CriminologyJustice: Benghazi

Showing posts with label Benghazi. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Today’s Investigative Special Report – November 13, 2012 “Dealing With Today’s Law Enforcement Specialized Investigations” “Where Does Law Enforcement Fit In?” Former CIA Director Petraeus and President Barack Obama in the Thick of the Benghazi Investigation

Posted on 9:00 PM by Unknown

By Lawrence W. Daly, MSc

Forensic Expert – Senior Author

What role did law enforcement play in the Benghazi, Libyaand Director David Petraeus’s matter? It appears the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has been involved in both situations. To date the role and results of the FBI in the Benghazi investigation is unknown. Though in the Petraeus’s matter it appears they have been and continue to investigate several individuals.

Two FBI employees share a laugh with President Barack Obama during his visit to FBI headquarters. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Today the Whitehouse continued to dodge what specifically the FBI performed in their lengthy investigation of the Petraeus situation. When asked by a reporter today what has been transpiring with the Petraeus situation Jay Carney, the Whitehouse Press Secretary, referred him to the FBI. Instead of answering the question the Whitehouse continues to allow the cyclical lack of information.

The recent discovery that CIA Director David Petraeus resigned on Friday, November 9, 2012, from his position ‘citing personal reasons for the resignation.’ The personal issues surround the FBI’s discovery that Petraeus was having an affair with his biographer, Pamela Broadwell. Allegedly, Broadwell had sent some threatening and intimidating emails to an employee inside the CIA, Jill Kelley, a family friend of the Petraeus’s. This past week Broadwell’s residence was raided by the FBI. Previously Broadwell was interviewed by s
omeone in the FBI. The results of the interview with Broadwell are unknown.

General David Petraeus (Photo credit: Talk Radio News Service)

The resignation comes at a time where Petraeus was to testify on Thursday, November 15^th in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Since Petraeus submitted his resignation the social media has focused on him not wanting to provide testimony to the Committee about his and everyone’s action in reference to the murder of four Americans at the Consulate in Benghazi, Libya on September 11^th.

There are many hypotheses which should be considered reference why Petraeus submitted his resignation on Friday and why he now is refusing to testify in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee. They are as follows:

1. Taking one for the team. It is always possible that Petraeus has agreed to take the responsibility for what happened in Benghazi. This is highly unlikely, but must be considered. The need for President Barack Obama to be as far distant from these murders is important. There are several reasons for this as the manner in which Americans have received information from the Whitehouse has been confusing, misleading, not forth-coming, and so forth. The President has been associated with or promoted much of the misinformation according to many reliable sources and social media outlets.

2. Petraeus’s resignation may have nothing to do with the timeliness of him having to testify. The issue and analysis of the timeliness of the resignation has many people asking the question about the coincidence of why now since the FBI allegedly knew about the extramarital affair six months ago? No matter what the Whitehouse has to offer in way of an explanation it is difficult for people to believe they had nothing to do with one another.

3. If Petraeus testifies the information he may provide may put the President in vulnerable and precarious situations. The need for Petraeus to testify is relevant and material because he knows who knew what. In the debate with Representative Paul Ryan and Vice-President Joe Biden, Biden stated that he and the President did not have any knowledge, he said, “…we weren’t told they wanted more security” at the diplomatic facility in Benghazi.

President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

4. It appears the allegation of Petraeus and Broadwell having an extramarital affair is true. However, the sex scandal appears to be driving the politicians from moving from the Benghazi incident to focusing on Petraeus. It seems reasonable and logical that both Petraeus and his extramarital affair with Broadwell are inter-related. How at this time is unknown.

There are numerous times where the President made statements that he knew nothing about what had occurred early on in Benghazi; that what occurred was in response to a videotape and they are investigating the matter. When the President spoke in front of the United Nations he repeatedly blamed the death of the four Americans on the videotape.

Further, the President did not call the act a “terrorist act” until many days after the incident. Although he did state that our country would not stand for terrorist acts. He didn’t directly state that the incident in Benghazi was a terror act. On Sunday, two days before the presidential election, CBS News released a video clip that provides an interesting dialogue. The clip is from President Barack Obama’s Sept. 12 interview with Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes. The newly released clip includes this exchange between the reporter and the president.

KROFT: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya Attack, do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?

OBAMA: Well it’s too early to tell exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. We are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one-way or the other.

In the debate with former Governor Mitt Romney, he told President Obama, “I want to make sure we get this for the record, because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror. The President responded by check the record. Social media outlets did check the records and the President was mistaken.

5. During his first Presidential term, President Obama has not used the words “Terror, Terrorism, or Terrorists. The reasons will not be known why he will not use these words until years from now. His Presidential campaign surrounded the theme that his administration had Al-Qaida on their heels, using the death of Osama Bin Laden as an indication for his opinion. The explanations are yet to have been revealed at this time why the President is leading the country in this manner.

6. If the resignation of Petraeus would have been disclosed to the public prior to the Presidential election the information may have been harmful to Presidential Obama’s re-election bid. Former Governor Mitt Romney may have been able to use this information along with the other leadership problems in Obama’s administration during his first Presidential term. There appears to be a multitude of problems from the GSA to Homeland Security to Attorney General’s Office to the partying of CIA Agents and etc. There seems to be a pattern which has taken place during the President’s first term in office.

7. President Obama’s reputation as an “ineffective leader” is something he does not want to be an aspect of his Presidential Legacy.

8. The reasons for the FBI investigating Petraeus is something which would not be dealt with without the authority of the President. According to the social media outlets, the allegations about Petraeus having the extramarital affair were known by FBI Director Robert S. Mueller, National Intelligence Director James R. Clapper, and Attorney General Eric Holder.

English: U.S. Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander of Multi-National Force – Iraq, walks with Sen. Barack Obama after Obama’s arrival to Baghdad International Airport in Baghdad, Iraq. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

9. It is illogical and unreasonable to believe that the first time President Obama heard about the allegations against Petraeus was on Election Day. This is not how the President operates nor would those working for the President would have kept this information from him. The President would have immediately been made aware of the situation as soon as one of these three Directors was made aware of the situation.

10. President Obama gives the appearance that he runs a tight ship and for him not to have known weeks or months in advance what was occurring with Petraeus prior to receiving his resignation is simply naïve and ignorant. There is an established chain of command which is in place for just these types of situations.

Once the extramarital affair was uncovered there would have been a time of meetings between the parties involved in the situation. President Obama and his advisors would have held meetings to determine what would be the best course of action.

If the FBI was truly investigating a complaint by a CIA employee, there will be an established timeline supported by written documents, emails, witness interviews, meetings, phone conferences, and any other type of facts and evidence which was uncovered. This is where the President needs to be careful about his rendition of when he became aware of Petraeus’s extramarital affairs, as well as his role in the Benghazi incident. Some social media outlets have alleged that Petraeus had been under investigation for some time, but the reasons for the investigations have yet to be made known to the public. It is possible the investigations by the FBI will never be made public citing confidential and national security reasons.

The investigation of the Benghazi incident and now the resignation of Petraeus continue to be a law enforcement issue. The investigation should be performed by law enforcement experts in the field to analyze all of the information from the beginning of both of these situations to today. The timeline will establish who was involved, who knew what, when they became aware of the information, who made decisions, and so forth.

Apparently the committees will continue to be the ears and voice of the people. Backdoor dealings or the appearance of any backdoor deals should and will cause the public to ask further questions about what happened and who was responsible. Petraeus may not appear for his scheduled testimony, but the committee does have subpoena power and may be able to force him to testify.

The Benghazi incident occurred over nine weeks ago and there has been too much happening in reference to obtaining the necessary information about what happened on September 11^th. Specifically, what has happened since the event, and what roles everyone played prior to, during, and since? The investigation by law enforcement, which ever agency is responsible for both investigations is not complicated and the convoluted manner in which this has been handled to date is incompetent, unreasonable, illogical, and lacking in the basics of a law enforcement investigation. The Committee needs to quit complaining about the resistance they have received from the State Department and the Whitehouse and begin unpeeling the layers of bureaucratic nonsense.

As of today, which law enforcement agency is doing what is unknown? It is a guessing game of who is the leader of the investigation. A strong leader is necessary someone who has the ability to process the information and guarantee Americans are being told the truth and all of the facts. As the information comes to light, there will be a better understanding of what happened in Benghazi and with Petraeus.

Lawrence W. Daly

www.onedaly.com

206-650-0229

onedaly@onedaly.com

Kent, WA

Posted in Barack Obama, Benghazi, Criminology Amp Justice, David Petraeus, Department of Homeland Security, FBI, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Jay Carney, Joe Biden, Mitt Romney | No comments

Saturday, November 10, 2012

Today’s Investigative Special Report – November 10, 2012 “Dealing With Today’s Law Enforcement Specialized Investigations” “Is The Integrity Of Law Enforcement Hurt By Extramarital Affair By The Top Spy CIA Director David Petraeus?”

Posted on 7:11 AM by Unknown

By Lawrence W. Daly, MSc

Forensic Expert – Senior Author

Yesterday President Barack Obama, citing using poor judgment by having an extramarital affair with his biographer, Paula Broadwell, accepted the resignation of top spy CIA Director David Petraeus. The resignation comes at a time when Director Petraeus was to testify in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee November 15, 2012, who are investigating the bombing of the consulate in Benghazi, Libyaon September 11, 2012. According to Petraeus he does not intend to testify in front of the committee at this time. Allegedly interim CIA Director Mike Morell will be taking his place and will testify in behalf of Petraeus.

English: Gen. David H. Petraeus chats with Sen. Barack Obama after a briefing to a congressional delegation led by Sen. Jack Reed, which also included Sen. Chuck Hagel. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The question is being raised that the timeliness of the resignation questions specifically what Petraeus may be trying to hide and is a ploy by the Whitehouse for him not to testify. The Committee must make the decision to subpoena Petraeus to testify and this is something the Committee will have to decide at a later date. However, Americans need to have closure on the Benghazi incident where four Americans were killed. New reports indicate the FBI was investigating another matter when they came across the extramarital affair.

Each time there is a scandal dealing with politicians and government officials, who are in the law enforcement profession, later cause all law enforcement's integrity to be placed in question. The average citizen generally can’t compare how the Top Spy in America somehow affects the law enforcement who works in Seattle, Washington.

Most Americans view law enforcement officials in a compartmentalized paradigm, where either they are eating donuts and drinking coffee when crime is being committed in their community or are pursuing women single or married. There is a risk to the reputation of law enforcement officers no matter what their position is.

General David Petraeus (Photo credit: Talk Radio News Service)

The average law enforcement officer who has an extramarital affair is not something which the community reads on the front page of the local newspaper or news show. It just doesn’t seem that important. However, it may be something which is serious and can’t be tolerated by the community or law enforcement officials.

If a law enforcement officer has sex on his mind, then his focus is not on the responsibilities of his job; which is to protect and serve. He avoids the reality that his improper actions have consequences and sooner or later his behavior will eventually ‘leak’ out and then there will be an accounting.

The integrity of law enforcement officers is a serious issue in that there is more to the event of an extramarital affair. If those in the law enforcement profession are known as an individual who lack common sense and expends his time on the job chasing women, he will be judged and viewed as lacking integrity. He disrespects the uniform in which he wears and generally once viewed as a disrespectable and indecent human being others look down their nose at him and wonder what he was thinking. This is one of the main questions being asked of Petraeus.

Sooner or later the mud slides far enough downward where it takes everyone who is in the quagmire down the hill where at the bottom stands individuals who will hold the officer accountable for his behavior.

In Petraeus resignation, the media is talking about his wife Holly and that he has been married for 37 years. There is little known about the woman he had the affair with, nor is there any indication that she will step forward until such time that some media outlet or publisher offers her millions of dollars to ‘tell all.’ Moreover, the social media will expend hours trying to draw people out who have knowledge about the affair.

The moral majority will provide advice to others that having an extramarital affair is something which has and will be destructive if you are married. There are no winners when you are sleeping with a man or woman who is married.

The standard of whether a law enforcement officer should be held to a higher standard must be decided by the expectations of the community and law enforcement officials. If there is a ‘moral clause’ in the agreement of employment with the law enforcement agency then there must be a definition for what specifically does the ‘moral clause’ include? If there is no definition then an officer probably will not be held accountable for his extra-curricular activity, unless the improper conduct occurred while on duty.

Law enforcement integrity according to Captain Randy S. Belasic (n.d.) of the Zephyrhills Police Department:

Police integrity is a serious topic that has been the spotlight of law enforcement’s concern for the last fifteen years. Corruption and integrity are germane where corruption is basically dishonesty for personal gain and integrity can best be defined as “the normative inclination among police to resist temptations to abuse the rights and privileges of their occupation” (U.S. Department of Justice, 2005). Integrity can be measured based upon an individual’s moral principles or ethical values.

Did Director Petraeus see the value of the “Integrity which can be measured based upon an individual’s moral principles or ethical values?” In comparing moral principles and ethical values there is this thin line between these principals where the community of law enforcement officers should abide by? Here is a man for 40 years dedicated himself to the United States of America and now with a major indiscretion has lost all that he has represented across his professional and personal life.

The general attitude about who has sex and with who is demonstrated in the number of children being born out of wedlock. Currently two-thirds of children are born to mothers under thirty. Making good decisions about why and who people have sex with has diminished over the past decade. The changing in the attitudes of this new attitude comes from a multitude of reasons.

WASHINGTON - APRIL 28: (L-R) Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Vice President Joseph R. Biden and President Barack Obama listen while the new Secretary of Defense nominee, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Leon Panetta, speaks in the East Room of the White House April 28, 2011 in Washington, DC. President Obama announced he is nominating Director of the CIA Leon Panetta as Secretary of Defense, commander for International Security Assistance Force and US forces in Afghanistan Gen. David Petraeus as Director of the CIA, Ryan Crocker as US ambassador to Afghanistan and Gen. John Allen as commander for International Security Assistance Force and US forces in Afghanistan. (Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)

The percentage of married couples who cheat according to author Lindsay Shugerman is “…approximately 50 percent married women and 60 percent of married men will have an extramarital affair at some time in their marriage.” (Journal of Couple and Relationship Therapy, n.d.)

When taking a broad stroke of the pen when evaluating and examining the Top Spy caught in an extramarital affair, to the integrity of law enforcement officials when it comes to their integrity or to women and men having an extramarital affair may seem like a stretch. The question is, “Is it, really a stretch; isn’t there some correlation between these issues?” Isn’t the attitude of Americans being demonstrated inside the bedroom and who you have sex with is something that appears to be significantly consistent with research and morals.

Law enforcement officers, no matter if it is the Top Spy in America or the law enforcement officer working the streets in Seattle must live by a higher standard than other individuals and professions. Their integrity, reputation, morals, honesty, presentation, attitude, behavior, and other characteristics, which reflect upon them not only as individuals but as an individual who enforces the law must be above reproach.

There can be no indiscretions, there can be no excuses, there can be no missteps, and there must be a law enforcement code of morality which can never be abused, twisted, violated, or put to question. Obviously Director Petraeus no matter how honorable he was for 40 years in the United States Armed Services or married to a woman (Holly) for 37 years, he has indirectly and directly negatively affected the image of law enforcement officials. The ripple effect of his behavior will have consequences for all who wear the law enforcement uniform who serve and protect their community, especially the men and women in the CIA. The ramifications of such conduct always has a lasting affect and with the facts which came out today it appears Americans have much to learn about his behavior over the past year.

His conduct can only be viewed as extremely improper, inappropriate, and possibly dangerous as he was the leader of thousands of men and women with a magnitude of responsibilities worldwide. Instead of protecting the four dead Americans who died in Benghazi, Libya on the anniversary of 9/11, possibly being preoccupied with Ms. Broadwell, a married woman, may later be determined that his lack of leadership had something to do with their deaths. This statement is written with the hope that this isn't true, but his refusal to testify now speaks highly of what information is unknown to Americans.

In Petraeus’s personal life, his wife is also the victim here and everyone should pray that she will rise above the hurt and pain and move forward from this tragedy.

Lawrence W. Daly

www.onedaly.com

206-650-0229

onedaly@onedaly.com

Kent, WA

Posted in Barack Obama, Benghazi, Criminology Amp Justice, Crimiology Amp Justice, David Petraeus, Law enforcement agency, Law enforcement officer, Lawrence W. Daly, Master of Science, United States | No comments

Friday, September 21, 2012

Ya know what, that makes me mad!—World Uproar and Violence

Posted on 9:00 PM by Unknown

Author Opinion Articleby: Scott Hall

Domestic violence in Spain 1998-2007 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Our Globe, our Earth, our Planet is in danger, but not from natural disasters nor from oil spills or even the looming threat of wars yet to be fought, it is in danger from the very people who have inherited the regions and places we all live. In today’s headlines (September 21, 2012) a hostage situation in Pittsburgh where the alleged suspect walked in asking of a specific person and carrying two duffle bags. Currently, on trial another suspect who killed several in a movie theater, dressed in a tactical outfit. Across the globe in several remote regions, uproars over a film that was very low budget and released through various outlets about their prophet, Muhammad which brought out attacks that have spanned across several USA embassies, a “protest”. Senator’s shot, innocent civilians having to scramble for their lives, police forces overwhelmed and military forces having to assist in some cases all loaded in violent outbreaks, tear gases, mace and rubber bullets. In physics, the action being met with equal and opposite action where many die and few claim victory, when truly there is no victory in violence or violent reactions, so what is going on in our world, is our violence uproar getting worse or are these actions a sign of times to come; this will be a tough challenge for our minds, even with truth glasses upon our brow, so let us move softly through a perilous avenue, world violence.

City of Fresno domestic violence statistics. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Rather than our usual path of literal definition, this author will attempt to define in my own point of view what violence is, of course this will be influenced from my own education and understanding, but will include a perspective of what is being seen. Violence is when people do harm to one another, whether it is physical, emotional, metaphysical or some other path, violence hurts more than the person being inflicted upon (reference the article presented on our platform entitled: Domestic Violence, The Hurting of our fellow citizen). A person with a “violent” temper may act crazy or “lose it” when angered, a person with violent tendencies could mean that they punch first and ask questions later, or in the case of what is going on in our world, people become offended by a movie, so they hurl fire bombs and rocks at a building blaming the embassy staff for someone half a planet away and in multiple regions, not to mention the people involved now into hiding for fear of their own safety, one never knows when those death threats are serious or just rhetoric. Some of this anger or outcry, I believe to be “just because we can”, as one reporter observed in a telecast from CNN, “some of the younger persons who are hurling these objects have a sly grin on their faces, as though they are just in this for the rush of the event.” It wasn’t until I heard that statement that I went searching the news casts to observe the films being presented to the viewing public, including those that happen right here on US soils and in each one, I see certain persons showing genuine concern, some curious and willing to offer input and the ones I observed in each: Those who are checking to see the camera pan in their direction.

English: Suzanne Perry, Domestic violence victim advocate. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This is particularly dominant in the films from the middle east in that several protestors who were burning effigies’ of presidents or flags only became furious in frenzy when the camera was catching their eyes and they knew they were being filmed, including the signage being held up, nothing was immune. Let me stop most of you here and say this, I am not poking fun nor trying to point out the stages of an eruptive event, I am not saying the violence doesn’t exist nor am I saying it isn’t serious or that we should not take note of it, I am saying merely this, surely rather than take innocent lives over a film or hold someone hostage because you are not satisfied with an outcome or event, surely there are more peaceful avenues and maybe we are not seeing the entire picture of what stresses may lie beneath the surface. In lots of regions, debate fuels anger and then fuels violence and in cohesion to anger comes confusion. For example, in an article in USA Today, we see three things unfold, the first being the belief that the unrest came from the release of the film, then we hear that it was a terrorist attack from the White House and in the heat of the battle, persons being questioned over the deaths of leaders and staff where two people cannot see eye to eye on what happened not to mention this happened after the national counter terrorism center comes under questioning to a homeland security committee complete with press releases about opinions, debates and centered around the violence, including an apology tour from our own Government rejecting film. With this level of debate and the media taking excerpts from each side and then reporting on their own breakdown or analysis, it is little wonder the peace hasn’t set in, people are tuned in to a seemingly violent planet, full of finger pointing, mistake checking, fact blundering and plenty of splicing.

In every unrest situation, there are “refugees” and those who are instantly displaced from their normal lives, keep in mind these are citizens who no doubt pay attention to the things happening around them, but choose not to act violently. Humanitarian relief efforts would go much smoother, if those persons didn’t have to worry about being killed or attacked as well, as was the case in a headline that caught my eye in the New York Times, here is only a paragraph of what was reported:

9/11: Launching the War of Ideas (September 11, 2011 / 12 Elul 5771) ...item 2.. We Are Spartacus –- and act on it every day in small ways (June 21, 2012 / 1 Tammuz 5772) ... (Photo credit: marsmet542)

“The attackers had lain in wait, silently observing as the rescuers, including eight State Departmentcivilians who had just landed at the airport in Benghazi, arrived in large convoys. This second attack was shorter in duration than the first, but more complex and sophisticated. It was an ambush.”

We are aiding those who suffer this disparage, then while attempting that help, the attackers sit silently observing the area so that they may ambush those who want to help, my mind wonders back to our own US History of when we decided to not stand in a line and fire against the British, as we knew we could not take those who were better trained, so we innovated and as far as is known, we became a country and only finite details of that history are missing, I cannot help but wonder if some of those same tactics were deployed, such as sabotaging aid or crippling the help, food for thought. All of this leaving behind whispers of “it had to be a well planned item” this suggests our enemies are studying the habits of not just the armies (two former navy seals were killed in this attack) but the relief efforts and the media reporting all of it, which most citizens only see the violent ends and hear the questions and the advanced rhetoric of “unfair advantages” and “arming the rebelling force” in the name of peace, quite the fine line to walk from this author’s view, truth glasses on or off.

NNEDV Logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Whether it’s a Diplomat that is killed, Senators, persons watching a movie or working their jobs, it seems this violent uproar may be gaining a trend with those who are “just fed up” or maybe it is an outcry of citizens who want change and all the normal avenues they seek lead to stagnant policy promises or no action at all. Violence in our world needs only one thing to start the peace process, the ability to listen to what is being said through the cries of protest and death threats, which in this author’s humble opinion is “we want the violence to stop so we can talk, but if you talk violence, we will not stop.” Where we go in our world from here has yet to be seen, but what is currently being seen is a world full of questions and when they hear the answers and “reject” those answers or see others seemingly roam free inciting unrest, the answer seems to be, “beat them down” or “kill them” statements that to date have only worked when no other option is seen upon the table of debate. Peace to our readers, from an author with watchful eyes and hopeful ambition in our world’s quest for the end to all the bloodshed and hate.

News Links from across the USA, pay attention to the wording and photo’s:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012/09/21/benghazi-consulate-attack-was-spontaneous-terrorism-white-house-now-says/57818876/1?csp=34news

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012/09/21/protests-in-pakistan-over-anti-muslim-film-turn-deadly/57818738/1?csp=34news

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/21/world/africa/after-attack-in-libya-ambush-struck-rescuers.html?_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/22/world/asia/protests-in-pakistan-over-anti-islam-film.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/22/world/middleeast/israel-kills-3-attackers-on-border-with-egypt.html

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444032404578008521228332116.html?mod=rss_whats_news_us&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wsj%2Fxml%2Frss%2F3_7011+%28WSJ.com%3A+What%27s+News+US%29

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-pittsburgh-hostage-standoff-20120921,0,1104765.story

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-pakistan-protests-m,0,1708675.story?track=rss

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-libya-attack-terrorism-m,0,900475.story?track=rss

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2012/09/21/grenade-on-soccer-field.hln

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2012/09/20/dnt-ga-high-school-brawl.wsb