[Adfcvkdg]

The Arab Spring Obama is trying to take credit for is turning out to be big time Islamist Cluster Phuck.


Al-Qaida plants its flag — literally — in Libya

5:26 PM 10/28/2011


If there were questions about al-Qaida’s role in post-Gadhafi Libya, VICE reporter Sherif Elhelwa provides some answers in a new story with eyewitness descriptions.
Al-Qaida flags, Elhelwa reports, are popping up around Benghazi. At the city courthouse, which played a prominent role in the Libyan revolution, residents are flying the late terrorist’s Osama bin Laden’s colors.
Similarly, Elhelwa recounts a regular evening sight: “Islamists driving brand-new SUVs and waving the black al Qaeda flag drive the city’s streets at night.”...
This is the part that got my attention:



..Earlier this week, I went to the Benghazi courthouse and confirmed the rumors: an al Qaeda flag was clearly visible; its Arabic script declaring that “there is no God but Allah” and a full moon underneath. When I tried to take pictures, a Salafi-looking guard, wearing a green camouflage outfit, rushed towards me and demanded to know what I was doing. My response was straightforward: I was taking a picture of the flag. He gave me an intimidating look and hissed, "Whomever speaks ill of this flag, we will cut off his tongue. I recommend that you don't publish these. You will bring trouble to yourself.”..

And these are Obama's good guys?

[b3JOkwXL]

I've been saying this for months now... this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone with half a brain.

These "Freedom fighters" didn't just spring up out of the ground - many of them are probably veterans from the Afghan war.

[Abnorbprootly]

*Double post I can't delete for some reason. Ignore*

[adolfadsermens]

I've been saying this for months now... this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone with half a brain.These "Freedom fighters" didn't just spring up out of the ground - many of them are probably veterans from the Afghan war.

And Israel sits atop the list of those who are in sights of the Islamic terror.

From Haaretz.com

…Libyan anti-aircraft missiles reach Gaza The improved quality of anti-aircraft missiles held by Hamas in Gaza is increasingly worrying the Israeli defense establishment. Hamas recently managed to smuggle relatively advanced Russian missiles, which were looted from Libyan military warehouses, into the Gaza Strip. Israel is worried about the presence of the missiles, both because they curb the air force's almost unlimited freedom of movement over Gaza today, and because of their possible use against civil aviation in Eilat. Shoulder-fired anti-aicraft missiles have been smuggled into Gaza in recent years at Iran's initiative. But the fall of Muammar Gadhafi's regime has enabled Hamas to bring in much higher quality missiles - and in much larger quantities….

[itaspCatCriny]

I hope President Obama and his supporters are happy.

It's time we vote this guy outta office.

[somawaima]

Um, do you all realize this is nothing new (go ahead and fire up your Google machine and see what you find)? The question isn’t about al-Qaeda in Libya. They were there before the uprising. They are in a lot of places. We’ll have to see how this plays out from here. In my opinion, we’ll keep a close eye on the place before actually removing our drones. You all cannot deny that we’ve really hurt al-Qaeda under the current administration – even more that the whole Bush presidency. They can’t move money or personnel, their leadership is fractured, and they no longer have safe havens in Germany, Pakistan, and Yemen – among other places. We’ll see how this develops. After all, did the Iraqis great us as liberators and sign over oil leases?

History lesson – Qaddafy was a totalitarian dictator that directed terrorist attacks, gave human rights criminals sanctuary, and pursued WMDs. The Bush administration cozied up to him, the current administration took him out. I doubt he could be replaced by worse, the question is how much better will the next leader be?

There’s plenty to fault the president for. Like, his escalation in military conflict, or his cherry picking of popular uprising to support. The question should really be, if the administration is concerned human rights, why didn’t they support the Bahrain effort? What, are Shia too scary? What about Syria? Their skulls are being cracked like war vets in Oakland. What’s the administration’s position there?

Look – don’t be a naysayer just to say no. This al-Qaeda thing is nothing new, and it’s actually one of the fronts in which the president has shown a lot of leadership and success. Democracy is a messy business – at home and abroad.

[Suvuseh]

Um, do you all realize this is nothing new (go ahead and fire up your Google machine and see what you find)? The question isn’t about al-Qaeda in Libya. They were there before the uprising. They are in a lot of places. We’ll have to see how this plays out from here. In my opinion, we’ll keep a close eye on the place before actually removing our drones. You all cannot deny that we’ve really hurt al-Qaeda under the current administration – even more that the whole Bush presidency. They can’t move money or personnel, their leadership is fractured, and they no longer have safe havens in Germany, Pakistan, and Yemen – among other places. We’ll see how this develops. After all, did the Iraqis great us as liberators and sign over oil leases?

History lesson – Qaddafy was a totalitarian dictator that directed terrorist attacks, gave human rights criminals sanctuary, and pursued WMDs. The Bush administration cozied up to him, the current administration took him out. I doubt he could be replaced by worse, the question is how much better will the next leader be?

There’s plenty to fault the president for. Like, his escalation in military conflict, or his cherry picking of popular uprising to support. The question should really be, if the administration is concerned human rights, why didn’t they support the Bahrain effort? What, are Shia too scary? What about Syria? Their skulls are being cracked like war vets in Oakland. What’s the administration’s position there?

Look – don’t be a naysayer just to say no. This al-Qaeda thing is nothing new, and it’s actually one of the fronts in which the president has shown a lot of leadership and success. Democracy is a messy business – at home and abroad.

He's been aggressive in the pursuit, there's no denying it. The question I think is important is whether we approve of the aggressive stance. If you do approve, Obama's your president in foreign policy!

[dwestemesse]

Where's Ramsey Clark when you need him?

(He sued when Reagan bombed Libya in the 80's)

[IdomeoreTew]

Im surpised they are opening showing their support. Did they forget we will attack them whereever they are?

[JohnMitchel]

Um, do you all realize this is nothing new (go ahead and fire up your Google machine and see what you find)? The question isn’t about al-Qaeda in Libya. They were there before the uprising. They are in a lot of places. We’ll have to see how this plays out from here. In my opinion, we’ll keep a close eye on the place before actually removing our drones. You all cannot deny that we’ve really hurt al-Qaeda under the current administration – even more that the whole Bush presidency. They can’t move money or personnel, their leadership is fractured, and they no longer have safe havens in Germany, Pakistan, and Yemen – among other places. We’ll see how this develops. After all, did the Iraqis great us as liberators and sign over oil leases?

History lesson – Qaddafy was a totalitarian dictator that directed terrorist attacks, gave human rights criminals sanctuary, and pursued WMDs. The Bush administration cozied up to him, the current administration took him out. I doubt he could be replaced by worse, the question is how much better will the next leader be?

There’s plenty to fault the president for. Like, his escalation in military conflict, or his cherry picking of popular uprising to support. The question should really be, if the administration is concerned human rights, why didn’t they support the Bahrain effort? What, are Shia too scary? What about Syria? Their skulls are being cracked like war vets in Oakland. What’s the administration’s position there?

Look – don’t be a naysayer just to say no. This al-Qaeda thing is nothing new, and it’s actually one of the fronts in which the president has shown a lot of leadership and success. Democracy is a messy business – at home and abroad.

It's because of the actions during the Bush administration that LED to AQ being in the state it's in. So you're saying in 2-3 years Pres. Obama crippled AQ? It's because of the intelligence work of the last 10 years that led to capturing bin Laden, that led to taking out other top officials in AQ and restricting their funding etc - all before Obama even thought about running for President.

So you're saying AQ in Libya is "nothing new"...then why did Obama fight so hard to help out the "freedom fighers" or the "rebels" if he knew AQ was there helping them?

[diundasmink]

And these are Obama's good guys?

Libya's about as far as can be from a monolithic society, yet you blame Obama for what flag an indeterminate amount of Libyans choose to wave? But even more than that, you have made up your mind on the Libyan government less than 24 hours after its inception based on that criteria?

[sttrqiss]

Remember that al-Qaeda isn't in charge, this guy is.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/10/31/wo...ya-government/

[imawlBoli]

Im surpised they are opening showing their support. Did they forget we will attack them whereever they are?

LOL good one. Our incredibly effective foreign policy strikes fear in the hearts of evil doers everywhere.

[kertionderf]

Um, do you all realize this is nothing new (go ahead and fire up your Google machine and see what you find)? The question isn’t about al-Qaeda in Libya. They were there before the uprising. They are in a lot of places. We’ll have to see how this plays out from here. In my opinion, we’ll keep a close eye on the place before actually removing our drones. You all cannot deny that we’ve really hurt al-Qaeda under the current administration – even more that the whole Bush presidency. They can’t move money or personnel, their leadership is fractured, and they no longer have safe havens in Germany, Pakistan, and Yemen – among other places. We’ll see how this develops. After all, did the Iraqis great us as liberators and sign over oil leases?

History lesson – Qaddafy was a totalitarian dictator that directed terrorist attacks, gave human rights criminals sanctuary, and pursued WMDs. The Bush administration cozied up to him, the current administration took him out. I doubt he could be replaced by worse, the question is how much better will the next leader be?

There’s plenty to fault the president for. Like, his escalation in military conflict, or his cherry picking of popular uprising to support. The question should really be, if the administration is concerned human rights, why didn’t they support the Bahrain effort? What, are Shia too scary? What about Syria? Their skulls are being cracked like war vets in Oakland. What’s the administration’s position there?

Look – don’t be a naysayer just to say no. This al-Qaeda thing is nothing new, and it’s actually one of the fronts in which the president has shown a lot of leadership and success. Democracy is a messy business – at home and abroad.

I will be a nay-sayer because Khadaffi, much like Saddam, had his shit together and kept things in control. Better the Devil you know than the Devil you don't know. I'm not saying that I agreed with the man back in the 80's or anything, but we just gave this shit-head terrorist group another 1-Up against us. That's really smart business.....right.

[IRYzouNv]

From ABC more evidence of the results of leading from behind:

Al Qaeda Terror Group: We 'Benefit From' Libyan Weapons

By LEE FERRAN and RYM MOMTAZ
Nov. 10, 2011



A leading member of an al Qaeda-affiliated terror group indicated the organization may have acquired some of the thousands of powerful weapons that went missing in the chaos of the Libyan uprising, stoking long-held fears of Western officials.
"We have been one of the main beneficiaries of the revolutions in the Arab world," Mokhtar Belmokhtar, a leader of the north Africa-based al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb [AQIM], told the Mauritanian news agency ANI Wednesday. "As for our benefiting from the [Libyan] weapons, this is a natural thing in these kinds of circumstances."....

[Boveosteors]

The Cluster Puck continues:

Meet Libya’s New Islamist Boss

Posted By Daniel Greenfield On November 10, 2011 @ 12:45 am In Daily Mailer,FrontPage |



In this week’s issue of The Australian, Sheikh Hamza Abu Fas, Libya’s new Minister for Religious Affairs, gave Westerners a taste of the “free and democratic” that NATO had been fighting for.


The law that allowed a first wife to veto marriage to a second wife will be overturned. “The woman is not equal to the man in the body,” explained Sheikh Hamza. Thieves will have their hands chopped off: “If this happens it will only happen once because other people will not want it to happen again and will not commit theft,” said the good Sheikh.



Islamic banking will be the only kind of banking in Libya. “In the future, we hope all banks will be Islamic,” Sheikh Hamza said. “The Islamic bank is best for all people. All Europeans and Australian people will realize the best solution for banks is Islamic banks.”


While the Australian article is careful to refer to Sheikh Hamza Abu Fas as a professor rather than a sheikh and emphasizes his title as “Minister for Religious Affairs,” he is actually a closer counterpart to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood leader Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. His role is to promote Islamist rule, not to blandly manage religious affairs.


In his message to the “People of Libya” on September 18th, 2011, Sheikh Hamza was already at it, writing, “It is known that the Libyan people, all Muslims are eager to apply the law of Islam, of which they were deprived of by the tyrant [Kaddafi], who even tried hard to discredit the law.”
How extreme a figure is Sheikh Hamza?.....


.....

The Brotherhood in Egypt managed to overthrow Mubarak, and the LIFG did the same in Libya, backed by American and European military intervention. Had the Brotherhood or LIFG tried to go it alone, they never would have received Western backing, but by forming coalitions with more liberal figures they secured Western support for their revolutions....

...Kaddafi and the West were tricked into a Muslim Brotherhood ploy that offered up a “kinder, gentler Jihad,” freed hundreds of LIFG terrorists from prison and put the movement on a path to seizing power through a coalition revolt. The same strategy behind successful Arab Spring revolts in Tunisia and Egypt....

---------------


Oh well, I guess America will eventually reap what Obama is sowing.