Tag: Terrorists

“Bergdahl” The Sequel: Biden Trades Terrorist For WNBA Player

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

“Some Pentagon officials expressed concern over the release of convicted Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout. The Thursday prisoner swap for Brittney Griner left officials worried Bout may return to illegally trafficking weapons, fueling existing conflicts abroad.

Bout, nicknamed the “Merchant of Death,” was serving a 25-year prison sentence in the U.S. for conspiring to kill Americans, delivery of anti-aircraft missiles and aiding a terrorist organization.

“I think there is a concern that [he] would return to doing the same kind of work that he’s done in the past,” said one senior Defense Department official, who spoke anonymously.

National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said that “our national security interest is not going to change” with Bout back in Russia.

“We’re going to make sure that we can defend this country against any and all threats,” Kirby said to CNN on Thursday. “And so, with Mr. Bout being back on the street, we’re going to stay focused on making sure we can defend this country.”

Sen. Bob Menendez, the Democratic chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the trade was far from equal.

“We cannot ignore that releasing Bout back into the world is a deeply disturbing decision,” he said in a statement Thursday. “We must stop inviting dictatorial and rogue regimes to use Americans overseas as bargaining chips, and we must try to do better at encouraging American citizens against traveling to places like Russia where they are primary targets for this type of unlawful detention.” (Courtesy Newsmax.com)

We should have expected a terrorist to be traded by Biden for an America-hating hostage.

For more than 200 years, the United States had a policy of not trading prisoners for American hostages. That policy was irreparably damaged, if not destroyed, in 2014 and, by doing so, Former President Barack Hussein Obama placed a target on the back of every single American – civilian and military alike.

He traded Deserter Private Bowe Bergdahl for 5 Muslim Terrorists.

Six brave American Soldiers lost their lives as a result of Bergdahl’s desertion, due to the search for him and due to mission plans having to be changed . Their names were

  • Staff Sgt. Clayton
  • Bowen Morris Walker
  • Staff Sgt. Kurt Curtiss
  • 2nd Lt. Darryn Andrews
  • Matthew Michael Martinek
  • Staff Sgt. Michael Murphrey

These men served with distinction.

Bergdahl did not.

Brittney Griner did not desert from our Armed Forces.

She was just stupid enough to be vaping THC in a country with strict anti-drug laws.

So now, after Biden’s disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, in which 13 American soldiers lost their lives because of poor Foreign Policy Decisions by Biden and his Administration, Biden once again sacrifices America’s Safety as a Sovereign Nation to appease the Far Left…

…and leaves Americans behind in the hand of our enemy.

Biden needs to be impeached.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Radical Islam in America…A Growing Problem

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

AFBranchFrance11315As we watched in horror last week, as events unfolded in Paris, France, our eyes confirmed the fact that the adherents of Radical Islam are merciless killers, who can strike without warning.

Could what happened in Paris happen here?

In an article posted yesterday on nationalreview.com, Ian Tuttle wrote

A major Islamist terror attack in France was only a matter of time. For several decades, the country has invited immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa en masse – first to bolster the labor force in the rebuilding years that followed World War II, then out of multicultural impulses that prevailed over prudential considerations. That radical Islam was transplanted to France, grew in strength and extent, and bore this week’s hideous fruit was not difficult to predict. The same is not unlikely in Sweden, Belgium, Germany, and elsewhere.

Demographics may not be the whole of destiny, but they are certainly a good part, and across the Atlantic, the United States seems increasingly to be turning toward Western Europe’s most undesirable demographic trends.
 
In 1992, 41 percent of new permanent residents in the United States — green-card holders — hailed from the Asia-Pacific region, the Middle East and North Africa, or sub-Saharan Africa, according to the Pew Research Center. A decade later, the percentage was 53 percent. Over that same period, predictably, the number of Muslim immigrants coming to the United States annually has doubled, from 50,000 to approximately 100,000 each year. In 1992, only 5 percent of Muslim immigrants came from sub-Saharan Africa; 20 years later, it was 16 percent. Of the 2.75 million Muslims in the United States in 2011, 1.7 million were legal permanent residents. 

There is no official estimate of Muslims in the U.S.; religious affiliation is not tracked by the Census Bureau. However, Pew’s estimate of 2.75 million seems to be on the lower end. The Council on American-Islamic Relations says there are approximately 7 million Muslims in the country.

Whatever the exact level, it can hardly be considered surprising that as the Muslim population in the country has expanded, so has the incidence of radicalism.

The Boston Marathon bombers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, born in the Soviet Union and Kyrgyzstan, respectively, came to the United States as refugees in 2002. They were radicalized inside the country, Tamerlan reportedly at the Islamic Society of Boston mosque in Cambridge, Mass. That mosque has reported links to several other convicted, or suspected, terrorists. Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi, born in Eritrea and raised in Yemen, was reportedly an attendee before being sentenced, in 2004, to 23 years in prison for (among other things) his role in a Libyan plot to assassinate then–Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah. Also reported to worship there was Aafia Siddiqui, “Lady al-Qaeda,” born in Pakistan, later a graduate of MIT and Brandeis University, sentenced to 86 years in prison in 2010 for attempting to kill a U.S. Army captain in Afghanistan. But that was just what they prosecuted: She had plans to conduct a chemical attack in New York City. (The Islamic Society of Boston denies these and several other troubling associations.)

And one can look elsewhere. In 2003, the “Lackawanna Six,” six naturalized citizens from Yemen, were convicted of providing material support to al-Qaeda. Lackawanna, N.Y., (as well as nearby Buffalo) is home to a large Yemeni population. In May, authorities arrested Mufid Elfgeeh, a Yemeni-born man who was allegedly attempting to recruit for the Islamic State and use revenues from his grocery store to fund the organization. He was living in Rochester, N.Y., just an hour east.

But the potential threats of a permissive immigration policy are multigenerational. France has spent decades ushering in its recent fate.

Consider: Said and Chérif Kouachi — the brothers responsible, along with a third accomplice, for the Charlie Hebdo murders — were native Frenchmen whose parents hailed from Algeria. So was Farid Benyettou, the man who drew Chérif Kouachi to radical Islam. So was Mohammed Merah, who shot seven people dead, including three children at Jewish day school, in Toulouse and Montauban in March 2012.

Radicalism seems to ferment as much, if not more so, among first-generation Westerners as among their immigrant parents. Which means that massive Muslim immigration may have few visible repercussions today — but a great many tomorrow.

That reality is becoming manifest in the United States. 

First off…while I have met some very nice American Muslims, I have also been inside a mosque where I was looked at as if they wanted to take a scimitar to my neck.

If Moderate Muslims are not behind their radical brethren’s eternal jihad against us infidels, they need to get their mugs in front of the cable news networks’ TV cameras and say so…because all I see representing them when I turn on the news, are the abrasive members of CAIR, blaming America for all the world’s troubles.

Which is ironic, because the President of the United States of America is demonstrably Islam’s biggest supporter in this country, as so aptly proven by his refusal to participate in last weekend’s March Against Radical Islam, led by 50 World Leaders, in Paris France.

From the article, “Obama: Man of the World”, written by Nicholas Kristof, published in The New York Times on March 6, 2007…

“I was a little Jakarta street kid,” he said in a wide-ranging interview in his office (excerpts are on my blog, www.nytimes.com/ontheground). He once got in trouble for making faces during Koran study classes in his elementary school, but a president is less likely to stereotype Muslims as fanatics — and more likely to be aware of their nationalism — if he once studied the Koran with them.

Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”

Moreover, Mr. Obama’s own grandfather in Kenya was a Muslim. Mr. Obama never met his grandfather and says he isn’t sure if his grandfather’s two wives were simultaneous or consecutive, or even if he was Sunni or Shiite. (O.K., maybe Mr. Obama should just give up on Alabama.)

For several years now, Obama has encouraged Muslim Immigration to America.

As a child, Barack Hussein Obama attended a private Madrassa, err, school in Indonesia while living there with his Mom and Step-father.  As a grown man, Barack Hussein Obama attended Trinity Church in Chicago, led by Former Black Muslim, Pastor Jeremiah Wright, for over 20 years.  It is a Black Liberation Theology Church.  They view Christ as a revolutionary liberator like Che.  They do not believe in the Resurrection.  They are often referred to as being Muslim-lite. For more information about Black Liberation Theology, please visit luoamerican.com.

Through his background, as carefully hidden as it is, and his words and actions since becoming Leader of the (for now) Free World, Obama has revealed himself.  Some questions still remain:  How much did the Democratic Party know about this man and when did they know it?  The same goes for the sycophantic Main Stream Media.  They were all complicit in bringing this miserable excuse for a President of the United States to power.

Will America survive the Obama Presidency and the threat of Radical Islam?  Yes, we will.  The Mid-Terms were a Political Tsunami of epic proportions and Obama’s lame duck status will not improve.  He is too much of an ideologue, and it is too late in his Presidency,  to turn Moderate like Bill Clinton did.  He is marooned on an island of his own design.  The key for Americans is to continue to be vocal in our opposition to his schemes for radically changing our blessed land and to remain alert to the danger around us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Why are Liberals Siding With Hamas?

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, PoliticsLeave a comment

IsraelHamas2

Every since my collegiate days, from 1976-1980, when I was a Radio News Director, I have watched with stunned incredulity, as the  American Liberal Political Ideology and its adherents, have vocally castigated the country of Israel for defending themselves against the violent factions of nomadic tribes , who wish for nothing else than their annihilation of both the country of Israel and their citizenry.

The irony of their naivete, is the fact that, in the 1960’s, American Liberals were among some of Israel’s strongest supporters. However, as of this writing, they are blatantly backing (to the point of holding mass demonstrations) the murderous, cowardly Muslim Terrorists, known as Hamas.

Opposing God’s Chosen People and supporting the historically-nomadic people that call themselves “Palestinians” fits with Modern Liberals’ Political Ideology, which views modern political struggles as “Class Warfare”, being waged between race and ethnic groups. Liberals believe that the predominantly white West is  somehow subjugating the non-white rest of the world. This viewpoint is an extension of the class-based, rich versus poor, categories, which they intentionally classify people in, following the lead of their fallen messiah, President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm)

On July17, 2014, an article titled, “Why Do Liberals Oppose Israel?” was posted on ChristianPost.com, featuring Joshua Muravchik, a fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, author of “Making David Into Goliath: How the World Turned Against Israel, 2014. In this book, the author explores the reasons behind this change.

Here are some excerpts from an email interview between The Christian Post (CP) and Joshua Muravchik.

CP: Why, today, are conservatives generally pro-Israel and liberals generally pro-Palestinian?

Muravchik: Leftists/liberals/progressives believe that the great moral drama of our era is “the rest against the West” or the “people of color” against the “white man.” This has replaced poor-against-rich or worker-against-capitalist as the core idea of progressive thought. Seen through that lens, Israel (the “Western,” “white” guys) is automatically wrong and the Palestinians (the “anti-colonialist” “people of color”) are automatically right. On the other side, conservatives value Israel as a free country, a democracy, and an ally of the United States.

…CP: What would we see from the Democratic Party today if there were no strong pro-Israel forces within its coalition?

Muravchik: Support for Israel by Democratic politicians has less to do with any “forces” in the “coalition” than with the simple fact that U.S. public opinion is firmly pro-Israel. The Left, however, is now anti-Israel and it does its best to push the party in that direction. We saw its influence at the 2012 Democratic convention when the draft platform was much less pro-Israel than in the past, and the Obama team had to pull out all the stops — and go through three votes — to change the wording because they feared it would cost votes.

…CP: In the United States, the strongest supporters of Israel have been Jews and Evangelicals. Recently though, there have been some vocal anti-Israel or pro-Palestinian sentiments from liberal Evangelicals. Has anything surprised you about this phenomenon?

Muravchik: It is not surprising for Evangelicals to be liberals. This faith does not require any particular political persuasion. But a genuine liberal must be pro-Israel. Israel — and not its enemies — is democratic, observes freedom of speech and worship, tolerates minorities, sanctifies the rights of women, and constantly reaches out to the other side with humanitarian gestures, such as the six Gazan babies who were transported to Israel this week, amidst the rocket fire, for free operations to repair congenital heart defects. To be anti-Israel is not to be liberal; rather it is to embrace the worldview of the radical Left which is totalitarian, anti-freedom, and anti-faith. It surprised me greatly to see some Evangelicals join that camp.

CP: What do you think about the media coverage of the current conflict taking place between Israel and Hamas? Some conservatives have complained that the coverage is unfairly biased against Israel.

Muravchik: The coverage is biased, especially in The New York Times, which once was fair and balanced but today filters the whole world through a leftish lens. And of course the Times influences others. In addition to simple bias, another factor is at work. Israel is an open society, with a press that watchdogs the government and washes the country’s dirty linen in public. Many stories in the U.S. press that show some of the bad side of Israel originate in the Israeli press. There is nothing remotely comparable on the Arab side. There is no press freedom, and if someone in Gaza wants to reveal Hamas’s nasty deeds, it’s as good as his life.

Dr. Muravchik’s insights and this week’s developments in the Israel Gaza Incursion, beg the question:

If the majority of Americans still support Israel, why is America’s President feigning support for Israel’s right to defend herself and then launching an economic boycott against them?

United States Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) wants to know the answer to that question, also…

Sen. Ted Cruz vowed Thursday to continue blocking confirmation of a series of ambassadorial and other diplomatic nominees despite the Federal Aviation Administration lifting a ban on U.S. airline flights to Israel. The State Department criticized the Republican lawmaker.

Cruz said he wouldn’t release the holds until the Obama administration answers his questions about the FAA’s prohibition, which went into effect Tuesday after a rocket landed about a mile from the Tel Aviv airport. The FAA ended the ban late Wednesday, after Cruz accused Obama of imposing an economic boycott of Israel while it is fighting the militant group Hamas in Gaza.

“There are still serious questions as to the decision-making that went in to the ban on flights and whether it was driven by political consideration at the White House or by objective expert opinion at the agency,” the Texas senator said Thursday.

Cruz is demanding to know why Israel was singled out, while commercial flights can still pass over Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Ukraine — where a Malaysia Airlines jet was downed, killing all 298 people on board. The FAA prohibited flights over Ukraine’s Crimea in April and has ruled out overflights of the east of the country since last week’s crash.

Cruz also wants to see any communication between the FAA, White House and State Department to see if the ban on landings in Tel Aviv was designed to punish Israel or advance cease-fire efforts. Almost 800 Palestinians have been killed in fighting over the last 16 days, mostly civilians, according to Gaza health officials. Israel has lost more than 30 soldiers and at least two civilians.

The false equivalencies being thrown about, all over the cable news channels and the internet by Liberal Pundits, paid and unpaid, trying to justify the murderous cowardly actions of Hamas, boggle the mind of any rational, well-informed American.

While israel has been one of our nations staunchest allies since their birth as a nation in 1948, Hamas, who took over for the Palestinian Liberation Organization, hates our ever-lovin’ guts, and would behead every single American, man or woman, adult or child, without any regret whatsoever. Because to them, we are infidels, and “The Great Satan”, against which they are waging a “Holy Jihad”.

And, for Liberals, whether they be anonymous Internet Chat Board/Facebook Page Posters or the President of the United States of America to believe anything different is stupidly, dangerously naive.

…and proves that denial is not just a river in Egypt.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Drones…Death By Remote Control: Obama: “I’m Really Good at Killing People.”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics5 Comments

obamakingOn January 20, 2009. newly elected United States President Barack Hussein Obama, said the following,

As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake. And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort – even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan. With old friends and former foes,

On January 21, 2013, newly re-elected United States President Barack Hussein Obama, said the following,

We, the people, still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war. Our brave men and women in uniform, tempered by the flames of battle, are unmatched in skill and courage. Our citizens, seared by the memory of those we have lost, know too well the price that is paid for liberty. The knowledge of their sacrifice will keep us forever vigilant against those who would do us harm. But we are also heirs to those who won the peace and not just the war; who turned sworn enemies into the surest of friends — and we must carry those lessons into this time as well.

We will defend our people and uphold our values through strength of arms and rule of law. We will show the courage to try and resolve our differences with other nations peacefully –- not because we are naïve about the dangers we face, but because engagement can more durably lift suspicion and fear.

On May 29, 2012, The New York Times, in an article about Obama’s Drone Strike Counterterrorism Campaign, titled “Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’s Principles and Will”, opined that

Nothing else in Mr. Obama’s first term has baffled liberal supporters and confounded conservative critics alike as his aggressive counterterrorism record. His actions have often remained inscrutable, obscured by awkward secrecy rules, polarized political commentary and the president’s own deep reserve.

In interviews with The New York Times, three dozen of his current and former advisers described Mr. Obama’s evolution since taking on the role, without precedent in presidential history, of personally overseeing the shadow war with Al Qaeda.

They describe a paradoxical leader who shunned the legislative deal-making required to close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, but approves lethal action without hand-wringing. While he was adamant about narrowing the fight and improving relations with the Muslim world, he has followed the metastasizing enemy into new and dangerous lands. When he applies his lawyering skills to counterterrorism, it is usually to enable, not constrain, his ferocious campaign against Al Qaeda — even when it comes to killing an American cleric in Yemen, a decision that Mr. Obama told colleagues was “an easy one.”

His first term has seen private warnings from top officials about a “Whac-A-Mole” approach to counterterrorism; the invention of a new category of aerial attack following complaints of careless targeting; and presidential acquiescence in a formula for counting civilian deaths that some officials think is skewed to produce low numbers.

Everyone’s concern about Obama’s used of Drone Strikes, has been well-founded.

The local CBS Affiliate, in Washington, DC, reported yesterday, that,

Mark Halperin and John Heilemann’s book “Double Down: Game Change 2012” notes President Obama commenting on drone strikes, reportedly telling his aides that he’s “really good at killing people.”

The quote from the book was first reported in Peter Hamby’s review in the Washington Post.

The White House had not officially commented on the alleged remarks, but senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer dismissed a series of reports from the book, including one that showed Obama campaign officials deciding whether to replace Vice President Joe Biden with Hillary Clinton.

“The president is always frustrated about leaks,” Pfeiffer said on ABC’s “This Week.” “I haven’t talked to him about this book. I haven’t read it. He hasn’t read it. But he hates leaks.”

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism estimates that a total of 2,528-3,648 people have been killed by CIA drone strikes in Pakistan since 2004, and between 416-948 of them being civilians. The group labels 326 of such events as “Obama strikes.”

President Obama has taken considerable criticism for the expansion of the CIA targeted killing program – especially from the man who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.”

FoxNews.com reported on May 14th, 2012,

Unmanned drones could soon be buzzing in the skies above many U.S. cities, as the federal government green-lights the technology for local law enforcement amid widespread privacy concerns.

The Federal Aviation Administration on Monday began to explain the rules of the sky for these newly licensed drones at potentially dozens of sites across the country. The agency, on its website, said that government “entities” will have to obtain a special certificate in order to fly the aircraft, adding that the FAA is “streamlining the process for public agencies to safely fly (drones) in the nation’s airspace.”

In doing so, the government is taking a tool that has become synonymous with U.S. counterterror warfare in countries like Pakistan and Yemen — and putting it in the hands of U.S. law enforcement.

Unlike some of the drones used overseas, these will not be equipped with missiles. They are to be used purely for surveillance. But that alone has raised serious privacy concerns on Capitol Hill and beyond.

How long until these proposed Domestic Drones are also armed?

By lining up all of these stories, I hoped to paint a very dangerous picture…of a United States President, who publicly proclaimed that he rejested “as false the choice between our safety and our ideals”, while in the privacy of the Oval Office, brags about his ability to kill people by remote control, in a scenario like playing a video game, except the target for assassination does not get any “extra lives”.

In 1985, a movie titled “Real Genius” came out. Starring Val Kilmer, the movie concerned a group of child prodigies at a University, who were all given assignments by a Professor, who unbeknownst to them, was working for the Federal Government. These assignments were all parts of a project: a Space Shuttle, equipped with a Conjugate Tracking System, designed to fire a laser from Earth’s orbit, which would vaporize its target, be it a foreign leader, or a domestic troublemaker.

The students, once they figured out what was going on, sabotaged the testing of the firing system, stopping the weapon, before it had a chance to be used.

Back then, everybody thought that movie was pretty far-fetched.

Now, 28 years later, “Death By Remote Control” is a reality.

And, we have a president who says that he’s “really good at it”.

Somehow, I don’t think that is an attribute that his favorite President, Abraham Lincoln, would be proud of.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Calls the President of Iran, Refuses to Negotiate With Republicans

On By kingsjesterIn Politics6 Comments

michelleobama2Islam 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 upon the persuasion of the mind and the heart and the soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it’s being challenged in many different ways. – President Barack Hussein Obama, “A New Beginning”, Speech to the Muslim World at the University of Cairo, Egypt

Since the ouster of the Shah, Iran has been a thorn in the side of the Free World, and, especially, the United States of America.

As a Radio News Director in College, I covered the Iranian Revolution and the resulting Hostage Crisis from start to finish.

Are you old enough to remember the Hostage Crisis? If not, here is a summary, courtesy of u-s-history.com:

 On November 4, 1979, an angry mob of some 300 to 500 “students” who called themselves “Imam’s Disciples,” laid siege to the American Embassy in Teheran, Iran, to capture and hold hostage 66 U.S. citizens and diplomats. Although women and African-Americans were released a short time later, 51 hostages remained imprisoned for 444 days with another individual released because of illness midway through the ordeal.

…Upon the death of the shah in July [1980] (which neutralized one demand) and the Iraqi invasion of Iran in September (necessitating weapons acquisition), Iran became more amenable to reopening negotiations for the hostages’ release.

In the late stages of the presidential race with Ronald Reagan, Carter, given those new parameters, might have been able to bargain with the Iranians, which might have clinched the election for him. The 11th-hour heroics were dubbed an “October Surprise”* by the Reagan camp — something they did not want to see happen.

Allegations surfaced that William Casey, director of the Reagan campaign, and some CIA operatives, secretly met with Iranian officials in Europe to arrange for the hostages’ release, but not until after the election. If true, some observers aver, dealing with a hostile foreign government to achieve a domestic administration’s defeat would have been grounds for charges of treason.

Reagan won the election, partly because of the failure of the Carter administration to bring the hostages home. Within minutes of Reagan’s inauguration, the hostages were released.

And now, with America at her most vulnerable, with our economy in horrible shape and about to get worse, thanks to the implementation of a National-run Healthcare System which nobody wants, and with an ineffectual Foreign Policy,which is as big a global joke as the President behind it, that self-same wuss of a United States President is now looking to negotiate with the before-mentioned Islamic Terrorist State.

President Obama proudly announced yesterday that he had talked on the phone with the new “Moderate” Iranian President Rouhani.

“Just now I spoke on the phone with President Rouhani of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” he said. “The two of us discussed our ongoing efforts to reach an agreement over Iran’s nuclear program.”

This is the first time leaders from America and Iran have spoken since 1979.

“I reiterated to President Rouhani what I said in New York. While there will surely be important obstacles to moving forward and success is by no means guaranteed, I believe we can reach a comprehensive solution.

“I’ve directed Secretary Kerry to continue pursuing this diplomatic effort with the Iranian government. We had constructive discussions yesterday in New York with our partners, the European Union, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, and China, together with the Iranian foreign minister, and going forward, President Rouhani and I have directed our teams to continue working expeditiously in corporation with the P-5 plus one to pursue an agreement. And throughout this process we will stay in close touch with our friends and allies in the region, including Israel.

“Now we are mindful of all the challenges ahead. The very fact that this was the first communication between an American and Iranian president since 1979 underscores the deep mistrust between our countries.”

Obama said that “Iran’s supreme leader has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons, President Rouhani has indicated that Iran will never develop nuclear weapons.”

This, from the same guy who will go down as the most partisan President in United States History, whose Administration has become notorious for calling Republicans everything but “children of God”.

And, who now, refuses to negotiate with Republicans about the Debt ceiling, Obamacare, or anything else.

So, what is the explanation for this? Naiveté? Stupidity? Ego? Yes, indeedy. However, there is something deeper behind this bonehead move by Obama. In fact, it’s soul-deep.

It goes back to a young Barack Hussein Obama, who, in one of his two books, written by Bomber Bill Ayers, “Dreams of my Father”, said,

Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific reassurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.

Right now, in our nation, the political winds have shifted in an ugly direction, thanks to Obama’s lack of leadership. Political Partisanship has intensified to such an extent, that political pundits on both sides of the aisle, have labeled the situation a “Civil War”

Instead of seriously attempting to unite the country he is supposed to be serving and protecting, Obama is acting like a petulant child, insisting that everybody play by his rules, or else, he will take his ball and go home.

Now, on top of that, he reaches out to a country who sponsors Islamic Terrorism, and with whom we have not had diplomatic relations since their revolution in 1979.

What is he going to do? Help them with their “Nuclear Enhancement Program”, so they can launch one at us quicker?

He negotiates with those who want to kill us, and gives ultimatums to his own countrymen.

He truly is our first Anti-American President.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s Report of Al-Qaeda’s Death Was Greatly Exaggerated

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

muslimredbeardYou know, for a “dead” group, al-Qaeda seems pretty lively to me.

According to the Wall Street Journal…

The State Department Sunday extended some embassy closures for the rest of the workweek, citing a need to “exercise caution” and take “appropriate steps” to protect American diplomats, local employees and visitors. Officials said the move wasn’t an indication that the U.S. had any new intelligence about the suspected plot or plots.

The high level of concern from U.S. officials underscores what many in the intelligence world have long warned. While al Qaeda’s central leadership may be weakened, the rest of the group has morphed into smaller entities and dispersed, which has made the threat harder to predict and track. This process was accelerated by the turmoil of the Arab Spring.

Officials briefed on the latest intelligence say the new warnings show that al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or AQAP, is as determined as ever to attack the West, but it is unclear whether the group is as capable of following through as it was before the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. military’s Joint Special Operations Command started targeting its leaders in Yemen in parallel campaigns.

The deaths of Osama bin Laden and other top al Qaeda officials in Pakistan has fueled U.S. confidence that al Qaeda’s core leadership can’t mount attacks on the U.S. and that U.S. drone strikes there could be phased out over time. But al Qaeda affiliates, the most active and lethal of which is AQAP, have shown themselves to be increasingly capable and autonomous organizations, making it harder for the U.S. to track and target their leaders.

A major concern for the U.S. is AQAP’s chief bomb-maker—a Saudi citizen named Ibrahim al-Asiri—who is thought to still be at large and has been active both experimenting with new bomb designs and training other bomb-makers, according to American officials and analysts.

Beyond Yemen, al Qaeda in Iraq has reconstituted itself. Its branch in Syria is drawing in hundreds of foreign recruits each month. And in Mali, al Qaeda-linked fighters fled French warplanes and commandos and have set up a rudimentary base in the Libyan Desert outside Paris’s reach.

“The problem we face today is there are probably more al Qaeda cells and affiliates across the Arab world in 2013 than there have ever been before because of the chaos that’s followed the Arab Spring,” said Bruce Riedel, a Central Intelligence Agency veteran and now director of the Brookings Intelligence Project

About al-Qaeda...

The group was founded in approximately 1988 by Osama bin Laden, Abdullah Azzam, and Muhammad Atef — the latter a native Egyptian and a onetime member of the terrorist group Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Al Qaeda’s overriding objective is to establish a worldwide caliphate governing all the earth via the dictates of Islamic Law. Crucial to the achievement of that goal is the destruction of America by any means necessary. As one Al Qaeda Training Manual makes explicitly clear, violence is the preferred method of dealing with the enemy:

“Islamic governments have never and will never be established through peaceful solutions and cooperative councils. They are established as they [always] have been by pen and gun, by word and bullet, by tongue and teeth.”

The manual further exhorts jihadists to “pledge … to make their [the infidels’] women widows and their children orphans … to slaughter them like lambs and let the [rivers] flow with their blood.”

Al-Qaeda has been in Yemen for a number of years.

Al Qaeda’s presence in Yemen is due to the with the country’s domestic conflicts and the convoluted agendas of former President Ali Abdullah Saleh. In the 1994 civil war, in which Saleh’s government defeated the Southern Rebels, Saleh and his loyal generals organized the mujahideen, some of whom would split off and form Al-Qaeda in Yemen, into fighting units against southerners who the jihadis already thought were godless socialists.

In the process of destroying an uprising of Zaydi Shiites in Yemen’s north known as the Houthi rebellion, Saleh backed the bujilding of Salafi schools linked with Al-Qaeda in Houthi territory, thus turning his political threat into a sectarian battle. Even during the war in Afghanistan against the Soviets, Yemeni leaders urged the country’s young men to travel to Afghanistan to fight.

Despite cooperating with them at the beginning, jihadis would find Saleh an undependable ally. Salah would readily cozy up to them when it suited his political goals, then he would just as readily turn on Al-Qaeda as soon as the benefits from doing so were presented to him, usually in the form of American aid money. His turncoat nature, in the years following the Cole bombing, led to the Yemeni Government arresting the group’s members, using deadly force against them, and allowing the U.S. intelligence services to operate in the country.

Saleh was an unfaithful friend to the United States in the war on terrorism, as well. His friendship ran hot and cold, even at one point refusing the FBI access to prisoners complicit in the USS Cole bombing.

Then, over the past decade, the U.S. supported a totally inept and totally corrupt Yemeni security apparatus When Yemeni security forces would somehow actually manage a victory in its fight against Al-Qaeda, it would lose to “escapes” twice as many Terrorists as it would capture.

Meanwhile, our American President, instead of providing troops to protect our American Embassies, has simply closed them, showing weakness to the barbarians, which is never a good idea.

I recognize the need to protect Americans, so more are not butchered, as Americans were on that fateful night in Benghazi. However. If this Administration does not show some backbone soon, America will continue to be in the same situation that England was under Neville Chamberlain.

We will be negotiating from a position of weakness.  

This is Smart Power?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Come, Mr. Taliban…

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

When is a conspiracy theory, not a conspiracy theory?  When evidence is found to prove it as a fact.

Guardian.co.uk has the story:

Documents found in the house where Osama bin Laden was killed a year ago show a close working relationship between top al-Qaida leaders and Mullah Omar, the overall commander of the Taliban, including frequent discussions of joint operations against Nato forces in Afghanistan, the Afghan government and targets in Pakistan.

The communications show a three-way conversation between Bin Laden, his then deputy Ayman Zawahiri and Omar, who is believed to have been in Pakistan since fleeing Afghanistan after the collapse of his regime in 2001.

They indicate a “very considerable degree of ideological convergence”, a Washington-based source familiar with the documents told the Guardian.

The news will undermine hopes of a negotiated peace in Afghanistan, where the key debate among analysts and policymakers is whether the Taliban – seen by many as following an Afghan nationalist agenda – might once again offer a safe haven to al-Qaida or like-minded militants, or whether they can be persuaded to renounce terrorism.

One possibility, experts say, is that although Omar built a strong relationship with Bin Laden and Zawahiri, other senior Taliban commanders see close alliance or co-operation with al-Qaida as deeply problematic.

Western intelligence officials estimate that there are less than 100 al-Qaida-linked fighters in Afghanistan, and last year the United Nations split its sanctions list to separate the Taliban and al-Qaida.

Both David Cameron and US secretary of state Hillary Clinton have said that some kind of political settlement involving the Taliban is key to the stability of Afghanistan once most western troops have withdrawn by 2014.

Some communications in the documents date back several years but others are said to be from only weeks before the raid on 2 May last year in which Bin Laden died.

The Obama Administration has been reaching out to negotiate with the Taliban within the last year, in the misguided notion that you can negotiate with barbarians who want your whole nation to be wiped off the face of the earth.

Last week, thehill.com explained why this was a very stupid strategy:

The Taliban’s recent multi-pronged attacks, coming just a month after suspending talks with the U.S. is a stark reminder that peace negotiations remain a long shot at best, escalating an increasingly contentious debate over whether the insurgent group has any serious intentions of reaching a political settlement. Given the unpredictable nature of the enemy, adopting either policy — cease to participate, or stubbornly pursue peace talks — is irresponsible and extremely risky. Before making any decision, we must first understand why the Taliban might not be vested in reaching a compromise at this point in time. Only then the Afghan government could craft strategies that would strengthen its leverage in any serious peace talks and maintain security in case the enemy abandons negotiations all together.

For starters, the Taliban, who have waged a war of attrition against the Afghan government and its allies for more than ten years now, have seemed more interested in waiting out the international forces that are scheduled to leave the country by the end of 2014. Why? There are three plausible reasons.

First, President Obama’s premature declaration of a withdrawal date and the expected “race to the exits” by other countries have only reassured the Taliban that their plan to exhaust America’s commitment is working — and that sooner rather than later the early 90s scenario would repeat itself. The recent transfer to Afghan security forces of authority over detainees and the conduct of night raids, and Australia’s panicky announcement to pull out its troops nearly a year earlier than planned (although they took a “U-turn to fine-tune the coalition’s plan”) are affirmations of that realization.

Secondly, Taliban’s belief that their worst days are soon to end and that the fight will only get easier have boosted its morale. It should not come as a surprise from an insurgent group that lost thousands of fighters—yet remained steadfast against mighty forces in the decade-long war—that they would give themselves an extra five-year window to test out its ability to take over Kabul after foreign troops withdraw. In fact, it would be a quite rational step forward, especially when the Taliban’s leaders expect the tide to turn in their favor post-2014.

Third, this ideology-driven terrorist group believes that God and time are on its side, resulting in an unwavering commitment to stay the course to oust what they consider the soon-to-be-vulnerable puppet Afghan government militarily.

In the face of a foe like the Taliban, it is clear that hinging all hopes for a sovereign and peaceful Afghanistan on a political settlement would be foolhardy. Yet it does not mean that Afghans should refuse to welcome talks. Either way is an extreme position that will only limit the government’s options. Instead, a middle ground strategy is needed to limit the enemy’s options and possibly its ambitions before any serious negotiations are possible and fruitful.

So, now it turns out that Obama and his minions have been attempting to negotiate with people who were close confidants with those instrumental in the largest Terrorist attack ever on U.S. soil on September 11, 2001.

Smart Power?  Nope.  More like Chamberlain-esque.