.8 percent of his Presidential Daily Briefs in the first 1,225 days of his Administration.

And Allahpundit asked:

Quick question for President Pitching Wedge if he’s not too busy with more important stuff: Did he have reason to know that jihadist groups have been threatening the consulate in Benghazi for months? International correspondents seem to have noticed:

The group suspected to be behind the assault — the Imprisoned Omar Abdul Rahman Brigades — first surfaced in May, when it claimed responsibility for an attack on the International Red Cross office in Benghazi. The following month the group claimed responsibility for detonating an explosive device outside the U.S. Consulate, and later released a video of that attack…

Benotman, who had earlier warned of the likelihood of renewed attacks against U.S. interest in Libya, said the Omar Abdul Rahman Brigades is a prime suspect in the Benghazi attack Tuesday. He believes it is likely the deadly attack was also linked to a video statement released by al-Zawahiri on the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. In the video, al-Zawahiri confirmed the death of al-Libi — a prominent member of the al Qaeda-linked group — adding: “His blood is calling, urging and inciting you to fight and kill the crusaders.”

The video released by the Brigades in June showed nighttime explosions around the consulate, interlaced with footage of Osama bin Laden and al-Zawahiri, along with images from the 9/11 attacks. At the time the Brigades claimed it had launched the attack in response to the first reports of al-Libi’s death in a drone strike in the tribal areas of Pakistan.

Notably, the Brigades said the June 5 attack was also timed to coincide with preparations for the arrival of a senior U.S. State Department official.

Go figure that a jihadist group that had targeted the consulate before might try something on 9/11, just as the leader of Al Qaeda was putting out a message eulogizing one of AQ’s Libyan capos. The signs were there; one of the [people killed] at the consulate apparently even saw Libyan “security” taking photos of the compound beforehand. What did the State Department do to prepare? Why are Marines only being sent now, after the fact, to beef up security? Why was there no evacuation plan in place?

John Nolte also reported that there were no Marines guarding the U. S. consulate in Benghazi, and Guy Benson noted:

There are also clues emerging that US intelligence officials knew about threats of embassy violence in advance. These puzzle pieces raise a number of unpleasant questions: (1) How on earth was our consulate and staff so poorly protected? (2) How badly compromised are our operations in Libya — and possibly elsewhere — if even our worst-case-scenario “safe houses” aren’t safe? (3) If this was in fact a long-planned raid, did our intelligence community miss it, or was our response delayed and/or botched? (4) Why did our State Department decide to keep our diplomats on the ground after numerous “warning signs” of increasing aggression prompted the British to pull their team out of Benghazi? (If you click through to that article, be prepared to read a Libyan official blaming the victims). (5) How were we caught flat-footed by violence on the obvious and symbolic date of September 11?

[…]

Meanwhile, the wildfire is spreading to other Middle Eastern nations, and our Afghan “ally” Hamid Karzai is using the flap to incite his populous against the United States. This is a full-fledged foreign policy and national security crisis. The President of the United States and the State Department should be answering some of the tough questions I outlined above. (Also: Did Barack Obama skip important intelligence briefings in the lead-up to these outrages? How is it remotely appropriate for him to attend his planned Las Vegas political fundraiser tonight in the midst of a sweeping international crisis?) They should also be pressed to explain the US embassy in Cairo’s craven and disgraceful statements apologizing for the free speech “abuses” of the Egyptian ex-pats who dared to offend the sensibilities of Muslims. Free speech can be ill-advised, and the US government can disavow certain messages, but attempting to placate the barbarians by diminishing and critiquing basic Constitutional rights is unforgivable. Byron York has a helpful column charting the administration’s weak, then increasingly robust, condemnations of the attacks over the last 24 hours.

Which brings me to the second element of why today has been so upsetting. In the face of swirling, ongoing world events and horrific murders, the American press is positively obsessed with Mitt Romney’s reaction to the initial Cairo protests. Remember, Egyptian extremists breached our embassy and pulled down our flag, replacing it with what appeared to be an Al Qaeda flag of some sort. Our embassy there issued two statements, each of which focused on scolding the people whose free speech “provoked” the riots, rather than rejecting the rioters.

There was nothing wrong with what Governor Palin wrote in her statement, nor was there anything wrong with what Mitt Romney released. The media can try to deflect attention away from Barack’s stumbling by telling Americans that both were in the wrong for speaking out, but that is nothing more than spin and cover. The evidence that Barack Obama is completely out of his league is stacking up, and we aren’t blind.

Tensions are high in the Muslim world, and Americans who were serving their country are now dead. The “Arab Spring” that Obama touted many moons ago has produced a place where Al Qaeda can operate against our interests and our people while this president spends his time raising money in Vegas and going on trashy late night television shows. His former Libyan allies, these so-called “freedom fighters,” handed our Ambassador over to our enemies, who are certainly no lovers of freedom. Obama’s foreign policy is a disaster, and no amount of help from his friends in the press will change that fact.