WhatFinger

Despite being urged to do so.

Hillary's State Department refused to designate Boko Haram a terrorist group



Hillary Clinton needs to be elected president, we are told, because she's all about freedom and opportunity for women. Rhetorically, she has been trying to make that point in recent days by railing against the Nigerian terror group Boko Haram and its horrific practice of abducting innocent girls.
Now what have I been telling you about Hillary Clinton for the past, oh, forever? I've been telling you that she can say anything she wants, but if you go looking for a track record to show she has ever actually done anything, you will find nothing. So can we find a track record for Hillary as it pertains to Boko Haram? Oh yes. Yes we can. But you won't like it, as Josh Rogin of the Daily Beast reports:
The State Department under Hillary Clinton fought hard against placing the al Qaeda-linked militant group Boko Haram on its official list of foreign terrorist organizations for two years. And now, lawmakers and former U.S. officials are saying that the decision may have hampered the American government's ability to confront the Nigerian group that shocked the world by abducting hundreds of innocent girls.

In the past week, Clinton, who made protecting women and girls a key pillar of her tenure at the State Department, has been a vocal advocate for the 200 Nigerian girls kidnapped by Boko Haram, the loosely organized group of militants terrorizing northern Nigeria. Her May 4 tweet about the girls, using the hashtag #BringBackOurGirls, was cited across the media and widely credited for raising awareness of their plight. What Clinton didn't mention was that her own State Department refused to place Boko Haram on the list of foreign terrorist organizations in 2011, after the group bombed the U.N. headquarters in Abuja. The refusal came despite the urging of the Justice Department, the FBI, the CIA, and over a dozen senators and congressmen. "The one thing she could have done, the one tool she had at her disposal, she didn't use. And nobody can say she wasn't urged to do it. It's gross hypocrisy," said a former senior U.S. official who was involved in the debate. "The FBI, the CIA, and the Justice Department really wanted Boko Haram designated, they wanted the authorities that would provide to go after them, and they voiced that repeatedly to elected officials." In May 2012, then-Justice Department official Lisa Monaco (now at the White House) wrote to the State Department to urge Clinton to designate Boko Haram as a terrorist organization. The following month, Gen. Carter Ham, the chief of U.S. Africa Command, said that Boko Haram "are likely sharing funds, training, and explosive materials" with al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb. And yet, Hillary Clinton's State Department still declined to place Boko Haram on its official terrorist roster.
Supposedly Hillary's rationale was that the U.S. couldn't concern itself over every local matter of unrest in some other country. Wait. I'm hearing an echo . . . I can't be responsible for the fate of every undercapitalized entrepreneur! Huh. That was weird. I guess it was just an echo. At any rate, it appears there were an awful lot of folks, within the Obama Administration no less, who thought Boko Haram at least had the potential to be a much bigger problem than just a source of local unrest. But Hillary wasn't interested in making the designation. Fast-forward to the present: Hillary is trying to make the case for herself as Obama's successor, in large part by gallivanting around and talking a big game about all the oppressed women around the world who need support. Well. Does Hillary think it's the job of the U.S. government to actually provide that support? Because if she does, then why didn't she do anything about Boko Haram when she could have as Secretary of State? And if she doesn't, because they're just local matters, then why is she talking about it? The answer, of course, is that Hillary's game never changes. She will talk about whatever she thinks might make her look good in the moment, but she will almost never do anything of substance, because stuff might go wrong, and she's trying to position herself to run for president don't you know. Hillary is being somewhat truthful when she talks about the advancement of women. She is very much in favor of the advancement of one woman. Herself. As for the rest, don't expect her to actually do anything that will make a difference. She's out to be something, not to do anything.

Support Canada Free Press

Donate


Subscribe

View Comments

Dan Calabrese——

Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain

Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.


Sponsored
!-- END RC STICKY -->