More on Benghazi

                I believe the Obama Administration might have their backs in a corner on the Benghazi problem.  Four Americans – Ambassador Chris Stevens, information officer Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALS Tyron Woods and Glen Doherty – were killed in Benghazi, Libya, during an attack at our consulate during the night of September 11-12, 2012.  The administration lied to the American people and continues to lie; however, the truth continues to trickle out.  Americans want some truthful answers from the administration.

                “On the night of September 11, 2012, a heavily armed group of between 125 and 150 gunmen attacked the American diplomatic mission at Benghazi, in Libya, killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and another diplomat.  Several hours later in the early morning of the next day, a second assault targeted a nearby CIA annex in a different compound about one mile away, killing two embassy security personnel.  Ten others were injured in the attacks which were condemned by the governments of Libya, the United States, and many other countries throughout the world….

                “Initially, it was reported that the Benghazi attack emerged from a spontaneous protest against a video, Innocence of Muslims.  Subsequent investigations by the U.S. State Department; by the House of Representatives committees on Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, the Judiciary, and Oversight and Government Reform; and by the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence determined that there was no protest and that the attack was a planned terrorist attack launched by Islamist militants….”

                Doug Hagmann published an interesting article at Canada Free Press.  The U.S. Department of Justice has set its sights on an extra-ordinary CIA whistleblower, Robert “Tosh” Plumlee.  Mr. Plumlee has “extensive history and knowledge of the criminal infiltration into the U.S. government, their methods and operations.”  As such, he has “become one of the most dangerous men to the criminal cabal operating at the highest levels of the U.S. government.  The Holder Justice Department and the criminal `gatekeepers’ within the CIA and other government agencies desperately want him silenced – and they absolutely intend to do just that.”

                Mr. Hagmann describes how Mr. Plumlee “laid it all out in stunning detail” on April 30, 2014, edition of The Hagmann & Hagmann Report.  “His disclosures, in the form of 11 questions, validate the information I provided in nearly four dozen separate reports since the 2012 attacks.  They expose that the operations of the criminal cabal that were operating under diplomatic cover are in direct violation of U.S. and international law.  They are, in large part, responsible for the quarter-of-a-million deaths of men, women and children in Syria and the millions of refugees.  Those numbers are still climbing, and the path being laid is taking us and the world to World War III.”

                Mr. Plumlee asked the following eleven questions, questions that the federal government wants to censor.  (1) “Is the United States secretly arming and supporting various factions of the Syrian Rebels with high caliber impact weapons from the United States arsenals?”

(2) “Is the United States little known Direct Commercial Sales Program, also known as `The Blue Lantern Report”, being used as a `cutout’ to secretly aid both sides of a Middle Eastern civil war?  (3) Is America again playing both sides against the middle for corporate gain as previously demonstrated by the Cuban Project of the fifties and sixties, as well as the Iran Contra fiasco of the eighties and the South American-Mexican Drug Wars of the nineties?  …. “ (4) “What happens to those weapons after legally being sold via this program and they leave our control?”

(5) “Are they being monitored, traced, certified, and inventoried after arriving in other countries?”  (6) “Will our troops one day again face these American made weapons on some foreign battlefield?”  (7) “Is this Direct Commercial Sales program a secret cash cow for many US Corporations, International arms merchants, its insiders, or affiliates?”  (8) “Is it possible this could be another `off-the-books’ secret covert operation ran by the CIA’s Special Tactical Unit, similar to the Iran-Contra operations of the eighties and the old Cuban projects of the fifties and sixties, where we supplied both sides weapons and escalated the conflict for personal and corporate gain?”  (9) “Could we be selling and supplying dangerous high impact weapons, while aiding and financing both sides of a Civil War in Syria?”  (10) “Could we be escalating the Middle East conflict either knowingly or unintentionally providing weapons to both sides of the Syrian conflict?  These are simple questions.  I’m just asking:  Did our Ambassador and others, weeks before they were murdered, notify our State Department and CIA that Syrian Rebels had obtained US Weapons, including `Stinger missiles’ from Jordan, Turkey, Pakistan, shipped from CIA safe houses?”  (11) “Were they told to `Stand Down’?”

                These are interesting questions that deserve honest answers.  There are many other good questions.  I believe it is past time we got answers to some of the questions.  Maybe Rep. Trey Gowdy can dig out the truth!

Benghazi Is Hot News

                News about Benghazi is popping up all over the news; even the main stream media outlets have been forced to cover it.  The latest news is so bad that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is considering action to form a select committee to investigate the 2012 attacks in Benghazi.  The news must be really hot because Mr. Boehner has previously been cool to this idea.  Mr. Boehner claims that a recently released e-mail is the “straw that broke the camel’s back.”  This is good news!

                Mr. Boehner is not wants a more in-depth investigation done on Benghazi, he wants Representative Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) to lead the committee.  Since Mr. Boehner prefers him, Mr. Gowdy is most likely to preside over the investigative committee.  As far as I am concerned, Mr. Gowdy is like a bull dog.  He stands his ground and does not take any guff from anyone!  I cannot think of anyone I would more like to see lead an investigative committee than Mr. Gowdy!  He tells it like it is and is not afraid of the truth!

                Mr. Boehner stated, "Americans learned this week that the Obama Administration is so intent on obstructing the truth about Benghazi that it is even willing to defy subpoenas issued by the standing committees of the People’s House….  These revelations compel the House to take every possible action to ensure the American people have the truth about the terrorist attack on our consulate that killed four of our countrymen.

                “In light of these new developments, the House will vote to establish a new select committee to investigate the attack, provide the necessary accountability, and ensure justice is finally served.”

                Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, submitted a Freedom of Information Act request over a year ago for information about Benghazi.  The Obama administration gave some material, but Judicial Watch demanded more.  A new e-mail released last week is supposedly the “smoking gun” that connected the White House to the disaster in Benghazi.  The e-mail showed that the White House simply ignored the intelligence reports and made their own talking points.  The intelligence reports showed that Al Qaeda was involved in the Benghazi attack.  Instead of accepting responsibility for the lax security at the consulate in Benghazi, “they” decided to lie to the American people and say the attack was a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim video. 

                The e-mail was not the only “bomb” thrown at the Obama administration last week.  A retired Air Force General went before a House committee and testified that he knew the attack was not the result of a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim video and he had that information “early on.”   

                The Obama Administration knew “early on” that the Benghazi attack was not caused by a video, but numerous members of the administration – including Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton, Susan Rice, and Jay Carney – all publicly blamed a You Tube video that very few people even knew about!   Over a period of two weeks – September 12 to 26, 2012, members of the administration blamed the video at least seven times as shown here.  

                Americans – and particularly the parents and loved ones of those killed in Benghazi – want to know the truth of what happened and why it happened.  Charles Woods, the father of former Navy SEAL Ty Woods who was killed in Benghazi, was interviewed by Sean Hannity.  He expressed his frustration about the fact that no military units attempted to save the Americans.  He listened to the testimony of Brig. Gen. Robert Lovell (Ret.) and then said, “And there was no attempt made.  As many military have said, within an hour or an hour and a half they could have had jets from Italy above the battle at Benghazi.  Whether they were armed or not, at least they could have broken the sound barrier, they could’ve dispersed and caused confusion on the battlefield.  Even that was not done.  No attempt was made.”

                We all want to know the truth about Benghazi.  Why was our ambassador left with so little security?  Why didn’t the military respond to the attack on Americans?  Why did the administration lie – and continue to lie today – about what happened?

John Brown

                John Brown was an abolitionist during the Civil War; his deeds inspired the words a song:  “John Brown’s Body lies a-moldering in the grave….”  He was born on May 9, 1800, in Torrington, Connecticut.

                Brown was an unsuccessful businessman.  He opposed slavery – as did his father.  In 1849 .he moved his family into a Negro community at North Elba, New York.  He led a group of people fighting against slavery and had a crusade to help escaping slaves.  He led a group in 1856 to Pottawatomie Creek in Kansas; there his men brutally murdered five suspected pro-slavery settlers.

                Brown occupied the Federal Arsenal at Harper’s Ferry, Virginia, on October 16, 1859.  He was finally captured by then Colonel Robert E. Lee.  He was tried and convicted of murder, promoting slave insurrection and treason against Virginia.  Brown was hanged on December 2, 1859, and became a martyr to many Northerners.  It is possible that “John Brown’s Body” was the most popular Union song of the Civil War!

Probable Cause

                The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday comes from the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:  “The right of the people … no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oat or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”  This provision guarantees to the American people that they are to be free from arrest except on properly issued warrants.

                W. Cleon Skousen explained, “However, no warrant is required if the person is observed committing the crime and he is apprehended by those who witnessed the offense.

                “Among the most offensive devices used by the Crown against the colonies were the writs of assistance, general warrants allowing officials to engage in `fishing expeditions,’ ostensibly to discover evidence of smuggling contraband goods.  James Otis of Massachusetts became celebrated in 1761 by contesting this form of tyranny in the courts.”  (See The Making of America – The Substance and Meaning of the Constitution, p. 703.)

                William J. Stuntz of The Heritage Foundation explained, “The first half of the Fourth Amendment’s text bans `unreasonable searches and seizures.’  The second half, known as the Warrant Clause, states a set of basic requirements for search warrants – that they must be supported by an affidavit that establishes probable cause, and that they must describe both the location and objects of the search.

                “One its face, the Warrant Clause would appear to be one of the most clearly written clauses in our Constitution.  It requires that warrants be supported by probable cause, that the police officer seeking the warrant swear to the truth of the facts used to support his application, and that, once issued, the warrant describe where the search is to take place and what the officer is allowed to look for.  All this is plain from the text.  Perhaps because they are so plain, the rules just described have not been the subject of much litigation.”

                Mr. Stuntz further explained that the text of this clause did not answer clearly two very important questions:  (1) “What does `probable cause’ mean?  The Fourth Amendment’s text does not say.”  (2) “Are officers ever required to obtain warrants in order to carry out a search or make an arrest?  Again the text leaves the question open, though it implies that the answer is no:  the phrasing of the Warrant Clause limits warrants but does not mandate their use.”

                “Probable cause” was determined by two court cases.  “In Brinegar v. United States (1949), the Supreme Court defined `probable cause’ as information that would lead `a man of reasonable caution’ to believe `that an offense has been or is being committed.’  In Illinois v. Gates (1983), the Court put it more succinctly, describing probable cause as `a fair probability.’  … In most cases `probable cause’ means what the ordinary definition of `probable’ would suggest:  more likely than not….”

                After explaining why the second question is much more complex, Mr. Stuntz explained:  “Thus the original understanding of the Warrant Clause was in one sense clear, and in one sense not….

                “Today’s Warrant Clause doctrine differs from the historical understanding in some important respects….” 

                A quick summary of my understanding of what Mr. Stuntz wrote would be:  Warrants should be issued only by judicial officers or magistrates.  Warrants can be issued without “probable cause” to authorize such things as building and fire code inspections.  Because police investigate crimes and have more power to enforce the law, they normally need to have warrants for “probable cause” – except for (1) Exigent circumstances” – meaning practically impossible; (2) Arrests outside the home;  (3) Searches incident to arrest – if being arrested, officers can search bags, cars, etc.;  (4) Inventory searches – officer can take any belonging the arrestee has in his possession to the police station, and make a record of it; (5) Automobiles can be searched without warrants for “probable cause”; (6) Street stops and frisks – given reasonable suspicion, officer can briefly stop a suspect and frisk for weapons.

                “In addition to these exceptions, there are several categories of searches that involve government officials other than police officers (e.g., searches of lockers by school principals, and government employers searching employees’ file cabinets), or government interests separate from the interest in criminal law enforcement (e.g., searches of vehicles at the nation’s borders, searches of baggage at airports).  Such searches general do not require warrants.”  (See The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, pp. 326-329.)

Living Prophets and Apostles

                I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and I believe that God speaks to His children.  One of our Articles of Faith states, “We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God” (Pearl of Great Price, Articles of Faith 1:9).  I believe that we can all improve in our ability to learn from the revelations from God, which are found in the Holy Scriptures and in the words of living prophets.  I also believe that we can each receive personal revelation from God through the power of the Holy Ghost to assist us in our individual lives and families.

                I believe that living prophets and apostles receive revelation to guide the Church.  I also believe that their counsel reflects the will of the Lord.  I know that God knows each of us perfectly; I also know that He understands our individual challenges.  I believe that God reveals to living prophets and apostles the information that we need right now. 

                Just two weeks ago, April 5-6, I had the opportunity to spend ten hours listening to the counsel of these prophets and apostles, along with counsel from other Church leaders.  I believe that their counsel contains the information we need to know to survive and prosper in the coming six months or until the next General Conference of the Church.  The counsel of these great leaders can be found here.  

                Elder Robert D. Hales of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostle spoke in the October 2013 General Conference about conference strengthening our faith and testimony.  “Conferences have always been part of the true Church of Jesus Christ.  Adam gathered his posterity and prophesied of things to come.  Moses gathered the children of Israel and taught them the commandments he had received.  The Savior taught multitudes gathered both in the Holy Land and on the American continent.  Peter gathered believers in Jerusalem.  The first general conference in these latter days was convened just two months after the Church was organized, and conferences have continued to this very day.

                “These conferences are always under the direction of the Lord, guided by His Spirit….”

                Elder Hales explained that no topics are assigned to any speaker and that each speaker, through much fasting and prayer, determines what the Lord would have him/her say.  “In conferences we can receive the world of the Lord meant just for us.  … [Because each speaker tries to present the words of the Lord, each listener can receive personal revelation directly from the Lord.] …

                “This is possible because the Holy Ghost carries the word of the Lord unto our hearts in terms we can understand.  When I take notes at conference, I do not always write down exactly what the speaker is saying; I note the personalized direction the Spirit is giving me.

                “What is said is not as important as what we hear and we feel.  That is why we make an effort to experience conference in a setting where the still, small voice of the Spirit can be clearly heard, felt, and understood.

                “Oh, how we need general conference!  Through conferences our faith is fortified and our testimonies deepened.  And when we are converted, we strengthen each other to stand strong amid the fiery darts of these latter days.” 

                There was much in our most recent conference that reminded me of actions I should take to become more like the Savior, but I received personal revelation in several instances about how I should apply the counsel in my personal life.  I am very grateful for my knowledge of living prophets and apostles and for the many modern technological advances that makes hearing their counsel so easy.  

Parenting Mistakes

                Families, communities, and nations are strengthened when we avoid as many parenting mistakes as possible.  We all know families that have wonderful children who grow up to take their rightful places in their communities.  Sometimes, all of the children grow to be well-balanced adults who are blessings in their communities; sometimes, most of the children are well-balanced adults; sometimes, only one or two of the children grow to adulthood ready to take their place in society.  What makes the difference in the lives of these young adults?

                The most obvious difference is that each young adult is an individual with their own set of ideas about what is important in life and their agency to choose their actions.  Agency is most likely the main reason why two children coming out of the same home and living under identical conditions and rules turn out completely different as adults; parents however can take actions to increase the rate of success with their children.

                Randal A. Wright, an accomplished author with a Ph.D. in family studies, authored Power Parenting in the LDS Home where he shared twenty-five of the most common mistakes that parents make in rearing their children. 

                Mr. Wright shared five of those parenting mistakes with LDS Living Magazine:  (1) “Failure to establish a home environment that reflects the gospel.” (What kinds of music, entertainment, artwork, etc. are allowed in your home? (2) “Failure to be at the crossroads of children’s lives.”  (Are you home and awake when your children are coming and going?)  (3) “Allowing children to associate too closely with friends who do not share their same standards.”  (Parents have to decide what “too closely” means for them and where to draw the line.  Is it only dating or simply hanging out together after a game?)  (4) “Failure to express love and give appropriate physical affection to family members.”  (You can never love – truly love – someone too much!)  (5) “Allowing children to steady date during the teen years.”  (This can be tricky to negotiate.  I never mastered it.  I think all my children dated only one person at a time.)

                I do not know what Mr. Wright’s other twenty parenting mistakes are, but I would add one mistake that parents should avoid:  Failure to counsel with your children about important decisions.  I left home for the summer when I was seventeen years old with every intention of returning home for my senior year.  I stayed with my older brother and his family to help my sister-in-law with her five small children and to earn some money for the next school year.  As the summer drew to a close, I told my parents that I was going to stay there to attend school, and my parents simply accepted my decision!  The fact is, I was not adamant about staying there and would have willingly gone back home if my parents had said “No.  You need to come home.” 

                I did not get into any trouble.  I got along fine with my brother and his wife; I even graduated from high school with honors.  In fact, I did not think anything of the situation until I became a mother with teenagers of my own.  It was only then I realized that children and youth need to be with their own parents until they become adults if at all possible.  This is because no one loves a child more than their own parents. I believe that simply being at home with my own parents would have helped me to become a more secure adult.   I believe that I should have gone home and graduated with my life-long school friends.  It is one thing to leave home as an adult and quite another to leave home as a seventeen-year-old high school student.

                I too have made this mistake.  I failed to counsel adequately with several of my own children about their education choices.  I gave all of them total freedom and responsibility to make their own choices as to which fields to train for.  I believe that I should have been more involved and asked many more questions about why they made certain choices and how certain careers would or would not provide adequate money to pay expenses.  I know that we can strengthen our families, communities, and nations by avoiding as many parenting mistakes as possible!

Freedom from Old Debts

                The federal government under the Obama administration has found yet another way to take our money.  The Social Security Administration and other government agencies started to confiscate the tax returns of Americans to pay for old debts, no matter how long ago the debt was made or by whom.

                “Across the nation, who are expecting refunds this month are instead getting letters … informing them that because of a debt they never knew about – often a debt incurred by their parents – the government has confiscated their check.

                “The Treasury Department has intercepted $1.9 billion in tax refunds already this year -- $75 million of that on debts delinquent for more than 10 years, said Jeffrey Schramek, assistant commissioner of the department’s debt management service.  The aggressive effort to collect old debts started three years ago – the result of a single sentence tucked into the farm bill lifting the 10-year statute of limitations on old debts to Uncle Sam.”

                This article has some very interesting information for the adult children of parents who were overpaid by Social Security or any other federal government agency.  It appears that survivors are not normally responsible to pay out of their own funds the debts of deceased parents, but if the person or persons – even as children – benefitted indirectly from the overpayment, they are being held responsible for the debt.  The government begins with the oldest child and goes down the line until the debt is paid.  This may apply to my husband since he is the oldest child of his parents.  They did not receive Social Security benefits, but they did receive retirement benefits from the government.  I guess only time will tell if we get a letter.

                The Social Security Administration apparently felt some heat when their collection of old debt became widely known and directed an immediate halt to the program to give the agency time to “review” it.