Regime Getting Slammed For Releasing Info On Foley Rescue Mission

Obama’s decision to release the details of an unsuccessful mission in Syria last month to rescue several Americans held captive by ISIS is being slammed by critics who suggest that they did it  for political reasons – which is the reason this Regime does anything.

Via Hot Air: 

“Two Defense Department officials, who spoke separately on the condition of anonymity because of the operation’s delicate nature, expressed anger at the administration for revealing the mission,” The New York Times reported. “One of the officials said the aborted raid had alerted the militants to the Americans’ desire and willingness to try to rescue the hostages, and, in the aftermath, had probably forced the captors to tighten their security.”

According to a National Security Council statement, the administration was simply trying to get ahead of reporters who were going to reveal the details of the raid with or without government collaboration. The administration, the NSC claims, would have preferred to have been able to keep this failed mission a secret indefinitely.

“We never intended to disclose this operation,” said National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden. “An overriding concern for the safety of the hostages and for operational security made it imperative that we preserve as much secrecy as possible.”

“We only went public today when it was clear a number of media outlets were preparing to report on the operation and that we would have no choice but to acknowledge it,” she added.

Why then, Noah Rothman asks, “would they not simply confirm that the raid occurred to press outlets making that inquiry?”

Why release details of the forces and equipment used, the faction of ISIS responsible for the hostages, and the mission goals?

As usual, to make Obama look less like a clueless Golfer-in-Chief, they released the details of the mission he was hesitant to even want to authorize.

This administration knows how to keep secrets when it comes to protecting their own hides – no matter how many media outlets are on the case.

Rep. Buck McKeon (R., Calif.) on Thursday called  for an investigation to track down the people who first disclosed the information to reporters:

“Disclosure of these missions puts our troops at risk, reduces the likelihood that future missions will succeed, and risks the lives of hostages and informants alike,” he said in a statement.

Here are some others who are excoriating the Regime for this latest leak scandal. I saved the best one for last.

General Jack Keene: ‘No reason’ for White House to disclose failed rescue of American hostages:

Appearing on the Kelly File, August 20, shortly after the news broke:

JACK KEANE, FOUR-STAR GENERAL (RET): Yeah. I think as a matter of principle, Megyn, we really shouldn’t talk about these operations. And certainly an operation like this is no reason to disclose it. At deference to Mr. Foley’s family, I probably would have told that family what we had attempted to do at least and give them some comfort that we may did try to rescue him.

But, you know, even going back to the bin Laden raid which was obviously successful, the amount of information that was released after that infuriated the secretary of defense. I know if our special operators were here, they don’t want these things talked about. They don’t want them out in the media.

What will happen now because we disclosed the event, journalists will pursue with sources to get more information about the details of that event. And that is what the special operators don’t want out there.

KELLY: And if you look at what the White House has revealed, I mean, it’s lengthy. They go into all sorts of details about the operation and what parts of it failed and where they were carried out and how they were carried out. And then, it’s also being reported that there is some concern among military personnel that the release of this info will impede them from being able to carry out this information or this kind of operation in the future. Do you share that concern?

KEANE: Oh yeah, absolutely. Listen, here’s what they depend on. You know, first of all, they need accurate intelligence. And obviously in this case they didn’t have it. Secondly, they need the element of surprise because we plop them downright usually in the middle of the enemy. And after that they certainly have to rely on their extraordinary skill and also on their daring and courage. All those elements contribute to success. And certainly surprise is something they absolutely need to have or else they lose the advantage.

And so, they don’t want people on their guard about these kind of operations. We’ve got about eight hostages in seven different country. You can know for a fact that every one of those people who are holding them captive are looking at where are they, should we move them, what’s the circumstances, do we have enough — do we have enough prevention here in the event that somebody was coming after them.


AMB. JOHN BOLTON: I think this is a stunning breech of security for the United States. Obviously, ordered by the White House, I cannot conceive of the Pentagon releasing this on their own. This is exactly the sort of thing that should remain completely confidential for 50 years, number one, because it tells people what we try to do. Number two, it’s an admission of failure. Well, the United States tried again and couldn’t do it. Number three, whoever was — we relied upon, whoever gave us the tip is now in jeopardy from the Islamic State and they will be dead already. This is just not something do you.



Peters said the released remind him of “Stalinist bureaucrats’ and the “administration acted disgracefully” and purely for “political cover.”

“I have got to address not only disgraceful, but murderous release of details of this raid,” Peters said. “You just don’t do it. The special operators are furious because the administration rolled them on the bin Laden raid.”

“Why do I say murderous?” he continued. “Not only because detailing which units are involved, tactics, how we did it, not only does that endanger our fighters, if we go in on a future raid, but the administration didn’t think about the hostages still being held. They released the data, to the information that we got intelligence from released European hostages. do you think the Islamic State is going to release more hostages? We signed their death warrants by compromising that information.”

“I’m a former intelligence guy,” he added. “You do not compromise a vital, above top secret national security information for five minutes of political gain. It’s un-American.”


The Council Has Spoken!! This Weeks’ Watcher’s Council Results

tribal council 3 (1)

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast, and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match up.

“This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice.” – Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

“In keeping people straight, principle is not as powerful as a policeman.” – Abel Hermant, Le Bourgeois, 1906

“Hating people because of their color is wrong. And it doesn’t matter which color does the hating. It’s just plain wrong.” – Muhammad Ali

Right Planet

This week’s winner, The Right Planet’s #Ferguson: Facts Don’t Matter Anymore is an excellent rundown on the Michael Brown shooting and the subsequent riots in Ferguson, Missouri by someone fairly close to the action. Here’s a slice:


Facts and details are starting to leak out concerning the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri—albeit slowly. But facts don’t seem to matter anymore in our idiocracy, i.e. mobocracy. If they did, I doubt Ferguson would be in flames right now. But I digress.

Earlier this week, I was listening to a caller on the Dana Loesch radio show who allegedly had spoken with the spouse of Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson—the officer who shot Michael Brown. The caller claimed Michael Brown became involved in an altercation with Officer Darren Wilson, and even tried to take his gun—which allegedly went off during the struggle. The caller also stated Brown bum-rushed the police officer.

Additionally, an audio of some alleged eyewitnesses to the lethal shooting of Michael Brown has recently come out and seems to corroborate the details provided by the caller on Dana Loesch’s radio show.

Here’s the audio from both sources (hat tip: Representative Press):

Now, an autopsy report published in the New York Times seems to corroborate the two aforementioned sources, showing Michael Brown was shot from the front, not the back, as is alleged by some who claim Officer Darren Wilson mercilessly “executed” Michael Brown simply because he was black.




The notion Michael Brown was simply an innocent 18-year-old “child” who was ruthlessly “executed” by a “trigger-happy, racist white pig” was brought into question when surveillance video appeared to show Michael Brown committing a strong-arm robbery of a convenience store, roughing up the store’s owner and brazenly walking off with approximately $50 worth of Swisher Sweets cigars in the process.


The suspect in the video shoving the store’s proprietor is wearing the exact same clothes and shoes as Michael Brown, and matches Brown’s physical description, when he was shot.


I’m sorry, for the doubters out there, if that isn’t Michael Brown, my name is Barack Obama. Michael Brown was no “child”; he was a young man who stood 6’4″ tall and weighed 292 pounds, and he apparently had an attitude to boot.


Despite these important details that are now starting to come out, the city of Ferguson, Missouri, has been plunged into utter chaos and mayhem for the past week. Last night, the situation in Ferguson escalated to a point where Missouri Governor Jay Nixon felt it necessary to call in the National Guard.


The Wall Street Journal reported:

Traffic opened again in downtown Ferguson along West Florissant Avenue, the center of an hourslong running battle between heavily armed police and hundreds of protesters Sunday evening that started at about 8:30 p.m. Police said Molotov cocktails thrown at them, as well as shootings throughout the neighborhood, forced them to respond with smoke devices and tear-gas canisters.

Before anything was really known about the circumstances surrounding the shooting of Michael Brown, a throng of “outside agitators” flocked to Ferguson to inflame an already volatile situation—namely, the main-stream media, who apparently seems hellbent on creating even more racial strife by stirring the pot and fanning the flames. This is what “social justice” looks like, and it has nothing to do with the rule of law, but it has everything to do with furthering a cynical political agenda.

Much more at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner by a nose was Kurt Schlichter with The GOP Needs to Return to a “Feared By Our Enemies” Foreign Policy submitted byJoshuapundit. I nominated this, quite simply, because it’s one of the best short capsulizations of what I think America’s foreign policy direction ought to be that I’ve read in quite some time. Short, sweet and simply superb.

Okay, let’s get to this week’s full results:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week! Don’t forget to tune in on Monday AM for this week’s Watcher’s Forum, as the Council and their invited guests take apart one of the provocative issues of the day and weigh in…don’t you dare miss it. And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that!


%d bloggers like this: