Tag: Syria

Since Paris: Obama Has Imported 605 Muslim Syrian “Refugees”, 2 Syrian Christians. THIS is “Not Who We Are”.

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics3 Comments

Refugees-NRD-600During the G20 Summit, held in November of 2015, the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, made the following two Statements…

  1. Here at the G-20, our nations have sent an unmistakable message — that we are united against this threat. ISIL is the face of evil. Our goal, as I’ve said many times, is to degrade and ultimately destroy this barbaric terrorist organization. As I outlined this fall at the United Nations, we have a comprehensive strategy using all elements of our power, military intelligence, economic development, and the strength of our communities. We have always understood that this will be a long-term campaign. There will be setbacks and there will be successes. The terrible events in Paris were obviously a terrible and sickening setback. Even as we grieve with our French friends, however, we can’t lose sight that there is progress being made. – courtesy of whitehouse.gov
  2. …And when I hear folks say that, well, maybe we should just admit the Christians but not the Muslims. when I hear political leaders suggesting that there     would be a religious test for which person is fleeing from a war-torn country is admitted. When some of those folks themselves come from families who benefited from protection when they were fleeing political persecution that’s shameful. That’s not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion. When Pope Francis came to visit the United States and gave a speech before congress, he didn’t just speak about Christians who were being persecuted. He didn’t call on Catholic parishes just to admit those who were of the same religious faith. He said protect people who are vulnerable. So I think it is very important for us right now, particularly those who are in leadership, particularly those who have a platform and can be heard, not to fall into that trap, not to feed that dark impulse inside of us. – courtesy of breitbart.com

As we have all come to realize…as far as Obama is concerned…HYPOCRISY ABOUNDS.

CNSNews reports that

The government has admitted 605 Syrian refugees for resettlement in the United States since last November’s Paris terrorist attack, two of whom are Christians.

The rest are 589 Sunni Muslims, 10 Shia Muslims, three other Muslims, and one refugee identified in State Department Refugee Processing Center data as “other religion.”

At the same time, the proportion of Christians among the total cohort of Syrian refugees admitted into the U.S. since the conflict began five years ago has now dropped below two percent.

Just 55 Christians (1.9 percent) are among the 2,769 Syrian refugees admitted since March 2011, while a large majority – 2,594 (93.6 percent) – has been Sunni Muslims.

Christians accounted for about 10 percent of Syria’s population when the civil war began and Sunni Muslims for an estimated 74 percent.

Christians and other non-Muslim minorities have been targeted specifically by ISIS and other radical groups, and monitoring group estimate that more than 700,000 Christians have fled Syria since then.

Other non-Muslims among the Syrian refugees admitted to the U.S. since the war began include small numbers of Baha’i (2), Yazidis (1), Jehovah’s Witnesses (8), Zoroastrians (6), atheists (3) and Syrians who have self-identified as having no religion (7).

The administration has rejected calls by some Republican lawmakers, and some GOP presidential candidates, for Syrian Christians to be prioritized in the refugee admission process.The ISIS terrorist attack in Paris on November 13 fueled concerns that the terrorist group was exploiting the flow of refugees and migrants as cover to send jihadists into the West to carry out attacks.

French authorities said two of the attackers had been carrying fake Syrian passports and warned European Union partners that “some terrorists are trying to get into our countries and commit criminal acts by mixing in with the flow of migrants and refugees.”

Last Tuesday, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper affirmed during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing that ISIS has done so.

“Isn’t it already proven that Mr. Baghdadi is sending people with this flow of refugees that are terrorists that – in order to inflict further attacks on Europe and the United States?” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) asked him, referring to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

“That’s correct,” Clapper replied. “That’s one technique they’ve used is taking advantage of the torrent of migrants to insert operatives into that flow.”

In addition, he continued, ISIS has become “pretty skilled at [producing] phony passports, so they can travel ostensibly as legitimate travelers as well.”

In December, House Homeland Security Committee chairman Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas) said the U.S. intelligence community “has identified already individuals tied to terrorist organizations in Syria that want to exploit and get into the United States through the refugee process.”

Obama’s defense for America admitting undocumented and un-vetted Syrian “Refugees”, who have, literally, as documented, torn apart Europe, is the scolding comment, which he makes time and time again,

That’s not who we are.

“We” who, Mr. President?

Americans have been aware, for the last 7 years, that there is a great disconnect between the citizens of the United States and their president.  It’s not just his stand-offish behavior.  There’s something else going on.
He was not raised like the majority of Americans.
He didn’t have rubber dart gun wars in the neighborhood backyards.  He didn’t play Nerf football in the front yards.  He didn’t go to Vacation Bible School.  I don’t know if he was ever told to stand with his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance.
It is this disconnect that is at the heart of the distrust that Americans have experienced and are experiencing, regarding the Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama.
Hope and Change have turned into despair and disbelief.  Obama has never understood the shared values of average Americans, because the people who raised him did not share those values, either.  It is the concern that we feel for one another, that shared American value system, that has caused a great awakening.
Allow me to tell you who “we”, the average Americans, who have been watching you tear OUR country apart for the last 7 years, are, Mr. President.
We are the men and women, who landed on the shores of an unknown, uncivilized land, in order to be free from a tyrant and, in order to be free to worship the God of Abraham as we pleased.
We are the people who defeated that same tyrant and began a nation that, despite growing pains, and a war which pitted brother against brother, became the Greatest Nation on the Face of God’s Green Earth.
We are that small band of Tennessee Volunteers, who, with Davy Crockett at the Alamo, though hopelessly outnumbered, gave their lives in defense of freedom.
We are the sons and grandsons of those brave men who landed on Normandy Beach, turning the tide of World War II.
We are the people who are the most charitable people on Earth, contributing millions upon millions of our hard-earned money to private and faith-based charities, and, who personally help our family friends, and neighbors out, when disaster strikes…OUT OF THE GOODNESS OF OUR HEARTS, NOT PRESIDENTIAL DECREE.
.
We have taken in millions of immigrants, who came here legally, to start a new life in this blessed land, eager to assimilate into the American Way of Life, where, by God’s Grace…and hard work, they , too, could achieve the American Dream.
And, we are a nation, comprised of a population, of whom 75% STILL identify themselves as CHRISTIANS.
That’s who WE are, President Obama.
President Abraham Lincoln once said,
If once you forfeit the confidence of your fellow-citizens, you can never regain their respect and esteem.
That is the situation that you find yourself in today, Mr. President.
Judging by your past actions, including the clandestine dissemination of the “youths” from Central and South America, who arrived here, parentless, last year, throughout our country, we “average Americans”, do not trust you and your people, when you say that you will “vet” these Syrian “Refugees”. Especially, since the overwhelming majority of them are well-fit young men with cell phones, who look like soldiers.
And, that is why we and our states’ Governors’ are standing up to your plans to disseminate these Syrian “Refugees” among us.
And now, you wonder why the majority of Americans oppose you at every turn, including calling for our Senators to block your Supreme Court Nominations in this, your last year in office?
It’s a matter of SURVIVAL.
Until He Comes,
KJ

Escalation in Iraqi-Nam: Obama Sending Special Forces to Fight ISIS. So Much for “No Boots on the Ground”.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

Tuntitled (14)“This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it. – Admiral Josh Painter (Fred Thompson), “The Hunt For Red October”

Nationalreview.com reports that

President Obama is sending an “expeditionary force” of U.S. military special operators to carry out raids against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, a move that expands on their decision to send about 50 special operators to Syria to coordinate air strikes. “In full coordination with the Government of Iraq, we’re deploying a specialized expeditionary targeting force to assist Iraqi and Kurdish Peshmerga forces and put even more pressure on [ISIS],” Defense Secretary Ash Carter told the House Armed Services Committee in announcing the new deployment on Tuesday. Although the term “expeditionary force” evokes large-scale mobilizations such as those seen in World War II or the Iraq War, Carter outlined a more limited deployment. But his announcement still provoked questions about the legal basis for the move, and caused one Democrat to warn of the specter of nuclear war with Russia. In arguing for the additional force, Carter invoked the recent rescue of ISIS prisoners in Iraq and the raid in Syria that killed a top commander in charge of the terrorist group’s oil and gas operations. “Imagine . . . on a standing basis, being able when occasions arise . . . to conduct raids like that anywhere in the territory of Syria and Iraq. That is what we’re talking about.”

He couldn’t, however, claim the legal authority to make such a deployment under the terms of the 2001 legislation that authorized the use of military force (AUMF) in Afghanistan and Iraq — the only such congressional authorization on the books. “I can’t speak to [that],” Carter told Representative Bradley Byrne (R., Ala.).

White House press secretary Josh Earnest urged lawmakers to pass new legislation providing Obama with the explicit authority to counter ISIS. “This effort is serious, and should be the focus of serious debate,” Earnest told reporters during his Tuesday briefing. “It will take more than three weeks to pass an AUMF, but Congress, in each of these cases, must stop using the fact that these issues are difficult as an excuse for doing nothing.”

Carter got a hint of just how difficult it may be to sell Congress on such legislation when Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D., Hawaii) suggested that Obama’s decision to place American fighter jets equipped “to target Russian planes” on the border between Turkey and Syria, and his stated opposition to Russian-backed Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, could lead the U.S. into a nuclear war with Vladimir Putin’s regime.

“Russia’s installation of their anti-aircraft missile-defense system increases that possibility of — whether it’s intentional or even an accidental event — where one side may shoot down the other side’s plane,” Gabbard told Carter. “And that’s really where the potential is for this devastating nuclear war.” Carter characterized the U.S. disagreement with Russia as a diplomatic problem, not a military danger. “We have a different view, a very different view from Russia about what would be constructive for them to do in Syria,” he said. “That’s not the same as the United States and Russia clashing.”

Once again, as he has in the 7 years since he took office, President Barack Hussein Obama is “leading from behind”.

The fact that Vladimir Putin has taken the lead in the Middle East is testimony to the dangerous, mass confusion that Obama’s failed Foreign Policy, euphemistically dubbed “Smart Power!” has turned out to be.

And, “Smart Power!” has illuminated the fact, once again, that ALL of Obama’s promises come with expiration dates.

September 11, 2014 – The New York Times reported that

After enduring harsh criticism for saying in a news conference two weeks ago that he did not have a strategy for dealing with ISIS in Syria, Mr. Obama sketched out a plan that will involve heightened American training and arming of moderate Syrian rebels to fight the militants. Saudi Arabia has agreed to provide bases for the training of those forces.

The White House has asked Congress to authorize the plan to train and equip rebels — something the Central Intelligence Agency has been doing covertly and on a much smaller scale — but Mr. Obama said he had the authority necessary to expand the broader campaign.

“These American forces will not have a combat mission — we will not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq,” Mr. Obama pledged, adding that the broader mission he was outlining for American military forces “will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; it will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil.”

Setpember 16, 2014 – ABCnews.go.com reported that

American ground troops may be needed to battle Islamic State forces in the Middle East if President Barack Obama’s current strategy fails, the nation’s top military officer said Tuesday as Congress plunged into an election-year debate of Obama’s plan to expand airstrikes and train Syrian rebels.

A White House spokesman said quickly the president “will not” send ground forces into combat, but Gen. Martin Dempsey said Obama had personally told him to come back on a “case by case basis” if the military situation changed.

“To be clear, if we reach the point where I believe our advisers should accompany Iraqi troops on attacks against specific ISIL targets, I will recommend that to the president,” Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee. He referred to the militants by an alternative name.

Pressed later by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the panel’s chairman, the four-star general said if Obama’s current approach isn’t enough to prevail, he might “go back to the president and make a recommendation that may include the use of ground forces.”

Dempsey’s testimony underscored the dilemma confronting many lawmakers as the House moves through its own debate on authorizing the Pentagon to implement the policy Obama announced last week. In Iraq on Tuesday, the U.S. continued its expanded military campaign, carrying out two airstrikes northwest of Irbil and three southwest of Baghdad.

After the hearing, Dempsey told reporters traveling with him to Paris that the Pentagon had concluded that about half of Iraq’s army was incapable of partnering effectively with the U.S. to roll back the Islamic State group’s territorial gains in western and northern Iraq, and the other half needs to be partially rebuilt with U.S. training and additional equipment.

September 17, 2014 – According to politico.com,

“U.S. ground troops will not be sent into combat in this conflict,” Kerry testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “Instead, they will support Iraq forces on the ground as they fight for their country.”

…Kerry’s testimony comes as Congress races toward a critical vote to give the Obama administration the green light to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

The House is set to vote on the measure later Wednesday, with the Senate to take up the legislation later this week. The measure has run into considerable opposition from both the right and the left but is expected to pass before lawmakers left Washington until after the midterm elections.

President Barack Obama reiterated earlier Wednesday in a speech at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida, that he will not send U.S. combat troops to fight ISIL in Iraq, following testimony from Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey that opened the door to that option earlier this week.

And later during the Foreign Relations hearing, Kerry declined to move off that position, despite questioning from Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), whom Kerry told: “I’m not going to engage in hypotheticals.”

“The president has made a judgment as commander-in-chief that that’s not in the cards,” Kerry said, referring to ground troops.

Shortly before the hearing began before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, protesters from the anti- war group Code Pink – a prevalent sight on the Hill in recent days as lawmakers engaged in debate about arming Syrian rebels – stood up, held signs and chanted “No more war!”

Deviating from his prepared remarks, Kerry turned his attention to the protesters, seated in the front row of the hearing room, and told them that while he was sympathetic to their opposition to war, if they believed in the broader mission of Code Pink, “then you ought to care about fighting ISIL.”

Stressing that the Islamic State was “killing and raping and mutilating women” and “making a mockery of a peaceful religion,” Kerry told the protesters: “There is no negotiation with ISIL.”

Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) stressed that if the military campaign continues for an extended period of time – like he expects – lawmakers will need to pass a new authorization for the use of military force that focuses narrowly on ISIL. He signaled last week that the panel will begin drafting one.

“I am personally not comfortable with reliance on either the 2001 AUMF that relies on a thin theory that ISIL is associated with Al Qaeda, and certainly not the 2002 Iraq AUMF which relied on misinformation,” Menendez said.

Later as he questioned Kerry, Menendez told the secretary of state that “you’re going to need a new AUMF, and it’ll have to be more tailored.” Kerry responded that the administration would “welcome” it.

The panel’s top Republican, Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, expressed deep skepticism about the Obama administration’s strategy to fight Islamic State extremists, telling Kerry: “We know the Free Syrian Army can’t take on ISIL. You know that.”

“I do want us to deal with this,” Corker told Kerry “You’ve not laid it out in a way that meets that test.”

Later in the day on September 17, 2014 – According to FoxNews.com,

The White House acknowledged Wednesday that President Obama would consider putting U.S. troops in “forward-deployed positions” to advise Iraqi forces in the fight against the Islamic State — even while insisting U.S. troops would not be sent back into a “combat role” in Iraq. 

Obama and his top advisers appeared to be threading a needle as they carefully clarified how exactly U.S. troops might be used, a day after Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey opened the door to approving “U.S. military ground forces.” 

The White House continued to insist Wednesday that a “combat” role has in fact been ruled out, and that U.S. troops will not be engaging the Islamic State on the ground. 

Speaking at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, after visiting U.S. Central Command, Obama told troops: “I will not commit you and the rest of our Armed Forces to fighting another ground war in Iraq.” 

He vowed that the U.S. forces currently deployed to Iraq to advise Iraqi forces “will not have a combat mission.” Instead, he said, they will continue to support Iraqi forces on the ground, through a combination of U.S. air power, training assistance and other means. 

But shortly afterward, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest clarified that Dempsey was talking about the possible need to put U.S. troops already in Iraq into “forward-deployed positions with Iraqi troops.” 

Earnest said that step has not yet been necessary, but if Dempsey asks to “forward deploy” American advisers, “the president said he would consider it on a case-by-case basis.” 

He said, in that scenario, U.S. troops “would be providing tactical advice to Iraqi security forces” or be in position to call in airstrikes. 

“They would not have a combat role. They would not be personally or directly engaging the enemy,” Earnest stressed. 

So, now, we will officially have “boots on the ground”, even though we already have “Military Advisors” in Iraq.

What is this? Leadership by ‘three blind men describing an elephant”?

This is what happens when you have a President more interested in “fighting a war” against a disease breaking out in his father’s home country, than protecting the country that he is supposed to be leading, from Muslim Terrorists.

Years ago, the local ABC Affiliate in Memphis used to run The Benny Hill Show at 10:30 p.m. on Saturdays. For those of you sheltered younger readers, Benny Hill was a wonderful British comedian and entertainer. “The Lad Himself” wrote a lot of his own hilarious  material, including such memorable characters as Cap’n Scuttle, and songs that would literally have you busting your gut in laughter. However, one of the things that Benny will forever be remembered for, happened at the end of every show, when one thing would lead to another, culminating in a rip-roaring chase scene, set to the saxophone-led accompaniment of the incomparable Boots Randolph’s “Yakety Sax”.

The chaotic, amateurish manner in which the administration has attempted to “prosecute” the limited war against the Muslim Terrorist Group, now numbering almost 32,000 members, known as ISIS or ISIL, is very reminiscent of a Benny Hill Show Chase Scene.

Except…there’s nothing funny about it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Turkey Shoots Down Russian Jet. Kills Pilots in the Air. Obama to “Rebuke” ISIS By Attending Climate Change Summit. “Hello, McFly!!!”

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

The-Block-NRD-600-578x420And, you don’t believe we’re on the Eve of Destruction… – Barry McGuire (1965)

The Washington Post reports that

BEIRUT — NATO faced being thrust into a new Middle Eastern crisis on Tuesday after warplanes from member state Turkey shot down a Russian jet that Turkish officials said had violated their country’s airspace on the border with Syria.The incident marked a serious escalation that is likely to further strain relations between Russia and the NATO alliance.

Russian officials confirmed that a Russian Su-24 attack aircraft was shot down Tuesday morning but insisted it had not violated Turkey’s airspace.

Russia’s Defense Ministry said one of at least two pilots probably died during the incident, and a marine also was killed by apparent Syrian insurgent fire during a helicopter rescue operation to retrieve the downed airmen.

The downing brings renewed attention to a scenario feared for months by the Pentagon and its partners: a potential conflict arising from overlapping air missions over Syria — with Russia backing the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and a U.S.-led coalition conducting airstrikes against the Islamic State.

Turkish officials have accused Russia of repeated airspace violations since it launched airstrikes against Assad’s armed opposition in late September.

Russian President Vladimir Putin had strong words for Turkey, calling the incident a “stab in the back.”

In Washington, President Obama called for de-escalation but said Turkey had the right to defend its airspace.

Turkey’s military said the Russian jet was warned multiple times before it was targeted by two F-16 fighter jets in the border zone in western Syria in mountains not far from the Mediterranean coast.

Turkey called for an emergency NATO session to discuss the incident but has not invoked alliance provisions that would involve other members in its defense.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said after the meeting that NATO allies with intelligence assets near where Turkey shot down the Russian warplane had confirmed Turkey’s version of events and rejected Russia’s claim that its aircraft was flying over Syria and had not crossed into Turkish airspace.

“The information we have from other allies is consistent with what we have got from Turkey,” Stoltenberg told reporters in Brussels.

“This is a serious situation” that calls for prudence and de-escalation, Stoltenberg said. “We have to avoid that situations, incidents, accidents spiral out of control.”

A U.S. military spokesman confirmed that Turkish pilots issued 10 notifications to their Russian counterparts warning that they were in Turkish airspace and that the Russians did not respond.

“On the radio . . . we were able to hear everything that was going on,” said Col. Steve Warren, spokesman at the Baghdad headquarters for U.S. forces operating in Iraq and Syria.

Last month, NATO decried a “troubling escalation” by Russian forces in Syria and raised concerns about attack missions within sight of the Western alliance’s borders.

Although Turkey and the United States oppose Assad, their warplanes have avoided the Syrian leader’s military and are instead bombarding the Islamic State militant group, which controls parts of Syria and Iraq. Russian aircraft have primarily hit non-Islamic State rebels, including some groups that are backed by the United States and Turkey.

The fallout could complicate a diplomatic push to bring greater international coordination to the fight against the Islamic State. The radical group has claimed responsibility for the Nov. 13 Paris attacks that killed at least 130, as well as the Oct. 31 downing of a Russian passenger plane over Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula that killed all 224 aboard.

French President François Hollande met with Obama in Washington on Tuesday to discuss strategies against the Islamic State and parallel efforts to seek a negotiated end to Syria’s nearly five-year civil war. Hollande is expected to meet later in the week with Putin and other world leaders.

In the Russian resort city of Sochi, Putin said the plane “did not threaten the territory of Turkey” and that it was “pursuing operations” against the Islamic State in mountainous areas north of the Syrian port of Latakia.

“Today’s tragic cases will have significant consequences for the relations between Russia and Turkey,” Putin told reporters after talks with Jordan’s King Abdullah II, whose nation is part of the U.S.-led coalition.

Some Russian lawmakers have called for retaliation against Turkey by evacuating Russian tourists from popular vacation destinations. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov canceled a scheduled trip to Turkey.

Video footage of the incident showed a warplane on fire before crashing on a hill and two crew members apparently parachuting down. But a video purportedly posted by Syrian rebels appeared to show the body of a Russian pilot.

Sergei Rudskoi, an officer in the Russian army’s General Staff, said a rescue helicopter sent to retrieve the pilots came under heavy fire. “During the operation, one of the helicopters due to gunfire was damaged and forced to make an emergency landing on neutral territory,” Rudskoi said in a briefing with Russian journalists. “One marine was killed.”

Rebel forces released video footage showing an anti-government fighter using a surface-to-surface missile to destroy what appears to be a Russian helicopter. The authenticity of the video could not be confirmed.

Some rebels have been using U.S.-made BGM-71 TOW missiles as part of a covert program coordinated between the United States and its allies.

In early November, the United States deployed additional fighter aircraft to Turkey’s Incirlik air base to help the country protect its airspace.

Friction between Ankara and Moscow has also intensified over alleged Russian airstrikes on Syrian villages dominated by Turkmen, an ethnic minority with cultural ties to Turkey.

Last month, Turkey’s military downed an unmanned aerial vehicle near the border with Syria that military analysts said appeared to be Russian-made. Officials in Moscow denied connection to that downed aircraft and sent a delegation to Turkey to smooth over concerns.

Russia issued a formal apology to Turkey in early October when a jet violated Turkish airspace and Turkish F-16s were scrambled to intercept the plane. The Russians called the mistake “a navigational error.”

Russia has carried out more than 4,000 airstrikes since the beginning of its intervention in Syria, using a force of modern and modified Soviet-era aircraft. Russia has at least 32 fixed-wing aircraft and 16 helicopters at the Khmeimim air base near Latakia, an Assad stronghold on the Mediterranean Sea just 30 miles from the Turkish border.

The Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Rush Limbaugh, said the following about this ominous incident…

This is a mess.  This is a total mess.  And it’s not hard to pinpoint why.  But if I were to say it, I would be accused of the same thing I’m accusing all these Drive-Bys of, drawing this comparison.  Well, if Obama was providing standard, ordinary, expected American leadership in the last seven years, we wouldn’t even be here.  There wouldn’t even be an ISIS.  There wouldn’t be an Iran ascending to run the entire Middle East because they wouldn’t have been enabled to create a military weapons program.  None of this would have happened it’s safe to say if anybody else had been elected president. 

Now, if Hillary had won the Democrat nomination, I don’t know.  But we’re dealing with a dangerous set of circumstances.  On the one hand we’ve got leadership incompetence, or maybe leadership absence on the part of Obama.  It’s just not something he wants to do.  And, by the way, don’t get on me.  It was Obama who said it last week at that press conference he had in Turkey where he said he’s not into sloganeering and these concepts of American leadership and American victory, winning.  Those are things that make him uncomfortable.  It’s not what this is really all about. 

You can interpret that in any number of ways, but one thing, he doesn’t want to lead, he doesn’t want the US in a leadership or dominant position.  And the reasons for that are multi.  He doesn’t think that we deserve it.  We are not the world’s superpower.  We’re illegitimate.  You know the drill.  What my opinion of Obama’s opinion of the United States is.  So a lot of people are understandably worried about what comes next because this is Vladimir Putin who has been attacked, and Putin is interested in winning, and Putin is interested in Russian leadership, and Putin does want to be allied with whoever ends up running the Middle East.  Winning and victory and leadership are not concepts that Putin finds nervous or embarrassing.  He finds them challenging.  So this could go any number of places.  We just have to sit and watch, see how it plays out. 

In a memo e-mailed the week of March 25th, 2009, in the middle of the World Apology Tour, to Pentagon staff members, the Defense Department’s office of security review proclaimed that “this administration prefers to avoid using the term ‘Long War’ or ‘Global War on Terror’ [GWOT.] Please use ‘Overseas Contingency Operation.’ ”

And so it began.

On Thursday, June 4th, 2009 at the University of Cairo, Obama addressed the Muslim World.  Here is an excerpt from the 6:35 a.m. speech:

Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith-based lives upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways.

Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one’s own faith by the rejection of another’s. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld – whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq. 

Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat. 

Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit – for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.

Scooter believed that by reaching out to the Muslim world through changing and softening our terminology as it pertained to the Jihad declared against the United States by Muslim Extremists, his administration would make huge inroads in America’s relationship with the Islamic World.  This action did nothing but encourage our enemies.

As I have written before, Obama’s insistence that Radical Islam does not exist, even now, in the face of the possible beginning of a global Conflict, is either naiveté, stemming from a livelong dhimmitude, or being an intellectual lightweight.

A recent Fox News Poll reveal that the overwhelming majority of Americans view Muslim Terrorist as the number one thing that they are concerned with. Obama’s obsession, Climate Change was down toward the bottom of the list.

And yet, the President of the United States of America, yesterday said that he was going to “strongly rebuke” ISIS by attending the Climate Change summit.

Obama must still be hanging with the Choom Gang, partaking of “herb”, as he did in high school.

God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

While Obama Scolds Americans for Worrying About ISIS Among “Refugees”, ISIS is Entering America At Our Southern Border.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

AFBrancoRadicalIslamUnicorn21215This is a petulant, childish man-child who’s having trouble getting his way without opposition.  Opposition offends him.  How dare anybody oppose him.  There are real concerns and we see them on television every day.  We’re living daily fear.  The media.  If there is no terror attack during the day, the media’s got everybody in crisis mode on something else.  Every day, everybody keyed up, there’s a crisis of something happening that is threatening our health, our lives, our existence some way.  Every day in the news.  And here comes a real-life terror event, which is predictable, there will be more, and Obama impugns those who react to them. – Rush Limbaugh, November 18, 2015

Foxnews.com reports that

President Obama threatened late Wednesday to veto legislation aimed at improving screening for Syrian refugees, potentially putting the White House and Congress on a collision course in a matter of days. 

The veto threat came as the House was preparing the bill — which sets high hurdles for refugee admission including FBI background checks and sign-offs by top officials — for floor action as early as Thursday. In a committee meeting, Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, accused the president of confusing the public about the intentions of the legislation. 

Moments later, the White House issued a statement defending the current screening process and claiming the changes called for under the bill would create “significant delays and obstacles” for the existing vetting program. 

“Given the lives at stake and the critical importance to our partners in the Middle East and Europe of American leadership in addressing the Syrian refugee crisis … [Obama] would veto the bill,” the White House said. 

But House Republicans touted the legislation as a common-sense answer to security concerns. 

Further, while Republicans a day earlier called for a “pause” in Syrian refugee admissions, some on Wednesday indicated a willingness to accept refugees from Syria and Iraq who are fleeing the civil war and Islamic State militants — provided the screening process is improved, under the terms of the bill.  

“America has a proud tradition of welcoming refugees into our country, and we lead the world in humanitarian assistance. However, we also must put proper measures in place to ensure our country’s safety,” House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, R-Texas, said in a statement. 

The bill introduced Wednesday would require the FBI director to certify a background investigation for each refugee — and several top security officials to certify that each refugee is not a security threat to the U.S. — before a refugee from Iraq or Syria can be admitted. 

House Speaker Paul Ryan said the chamber would vote on the bill later this week, and stressed that it would not subject applicants to a religious test. He made this clarification after some GOP presidential candidates suggested preference should be given to Christians. 

McCaul, in a statement, said that while he wants a “temporary suspension” of Syrian refugee admissions, “It is apparent that the President will ignore these concerns, making this legislation necessary to toughen security measures.” 

Indeed, Obama on Wednesday continued to defend plans to bring in an additional 10,000 Syrian refugees over the next year as he threatened to veto the House bill. 

“Slamming the door in the face of refugees would betray our deepest values. That’s not who we are. And it’s not what we’re going to do,” Obama tweeted late Wednesday morning. 

Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., also touted the latest House bill, saying it was based on legislation he introduced just days earlier. Hudson said the new bill would likely be voted on in the House on Thursday. 

“America is a compassionate nation. No country on Earth does more or spends more to care for our fellow man. But being compassionate doesn’t mean we have to have reckless policies that put American lives at risk,” he said in a statement. 

McCaul’s committee also released a report Wednesday on the Syrian refugee flow, saying it reveals “alarming gaps in the vetting of Syrian refugees at home and abroad.” 

Already, the new legislation was facing criticism from both sides of the aisle — and not just the White House. 

Heritage Action executive officer Michael A. Needham said in a statement that the bill, while setting up better vetting, “provides no leverage for Congress to weigh in and relies solely on President Obama’s appointees to carry out the new vetting process.” 

House Democrats also voiced opposition, with one House Democratic leadership aide telling Fox News the bill would “end the refugee program altogether.” The aide said they hope to “negotiate a bipartisan bill” and are weighing introducing an “alternative bill.” 

Meanwhile, CIA Director John Brennan said in a speech Wednesday that about half of Syria’s population — or about 12 million people — has been displaced by the ISIS onslaught and the civil war, a number that includes both those who have been internally displaced and those forced to flee the country. 

Speaking at the Overseas Security Advisory Council Conference, Brennan said Syria is “approaching 50 percent of the population” that has been displaced.

House Republicans aren’t the only ones concerned.

News.investors.com reports that

National Security: Speaking in another country 8,600 miles away from the U.S. capital, President Obama viciously attacked anyone who dares oppose his Syrian refugee plans. Does he include his fellow Democrats?

‘Apparently, they’re scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America.” That was how Obama, in Manila, rebuked Republicans on Tuesday for expressing concern about ISIS terrorists slipping into America amid the 10,000 Syrian refugees he wants to bring here.

The president’s sense of timing these days leaves something to be desired. Hours after he declared ISIS was “contained,” it launched a well-coordinated, multi-pronged surprise terrorist attack in Paris.

And hours after chastising the GOP for being scaredy-cats about widows, a woman connected with the Paris attacks blew herself up during a raid.

As his feckless anti-ISIS policy gets exposed by facts on the ground, Obama is become increasingly bellicose, agitated and hostile — against Republicans, not ISIS, which Obama insists on calling ISIL.

And he’s becoming increasingly isolated as Democrats come to realize how detached he is from reality.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., sharply criticized Obama for his “all is well” boasts, saying — on MSNBC, no less — that she’s “never been more concerned. I read the intelligence faithfully. ISIL is not contained. ISIL is expanding.” Now Feinstein is urging caution on admitting Syrian refugees.

Sen. Charles Schumer of New York has also refused to fall into line, saying a “pause” might be necessary.

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., signed a letter to Obama urging him to stop admitting refugees until “federal authorities can guarantee with 100% assurance that they are not connected” to ISIS.

New Hampshire’s Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan says she doesn’t want to accept Syrian refugees until the government can “ensure robust refugee screening.”

Other governors, Democrats and Republicans alike, are complaining that the administration won’t share information on how many or what kind of refugees may be headed their way.

Even top officials in Obama’s administration don’t buy his reassurances about the vetting process.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said in September that he wouldn’t “put it past the likes of ISIL to infiltrate operatives among these refugees,” adding that it’s “a huge concern of ours.”

FBI director James Comey told Congress last month that he couldn’t “offer anybody an absolute assurance that there’s no risk associated with this.”

He should know, since the FBI arrested two “robustly vetted” Iraqi refugees on terrorism charges six years ago, and suspended admission of more for months while investigating other possible infiltrations.

We haven’t even mentioned the fact that ISIS itself said it was going to use refugees as cover.

In the face of such unstoppable facts, Obama’s arrogance remains an immovable object.

It would be pathetic if it weren’t so dangerous.

Dangerous, indeed.

However, ISIS is also coming into our Sovereign Nation via a different route.

Breitbart.com reports that

Two federal agents operating under the umbrella of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are claiming that eight Syrian illegal aliens attempted to enter Texas from Mexico in the Laredo Sector. The federal agents spoke with Breitbart Texas on the condition of anonymity, however, a local president of the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) confirmed that Laredo Border Patrol agents have been officially contacting the organization with concerns over reports from other federal agents about Syrians illegally entering the country in the Laredo Sector. The reports have caused a stir among the sector’s Border Patrol agents.

The sources claimed that eight Syrians were apprehended on Monday, November 16, 2015. According to the sources, the Syrians were in two separate “family units” and were apprehended at the Juarez Lincoln Bridge in Laredo, Texas, also known officially as Port of Entry 1.

Border Patrol agent and NBPC Local 2455 President Hector Garza told Breitbart Texas, “Border Patrol agents who we represent have been contacting our organization to voice concerns about reports from other agents that Syrians crossed the U.S. border from Mexico in the Laredo Sector. Our agents have heard about Syrians being apprehended in the area from other federal agents.” Agent Garza added, “At this time, I cannot confirm or deny that Syrians have crossed, for security reasons.”

Agent Garza further stated that in matters as sensitive as Syrians crossing the border from Mexico, it would be highly unlikely that federal agencies would publicize it or inform a broad group of law enforcement. He did say that Local 2455 is taking the reports seriously and that they “will be issuing an officer safety bulletin advising Border Patrol agents to exercise extra precautions as they patrol the border.”

Breitbart Texas can confirm that a Syrian did attempt to enter the U.S. illegally through Texas in late September. The Syrian was caught using a passport that belonged to someone else and U.S. authorities decided against prosecuting anyone involved due to “circumstances.”

Unfortunately, agents of Islamic State have been entering from our Southern Border for quite a while now.

The following information is from a blog I posted on August 29, 2014, titled “ISIS Gathering At Our Southern Border. No Strategy = No America.”:

Former Congressman, Lt. Col. Allen B. West, reported the following on July 11th on his website…

Congressman Ted Poe (R-TX) told CBS’s local Dallas Fort Worth affiliate he believes that ISIS will use Texas’s southern border to enter the United States. “Of course the way they would come to the United States would be through the porous border with Mexico. The drug cartels will bring people into the country no matter who they are — for money,” says Poe.

The U.S. Border Patrol has a specific classification for those caught illegally entering America called OTMs (Other than Mexicans) which denotes those not of Hispanic descent. It is well known that drug cartels are assisting Islamic terrorists in gaining entrance and crossing the border. In fact it’s been going on for some time.

According to Breitbart.com, Human Events reported in 2010 that Iranian currency and prayer rugs were regularly found near the southern border.

A November 2012 House Committee on Homeland Security report from the Oversight Sub-Committee stated:

“U.S. Government officials who are directly responsible for our national security continue to affirm the vulnerability. In August 2007 former Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell stated that not only have terrorists used the Southwest border to enter the United States but that they will inevitably continue to do so as long as it is an available possibility. In a July 2012 hearing before the full U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano confirmed that terrorists have crossed the Southwest border with the intent to harm the American people. Additionally, the U.S. Border Patrol regularly apprehends aliens from the 35 “special interest countries” designated by our intelligence community as countries that could export individuals that could bring harm to our country in the way of terrorism.” From Fiscal Years 2006 to 2011, there were 1,918 apprehensions of these Special Interest Aliens at our Southwest border.”

An independent security contractor told Breitbart News last week that six Special Interest Aliens (SIA’s) from Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen were picked up by U.S. border patrol near Laredo, Texas. Each one had 60,000 Iraqi Dinars ($51.00) apiece on them.

Last week  [the second week in July] in Arizona, a Muslim prayer rug was found.

Wrap your heads around that information for a while, gentle readers.

Thanks to Obama’s Open Border Policy, the Radical Islamic Terrorists known as ISIS, have been coming into America, with the rest of the Illegal Aliens, via our Southern Border.

How many are already here, living among us, plotting attacks against us?

Obama’s willful and arrogant obtuseness, concerning the danger of a wide open Southern Border, has added to the now apparent critical situation which our nation finds itself in, concerning these barbarians, who slaughter innocent people in the name of Islam, a political ideology masquerafing as a faith.

…Whose Call to Prayer, our president has stated, is “one of the most beautiful sounds on the face of the Earth”.

God protect us.

…Because Obama certainly does not seem to be inclined to.

Until He Comes,

KJ

ISIS Slaughters Christians, Blows Up Russian Airplane. Who Will Stop Them?

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

Bully-Putin-600-LIThe slaughter of innocent Christians by ISIS continues as a strong president prepares to take them out.

Unfortunately, it is not our’s.

The Christian Post reports that

The United States Department of State has detailed in its International Religious Freedom report what one group described as “unimaginable horrors” Christians are facing at the hands of the Islamic State terror group, including beheadings and kidnappings.

The American Center for Law and Justice, which has been speaking out about Christian persecution across Iraq and Syria, described accounts in the IRF report as “truly gut-wrenching,” and said the report only offers “a small glimpse at the unimaginable horrors” Christians are facing.

David Saperstein, ambassador-at-large for International Religious Freedom, said:

“There is an absolute and unequivocal need to give voice to the religiously oppressed in every land afraid to speak of what they believe in; who face death and live in fear, who worship in underground churches, mosques or temples, who feel so desperate that they flee their homes to avoid killing and persecution simply because they love God in their own way or question the existence of God.”

The accounts confirm the many news reports that Christians in the territory captured by IS have been given the choice to convert to Islam, pay a large tax, flee from their ancestral homes, or be killed.

One account shared the story of a young Christian girl who was taken from her mother and told she would never see her again.

The report states: “Three-year old Christina Khader Ebada boarded a crowded bus with her mother to leave when suddenly one of the fighters guarding the checkpoint tore Christina from her mother’s arms. The panicked mother followed him, pleading with him to return the girl. ‘Shut up,’ he responded. ‘If you come close to this little girl you will be slaughtered; we will slaughter you.’ And she was forced back on the bus, leaving her baby behind, never to know what became of her.”

The State Department report further criticized the lack of government response to increasing societal tensions and discrimination.

The report claimed that the administration of President Bashar al-Asad promoted a “sectarian narrative” rather than trying to bring peace and stability to the region.

“This created an untenable situation where religiously motivated attacks targeted Syrians across the political and religious spectrum. In many situations, the lack of regime action to try to stop ISIL’s and other groups’ advances and attacks on specific religious groups and communities laid bare Asad’s cynical political calculations in daring to claim the title ‘protector’ of any of Syria’s people,” it added.

As far as positive developments regarding religious freedom in 2014, the report claimed that the suffering Egyptian Coptic population has received some help from its country’s government.

“There have been some convictions of perpetrators of violence against Copts, although impunity from prosecution for such crimes remains a serious problem,” the report continued.

“The new Egyptian constitution provides increased human rights protections as compared to the previous constitution, including a stipulation of equality before the law irrespective of religion.”

The ACLJ has meanwhile been critical of President Barack Obama’s decision to send 50 Special Operations troops into Syria to help ground troops battling IS, saying that it is not enough.

IS has continued to conquer towns in Syria despite airstrikes from the U.S. and Russia, which only joined the anti-terrorism effort in October.

Islamic jihadists captured the town of Maheen in the central Homs Province over the weekend, and reports say that fighting has begun on the outskirts of the predominately Christian town of Sadad — home to 15,000 Syriac Orthodox Christians.

Speaking of Islamic State, CNN reports that

Days after authorities dismissed claims that ISIS brought down a Russian passenger jet, a U.S. intelligence analysis now suggests that the terror group or its affiliates planted a bomb on the plane.British Foreign Minister Philip Hammond said his government believes there is a “significant possibility” that an explosive device caused the crash. And a Middle East source briefed on intelligence matters also said it appears likely someone placed a bomb aboard the aircraft. 

Metrojet Flight 9268 crashed Saturday in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula after breaking apart in midair, killing all 224 people on board. It was en route to St. Petersburg from the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh.

The latest U.S. intelligence suggests that the crash was most likely caused by a bomb planted on the plane by ISIS or an affiliate, according to multiple U.S. officials who spoke with CNN.

The officials stressed that no formal conclusion has been reached by the U.S. intelligence community and that U.S. officials haven’t seen forensic evidence from the crash investigation. 
Intelligence also suggests someone at the Sharm el-Sheikh airport helped get a bomb onto the plane, one U.S. official said.

“This airport has lax security. It is known for that,” the official said. “But there is intelligence suggesting an assist from someone at the airport. “

Egyptian authorities, who are leading the investigation into the crash, haven’t publicly responded to reports on U.S. intelligence. Since the crash, they’ve downplayed the possibility that terrorism could be involved.

The signs pointing to ISIS, another U.S. official said, are partially based on monitoring of internal messages of the terrorist group. Those messages are separate from public ISIS claims of responsibility, that official said.

In an audio message from ISIS’ Sinai branch that was posted on terror-related social media accounts Wednesday, the organization adamantly insisted that it brought down the flight.

“Find your black boxes and analyze them, give us the results of your investigation and the depth of your expertise and prove we didn’t do it or how it was downed,” the message said. “Die with your rage. We are the ones with God’s blessing who brought it down. And God willing, one day we will reveal how, at the time we desire.”

Typically, ISIS is quick to trumpet how and who carried out any attacks for purposes of praise and propaganda. To some, the fact that ISIS hasn’t provided details in this case raises doubt about the group’s repeated claims of responsibility.

Officials in Egypt and Russia have said there’s no evidence to support ISIS’ claims.

“That was a very baffling way to claim credit for what would be the most significant terrorist attack since 9/11,” CNN terrorism analyst Paul Cruickshank said. “But there may have been a method behind this and a reason behind this, and that may have been to protect an insider at Sharm el-Sheikh airport.”

Perhaps.

But, who will protect ISIS from Putin?

Former UN Ambassador John Bolton, appearing on Greta Van Susteran’s program, last night on Fox News, made the prediction that Putin will retaliate against Islamic State and strike back hard.

Well, duuuh.

It is what any strong leader would do.

Unlike our country’s President, who has invited the Muslim Brotherhood to the White House several times, and who relies on Iranian Valerie Jarrett to run the place for him.

For President Barack Hussein Obama to have attempted to prosecute a War against ISIS by remote control, with apparently no military strategy in place at all, was one the silliest things I’ve ever seen in my life.

As was noted by several military analysts, when his “War-By-Remote-Control began, eventually, Obama was going to have to put troops on the ground. That is, additional troops to the troops which he already has on the ground in the role of  “military advisors”.

Last week, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter announced that there would be a limited amount of American Troops, putting their boots on the ground to conduct “raids” against ISIS.

Let’s face it, Obama’s bombing runs were doing minimal damage, at best.

The fact of the matter is, you cannot bomb buildings and expect to kill your enemy, when the enemy is a guerrilla force, which  does not stay in any building for any period of time. Just like their Nomadic Barbaric Ancestors, these guerrillas keep moving, regrouping, and attacking.

Obama had hoped that his “Coalition of the Unwilling”, the Middle Eastern Muslim Nations , who reluctantly agreed to support Obama against ISIS, would be willing to be his “boots on the ground” and would lay down their lives for him.

I am still trying to figure out how Obama could have possibly thought that those who think of us as the Great Satan, would lay down their lives for us.

Of course, Obama also thinks that if  Iran promises not to build a nuke, they won’t build it.

Just yesterday, voanews.com reported that

Russian President Vladimir Putin has been named world’s most powerful person by Forbes magazine.

“Putin continues to prove he’s one of the few men in the world powerful enough to do what he wants – and get away with it,” the magazine said of the Russian leader, who has topped the list three years in a row.

Germany Chancellor Angela Merkel took over the second spot from U.S. President Barack Obama, who dropped to third.

It marks the first time a U.S. president has not been in the top two in the seven-year history of the rankings, according to the 73-person list named by Forbes.

Meanwhile, four Americans, including a Pastor remains a prisoner in Iran and Russian President Vladimir Putin is prepare to wipe ISIS off the map.

President Barack Hussein Obama should not even be third on that list.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Welcome to Iraqi-Nam! Obama Sends Troops to Fight ISIS. So Much For “No Boots on the Ground”.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

untitled (9)Have you ever played the “Gossip Game”?

We used to do it all the time on Church Youth Retreats. You line up a long row of chairs and sit your group down in them. Somebody whispers a sentence into the ear of the person in the first chair, who then whispers it in the ear of the person in the second chair, and so forth. By the time the sentence is whispered in the ear of the person in the last chair, it sounds nothing like the original sentence.

The message that Obama and his Administration communicated, over a year ago, about how they are going to prosecute the “limited engagement” against ISIS/ISIL reminded me, at the time, of the “Gossip Game”.

Let’s examine the Administration’s disjointed message, shall we?

To the Wayback Machine, Sherman!

September 11, 2014 – The New York Times reported that

After enduring harsh criticism for saying in a news conference two weeks ago that he did not have a strategy for dealing with ISIS in Syria, Mr. Obama sketched out a plan that will involve heightened American training and arming of moderate Syrian rebels to fight the militants. Saudi Arabia has agreed to provide bases for the training of those forces.

The White House has asked Congress to authorize the plan to train and equip rebels — something the Central Intelligence Agency has been doing covertly and on a much smaller scale — but Mr. Obama said he had the authority necessary to expand the broader campaign.

“These American forces will not have a combat mission — we will not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq,” Mr. Obama pledged, adding that the broader mission he was outlining for American military forces “will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; it will not involve American combat troops fighting on foreign soil.”

Setpember 16, 2014 – ABCnews.go.com reported that

American ground troops may be needed to battle Islamic State forces in the Middle East if President Barack Obama’s current strategy fails, the nation’s top military officer said Tuesday as Congress plunged into an election-year debate of Obama’s plan to expand airstrikes and train Syrian rebels.

A White House spokesman said quickly the president “will not” send ground forces into combat, but Gen. Martin Dempsey said Obama had personally told him to come back on a “case by case basis” if the military situation changed.

“To be clear, if we reach the point where I believe our advisers should accompany Iraqi troops on attacks against specific ISIL targets, I will recommend that to the president,” Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee. He referred to the militants by an alternative name.

Pressed later by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the panel’s chairman, the four-star general said if Obama’s current approach isn’t enough to prevail, he might “go back to the president and make a recommendation that may include the use of ground forces.”

Dempsey’s testimony underscored the dilemma confronting many lawmakers as the House moves through its own debate on authorizing the Pentagon to implement the policy Obama announced last week. In Iraq on Tuesday, the U.S. continued its expanded military campaign, carrying out two airstrikes northwest of Irbil and three southwest of Baghdad.

After the hearing, Dempsey told reporters traveling with him to Paris that the Pentagon had concluded that about half of Iraq’s army was incapable of partnering effectively with the U.S. to roll back the Islamic State group’s territorial gains in western and northern Iraq, and the other half needs to be partially rebuilt with U.S. training and additional equipment.

September 17, 2014 – According to politico.com,

“U.S. ground troops will not be sent into combat in this conflict,” Kerry testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “Instead, they will support Iraq forces on the ground as they fight for their country.”

…Kerry’s testimony comes as Congress races toward a critical vote to give the Obama administration the green light to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

The House is set to vote on the measure later Wednesday, with the Senate to take up the legislation later this week. The measure has run into considerable opposition from both the right and the left but is expected to pass before lawmakers left Washington until after the midterm elections.

President Barack Obama reiterated earlier Wednesday in a speech at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida, that he will not send U.S. combat troops to fight ISIL in Iraq, following testimony from Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey that opened the door to that option earlier this week.

And later during the Foreign Relations hearing, Kerry declined to move off that position, despite questioning from Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), whom Kerry told: “I’m not going to engage in hypotheticals.”

“The president has made a judgment as commander-in-chief that that’s not in the cards,” Kerry said, referring to ground troops.

Shortly before the hearing began before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, protesters from the anti- war group Code Pink – a prevalent sight on the Hill in recent days as lawmakers engaged in debate about arming Syrian rebels – stood up, held signs and chanted “No more war!”

Deviating from his prepared remarks, Kerry turned his attention to the protesters, seated in the front row of the hearing room, and told them that while he was sympathetic to their opposition to war, if they believed in the broader mission of Code Pink, “then you ought to care about fighting ISIL.”

Stressing that the Islamic State was “killing and raping and mutilating women” and “making a mockery of a peaceful religion,” Kerry told the protesters: “There is no negotiation with ISIL.”

Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) stressed that if the military campaign continues for an extended period of time – like he expects – lawmakers will need to pass a new authorization for the use of military force that focuses narrowly on ISIL. He signaled last week that the panel will begin drafting one.

“I am personally not comfortable with reliance on either the 2001 AUMF that relies on a thin theory that ISIL is associated with Al Qaeda, and certainly not the 2002 Iraq AUMF which relied on misinformation,” Menendez said.

Later as he questioned Kerry, Menendez told the secretary of state that “you’re going to need a new AUMF, and it’ll have to be more tailored.” Kerry responded that the administration would “welcome” it.

The panel’s top Republican, Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, expressed deep skepticism about the Obama administration’s strategy to fight Islamic State extremists, telling Kerry: “We know the Free Syrian Army can’t take on ISIL. You know that.”

“I do want us to deal with this,” Corker told Kerry “You’ve not laid it out in a way that meets that test.”

Later in the day on September 17, 2014 – According to FoxNews.com,

The White House acknowledged Wednesday that President Obama would consider putting U.S. troops in “forward-deployed positions” to advise Iraqi forces in the fight against the Islamic State — even while insisting U.S. troops would not be sent back into a “combat role” in Iraq. 

Obama and his top advisers appeared to be threading a needle as they carefully clarified how exactly U.S. troops might be used, a day after Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey opened the door to approving “U.S. military ground forces.” 

The White House continued to insist Wednesday that a “combat” role has in fact been ruled out, and that U.S. troops will not be engaging the Islamic State on the ground. 

Speaking at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, after visiting U.S. Central Command, Obama told troops: “I will not commit you and the rest of our Armed Forces to fighting another ground war in Iraq.” 

He vowed that the U.S. forces currently deployed to Iraq to advise Iraqi forces “will not have a combat mission.” Instead, he said, they will continue to support Iraqi forces on the ground, through a combination of U.S. air power, training assistance and other means. 

But shortly afterward, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest clarified that Dempsey was talking about the possible need to put U.S. troops already in Iraq into “forward-deployed positions with Iraqi troops.” 

Earnest said that step has not yet been necessary, but if Dempsey asks to “forward deploy” American advisers, “the president said he would consider it on a case-by-case basis.” 

He said, in that scenario, U.S. troops “would be providing tactical advice to Iraqi security forces” or be in position to call in airstrikes. 

“They would not have a combat role. They would not be personally or directly engaging the enemy,” Earnest stressed. 

Fast forward to the present.

As someone once famously said,

All of Barack Hussein Obama’s promises come with an expiration date.

It might have been Mooch (Michelle).

But, I digress…

So, now, we will officially have “boots on the ground”, even though we already have “Military Advisors” in Iraq.

NBC News reports that

Defense Secretary Ashton Carter said Tuesday that the U.S. will begin “direct action on the ground” against ISIS forces in Iraq and Syria, aiming to intensify pressure on the militants as progress against them remains elusive.”We won’t hold back from supporting capable partners in opportunistic attacks against ISIL, or conducting such missions directly whether by strikes from the air or direct action on the ground,” Carter said in testimony before the Senate Armed Services committee, using an alternative name for the militant group.

Carter pointed to last week’s rescue operation with Kurdish forces in northern Iraq to free hostages held by ISIS.

Carter and Pentagon officials initially refused to characterize the rescue operation as U.S. boots on the ground. However, Carter said last week that the military expects “more raids of this kind” and that the rescue mission “represents a continuation of our advise and assist mission.”

This may mean some American soldiers “will be in harm’s way, no question about it,” Carter said last week.advertisement
 
After months of denying that U.S. troops would be in any combat role in Iraq, Carter late last week in a response to a question posed by NBC News, also acknowledged that the situation U.S. soldiers found themselves in during the raid in Hawija was combat.

“This is combat and things are complicated,” Carter said.

During Tuesday’s Senate hearing, Carter said Wheeler “was killed in combat.”

White House deputy press secretary Eric Schultz on Tuesday said the administration has “no intention of long term ground combat”. He added that U.S. forces will continue to robustly train, advise and assist.

A feisty Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, said on Tuesday in the Senate Armed Services committee hearing that the U.S. effort in Syria is a “half-assed strategy at best,” and said that the U.S. is not doing a “damn thing” to bring down Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime.

Carter on Tuesday pushed back against that notion.

Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged that the “balance of forces” has tilted in Assad’s favor.

This is what happens when you have a President that is more interested in “fighting a war” against our country’s municipal police departments, and a disease which broke out in his father’s home country, than protecting the country that he is supposed to be leading, from Muslim Terrorists.

Years ago, the local ABC Affiliate in Memphis used to run The Benny Hill Show at 10:30 p.m. on Saturdays. For those of you sheltered younger readers, Benny Hill was a wonderful British comedian and entertainer. “The Lad Himself” wrote a lot of his own hilarious  material, including such memorable characters as Cap’n Scuttle, and songs that would literally have you busting your gut in laughter. However, one of the things that Benny will forever be remembered for, happened at the end of every show, when one thing would lead to another, culminating in a rip-roaring chase scene, set to the saxophone-led accompaniment of the incomparable Boots Randolph’s “Yakety Sax”.

The chaotic manner in which the administration is attempting to “prosecute” a “limited war” against the Muslim Terrorist Group, now numbering almost 32,000 members, known as ISIS or ISIL, is very reminiscent of a Benny Hill Show Chase Scene.

Except…there’s nothing funny about it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

“Smart Power!” Continues Down the Porcelain Receptacle as Israel Prepares for Third Intifada.

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics2 Comments

americanisraelilapelpinMerriam-Webster defines the word Intifada as

:  uprising, rebellion; specifically :  an armed uprising of Palestinians against Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip

This is a word which the world has become familiar with twice before.

Now, with the bubbling cauldron of potentially-nuclear annihilation getting hotter every passing day in the Middle East, thanks to President Barack Hussein Obama’s failed Foreign Policy of “Smart Power!”, the third time we become acquainted with the word Intifada, will definitely not be a “charm”.

Foxnews.com reports that

The Obama administration is under pressure to help calm the growing violence in Israel which has some warning of a third intifada, as Israel’s military steps up its response to deadly Palestinian attacks by deploying hundreds of troops. 

Amid the unrest, Secretary of State John Kerry just announced plans to visit the region, and has spoken with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. 

“We’re working on trying to calm things down,” he said Tuesday during an event at Harvard University. “And I will go there soon at some point appropriately and try to work to re-engage and see if we can’t move that away from this precipice.” 

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest also cited that visit Wednesday when asked what President Obama is doing to address the crisis, saying Kerry will travel “in the near future.” He said the visit underscores the “continuing deep concern” the U.S. has and urged both sides to take “affirmative steps” to calm tensions. 

Yet the State Department under both Hillary Clinton and now Kerry so far has been unable to push forward the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Relations between Obama and Netanyahu remain as chilly as ever — particularly after the Iran nuclear deal put them on opposite sides of the debate — and it’s unclear how much sway the administration still has in the volatile region. 

Retired Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, a Fox News analyst, cited Netanyahu’s visit last month to Moscow to meet with Putin to discuss Syria. “He can see that Obama’s Middle East non-policy has failed utterly,” Peters said.  

Kerry may be hoping his personal touch can help bring both sides together as tensions reach a critical point. 

Tuesday was among the bloodiest days so far, as a pair of Palestinian stabbing and shooting attacks in Jerusalem killed three Israelis and another two attacks took place in the normally quiet Israeli city of Raanana. Three Palestinians, including two attackers, were also killed. 

On Capitol Hill, U.S. lawmakers urged a stronger response from the administration. 

“I stand behind Israel’s fundamental right to defend itself and its people from violence and terror,” Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., said in a statement. “Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his government have an obligation to stop these attacks, to cease the harsh rhetoric that incites them, and to negotiate in good faith for a peaceful resolution.” 

He added, “It is imperative that the United States continue to ensure that Israel has the resources [it] needs to enhance its security and meet these threats.” 

Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., said “it is critical that the Obama administration and Congress press Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas … to act decisively to end the growing wave of Palestinian violence and return to bilateral peace negotiations with Israel.” 

State Department spokesman John Kirby on Tuesday put out a statement condemning “in the strongest terms today’s terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians.” 

He said the U.S. stresses the importance of “condemning violence and combating incitement” and is in “regular contact” with both governments. “We remain deeply concerned about escalating tensions and urge all sides to take affirmative steps to restore calm and prevent actions that would further escalate tensions,” he said. 

It’s unclear what the U.S. message involves beyond those appeals. 

That’s simple.

United States President Barack Hussein Obama and Secretary of State John F. Kerry still want Israel to give half of their country to the “Palestinians”, which would return their nation to basically a strip of land, as it was before the Six Day War.

Who exactly are “The Palestinians”?

According to disoverthenetworks.org,

Since the Six Day War of 1967, the Arab world’s most powerful leaders — in Egypt, Libya, Arabia, Syria, and Iraq prior to Saddam Hussein’s demise — have waged a war of words against Israel. Having failed to defeat Israel by means of naked military aggression, these leaders and their advisors decided, sometime between the end of the war and the Khartoum Conference of August-September 1967, to bring about the destruction of Israel by means of a relentless terror war.

To justify to the world their ruthless murder of Israeli civilians and their undying hatred of the West, these leaders needed to invent a narrative depicting Israel as a racist, war-mongering, oppressive, apartheid state that was illegally occupying Arab land and carrying out the genocide of an indigenous people that had a stronger claim to the land of Israel than did Israel itself.

Thus the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), under the tutelage of the Soviet KGB, invented “The Palestinian People” who allegedly had been forced to wage a war of national liberation against imperialism.

To justify this notion, Yasser Arafat, shortly after taking over as leader of the PLO, sent his adjutant, Abu Jihad (later the leader of the PLO’s military operations), to North Vietnam to study the strategy and tactics of guerrilla warfare in the hopes that the PLO could emulate Ho Chi Minh’s success with left-wing sympathizers in the United States and Europe. Ho’s chief strategist, General Giap, offered advice that changed the PLO’s identity and future:

“Stop talking about annihilating Israel and instead turn your terror war into a struggle for human rights. Then you will have the American people eating out of your hand.”

Giap’s counsel was simple but profound: the PLO needed to work in a way that concealed its real goals, permitted strategic deception, and gave the appearance of moderation. And the key to all this was creating an image that would help Arafat manipulate the American and Western news media.

Arafat developed the images of the “illegal occupation” and “Palestinian national self-determination,” both of which lent his terrorism the mantle of a legitimate peoples’ resistance. After the Six Day War, Muhammad Yazid, who had been minister of information in two Algerian wartime governments (1958-1962), imparted to Arafat some wisdom that echoed the lessons he had learned in North Vietnam:

“Wipe out the argument that Israel is a small state whose existence is threatened by the Arab states, or the reduction of the Palestinian problem to a question of refugees; instead, present the Palestinian struggle as a struggle for liberation like the others. Wipe out the impression . . . that in the struggle between the Palestinians and the Zionists, the Zionist is the underdog. Now it is the Arab who is oppressed and victimized in his existence because he is not only facing the Zionists but also world imperialism.”

So, why would an American Administration and their fellow Liberals, including American Jews,  join with our nation’s sworn enemies in their Jihad against our staunchest ally, Israel?

In an  article, posted on June 2, 2011, on americanthinker.com, Why Does the Left Hate Israel?,  Richard Baehr attempted to answer that very question…

…I have been to several of the left wing Israel hate fests. They are scary. There is real passion in the air. There is something about Israel that gets the juices going. Anti—Semitism is a part of it. There are a lot of people who are envious of Jews, on the left as well as the right. Patrick Buchanan thinks Jews have hijacked the conservative movement. But on the left, particularly in the academy, and in journalism, I am certain there is professional envy of the many Jewish faces and what better way to get even, and get back for sometimes losing the competitive battle, than by picking on the Jewish state as a surrogate. Leftist Jews sometimes lead the assault against Israel in these venues, thereby giving the attacks, whatever their reason, greater moral authority. Few Jews will stand up for Israel in these environments, because of the great pressure on the left to conform to the group think in the institutions they control.

…The evidence I believe is clear today that Israel faces far greater threats from the left than the right. The left is reflexively anti—Israel and has established important beachheads in significant American institutions— academia, the media, and the old line Protestant ‘high’ churches, as well as in the very seats of government power in many Western European countries, and their intelligentsia. It is not surprising that Israel seems unable to get a fair shake from college professors, the BBC, Reuters, NPR, or liberal churches. Being anti—Israel has become part of their religion.

As a Christian American, I know who I support:  God’s Chosen People. 

You see, I’ve read The Book.  I know how all of this ends.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Obama, Putin, and the Syrian Situation: Another Fine Mess

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

Movin-In-600-LI

This is another fine mess you’ve gotten us into. – Oliver Hardy to Stan Laurel

To quote the late, great Strother Martin, in “Cool Hand Luke”,

What we have heah is a failure to communicate.

According to mcclatchydc.com…

While they confer about “de-conflicting” their bombing raids in Syria, U.S. and Russian military officials also might want to discuss what the word “terrorist” means.That would be an easier discussion for the Russians, who began conducting airstrikes Wednesday, than the Americans, who’ve been bombing Syria for more than a year.

For Russian President Vladimir Putin and his generals, the definition of “terrorist,” when it comes to the increasingly turbulent Syrian civil war, is simple: anyone who uses violence to try to topple President Bashar Assad.

Assad is a dictator, but he’s Moscow’s dictator. Just as the late Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein was Washington’s dictator, for decades, before President George W. Bush turned against him and launched an ill-fated March 2003 invasion whose consequences are still playing out more than a dozen years later across the Middle East, from Syria and Iraq to Libya and Iran.

For President Barack Obama and his top military aides, it’s becoming more complicated by the day to say just who is a terrorist in Syria.

Like Moscow, Washington views some of the anti-Assad forces as terrorists, starting with the Islamic State militants.

But the United States’ uneasy alliances with Turkey and the elusive “moderate opposition groups” in Syria, along with the reluctance of Obama and Congress to get drawn further into that nation’s bloody disaster, require American leaders to engage in verbal jujitsu when asked if the U.S.-led air campaign is also targeting the Nusra Front, Ahrar al Shram and other al Qaida-linked groups.

“The fundamental problem is that the United States is trying to divorce its international anti-terrorism campaign from the rest of the Syrian civil war,” Christopher Kozak, an analyst with the Institute for the Study of War in Washington, told McClatchy. “That’s very difficult as we saw when the (U.S.-trained) New Syrian Force went in and just got obliterated by Nusra. The rebels want to fight the regime, not ISIS.

“The Russians have some leverage because they’re coming in with a position that’s more coherent,” he added. “Their anti-terrorism strategy is part of an endgame for ending the civil war, which is to protect the Assad regime.” ISIS is one of several acronyms for the Islamic State; ISIL is another.

Beneath their diverging views of who is a terrorist lies a more fundamental difference between Moscow and Washington: Russia traces the rise of the Islamic State to the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq; the United States blames it on the brutal Assad rule that it blames for the deaths of more than 200,000 Syrians.

Despite Assad’s record, Russia is now backing his regime with air strikes. It bombed other forces Wednesday and Thursday before striking Islamic State targets Friday.

Russia fought Islamic extremists in the Chechnya region within its own borders in two wars covering more than a decade and ending in 2009.
A U.S. official, who requested anonymity in order to discuss intelligence matters, confirmed the most recent Russian raids.

“We believe that they’ve struck a couple of different places where ISIL is present today, both near (Islamic State headquarters in) Raqqa and Deir el Zour” in eastern Syria, the official told McClatchy.

After Russian warplanes began bombing Syria this week, reporters repeatedly asked Pentagon officials how they felt about the Kremlin targeting Assad foes other than the Islamic State. Just as repeatedly, the U.S. military spokesmen declined to answer the questions directly.

Army Col. Steve Warren, spokesman for Operation Inherent Resolve in Baghdad, was asked via video conference about reports that Kurdish fighters in Syria, who have been the United States’ most effective ground force there against the Islamic State, welcomed Russia’s entry into the air wars.

“Our focus and our determination is to defeat ISIL,” Warren said. “If others are willing to work with us to defeat ISIL, then that is something that we are willing to welcome.”

Warren was asked to respond to Russian airstrikes against CIA-backed Syrians fighting to overthrow Assad.

“It’s an extraordinarily complex battlefield,” he said. “Now, what I’ll say is our focus is ISIL, and I’ll leave it there.”

At a separate briefing, Pentagon Press Secretary Peter Cook deflected similar questions.

“The sooner the Russians can be focused on those efforts to try and go after ISIL, the better, and that’s the message we’re going to continue to deliver,” Cook said.

Here’s the problem with that:

For Putin, this military action services two distinct purposes. As was just reported, Putin is protecting his “buddy”, Assad.

At the same time, Putin is enjoying making Obama look weak to the rest of the world.

And, that’s not just my opinion.

Per the London Telegraph,

This past week, White House press secretary Josh Earnest strained credulity when he said Mr Obama doesn’t regret drawing that red line.Weakness invites provocation, and – never one to miss an opportunity to outmanoeuvre Mr Obama – Mr Putin provided a self-serving opportunity that would also allow the president to save face: Moscow would push Syria to put their chemical weapons under international control. 

It’s also important to note that in the wake of the red line being trampled, Russia invaded Crimea. President Obama’s legacy may be mixed, but one thing is for sure: Vladimir Putin is much more powerful and provocative than he was before Mr Obama took office, and Russia has only expanded its sphere of influence.

The Syria bombings also come almost immediately after Mr Putin met with Mr Obama at the UN where they agreed to “deconflict” military operations – a very Obama-esque line that Mr Putin immediately crossed.

And prior to bombing our friends in Syria, the Russians also had the audacity to issue a “démarche” for the US to clear air space over northern Syria. As if that weren’t enough, this came just as reports that the Russians attempted to hack Hillary Clinton’s email server.

For those paying attention, Mr Obama’s foreign policy world-view has failed.

The suggestion that America could leave a vacuum that wouldn’t be filled by our adversaries – the idea that the “international community” (whatever that means) would respect us more if we were to retreat from the world – was always a farce.

At some level, high-stakes diplomacy is still a game of chicken – where machismo matters.

Even domestically, there are still traces of this left in our more civilised politics. 

We recently witnessed an example of Jeb Bush standing on his toes during a photo-op, attempting to appear taller than Donald Trump. This is childish and petty, and yet serious people play these power games.

But nobody plays them better than Mr Putin, the former KGB officer who likes to ride horses while shirtless.

It’s nice to live in a postmodern country, but we shouldn’t delude ourselves into believing the rest of the world is impressed by our sophistication.

In the vast majority of the world, power (or the perception of power) is what matters. In America, President Obama’s brand of metrosexual coolness works well.

He mocked Mitt Romney, for example, as a Neanderthal stuck in the 1980s for suggesting in 2012 that Russia was still our main geopolitical foe.

Mr Obama’s mix of cool insouciance and biting sarcasm plays much better with the latte-sipping crowd than it does with former KGB operatives, where his style and rhetoric suggests weakness, softness, and a lack of commitment and moral clarity.

This disdain that those in Europe hold for Obama is nothing new.

In an article posted on April 10, 2009, columnist Gerald Warner of this same London Telegraph, coined the title President Pantywaist for Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).  He gave him this nickname after Obama:

…recently completed the most successful foreign policy tour since Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow. You name it, he blew it. What was his big deal economic programme that he was determined to drive through the G20 summit? Another massive stimulus package, globally funded and co-ordinated. Did he achieve it? Not so as you’d notice. 

Given the way America’s enemies are laughing at America and spitting in our face, the way that Obama has arrogantly alienated our foreign allies, and the President’s Steve Urkel-esque naiveté as exhibited by his Smart Power Foreign Policy, I would say Mr. Warner hit the nail on the head.

In December of 1985, five U.S. citizens were murdered in simultaneous Islamic terrorist attacks at the Rome and Vienna airports. Upon finding out that Libyan Despot Muammar al-Qaddafi was behind the attacks, U.S. President Ronald Reagan ordered expanded sanctions against Libya and froze Libyan assets in the United States. On March 24, 1986, U.S. and Libyan forces clashed in the Gulf of Sidra, and four Libyan attack boats were sunk. Then, on April 5, terrorists bombed a West Berlin dance hall known to be frequented by U.S. servicemen. One U.S. serviceman and a Turkish woman were killed, and more than 200 people were wounded, including 50 other U.S. servicemen. U.S. intelligence actually intercepted radio messages sent from Libya to its diplomats in East Berlin ordering the April 5 attack on the LaBelle discotheque.

On April 14, 1986, President Reagan ordered air strikes against Libya in retaliation for their sponsorship of terrorism against American troops and citizens. The raid, which began shortly before 7 p.m. EST (2 a.m., April 15 in Libya), involved more than 100 U.S. Air Force and Navy aircraft, and was over within an hour. Five military targets and “terrorism centers” were hit, including the headquarters of Libyan leader Muammar al-Qaddafi.

In fact, the rumor was, we fired a Stinger Missile right into Qaddafi’s bedroom.

After this, Qaddafi left us alone and kept his mouth shut for 25 years. All it took to make the sponsor of Muslim Terrorism back down was a show of strength and a United States President who was not afraid to use our military might in defense of our country.

Fast forward to today…

Obama and his Secretary of State, John (I served in Vietnam) Kerry has agreed to a deal with Kerry’s son-in-law’s father, his counterpart in Iran, which will give them nuclear capability, while leaving four Americans, including a Christian Preacher, imprisoned in that barbaric country.

Now, Obama has Kerry trying to negotiate with Putin and the Russians after they have made the President of the United States of America look like a wuss to the rest of the world..

Meanwhile, last Friday, Obama gave a Press Conference, insisting that it is Putin who is looking weak.

Way to go, President Pantywaist. That showed ’em.

God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

America on the Brink: When We Need “Ronnie Raygun”, We’ve Got Steve Urkel.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

untitled (4)Once again, this has been a pivotal week in the life of our country.

Thanks to the woefully and purposefully inadequate leadership of the 44th President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, “The Shining City Upon a Hill” has become greatly tarnished, in not only the view of its citizens, but, also, in the view of the whole Free World.

At the same time, our enemies, the Enemies of Freedom, are diggin’ it….because America has gone from having a man like Ronald Reagan occupy the Oval Office to a clueless, prevaricating wuss, in the form of Barack Hussein Obama.

To prove my point, I am going to list five examples of the Greatest Accomplishments of  Ronald Wilson Reagan, courtesy of humanevents.com, and answer each one of them, with a failure of Barack Hussein Obama, in that very same area.

The kicker is, all of the failures that I will cite, have occurred THIS PAST WEEK.

1. Peace through Strength:  The military was diminished during the Carter years, but Reagan reversed that by rebuilding the armed forces.  His Peace Through Strength philosophy was manifested by his reviving the B-1 bomber that Carter canceled, starting production of the MX missile, and pushing NATO to deploy Pershing missiles in West Germany.  He increased defense spending by more than 40%, increased troop levels, and even got much-needed space parts into the pipeline.  Those efforts ensured that America remained a military superpower.

Last Monday, President Barack Hussein Obama appeared, once again, before the General Assembly of the United Nations. Among the topics he pontificated upon on, was his Foreign Policy Goals for the next year.

While ol’ Scooter was reporting in to his Masters at the UN, msn.com reported that

The Iraqi military announced Sunday that it had agreed to share intelligence about the Islamic State with Russia, the Syrian government and Iran, an agreement that caught the Obama administration off guard. The Iraqi military said in a statement that the new agreement was necessary because thousands of volunteers who have joined the Islamic State have come from Russia. Asked if he welcomed the accord, Secretary of State John Kerry said it was important that the United States and Russia coordinate.

“I think the critical thing is that all of the efforts need to be coordinated,” Mr. Kerry said at the start of a meeting in New York with Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister. “This is not yet coordinated. I think we have concerns about how we’re going to go forward, but that’s precisely what we’re meeting on to talk about now.”

Which leads us to Reagan’s next accomplishment…

2.  Ending the Cold War:  The Cold War had raged since World War II and  communism’s quest for world domination remained an existential threat to the United States when President Reagan took office.  Reagan reversed the policy of detente and stood firm against the Soviet Union, calling it the Evil Empire and telling Mikhail Gorbachev to “tear down this wall” in Berlin.  He was relentless in pushing his Strategic Defense Initiative and gave aid to rebels battling Soviet-backed Marxists from Nicaragua to Angola. Those efforts were critical in the ultimate collapse of the Soviet empire and essentially ended the Cold War.

This past week, Obama’s failed Foreign Policy, erroneously named “Smart Power!”, has resulted in Obama being told to “‘step aside”, getting sand kicked into his face, like the 98-lb. weakling in those old Charles Atlas Ads, which used to be on the back of comic books, back in the day, during a time when our enemies knew better than to mess with us.

Yahoo News reported that

Russia’s dramatic entry Wednesday into the Syrian war put the United States on the back foot once again and left Washington struggling to regain the military and diplomatic initiative.

As US Secretary of State John Kerry was in New York trying to coordinate with his Kremlin opposite number Sergei Lavrov, a Russian officer contacted the US embassy in Baghdad.

His message was simple: Russian jets are about to launch air strikes in Syria, please stay out of their way.

Kerry quickly protested to Lavrov that this was not in the spirit of Moscow’s promise to agree a “de-confliction” mechanism to ensure Russian flights do not interfere with US-led operations.

But the strikes were already underway, potentially altering the balance of power in Syria back in favor of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, and Washington was looking at a fait accompli.

Enough about Foreign Policy, let’s take a look at Domestic Policy…

3. Reaganomics: Reagan’s mix of across-the-board tax cuts, deregulation, and domestic spending restraint helped fuel an economic boom that lasted two decades.  Reagan inherited a misery index (the sum of the inflation and unemployment rates) of 19.99%, and when he left office it had dropped to 9.72%. President Obama take note:  Under Reaganomics, 16 million new jobs were created.

According to the Monthly Jobs Report, released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Friday Morning. the number of Americans not in the labor force exceeded 94 million for the second time in a row last month hitting a new record high.

The BLS reports that 94,610,000 people (ages 16 and over) were not in the America’s Workforce in September. This means that they were neither employed nor had made specific efforts to find work in the prior four weeks.

The number of individuals out of the work force last month — due to just flat giving up, retirement or other reasons, represented a huge 579,000 person increase over the most recent record, hit in August, of 94,031,000 people out of the workforce.

The story of this report lies not just in the shear, maddening numbers, but in the spiritual, psychological, and economical toll, grinding those families stuck in Obama’s Failed Economy, face down in a morass of overdue bills, failed marriages, and bankruptcy.

4. Morning in America:  It was basically a slogan for Reagan’s 1984 reelection bid, but Morning in America symbolized a new beginning for the country.  Reagan’s jaunty optimism and an economic boom was a much-needed tonic for a country that had experienced the malaise of the Carter years and the traumas of Watergate and Vietnam.

From the beginning of his tenure as President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has been a “Nattering Nabob of Negativity”, to quote the late Vice-President Spiro Agnew. From his Speech at the University of Cairo to the Muslim World, to his World Apology Tour, where he apologizes for “how mean” the USA had been to “everybody”, to his continuous blaming of America’s Municipal Police Forces for the violent result of HIS Rhetoric of Racial Animus and Class Warfare, to his championing of “Abortion Rights”, to his belief that all of those out here in America’s Heartland are “bitterly clinging” to our Bibles and our guns, Obama’s demonstrated belief that America and Americans are NOT exceptional, have lead to a seven year “malaise” that makes the Carter Years seem positively jubilant.

5. Voiced values: Reagan gave voice to the values that had served America well –   thrift, patriotism, and hard work –  and often recounted the wisdom of the Founding Fathers.  He also championed the causes of the pro-life and family-values movements that sought to counter the societal upheavals of the 1960s and 1970s.

Obama’s First Presidential Campaign was based on his call for “Radical Change” in America. Now, 7 years later, we know what he meant.

The past two afternoons, Obama has gotten his mug in from of the television cameras, addressing the nation, using the actions of a crazed shooter at a community college in Oregon, to call for his favorite cause (besides the advancement of Islam) Gun Control. Never mind the fact that Black-on-Black Homicides are out-of-control in America, with Chicago experiencing 50 violent deaths last weekend, and Detroit and my hometown of Memphis, both overwhelmingly-majority black, being listed by the FBI as the two Most Violent Cities in America.

As we all know, even Obama, thugs are called “outlaws’ for a reason. New gun laws will not stop the killings. A good American man or woman with a gun can, though.

So, why is Obama so fervent in his quest to get America’s guns?

As Vladimir Lenis said,

One man with a gun can control 100 without one.

And, by the way, don’t you dare call it fascism. Remember, it’s not fascism, when Modern American Liberals propose it.

Barack Hussein Obama’s disdain for all of the core values of our country, such as American Exceptionalism, American Rugged Individualism, American Achievement, the American Family Unit, and the Faith of Our Fathers, has been shown through his words and actions, over and over again, through this long National Nightmare, through which we have been suffering, hoping fervently that the light at the end of the tunnel, is not an oncoming train…or a Nuclear Explosion.

The Good News is…

As a Constitutional Republic, those of us, the overwhelming majority of Americans who still believe in the concept of right and wrong, maintain the Rights which our Founding Fathers bestowed upon us, to speak our mind…regardless of what the current Presidential Administration, the Main Stream Media, and the rest of the mindless sycophants, who worship at the dual altars of popular culture and political correctness, want us to do.

We shall not be assimilated into the Hive-Mind.

That still, small voice which resides within each one of us, has led Americans to do great things, in service to their country and the concept of American Freedom, as personified by Lady Liberty, standing so majestically in New York Harbor.

God gave us this nation, ensconced in the concept of “Liberty and Justice for all”.

By His Grace, we will keep it.

As President Ronald Wilson Reagan, himself, said,

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Russia Attacks Syrian Rebels. Putin Pie-faces Obama. This is “Smart Power”?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

th (33)Yesterday, was a seminal moment in World History. And, a sad and embarrassing moment for the United States of America.

The President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, was told to “‘step aside”, getting sand kicked into his face, like the 98-lb. weakling in those old Charles Atlas Ads, which used to be on the back of comic books, back in the day, during a time when our enemies knew better than to mess with us.

Yahoo News reports that

Russia’s dramatic entry Wednesday into the Syrian war put the United States on the back foot once again and left Washington struggling to regain the military and diplomatic initiative.

As US Secretary of State John Kerry was in New York trying to coordinate with his Kremlin opposite number Sergei Lavrov, a Russian officer contacted the US embassy in Baghdad.

His message was simple: Russian jets are about to launch air strikes in Syria, please stay out of their way.

Kerry quickly protested to Lavrov that this was not in the spirit of Moscow’s promise to agree a “de-confliction” mechanism to ensure Russian flights do not interfere with US-led operations.

But the strikes were already underway, potentially altering the balance of power in Syria back in favor of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, and Washington was looking at a fait accompli.

Lavrov’s next move was to promise to bring a motion before the UN Security Council to coordinate “all forces standing up against Islamic State and other terrorist structures.”

This would be a plain victory for Assad, who invited the Russians to join his battle to cling on to power, and a defeat for the United States, which has demanded he step down.

The attacks came despite President Barack Obama sitting down with Russia’s Vladimir Putin on Monday at the United Nations for 90 minutes of what both camps called “business-like” talks.

One week ago, Kerry — despite being in frequent contact with Lavrov — told reporters that Russia’s deployment of war planes was consistent with their only defending their own base.

And just hours before the strikes began he appeared on CNN to say that Russia’s involvement could be an “opportunity” to persuade them to apply pressure on Assad to moderate his behavior.

After the strikes Kerry addressed the UN Security Council, but even here his message was mixed.

He said the United States would welcome the Russian action if it reflected a “genuine commitment” towards destroying the IS group and not the moderate opposition rebels threatening Assad.

Even as he spoke, a US defense official in Washington briefed journalists that: “We have not seen any strikes against ISIL, what we have seen is strikes against Syrian opposition.”

Defense Secretary Ash Carter was cautious, saying: “It does appear they were in areas where there were probably not ISIL forces.”

Rush Limbaugh made the following succinct observation on his radio program, yesterday…

They’re attacking targets where our allies are operating, not ISIL.  So if Russia’s recent actions, we’re prepared to welcome them.  Our people are clueless here, sadly, is what it seems like and don’t know how to react to this. So the best they can do is to go out and act like Russia is following through on what it said it was gonna do.  This whole statement from Kerry sounds like it’s predicated on his belief that they’re hitting ISIS.  First half of this statement, he thinks they’re hitting ISIS. 

He knows they’re not.  He’s trying to tell anybody listening, “Hey, they’re hitting ISIS. We agreed to it and we’re all-in for ’em, but if they veer from this then we’re gonna have a sit-down with ’em.”  That isn’t gonna happen. The only reason Putin’s doing any of this is because he’s confident as hell we’re not gonna do anything about it.  What is this deconflict anyway?  And to find a way to deconflict our operations and thereby multiply the military?  We are so, so screwed.

In 1974, at the very first Conservative Political Action Conference, the future President of the United States said the following:

Somehow America has bred a kindliness into our people unmatched anywhere, as has been pointed out in that best-selling record by a Canadian journalist. We are not a sick society. A sick society could not produce the men that set foot on the moon, or who are now circling the earth above us in the Skylab. A sick society bereft of morality and courage did not produce the men who went through those years of torture and captivity in Vietnam. Where did we find such men? They are typical of this land as the Founding Fathers were typical. We found them in our streets, in the offices, the shops and the working places of our country and on the farms.

We cannot escape our destiny, nor should we try to do so. The leadership of the free world was thrust upon us two centuries ago in that little hall of Philadelphia. In the days following World War II, when the economic strength and power of America was all that stood between the world and the return to the dark ages, Pope Pius XII said, “The American people have a great genius for splendid and unselfish actions. Into the hands of America God has placed the destinies of an afflicted mankind.

We are indeed, and we are today, the last best hope of man on earth.

And when Reagan became president, he did everything within his power to uphold these lofty words.

I suppose that is why I hold Barack Hussein Obama in such disdain. As a young man just starting my new life in the business world, I was able to watch the economy start to turn around under the greatest president in our lifetime. There was a confidence in our strength as an American people that I had never seen before.

You could see it in people’s faces as you walked past them on the street… or at the gas station, as we all watched the price of a gallon of gas finally go down after the pain at the pump that we experienced during the Carter Presidency.

People who had been out of work and suffering along with their families were beginning to be hired again. And, young Americans who had no confidence in the previous commander in chief, were once again going to military recruiters asking to sign up to serve our country.

Yes, indeed. Once again, it was “Morning in America”.

However, the popularity of our president was not just limited to the boundaries of our nation. Reagan was admired the world over. The things that he accomplished, along with his friends, Prime Minister of Britain Margaret Thatcher, Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev, and Pope John Paul II, have caused the decade of the 1980s to be recorded as a seminal moment in world history.

I remember watching President Reagan speak at the Berlin Wall. When he said, “Mr Gorbachev tear down this wall!”, I was never prouder to be an American and of an American president, than at that moment.

The Liberal Democrats lost their collective minds.

For you see, Liberal Democrats, just as they do now, hate it when Marxism gives way to Freedom.

Nothing bothers them more than when a strong American President is at the forefront of a conquering moment, when a strong foreign policy based on the reality that negotiating from a position of strength is always more effective than negotiating from a position of weakness.

Fast forward to the present, where an ineffective President Barack Hussein Obama is looking like a spineless fool to a world, who used to look to America as a bastion of strength and freedom, not weakness and political expediencies.

President Barack Hussein Obama has placed us in untenable position with his weak and vacillating “Smart Power” Foreign Policy.

Those who used to cringe in their desert tents, while calling us the Great Satan, now laugh in our faces as they walk across our southern borders with the rest of the illegal immigrants.

That is, if Obama simply does not invite them to the White House, give them a great big ol’ hug, and meet with them, as he has the Muslim Brotherhood.

…Or, give them Nuclear Capability, as he has the Radical Islamic Rogue Nation of Iran.

And now, the Russian Bear, Vladimir Putin, just swatted the President of the United States of America aside, as one would a fly at a picnic, daring Petulant President Pantywaist to do something about it.

I agree with Rush Limbaugh.

We are so, so screwed.

Has the trumpet sounded, yet?

Until He Comes (which could be anytime, now)

KJ