Will Americans be Outraged when the Finally Realize Obama is Supporting Al Qaeda?

When America finally gets past the big American Idol or Dancing with the Stars finales, they may soon discover a truth about Obama's illegal war in Libya. Before I get into the main points, let me remind you about how federal government is violating your Fourth Amendment at airports, groping your genitals looking for WMDs and other weapons. Let me remind you how the Republicans earlier this year pushed for extensions of the Patriot Act to keep you "safer" (to give the federal government more power of course.) All these not so American ideas are the result of the boogey man we call Al Qaeda.

It's now being reported all over, and Americans obviously aren't paying attention or they would be outraged considering the above, that Libyan rebel forces who Obama supports consists of members of Al Qaeda. That's right, we are dropping bombs to "protect" the very people our federal government says we are at war with in this war against terrorism.

Mike Chuch has offered some excellent commentary on his Sirius XM Patriot radio program this week.


A debate is raging over at National Review as to whether Neoconservatives are such warmongers that the fact the Libyan rebels consist of al-Qaeda makes any difference at all in their level of support for bombing and invading yet another sovereign nation in the Middle East.

Unfortunately, to the warmongering Straussian Neoconservative, war is the primary function of the state, consequences, i.e. dead civilians, starving children, resentment towards America be damned.

Many commentators have been making "the moral case" for waging no-fly zone, non-war, war against Ghadaffi's army. Now let's see them make the same case with the news coming out that "the rebels" we are all gung-ho to defend and provide air-power support for are members of Al Queda! Byron York at the Examiner reports...


"There's no question that the rebels Americans are currently fighting for in Libya include in their ranks jihadis who in recent years traveled to Iraq and Afghanistan to kill Americans. The only question is whether that worries you or not.
Take Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, a leader of U.S.-supported rebels in the fighting for Adjabiya. His hometown, Darnah, has produced many jihadis, and after the Sept. 11 attacks al-Hasidi traveled to Afghanistan to fight the "foreign invasion" -- that is, the U.S. military. According to a report in Britain's Daily Telegraph, al-Hasidi says he was later captured in Pakistan, handed over to the U.S., then held in prison in Libya before being released in 2008.

In addition to fighting the U.S. in Afghanistan, al-Hasidi also says he recruited about two dozen men to fight the U.S. in Iraq.

Now al-Hasidi and his allies are moving toward Tripoli, which would not be possible without the military power of the United States. The men who devoted so much energy to killing Americans are now thankfully watching Americans kill for them.

To some observers, that's no big deal. "No one seems all that frightened by him," the New York Times wrote of al-Hasidi after a visit to Darnah in early March. Al-Hasidi, the paper reported, "praises Osama bin Laden's 'good points' but denounces the 9/11 attacks on the United States." And besides, the Times reported, al-Hasidi finds it amusing that the government of Moammar Gadhafi considers him an al Qaeda terrorist. "He promised to lay down his arms once victory is won and return, he said, to teaching," the Times reported.

Maybe you believe that. Maybe you don't. The problem is, al-Hasidi is by no means alone. We know that from intelligence gained in the Iraq War."

York isn't alone. Saturday, my pal Andy McCArthy also reported similar findings at the Nation Reveiw's "Corner".

Jonah [Goldberg] and Mark [Steyn] went back and forth over the weekend on the question of whether Qaddafi has been right in saying that the “’rebels’ are al Qaeda.” In particular, Jonah pointed to the reports about the “rebel” commander Abdul Hakim al-Hasadi (alternatively referred to as al-Hasidi), a member of the Qaeda-connected Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIGF) who was detained by the U.S. for several years after his capture in 2002. (I discussed al-Hasadi in my weekend column.[4])

I’d suggest that the real issue here is not whether Qaddafi was right, it’s that our government knew he was right … unless you think they were lying to us throughout the Bush years. Here,[5] for example, is Secretary of State Condi Rice in 2006, explaining the Bush administration’s decision to restore diplomatic relations with Qaddafi:

We are taking these actions in recognition of Libya’s continued commitment to its renunciation of terrorism and the excellent cooperation Libya has provided to the United States and other members of the international community in response to common global threats faced by the civilized world since September 11, 2001.

The cooperation she to which she was referring primarily involved intelligence about al Qaeda affiliated terrorists (like the LIGF) in Libya. It was important because, as the Defense Department found, more Libyans (the kind of Libyans who are to be found among the “rebels”) traveled to fight against U.S. forces in the war on terror than the citizens of any other country by percentage of population.

Begin Mike Church Show Transcript

Mike: By the way, for all of you freshly minted members of the We Bomb You Klan (this includes you Congressman Billy Long), I have an interesting post here from Andrew C. McCarthy at the National Review Online that was posted just yesterday. Here’s Andy’s title: “It’s not that Qaddafi was right, it’s that we knew he was right.” “Mike, where do you get all this stuff from?” It’s not even hard to find.


There’s an argument going on over there at the National Review Online Corner blog as to whether or not the United States government knew as to whether or not Dear Leader Mahatmabama, the leader, the grand – oh, wait a minute, Bill Kristol is the Grand Dragon of the We Bomb You Klan – whether or not they knew that the “rebels,” as we keep hearing them being portrayed as, were a bunch of former members of Al Qaeda. Hell, they still are members of Al Qaeda. Does it matter? No, you just heard George Carlin, our number one export is bombs. Boom. Boom. We’re good at it. It’s not about freedom. It’s not about liberty. It’s not about defending the Constitution here. It’s about making war. Our nice little shining city on the hill is now a giant shining gun turret on a hill. The entire planet sees us as the place that makes and delivers the bombs. If you need someone bombed back into the Stone Ages, if you need some tinhorn dictator set right, you call Team America. 1-866-95-PATRIOT is our telephone number.

So I guess this is our fate for the rest of our lives here is permanent, non-ending, never-ending war. Which means that ever larger quantities of what you earn, as is your wealth, is going to be confiscated from you. And what they don’t confiscate from you today they will put on the We Bomb You Klan charge card, and they will pass it onto your children so your children can then pay for all of our little dalliances across the world. Ri-freaking-diculous. Founding fathers, idiots. They couldn’t possibly have seen the world as we see it today. Here, here’s a little evidence here from Andy McCarthy here:

“Jonah Goldberg and Mark Steyn went back and forth over the weekend on the question of whether [Muammar] Qaddafi has been right in saying that the ‘rebels’ are al Qaeda,” you nitwits. You got Qaddafi on worldwide television saying [indiscernible]. Translation, “Hey, you idiots, those guys you’re helping are Al Qaeda. I thought they were your enemy. You guys used to love me. What happened?”


“In particular, Jonah pointed to the reports about the ‘rebel’ commander Abdul Hakim al-Hasadi ... a member of the [Al] Qaeda-connected Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIGF) who was detained by the U.S. for several years after his capture in 2002. I’d suggest,” writes Andy McCarthy, “that the real issue here is not whether Qaddafi was right, it’s that our government knew he was right . . . unless you think they were lying to us throughout the Bush years. Here, for example, is Secretary of State Condi Rice in 2006, explaining the Bush administration’s decision to restore diplomatic relations with Qaddafi,” to wit, quote, “We are taking these actions in recognition of Libya’s continued commitment to its renunciation of terrorism and the excellent cooperation Libya has provided to the United States and other members of the international community in response to common global threats faced by the civilized world since September 11, 2001.”

In other words, we forgave Qaddafi. He was one of us. He was a buddy. He was a pal. “The cooperation to which she was referring primarily involved intelligence about al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorists like [the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group], the LIGF in Libya. It was important because, as the Defense Department found, more Libyans (the kind of Libyans who are to be found among the ‘rebels’ [today]) traveled to fight against U.S. forces in the war on terror than the citizens of any other country by percentage of population.” How do you like them apples, We Bomb You Klan? You can’t possibly know the outcome of this, but yet you’re gung-ho to get involved in it. “Well, they’re with Qaddafi, we’ve got to stop this.” Just think about what you’re doing, please.

“By the time of Condi’s gushing 2006 tribute to Qaddafi’s cooperation, [the] provision of intelligence had been [going on] for three years. (And it didn’t just involve us – the report I cite above says, ‘Libya began working last year [i.e., 2005] with Britain to curtail terrorism by the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and had extradited a suspect in a Cairo bombing [plot] to Egypt.’) The sharing of intelligence against Libyan jihadists also explains, in part, the Bush administration decision to take Qaddafi off the list of state sponsors of terrorism at that point – he was deemed to be an ally against jihadist terror, notwithstanding his blood-soaked history as an anti-American terrorist. It further explains why congressional Democrats like the late Tom Lantos” – Tom Lantos is famous because of “Frankly, gentlemen, I don’t buy it,” in his interrogation of General Petraeus back in 2006 – “the late Tom Lantos strongly supported the Bush administration’s cozying up to Qaddafi....”

The cooperation continued apace, according to our government. That’s why, with great fanfare in 2008, the Bush administration formally settled past hostilities with Libya.” So all of you nitwits out there running around, yeah, but he owed us for Pan Am, yeah, he owed us for the Marines, yeah, he owed us for this,” we forgave him. We told him, “Uh, you remember that whole thing about that Pan Am, eh, don’t worry about that.”

It is worth mentioning to the people that may have lost someone in the Pan Am flight that was downed over Lockerbie, Scotland, that your government officially said, eh, thanks but no thanks. Your government and the Obama administration officially said you can let al-Megrahi out of jail. Yeah, he’s got a prostate cancer problem. He needs to go die in peace in Libya. What was – how many of you people, I mean, this is just absolutely unbelievable here. Our thirst and our zeal for war can even obscure recent historical events such as the freeing of al-Megrahi, his triumphant return to Libya, where he was hugged after he got off that plane. Muammar Qaddafi hugged the man. They had tickertape parades throughout the streets of Tripoli, welcoming their conquering hero, al-Megrahi, back. And this is after he had been convicted of downing that plane. Oh, but they’re rebels now. They’re on our side, says Joe Lieberman. They are? Really? You want to make bedfellows with that kind of a nut job? Are you kidding me?

Despite all of the warnings and the protestations against the warfare state and standing armies and never-ending incursions here and allowing presidents to act like princes or kings, we’re oblivious. We’re just oblivious. “Oh, we’re smarter than that.” And we have an entire media organization – now, this is interesting. In the left-wing media you have the OMSNBCs and what have you that can’t bring themselves to criticize Obama. They just can’t do it. And then you have the fake conservative media that can’t bring themselves to criticize the actions in Libya. Now, they’ll criticize Obama, but they’re all for bombing the bejeezus belt of anything brown that moves in the desert in Libya. 1-866-95-PATRIOT is the telephone number. This goes all the way back to the Kennedy administration. AG, play that clip from John F. Kennedy. This is from Kennedy’s inaugural address; correct? Is that right?

AG: That’d be right, 1961.

Mike: This is 1961, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, his inauguration. Perhaps you will remember these words here, but they kind of set up the future here for the warfare state. Roll the digital media file.

[Clip] President Kennedy: Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

Mike: All right. Now, having come in 1961, that is an absolutely ridiculous statement when viewed in the context that liberty had survived. Liberty had beaten back the wilds of the American frontier. How the hell do you think we conquered all the way from Virginia to Oregon? Liberty had conquered every obstacle that had been put in front of it. It had conquered the frontier. It had figured out a way to colonize an entire uncolonized continent, save for the Indians, who we kicked out, thank you very much. Liberty had figured out how to beat the foes of the axis of evil powers in World War II. Liberty had withstood all of this. Hell, liberty withstood the assault on her Constitution by the Roosevelt administration. Oh, but we’ve got to ensure the survival of liberty. What was he talking about? He was talking about being the founding father of the We Bomb You Klan.

End Mike Church Show Transcript