Libyan President: Attack Premeditated, Al-Qaeda Involved, US Warned Beforehand
Libya's highest politician says the United States government was warned about a pending attack on its diplomatic staff three days before it took place.
Libyan President Mohammed el-Megarif says his government received word of the pending attack and passed that information to US diplomatic officials no later than 48 hours before the attack.President Megarif said the attack was planned by an Islamist group with links to Al-Qaeda.
A senior Libyan official in Benghazi says he also warned US diplomats three days before the attacks took place.
US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice appeared on various Sunday morning news programs to assure Americans the Obama administration had no prior knowledge of the Libyan attack that cost Ambassador Christopher Stevens his life. She said the attack was not premeditated nor was it part of a greater, orchestrated attack against the US.
Other officials have claimed the attack was "not premeditated" and have denounced reports that there was "credible information" about the attack before it took place. Secretary of State Clinton has stood by these statements, as well.
Our Ambassador was brutally killed and NOTHING is HAPPENING?
INVEST up top $10,000 at 12 Mos. with 15% Net return...GUARANTEED! BANCO SOCIAL
Selective Edit? Mother Jones Admits Romney Tape Missing 'One to Two Minutes'
Mother Jones, the left-wing magazine that released a controversial video of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's remarks to a fundraiser in May, now admits that it has no full tape of what Romney said, and that its video is missing "one to two minutes" at the most important moment.
The Legal Insurrection blog's William Jacobson and The Blaze both raised questions on Tuesday about whether Mother Jones had, as promised, revealed the full video, given an apparent jump cut in the critical section of Romney's remarks."Something is missing. Romney’s 47% answer was cut off before completed, and is not picked up on the Part 2 audio video," Jacobson noted.
Late Tuesday evening, Jacobson obtained the following comment from David Corn of Mother Jones:
According to the source, the recording device inadvertently turned off. The source noticed this quickly and turned it back one [sic]. The source estimates that one to two minutes, maybe less, of recording was missed.
Corn was forced to update his original post, which promised the "full" video, to reflect the fact that a key portion of the video is, in fact, missing.
There is no way to know, without the missing footage, exactly what Romney said. On Monday evening, Romney called for a complete video of his remarks to be released.
That now turns out to be impossible, either because Romney's remarks were never recorded in full (as Mother Jones now claims), or because some of his remarks--perhaps mitigating some of the controversial effect of his statements--were selectively edited out of the tape by Mother Jones or its chain of sources (including former President Jimmy Carter's grandson).
Earlier on Tuesday, new media pioneer James O'Keefe pointed out the hypocrisy of the mainstream media in accepting, without question, a snippet of a video recording that aimed to portray a Republican in a bad light, while conservatives are still doubted even after providing full video or audio, as O'Keefe did with his famous ACORN tapes.
Whether Romney is right or wrong about the "47 percent" of Americans he says have become dependent on government--he stood by his May remarks on Monday evening--he may have been taken out of context.
Mother Jones has failed a basic test and broken its promise to its readers and the public. There is now reason to doubt that it provided Romney's full remarks--not just the context, but the remarks themselves. And there is new reason to suspect manipulation.
Corn promised the complete version of Romney's remarks. Instead, he provided a version that is missing a large portion of video at the critical moment.
Mother Jones's entire story now deserves to be treated with suspicion, if not contempt.
NEED CASH ASSISTANCE? $500 at 2 Mos. TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE BY BANCO SOCIAL
La dependencia del gobierno aumenta al tiempo que disminuye el número de contribuyentes
La filtración de un video en el que aparece el antiguo gobernador Mitt Romney (R-MA) ha desencadenado el debate sobre la dependencia del gobierno y sobre el número de personas que no paga el impuesto federal sobre ingresos en Estados Unidos.
En el video, Romney se refiere al “47%” de americanos y comenta que son “dependientes del gobierno” y que “no pagan el impuesto sobre ingresos”. Aunque estos grupos no sean el mismo, hay un solapamiento entre los dos y los porcentajes de dependencia gubernamental y de quienes no pagan el impuesto son muy similares.
Es verdad que cerca de la mitad de todos los contribuyentes (aquellos que están presentando un formulario de ingresos al Servicio de Impuestos Internos (IRS) no paga ningún impuesto federal sobre ingresos. También es verdad que millones de americanos reciben algún tipo de sustento directo de parte del gobierno, incluidos los de tipo económico, alimentario, de vivienda, de atención médica, almuerzos escolares y muchos más.
En 2009, el 47% de todos los contribuyentes no pagó impuestos federales sobre ingresos individuales y en 2011 esa cifra fue del 46%. Esto plantea una pregunta crucial, pues como señala la analista de la Fundación Heritage Alison Fraser: “¿Realmente debería casi el 50% de los americanos estar exento de financiar las más básicas funciones constitucionales del gobierno además de la educación, los cupones de comida, la electricidad, la asistencia social, la ayuda exterior, los beneficios de los veteranos, la vivienda, etc.?”
Parece lógico que quienes se dejan la piel en mantener el sistema (los que están ayudando a pagar todos los programas del gobierno) son los que estén más preocupados en poner freno al gasto sin control del gobierno, puesto que ven como están subiendo sus impuestos mientras que está bajando la calificación crediticia del país.
Por otro lado, si Ud. está en el lado de los que reciben los beneficios gubernamentales, es probable que eso cambie su percepción acerca de cómo se debería gastar el dinero de los contribuyentes. Según el Índice de Dependencia del Gobierno de 2012 de la Fundación Heritage, 63.7 millones de americanos, es decir, alrededor de uno de cada cinco, están recibiendo un sustento directo del gobierno procedente del Seguro Social, la asistencia social o las Becas Pell, unos programas que además están en sus máximos niveles históricos.
Es muy probable que estas personas estén recibiendo beneficios adicionales procedentes de otros programas gubernamentales tales como Medicare o Medicaid, los cupones de comida, etc. y la proporción total de americanos que está recibiendo beneficios probablemente vaya a ser mayor cuando se tengan en cuenta los beneficios disponibles para cada aspecto de la vida, desde la vivienda hasta los almuerzos escolares. The Wall Street Journal encontró que en 2011, el 49% de los americanos vivía en un hogar en el que al menos un miembro de la familia recibía algún beneficio de parte del gobierno. READ MORE
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario