HUSSEIN Obama’s Illegal War In Libya: Nexus To Downed Russian Airliner. Where Is The Linkage?

0

ATOP every other danger accrued due to HUSSEIN Obama’s Islamic wildfires, what has (mostly) gone under the radar is the flood of MANPADS via a thriving black market bazaar throughout the Mid East and Africa. Still, why should Americans care what happens across the world? Basically, whatever happens in the aforementioned region eventually blows back onto America, and in a massive way.

DARE it be suggested, how difficult would it be for some of Allah’s barbarians to stow away their newly acquired wares, only to be launched when settled within their Euro destinations as new “refugees?” And how many US flights fly in and out of said cities on a daily basis? Okay…more than food for thought.

Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

MANY analyses are housed within this site regarding Obama Inc.’s decision to enter into an illegal war with Libya. Be that as it may, its rogue basis started with the administration’s failure to garner Congressional approval. This is not an insignificant, nor inconsequential, factor. Incontestably, every President – even “King” Obama – must abide by the War Powers Resolution. It is not optional. It reads in part:
Resolved by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. This joint resolution may be cited as the “War Powers Resolution”.

PURPOSE AND POLICY

SEC. 2. (a) It is the purpose of this joint resolution to fulfill the intent of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and ensure that the collective judgement of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations.

(b) Under article I, section 8, of the Constitution, it is specifically provided that theCongress shall have the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution, not only its own powers but also all other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

(c) The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

CONSULTATION

SEC. 3. The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situation where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.

REPORTING

SEC. 4. (a) In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced–

(1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances;

(2) into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces; or

(3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation; the president shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing, setting forth–

(A) the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces;

(B) the constitutional and legislative authority under which such introduction took place; and

(C) the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement.

(b) The President shall provide such other information as the Congress may request in the fulfillment of its constitutional responsibilities with respect to committing the Nation to war and to the use of United States Armed Forces abroad

(c) Whenever United States Armed Forces are introduced into hostilities or into any situation described in subsection (a) of this section, the President shall, so long as such armed forces continue to be engaged in such hostilities or situation, report to the Congress periodically on the status of such hostilities or situation as well as on the scope and duration of such hostilities or situation, but in no event shall he report to the Congress less often than once every six months….continue reading

PRAY tell, is there anything ambiguous about the above Constitutional mandate, that HUSSEIN Obama felt he had the right to abrogate its basis? Not a damn thing. Mind you, poli sci and/or law majors would fail first level course work, if they “misunderstood” its essence!  

IN fact, he stated very clearly that the “War Powers Resolution” Act does not apply to his administration. Really?

President Obama is again asserting his right to act unilaterally and without congressional approval in going to war. In what has become a mantra for this Administration, Obama reportedly told members of Congress that he does not need congressional approval to unleash a comprehensive military campaign against the Islamic State. The President informed a few members at a dinner — a striking image of how low congressional authority has become in our tripartite system of government.

We have been discussing the growing concerns over President Barack Obama’s series of unilateral actions in ordering agencies not to enforce law, effectively rewriting laws, and moving hundreds of millions of dollars from appropriated purposes to areas of his choosing. One of the greatest concerns has been his unchecked authority asserted in the national security area. I previously represented members of Congress in challenging Obama’s intervention in the Libyan civil war without a declaration from Congress. In the case, President Obama insisted that he alone determines what is a war and therefore when he needs a declaration. Since the court would not recognize standing to challenge the war, it left Obama free to engage in war operations in any country of his choosing. As with his approach in Libya, Syria and other combat operations (and most recently on whether he will resume the war in Iraq), Obama is again asserting his extreme view of executive power.

As in the past, Democrats are not just silent but actually applauding the circumvention of Congress — a precedent that will likely come back to haunt them if the next president is a Republican.

I have repeatedly testified (here and here and here and here) and wrote a column on President Obama’s increasing circumvention of Congress in negating or suspending U.S. laws. However, war is a particularly egregious form of this unilateralism since the Framers worked hard to limit such powers under Article I and Article II…continue reading

IN this regard, it has already been established that permission was not sought, nor granted, to enter into war with Libya. Still yet, the overarching questions remain: 1) What was the main goal? 2) What were/are the knock-on effects? 3) And how do they intersect with a downed airliner(s)?

 

ALAS, let the following serve as “testimony”:

TESTIMONY ONE:

IN answer to questions 1 and 2 – a little over a year and a half ago – this investigative journalist asserted: “The Mysterious Disappearance Of A Malaysian Airliner: Possible Intersection With Libya’s “Missing” MANPADS. What If R2P/Obama’s Benghazigate Bears The Onus?”

YES, bear in mind that Benghazigate was a DIRECT result of the illegal war in Libya. Cause and effect.

THEN, ask yourselves: Was “Testimony One” (once explored and read) a foreshadowing to the recently downed Russian Metrojet Flight 9268 over Sinai? Asked and answered.

  TESTIMONY TWO:

SO, now we segue to the downed flight on Oct. 31, 2015 via DEBKAfile – a highly reliable and notable intelligence site – and its assessment:

The British Cobra (emergency cabinet) decision of Wednesday, Nov. 4, not to send airliners to or from Sharm El-Sheikh, where 20,000 British tourists are stranded, further strengthens the assumption that the Russian Metrojet Flight 9268 was downed over Sinai Saturday by a terrorist missile. It confirms that air traffic over Sinai and landings at Sharm are under threat from the ground – else why leave a large group of Britons under virtual siege in the Egyptian Red Sea resort? London said that the suspension of flights to Sharm was “indefinite.”
Moscow early Thursday accused London of being moved to this action out of hostility to Russia rather than security concerns.
Downing Street released a statement Wednesday saying: “As more information has come to light, we have become concerned that the plane may well have been brought down by an explosive device.” This statement was criticized by Egypt as “premature” – not a good omen for the conversation Prime Minister David Cameron is due to hold with his visitor, Egyptian president Abdel-Fatteh El-Sisi, later Thursday.

The British government has therefore stubbed toes in Moscow and Cairo without coming up with an emergency plan for evacuating its citizens from Egypt, whether overland to Cairo by bus or by sea aboard ships picking them up at the Red Sea resort and sailing through the Suez Canal.

This lack of initiative is a sign of confusion and uncertainty.
So far, the drawn-out deliberations and prevarications by officials in several countries regarding the crash of the Russian plane are meant for one purpose: to gain time for doing nothing about ISIS in Sinai. Neither the US, Russia or Britain is ready to send forces to the peninsula to confront the terrorists head-on. {note: al-Qaeda/ISIS etc gained a firm foothold in Sinai AFTER Libya was blown up!)

The Ansar al Sharia terrorist organization in Libya, which attacked the US consulate in Benghazi and murdered the American ambassador in 2012, has the very missiles capable of shooting down large airliners flying at high altitudes:Russian-made ground-to-air Buk missiles, which have a range of between three and 42 kilometers. This ultra-violent Islamist terror group has very close operational ties with ISIS-Sinai, and very possibly smuggled the missile system into Sinai from Libya.
A number of intelligence agencies are aware of this and so a flock of leading European and Persian Gulf airlines lost no time in rerouting their flights to avoid Sinai straight after the Russian air disaster.

By causing this disaster, the Islamist terrorists coolly aimed for four goals:

1.  Retaliation for Russian intervention in Syria

2.  An attempt to destabilize the regime of Egyptian President Fattah Al-Sisi

3.  To show up the inadequacies of the 63-member coalition that the US formed in its effort to fight ISIS

4. To parade before the world the Islamic State’s operational prowess, its ability to shoot down the large passenger planes of the world’s biggest powers.

For five days, intelligence and flight safety experts dismissed the claim of responsibility that ISIS issued on the evening of October 31, maintaining that it was not to be taken seriously because no proof had been provided to support the claim – as if the charred fragments of the plane spread across tens of kilometers of desert were deniable.

In the second of its three messages, ISIS repeated its claim Wednesday, Nov. 4, promising details of how it downed the plane at a later date.

While more and more Western governments are coming around to accepting that the Russian airliner’s crash was caused by an explosive device, DEBKA file’s counterterrorism sources repeat that they cannot rule out the possibility of a missile. The argument made on Wednesday in Washington and London that terrorist organizations do not have missiles capable of downing such planes is are simply incorrect.

ISIS-Sinai’s possession of an advanced ground-air missile system does not only endanger planes in the peninsula’s airspace, but also those aircraft flying over the Suez Canal as well as parts of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel. One of the Egyptian president’s main purposes in his London visit was to try and persuade Prime Minister Cameron to join an Egyptian military operation against Ansar al Sharia in Libya and so eliminate a major prop and arms supplier for ISIS-Sinai. He does not hold out much hope of success.

CONCLUSIVELY, Obama Inc. and its entire intelligence apparatus (other regimes alike) knew full well that Libya was AWASH with advanced MANPADS. In fact, the CIA’s Petraeus warned :

Speaking at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University, former CIA director General David Petraeus issued a serious warning about the international threats posed by shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles (Manpads) in the hands of al Qaeda and other terrorists.  Petraeus referred to the January 27th downing of an Egyptian military helicopter by a Russian Strela-2 missile (aka SA-7) by al Qaeda-affiliated Ansar Beit al-Maqdis in the Sinai Peninsula. “Shooting down a helicopter with an apparent shoulder-fired missile is a big deal. … Our worst nightmare [was]that a civilian airliner would be shot down by one,” he said. … “The concern over an attack on civilian aviation flows not only from the loss of passengers’ lives, but also from the likely economic consequences that would follow—a worldwide grounding of air traffic that might bring the global economy to a screeching halt.”

The threat of Manpads in the hands of al Qaeda and terrorist groups has escalated dramatically. After Moammar Gadhafi’s killing by rebels in Libya, on October 20, 2011, some 20,000 Manpads went missing. Months later only 5,000 were reportedly destroyed. Where the remaining 15,000 missiles are is unclear.

While the Obama Administration issued a statement assuring Americans that most of Libya’s weapons, including shoulder-fired Manpads, had been secured, NATO’s then-military committee chairman, Admiral Giampaolo di Paola, was not so sure. His fear that Libyan Manpads could be scattered “from Kenya to Kunduz [Afghanistan]” subsequently materialized.

Libyan, Iranian and possibly Syrian MANPADs found their way to Salafi Bedouins, Hamas and al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist groups in the Sinai, forcing restriction of Israeli military and civilian air traffic in the area. A year after Gadhafi’s fall, Israeli officials reported that an SA-7 had been fired at one of their military aircraft over the Gaza Strip (AW&ST March 12,2012)….continue reading

libyan-rebel.JPG(An anti-Gadhafi rebel holds his rocket-propelled grenade launcher as he shouts slogans after the capture of the oil town of Ras Lanouf, in eastern Libya on March 5, 2011.TRIPOLI, Libya)

CONCOMITANTLY, despite all the out-sized dangers associated with blowing apart Libya, HUSSEIN Obama accelerated the Mid East’s wildfires, which, incidentally, happens to be my ‘hood! To wit, shouldn’t the Islamist-in-Chief “shoulder” responsibility for the deluge of advanced shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles (that which, heretofore, had been kept under lock and key by Gadhafi’s regime) and all the ensuing deaths?? If not, why not?    

9k338-igla-s-in-syria

About Author

Adina Kutnicki

Adina Kutnicki is an investigative journalist and independent op-ed contributor to various Zionist and Conservative media outlets. She contributed to an in-depth investigative series at FrontPage Magazine with Lee Kaplan from 2003-2007. They are still working together. Her op-eds have been featured at American Thinker, Israel National News,Israel Insider, The Jewish Press, MidEast Outpost, The Freeman Center For Strategic Studies, HONENU – Providing Legal Aid To Israeli Soldiers & Civilians In Distress, JEWSNEWS.co.il(http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/11/10/why-is-drunk-driving-treated-more-leniently-than-assault-with-a-deadly-weapon-op-ed-by-adina-kutnicki-featured-at-jewsnews-co-il/) as well as at other sites. Some interviews include: The Inquisitr Interviews Adina Kutnicki: The Reality Of Life For An Israeli Patriot and ‘The Muslim Brotherhood’s Quest For Global Dominance – An Interview With Adina Kutnicki.’ Her recent book review On A Wing From The Holy Land [Review Of An Exciting New Novel About The Spiritual Journey Of An Israeli Woman] was also spotlighted at Inquisitr. In addition, she is the Israel Administrator at Islam Exposed Online Her blog - www.adinakutnicki.com - received a ‘Watcher of Weasels’ Award - see within – scroll down to ‘Non-Council’ winners. Her full profile can be found at - http://adinakutnicki.com/about/

Send this to friend