NewsBreakingOnline

It was revealed Wednesday evening that the Obama administration sent clandestine CIA operatives to Libya weeks ago to assist rebels in their civil war against Moammar Gaddafi. Not only did MSNBC's Ed Schultz express his support for this action as well as arming these rebels, he also got into a heated argument with a Nation magazine reporter that compared this operation to the “disastrous dirty wars of the 1980s” bringing up images of Ollie North and the Iran-Contra scandal (video follows with transcript and commentary): ED SCHULTZ, HOST: But, this is the story we start with, that has me fired up tonight. It wasn’t supposed to go like this, but this is how it’s unfolding. “Reuters” reporting there are American boots on the ground in Libya. “President Obama has signed a secret order authorizing covert U.S. government support for rebel forces in Libya, officials tell Reuters.” The order was signed within the past two or three weeks. Tonight, “The New York Times” is reporting the Central Intelligence Agency has inserted clandestine operatives into Libya to gather intelligence for military airstrikes and make contacts with rebels battling Gadhafi’s forces, according to American officials. And the “National Journal” reporting more than a dozen CIA operatives were sent to Libya. You would think this announcement would quickly change the mind of a devout antiwar liberal like Schultz despite his having sycophantically and hypocritically expressed support for this Libyan operation right from the start. Well, think again: SCHULTZ: When the president announced the United States military engagement in Libya, he was emphatic. There would be no troops, no boots on the ground. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BARACK OBAMA,PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We will not — I repeat — we will not deploy any U.S. troops on the ground. (END VIDEO CLIP) SCHULTZ: In fact, U.N. resolution 1973 excludes, quote, “a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory.” Of any form? What’s that mean? NBC sources are telling NBC that the revelation of CIA operatives in Libya is pro forma. Still, the White House knows this kind of revelation — this kind of headline could change the dynamic on the ground in Libya, and support for the president at home could also shift. Indeed, as well as support from his friends in the media that have been for this war. At least, that's what you would think: SCHULTZ: The big question tonight that remains: will the United States or its allies arm these Libyan freedom fighters? “Reuters” also reports today U.S. officials have said that Saudi Arabia and Qatar, whose leaders despise Gadhafi, have indicated a willingness to supply Libyan rebels — I call them freedom fighters — with weapons. Now, remember yesterday, the president told Brian Williams that the operation of arming Libyan rebels wasn’t off the table. He also said the following to ABC News. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) OBAMA: It’s fair to say that if we wanted to get weapons into Libya, we probably could. We’re looking at all our options at this point. (END VIDEO CLIP) SCHULTZ: Senior European diplomat says the coalition of nations involved in Libya, considered arming rebels a serious option and that the coalition is considering that option now. Reports from the front lines are that anti-Gadhafi forces, they are in retreat. It was not a good day for them. And they are poorly armed. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REPORTER: The momentum has changed very quickly in this war. And on the front line, Libya’s revolution is being held together with sticky tape. Show me what you’re armed with. What’s your weapon? Only that? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Only that. (END VIDEO CLIP) SCHULTZ: So, we have stopped Gadhafi from slaughtering his people in Benghazi. Our airstrikes have allowed the rebels to advance. But now, they’re retreating. After all that, does the world community stand by and watch the freedom fighters get crushed? The president pledged that there would be no U.S. troops on the ground in Libya. Today, we learned that CIA operatives are on the ground. What does that all mean? Still, it looks like the freedom fighters’ only shot for survival at this point is a real injection of military hardware that they say they desperately need. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today said that there was still no decision on arming the rebels. Nobody wants another situation like the mujahideen in Afghanistan in 1980s. Whether or not we arm rebels, freedom fighters, whatever you want to call them, is a very hard decision. But I think we have to do it. It is a moral decision at this point. Imagine that. Despite what resulted from arming the mujahideen in Afghanistan – Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda – Schultz is all for doing it AGAIN! This seems especially absurd given reports that al Qaeda is already present amongst the Libyan rebels. But none of that matters to Schultz. His President is for this, and regardless of how he opposes this kind of conflict with every fabric of his being, this MSNBC shill is all in: SCHULTZ: You just saw that piece of videotape, that young kid, we have a state in the United States of America, New Hampshire, live free or die. What do you think that Libyan freedom fighter wants? What is his choice? He’s made what’s on the license plates in New Hampshire, live free or die. That’s where he is. And where does the United States stand tonight? Look, I am a liberal. I am a progressive. But that means that we need to stand behind people who want freedom. This isn’t Bush talk. This is totally different from Iraq. It’s totally different from any other situation in my opinion. This is a situation where we have got a coalition that has come together and realized that Gadhafi is a terrorist. The president has gone on record saying that Libyan agents have killed Americans. That’s all as an American I need to hear. This president has also gone on record that he was going to get America out of Iraq, close the terrorist center in Guantanamo Bay, and end secret CIA renditions. Despite him having gone back on all three pledges, Schultz is still taking him at his word: SCHULTZ: Let’s get it done. Let’s arm these rebels. Let’s give them a chance to fight. At least if they’re going to die, they’re going to have some hardware in their hands to defend themselves. There was a sound bite in Richard Engel’s piece last night, a gentleman says they’re pulling women out of houses. They’re lining people up and assassinating them. They’ve got shooters up on top of the roofs to picking people off. I mean, come on, America. When do we fight? Does it have to be absolutely perfect and we have to have an absolute end game, and, you know, dot all the I’s and cross all the T’s? Hell no. This is about freedom, is it not? This is about people who want to get rid of a dictator — a guy who has brutalized them for 40 years and we stand here tonight as if we’re not free. We stand here tonight as if — well, I don’t know about this, I don’t know about that. The military equation here I understand is very, very complicated. They not trained freedom fighters. But they have in their heart, they have in their soul the same things, and the same qualities and the same spirit that the people who founded this country had in their hearts and their minds centuries ago. How does he know that? Exactly how does anyone at this point know who or what these rebels are? Quite the contrary, we don't know. But Schultz's president is for this, and therefore, so is he: SCHULTZ: Look, this is a tough call. There’s no doubt. It’s a tough call for not only the president, and for people who support the president, who really have had enough of war. We don’t have a stomach for this, I know that. Just listen to the people on talk radio across America. They’re using this as a tool to take down our president, because they politically hate him. They have made it their goal over on the right to make sure that President Obama does not get reelected. So they’re playing the political games with the lives and the heart and the spirit and the soul of the Libyan people who all they want is a fighting chance to take down a dictator who has killed Americans. Liberals, we are better than this. Give them a chance. Arm them. That section there tells it all. Schultz must clearly think that if this mission in Libya fails, Obama's public support will plummet and with it his reelection chances. As such, he's willing to publicly and aggressively support an operation that he would otherwise be totally against simply because he believes it will help his president retain office. It's really quite disturbing when you think about it that way, for Schultz is pointing fingers at conservatives for “playing the political games with the lives and the heart and the spirit and the soul of the Libyan people.” But isn't it him playing political games with the lives of Americans that will be needed to assist these rebels?