Lieutenant General (Ret.) Jerry Boykin, former US Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, joins Frank for the entire show to help shed some light on the most important issues that the United States is currently faced with, including the very real and immediate threat that has befallen Americans with the ongoing Islamization of America, and the current administration’s policy of ignorance towards the dangers that radical Islam pose. Gen. Boykin reflects on the Extortion 17 case, a tragic incident that befell Seal Team Six that killed several of the team’s members, and also gives Frank and his listeners a look at the past with his sobering personal account of what happened the last time the Armed Forces were hollowed out.
Also see:
LYONS: Dereliction of duty - Obama policy of ‘leading from behind’ looks like switching sides (washingtontimes.com)
The Southern Poverty Law Center has taken a lead role in the institutional left’s attempt to unilaterally intellectually disarm America on the issue of Islamic terrorism. In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombing, it’s worth looking at how the group has attempted to silence critics of Islamic extremism, often by poisoning the well to discredit any examination of the possible dangers posed by Islamists.
The SPLC was started over forty years ago as a legitimate civil rights organization to combat the violent racist actions of groups like the Ku Klux Klan, but has become part of the vast web of organizations–many funded by George Soros’s Open Society Institute–that work together to smear conservative voices in order to advance a leftist agenda.
One way to think of the institutional left is as a body where different organs perform different functions but all function together to form a whole; your stomach signals your brain that it wants food, so your feet walk you to the fridge, your hand opens the door, and so on. With the institutional left, many different groups work in concert to promote the wider agenda of radicals, such as diminishing America’s security.
The role that the Southern Poverty Law Center plays is to be an “objective” source to brand conservative entities as “hate groups” for the purpose of stopping debate and discussion on important issues. The well-heeled SPLC–with financial reserves of over$200 million–does this through their Hate Watch blog and a quarterly magazine but, more ominously, by also reporting their findings directly to the FBI.
The Southern Poverty Law Center has explicitly targeted people like Atlas Shrugs blogger Pam Geller, author Robert Spencer, 60s radical-turned-conservative David Horowitz, and the Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney. By lumping these authors and speakers in with violent groups like the Aryan Brotherhood or Ku Klux Klan and then reporting them to law enforcement as “hate groups,” the SLPC is trying to create a chilling effect on investigation into what we’ve learned time and again are legitimate dangers.
The Southern Poverty Law Center’s impact is magnified because other institutional left groups pick up on the SPLC’s reports and regurgitate them; these circular references are then used to give the reports legitimacy.
Republican leaders of five House committees with national security jurisdictions have issued today a “progress report” (PDF) on the fruits of their respective efforts to investigate the murderous jihadist attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. The most important take-away is that, more than seven months after that outrage, these committees still do not know precisely what happened.
More to the point, the report indicates that the five committees intend to continue their investigations. It seems predictable that months spent on more of the same, business-as-usual inquiries will produce more of the same stonewalling by the executive branch, a host of still-unanswered questions and a continuing lack of accountability for the policies that got us into this fiasco in Libya, for the conduct during the attack and for the cover-up that was perpetrated at the highest levels of the Obama administration.
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., President of the Center for Security Policy, responded to the issuing of this report by renewing the Center’s call for the establishment, instead, of a select committee to get to the bottom of the Benghazigate scandal.
The American people are entitled to know the truth about what happened before, during and following the attack last year in Benghazi on 9/11. While the existing, standing committees have shed some light on pieces of this sordid affair, it is now evident that that truth simply is unlikely to be forthcoming in the absence of an aggressive investigative effort with real teeth.
We believe this progress report reinforces the request recently made by 700-plus Special Forces veterans urging Congress to establish a select committee pursuant to House Resolution 36, sponsored by Rep. Frank Wolf and a majority of the House Republican caucus. It is time for real progress and a select committee evidently is necessary to get it.
Concerned citizens can help get this select committee established by urging their representatives to endorse H.Res.36 by going to www.EndtheCoverup.com.
The worst lies are the ones we tell ourselves, and the most dangerous lies are the ones we tell ourselves about terrorism. The number one lie is that there no – is no Arab-Islamic terror. Lie number two is that Arab-Islamic terror has been defeated. And the third lie: Even though Arab-Islamic terror has been defeated, there was no way to foresee it because it never existed and it never posed a threat. Yes, I know it is not logical to hold all these three lies in your mind at the same time, but that is what has happened - Michael Widlanski
Frank Gaffney, President & CEO, Center for Security Policy; former Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy
Michael Widlanski, Author of Battle for Our Minds: Western Elites and the Terror Threat, Former Strategic Affairs Advisor to the Israeli Ministry of Public Security
Patrick Poole, National Security and Terrorism Correspondent for PJMedia
Representative Louie Gohmert (R-Tx)
Sebastian Gorka, Miilitary Affairs Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies & Council for Emerging National Security Affairs
Authorities in Massachusetts have identified suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing on Monday as Dzhokhar and (the now-deceased) Tamerlan Tsarnaev, two brothers of Chechen descent originally from Kyrgyzstan. Many Americans haven’t heard of the place; most couldn’t find it on a map. Nearly all would be unable to say why people from there would want to kill people from here.
Welcome to the phenomenon of global jihad. It is time to dispense with the illusion that we are safe from foreign threats because we have put, as President Obama repeatedly insisted during the last campaign, “al Qaeda on the path to defeat,” thanks to the death of Osama bin Laden and the drone-delivered thinning of the ranks of his lieutenants.
The Chechen jihadists in Boston may or may not have been associated with, or even inspired by, bin Laden’s terror network. But in the days and weeks to come we are likely to discover that they identify with its goals: 1) imposing the supremacist Islamic doctrine ofshariah – a totalitarian, brutally repressive and anti-Constitutional ideology – on the entire world, Muslim and non-Muslim alike. And 2) recreating a caliphate (or a similar theo-political entity) to rule according to that doctrine.
The same is true of other violent jihadists of the Sunni and Shia stripes, including, respectively, the Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia and the regime in Iran. Ditto the so-called non-violent Muslim Brotherhood. In fact, that organization – which is the mother-ship for virtually all modern Sunni jihadists – favors an approach better described as pre-violent: The Brotherhood is perfectly prepared to use violence when it will be effective. Until then, they will adopt other measures (which they call “civilization jihad”) to create conditions that would be conducive to the realization of the goals they share with all other Islamists.
My preliminary read on the Brothers Tsarnaev is that they, too, were committed to the triumph of shariah. And whether they were associated with one or the other of these groups, factions, or sects, or if they were self-taught and operating alone, it seems likely that they embraced that doctrine’s requirement to wage jihad against infidels – something they evidently did with pressure-cooker improvised explosive devices near the Finish Line on Monday.
Literally by the minute, we are learning more about their backgrounds and behavior. With luck, we will also know shortly whether they were aided by accomplices or organizational infrastructure that may still pose a threat.
What we know already, however, is that there are perhaps hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of others like them around the world. Folks who believe that their god commands them to engage personally in holy war against the infidels and non-shariah-adherent Muslims (whom they call apostates).
What is particularly worrying is that this is not a new revelation. We have been on notice of this fact since well before 9/11. And yet we have at times ignored it – or, in some cases, denied it assiduously. And that is not simply true of average Americans. It has been the widespread practice within administrations of both parties, beginning in earnest under George W. Bush and metastasizing greatly in the Obama presidency. (For a detailed treatment of how this has happened and why, see www.MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.comand The Muslim Brother in the Obama Administration www.horowitzfreedomcenter.org.)
We have thus systematically violated one of the cardinal principles of warfare dating back at least to the ancient Chinese strategist Sun Tsu, who warned that you cannot defeat an enemy you do not know. Worse, we have allowed an enemy we could and should have known long ago to dictate to us what we are allowed to understand, think, and do about them.
For example, the Obama administration has purged the files and training materials of federal law enforcement, intelligence, homeland security, and defense agencies of information that might “offend” Islamists. That would include knowing such truths as that it is the orthodoxy of Islam (although a practice not embraced by all Muslims) to engage in jihad to advance the supremacy of shariah.
Washington, D.C.: On the eve of a confirmation hearing on the nomination of Thomas Perez, President Obama’s pick to become the next Secretary of Labor, the Center for Security Policy released a 20-minute video featuring comments by six prominent public policy practitioners and experts urging the Senate to reject this selection. This “virtual press conference” (VPC) offers a litany of extremely troubling behavior spanning the nominee’s career prior to and during his tenure in his current position as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights.
The following participants and topics are featured in the “Reject Perez” video:
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., President of the Center for Security Policy, hosts the VPC and addressesPerez’s leading role in the Obama administration-wide effort to embrace, legitimate and empower the Muslim Brotherhood and its operatives.
Chris Farrell, Director of Investigations at Judicial Watch, describes Perez’s radical political philosophy and conduct before and during his time in the Justice Department.
Anita MonCrief, who once was a member of the hard-left group, ACORN, and is now a voting integrity activist with True the Vote, discusses Perez’s troubling proclivities with respect to immigration and labor law stemming in part from his past-presidency of Casa de Maryland, an organization that helps illegal aliens violate federal statutes.
Hans von Spakovsky, former counsel to one of Perez’s predecessors as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, who decries the “toxic culture” and mismanagement inside that organization as a result of the incumbent’s leadership – and the prevarication he engaged in during the course of a highly critical examination of the Perez tenure by the Justice Department’s Inspector General.
Rosemary Jenks, Director of Government Relations at Numbers USA, who questions whether the Senate can responsibly entrust the U.S. Labor Department to an individual who has worked to enable illegal aliens to take jobs from American workers.
J. Christian Adams, a former career attorney in the U.S. Department of Justice’s Voting Section details various actions – some taken personally by Perez and others by his organization on his watch – that have subverted the principle of equal justice under the law.
On the occasion of the release of the Reject Perez video, Mr. Gaffney observed:
Tom Perez is perhaps the most controversial of President Obama’s nominees to Cabinet positions in his second administration – and that is saying something in light of the competition for that dubious distinction. His past record and present mismanagement, if not actual malfeasance, at the Justice Department should disqualify him from serious consideration for not only the job of Secretary of Labor, but for any position of responsibility in the U.S. government.
Rep. Frank Wolf called a press conference outside the capitol to discuss his sponsorship of H. Res. 36, which would create a special congressional committee to investigate the failures that contributed to the deadly jihadist attack in Benghazi, Libya last year. He was joined by Family Research Council’s Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and former member of Delta Force. Boykin represented Special Operations Speaks, a group of ex-special forces operators who came together to write a letter to Members of Congress, urging them to commit to getting to the bottom of what happened in Benghazi, and to end the administration’s cover-up. Finally, the Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney spoke about the implications of the attack in Libya on America’s national security and foreign policy in the Middle East/North Africa region.
Tell your Congressmen to support H.Res 36, which would create a House Select Committee to investigate the September 11 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya.
In a conference call with bloggers, yesterday, Frank Gaffney mentioned a talking point that then Sec. of State Hillary Clinton repeated during her hearing on Benghazi. ”We are confronting a global jihadist threat,” she told the Senators several times. But the failure that was manifest on Sept 11, Gaffney reminded us, was that the Regime didn’t recognize the global jihadist threat in any way shape or form. Clinton failed to countenance the global jihadist threat until she was heading out the door.
Another thing Gaffney thought was kind of stunning was the absence of any of the folks who survived the attack from the public domain. He called it a “witness suppression program.”
The day before Hillary Clinton testified to both House and Senate committees on the Libya terror attack, Jennifer Griffen and Adam Housley posted a string of “Facts and questions about what happened in Benghazi” at Fox News. Unfortunately, most of those questions remain unanswered. A review of these questions now helps underscore how serious the failures in Benghazi are and leads us to the inescapable conclusion that there is indeed a massive cover-up:
DELAY IN MILITARY RESPONSE
The facts:
Fox News has learned that U.S. Marines who were part of a FAST (Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team) responding to Libya were told by the State Department to deplane, change out of their U.S. military uniforms and put on civilian clothes before flying to Tripoli — a decision that delayed them from launching by approximately 90 minutes, according to senior military officials who briefed Congress. The FAST team, which was made up of about 50 Marines, was ordered by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to launch from Rota, Spain, the night of the attack on the Benghazi diplomatic mission.
Members of the Special Operations teams sent from Fort Bragg, N.C. and the Commander’s In Extremis Force in nearby Croatia say they were never given permission to enter Libya, even though some were just a short flight away in Europe.
The Accountability Review Board appointed by Clinton and overseen by Adm. Mike Mullen and former Ambassador Thomas Pickering concluded: “The Board members believe every possible effort was made to rescue and recover Ambassador Stevens and Sean Smith. The interagency response was timely and appropriate, but there simply was not enough time for armed U.S. military assets to have made a difference.”
The questions:
Why was it necessary for those Marines to change into civilian clothing when it was apparent that U.S. government officials were in imminent danger?
Did the State Department ever secure permission from Libya and Italy to fly armed units and flights to Libya the night of the attack?
U.S. military planes based at both Sigonella and Aviano, Italy, must have permission from the Italian government on a case-by-case basis to take off armed. According to former U.S. military commanders, this is an issue that can stymie rescue efforts, if the State Department does not manage to secure the appropriate permissions from the host government — Italy, in this case. If those permissions were not secured, is it safe to assume the State Department was reluctant to ask the U.S. military to help in Libya before, during or after the Sept. 11 attack?
Were they concerned about a Black Hawk Down-type situation, losing military assets trying to help with a rescue?
The facts:
Defense Department spokesman George Little says that the FAST team would not have been in Libya in time to save any lives, and any delays to change out of military uniforms likely did not make a difference since all surviving State Department personnel left the consulate for the CIA Annex about an hour and 45 minutes after the attack began at 9:42 p.m. Libyan time.
However, even according the ARB timeline, Ambassador Chris Stevens’ body was not returned to the Benghazi airport until 8:25 a.m. on Sept. 12.
He remained missing for nearly 11 hours.
The question:
Should more have been done to try to retrieve his body from the Benghazi hospital?
DISCREPANCIES IN OFFICIAL DOD TIMELINE
The facts:
The official Defense Department timeline and the independent Accountability Review Board state that the European Commander in Extremis Force that AFRICOM commander Gen. Carter Ham ordered to Sigonella from a training mission in Europe arrived at 7:57 p.m. on Sept. 12 (nearly 22 hours after the attack began). Fox News has reported it was training in nearby Croatia, a short flight away.
Fox News has learned that a 12-member alert force from the CIF team who were staged to Sigonella from Croatia arrived at the staging base in southern Italy within several hours of being alerted of the attack — but they were not given permission to move into Libya.
Fox News has also learned that the team of Tier One special operators who took off from the United States landed in Sigonella air base in southern Italy at about 7:30 a.m. local time – an hour before Stevens’ body was retrieved.
And yet the official Defense Department timeline says that this National Mission Force team did not arrive in Sigonella until 9:28 p.m. Libyan time on Sept. 12 (nearly 24 hours after the attack began).
The question:
Why the discrepancy in the official Defense Department timeline and the time that those special operators say they landed in Sigonella from the United States?
“FAST MOVERS” WERE PROMISED
The facts:
The quick reaction force that was mobilized from the Libyan capital was made up of five Americans — including Glen Doherty, who was on contract with the CIA’s Global Response Staff (or GRS), and two Delta Force special operators who were in Libya on a separate assignment. That was all the hastily rented plane could hold, according to the State Department Review Board. Stevens used the cellphone of Regional Security Officer 1, who is currently recovering at Walter Reed. Stevens was speaking with the Embassy in Tripoli at 9:50 p.m. from the safe room where he and RSO1 had retreated for safety.
When the reaction team left Tripoli for Benghazi several hours after the attack began, they were told by one of the senior U.S. security officials at the Embassy that there would be “fast movers above Benghazi” when they arrived. “Fast movers” is a reference to military jets used to fly over a combat situation. It was a reference to F-18s, F-15s or F-16s that would have been flown in from Europe.
The team that left for Benghazi assumed they would have air cover when they landed. Instead, they got held up at the Benghazi airport without transportation and did not arrive at the CIA Annex to help with the evacuation until 5 a.m. local time on Sept. 12 (more than seven hours after the attack had begun.) Air support never came.
Doherty, a former Navy SEAL, was a part of that team and was killed by a mortar while he and Tyrone Woods manned defensive positions on the roof. Woods did not die immediately from the mortar attack. He bled out over several hours, according to one eyewitness who was there that night.
Fox News has also learned that some of Stevens’ in-country security detail did not accompany him to Benghazi on Sept 11.
The questions:
Why was the “fast movers” team never sent from Italy?
Why did highly trained members of the diplomatic security service remain behind in Tripoli, and why did Stevens take only a skeletal security team to Benghazi?
The Board found that Stevens made the decision to travel to Benghazi independently of Washington. His plans “were not shared thoroughly with the Embassy’s country team, who were not fully aware of planned movements off the compound,” according to independent investigators. Why the secrecy?
WHAT WAS THE CIA DOING IN BENGHAZI?
The facts:
The U.S. post in Benghazi consisted of two parts – the diplomatic consulate and a CIA Annex. Details about the extent of the annex’s work was unclear.
“General Ham did not have complete visibility of the extent and number of government personnel in Benghazi in the event that a NEO (Noncombatant Evacuation Operation) was required,” according to a report by Sens. Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins, even though the Defense Department “assumes responsibility for evacuation of diplomatic personnel, U.S. citizens…in crises. AFRICOM was responsible for working with Department of State officials in Libya to develop and coordinate Noncombatant Evacuation Operations (NEO) plans for the diplomatic facilities in the region.”
The questions:
What was the CIA doing in Benghazi establishing one of its largest hubs in North Africa without informing AFRICOM commander Carter Ham?
Why did Stevens feel the need to be in Benghazi on Sept. 11? He went to the CIA Annex for a briefing the day before. And why did communications specialist Sean Smith travel to Benghazi the week before Stevens’ arrival if he was simply going to Benghazi to attend the opening of an “American corner” at a local school, as reported in the ARB?
What was the meeting with the Turkish envoy about on the night of Sept. 11 — has the FBI interviewed the Turkish diplomat?
The facts:
The Embassy and Stevens were in the process of shutting down the Benghazi mission, and the State Department had authorized it to be closed in December 2012.
“Another key driver behind the weak security platform in Benghazi was the decision to treat Benghazi as a temporary, residential facility, not officially notified to the host government, even though it was also a full time office facility,” the ARB report concluded.
Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, who was just made the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Non-Proliferation and Trade, has been demanding answers from the Pentagon about what U.S. personnel were doing in Benghazi and has been frustrated about the administration’s unwillingness to answer his questions.
“There are a lot of contradictions and inconsistencies in these reports,” Poe told Fox News.
He has asked whether the U.S. or its allies furnished any rebel groups in Libya with weapons during the uprising against Muammar Qaddafi — in particular Ansar al-Shariah, the group largely believed to be responsible for the consulate attack.
The question:
Poe, in an interview with Fox News, asked “did we help facilitate in some way, or know about the movement of weapons to Libyan rebels and did we help, know about, or get involved in the weapons movement from Libya to Syria?”
WHAT DID THE NATIONAL COMMAND AUTHORITY AUTHORIZE?
The facts:
Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy was running the Operations Center overseeing the rescue on Sept. 11 at the State Department. As the attack began, the Tactical Operations Center in the U.S. mission Benghazi “triggered an audible alarm, and immediately alerted the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli and DS (Diplomatic Security) headquarters in Washington. These notifications were quickly transmitted from the Department of State to the Department of Defense. DS headquarters maintained open phone lines with the DS personnel throughout the attack.”
But the defense secretary and Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey were not alerted to the attack for 50 minutes, and they in turn did not raise the issue with the president until a previously scheduled meeting with Obama at the White House at 5 p.m. — one hour and 18 minutes after the attack began.
“That same DS agent (at the consulate) also called the annex to request assistance from security personnel there, who immediately began to prepare to aid the U.S. personnel at the diplomatic facility,” according to the Senate Homeland Security Committee’s report.
The CIA response team from the annex arrived at the consulate which was one mile away within 25 minutes. CIA Director David Petraeus was in the CIA operations center overseeing the rescue that night and did not leave until all U.S. personnel were accounted for. Petraeus flew to Tripoli in subsequent weeks to interview the station chief and others about what happened that night and found there was no delay in rescue efforts.
The Accountability Review Board, we have since learned, did not interview all members of the CIA’s Global Response Staff who were at the CIA Annex that night, at least one of whom says his team was not given permission at first to go and help at the “consulate” after security personnel put out immediate calls for help — a charge the CIA refutes.
The diplomatic security officer who repeatedly re-entered the smoke-filled premises to try to find Stevens also says he was not interviewed by Mullen and Pickering’s team. He says the senior leadership at the State Department did not make them available to the Accountability Review Board.
The questions:
Where was John Brennan, the president’s chief counterterrorism adviser, the afternoon of the attack?
Are there minutes from the Situation Room?
What was his advice to the president that afternoon and evening?
Was anybody at the CIA Annex told to stand down or to wait before responding to the consulate?
Andrew Breitbart frequently spoke and wrote of the need for an American dialog including voices beyond those approved by the mainstream media and the political establishment. Therefore, in his honor, the Breitbart News Network put on a CPAC panel called “The Uninvited” to feature topics and speakers otherwise absent from the CPAC agenda.
Breitbart News CEO Larry Solov and Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon compiled an ambitious slate of foreign policy experts and activists as well as a discussion of the cronyism that has turned our nation’s capital into a boomtown.
Despite the fact that the event was pieced together just days before CPAC commenced, the ballroom was packed and the audience was enthusiastic. Panelist Pamela Geller was greeted with standing ovations just for entering the room.
Iowa Congressman Steve King kicked the session off with a few remarks before Breitbart Editor-at-Large Larry O’Connor introduced former Attorney General Michael Mukasey. The former DOJ head charged that the FBI actively removed references to Islam in documents relating to the Nidal Hasan shooting at Fort Hood in November of 2009. The Obama DOD labeled the murder spree “workplace violence” instead of terrorism, despite that fact that Hasan shouted “Allahu Akbar” before he opened fire. Mukasey said that this is an example of the U.S. government redefining Islam in a politically palatable way at the expense of the truth.
Mukasey went on to make the case that if left unchecked, the rise of global Islam would become the 21st century equivalent to fascism and communism. The former Bush AG warned of a “civilizational jihad” in which the Islamists attempt to destroy the entire Western world as we know it and enforce sharia law. ”They want a world without infidels,” Mukasey told the crowd. “The want a world without us.”
One of the biggest controversies (and travesties) at CPAC this year has been the blatant blacklisting of some very prominent Conservative leaders, including Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs, Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy and others. In the spirit of Andrew Breitbart, Steve Bannon and all the good folks at Breitbart.com have chosen to do what no one else has done–ensure TRUE “inclusiveness” and making sure ALL important voices are heard at CPAC. Thank you to Voices Empower for the footage. From Breitbart.com, March 14, 2013 (Los Angeles, CA):
Breitbart News Network announced today that it will host a special two-hour session of controversial speakers and topics. The session will also include active audience participation. Among the topics covered: Crony Capitalism, Global Jihad, Illegal Immigration, the ongoing global persecution of Christians, and the gutting of the American Military.
Speakers include Former Attorney General of the United States Michael Mukasey and NY Times best-selling author and Breitbart Editor Peter Schweizer.
Panelists will include Robert Spencer, Dan Goure, Nina Shea, Rosemary Jenks, Frank Gaffney, and Pamela Geller.
Larry Solov, CEO and President of Breitbart News Network, said, “Andrew Breitbart never shied away from tackling controversial issues. He also understood that people need vigorous and sustained discussion and debate to make their own informed decisions. It is in Andrew’s spirit that we are proud to host this event.”
Breitbart Managing Editor Alex Marlow, Editor-at-Large Ben Shapiro, and Editor-at-Large Larry O’Connor will also participate.
Stephen K. Bannon, Executive Chairman of Breitbart News Network, said, “This session is not simply about speakers and panelists, but about direct engagement and participation by the CPAC audience. Andrew Breitbart believed in more voices, not less, and that is what this session will be about. We will get as many people as possible to the microphone to ask their questions and engage our speakers.”
The session will take place on Saturday, March 16, 2013 in National Harbor Rooms 4 and 5, from 1:00-3:00PM.
CPAC is hosted at the Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center, National Harbor, Maryland.
Schedule of Events:
1:00 Introduction: Larry Solov, CEO and President of Breitbart News Network
Speaker – Michael Mukasey, Attorney General under President George W. Bush, speaking on: “Civilizational Jihad and the Willful Blindness of America’s Elites”
Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey
Speaker – Peter Schweizer, Government Accountability Institute, speaking on: “The Plague: Crony Capitalism and DC’s Elites”
Peter Schweizer, author of Do As I Say (Not As I Do) Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy
Panel And Topics:
Moderator: Stephen K. Bannon, Executive Chairman of Breitbart News Network
1. Dan Goure, Lexington Institute – The Gutting of the American Military
2. Rosemary Jenks, Numbers USA – Alternatives to “Comprehensive Immigration Reform”
3. Nina Shea, Hudson Institute – The Global Persecution of Christians
4. Frank Gaffney, Center for Security Policy – The De-Nuclearization of America in the Face of Her Enemies
Frank Gaffney, founder and president of Center for Security Policy
5. Robert Spencer, Jihad Watch – Why I Am Not a Conservative
Robert Spencer
6. Pam Geller, author Freedom or Submission – The War On Free Speech
Secure Freedom Radio with Frank Gaffney:
