|
nChrist
|
 |
« on: November 17, 2015, 07:18:10 PM » |
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 11-17-2015
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
Daily Digest
Nov. 17, 2015
THE FOUNDATION
“To render the justice of the war on our part the more conspicuous, the reluctance to commence it was followed by the earliest and strongest manifestations of a disposition to arrest its progress. The sword was scarcely out of the scabbard before the enemy was apprised of the reasonable terms on which it would be resheathed.” —James Madison, 1813
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
Commander in Chief ‘Not Interested’ in ‘Winning’1
By Nate Jackson
Just when you thought you’ve heard it all… Hours before Islamic State jihadis killed 129 people in Paris Friday, Barack Obama boasted that his strategy had “contained2” the group formerly known as the JV team. Clearly, that self-praise was incredibly ill-timed. Undeterred, at a press conference Monday, he proceeded to utter what might become the defining statement of his atrocious presidency: “What I’m not interested in doing is posing or pursuing some notion of American leadership or America winning.”
Let that sink in for a minute. The president of the United States of America — the commander in chief of our Armed Forces — just said he isn’t interested in leading or winning. If Franklin Roosevelt had uttered those words, we’d all be speaking German or Japanese.
Obama meant his remarks as a rebuttal to a certain GOP presidential candidate who talks a lot about “winning.” Obama dismissed “whatever other slogans they come up with that has no relationship to what is actually going to work to protect the American people and to protect the people in the region who are getting killed and to protect our allies and people like France.” He concluded, “I’m too busy for that.”
Maybe if the commander in chief is too busy (golfing?) to worry about such inconsequential things as leadership and winning, he should retire now instead of making us suffer through another 14 months of his contemptible rein.
Instead, he slammed critics: “Some of them seem to think that if I were just more bellicose in expressing what we’re doing, that that would make a difference — because that seems to be the only thing that they’re doing, is talking as if they’re tough.”
Well, that sure beats telling the world you’re not interested in leadership or winning. Speaking softly only works if you carry a big stick — which is exactly what Republicans propose we do.
Unfortunately, Obama said a lot more. He explained his “contained” claim, saying, “[W]hen I said that we are containing [the Islamic State’s] spread in Iraq and Syria, in fact, they control less territory than they did last year. And the more we shrink that territory, the less they can pretend that they are somehow a functioning state and the more it becomes apparent that they are simply a network of killers who are brutalizing local populations.”
Small comfort to the “local population” in Paris some 2,500 miles from Islamic State territory.
Of the massive death toll in France, Obama said, “The terrible events in Paris were obviously a terrible and sickening setback.” A “setback”? Is he kidding?
But don’t worry; he’s got this. Doubling down is the answer. “So there will be an intensification of the strategy that we put forward,” he said, “but the strategy that we are putting forward is the strategy that ultimately is going to work. But as I said from the start, it’s going to take time.”
That would be because he’s not all that interested in leadership or winning. So we’re left to conclude that he means it’s going to take time until the next Republican president is elected.
Secretary of State John Kerry likewise bloviated, “We will defeat [the Islamic State] and all who share their despicable ideology, and we are on the course to do so. … That’s our responsibility, that’s our duty, and we will do our duty, side-by-side. And we will prevail.” Forgive us if that doesn’t inspire any more confidence than the pontification of his boss.
Anyone who would criticize Obama’s strategy, however, has no standing in his book. “If folks want to pop off and have opinions about what they think they would do, present a specific plan.”
His plan is, in part, to follow Vladimir Putin’s lead3 and just keep blaming Bush for his Middle East meltdown4.
Even some Democrats are expressing frustration with Obama’s (lack of a) plan. “I have never been more concerned,” said Dianne Feinstein, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. “ISIL is not contained. ISIL is expanding. … It is their intent to attack this country.”
In a maddening example of Obama’s moral equivalence, he lectured, “To the degree that anyone would equate the terrible actions that took place in Paris with the views of Islam, those kinds of stereotypes are counterproductive. They’re wrong. They will lead, I think, to greater recruitment into terrorist organizations over time if this becomes somehow defined as a Muslim problem as opposed to a terrorist problem.”
So we can’t link the Islamic State to Islam, but he thinks Christians today bear responsibility for the Crusades5. Figure that one out.
In closing, it’s notable that Obama opened his remarks with a nod to the upcoming climate conference in Paris — before he bothered mentioning terrorism. That’s quite revealing in terms of his priorities.
Obama’s Islamic Trojan Horse6
By Paul Albaugh
The terrorist attacks in France this weekend demonstrate the stark reality that radical Islamic terrorism has no borders. (That’s why we coined the term Jihadistan7 — a borderless nation of Islamofascists with global reach.) Every civilized Western nation has borders for the main purpose of keeping its citizens secure from outsiders who seek to do harm. Yet when a nation’s government decides to accept refugees from another nation, a vulnerability is created, which in the case of Paris was exploited by those seeking to terrorize the population.
So what’s Barack Obama’s real agenda with Syrian refugees?
Two months ago, Mark Alexander warned of the jihadi pipeline8 Obama was opening by welcoming 100,000 Syrian refugees. Indeed, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper called Obama’s crisis “a disaster of biblical proportions” and warned that terrorists would infiltrate the ranks of refugees. Many of the Muslims flooding into Europe were not “refugees” at all but rather migrants — only 15% were women and children. At least one of the French attackers was a “Syrian refugee.”
Yet despite Clapper’s warning, Obama decided to open the pipeline into the U.S. — not the Keystone pipeline9, but the one for jihad.
Last month, we warned10 that Syrian refugees would be coming soon to a city near you. It’s already happening. In fact, 32 states have accepted a total of 1,809 Syrian refugees since Jan. 1, with the highest numbers in California, Texas, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida.
Fortunately, the Paris attacks awoke a sense of caution. More than two dozen governors11 have now closed their doors. Though most are Republicans, even the Democrat governor of New Hampshire has said enough is enough.
Meanwhile, Sen. Rand Paul, a GOP presidential candidate, introduced legislation calling for an “immediate moratorium” on all Syrian immigration.
Though Obama yawns at jihadi attacks, what really makes him angry is Republicans. During his press conference12 Monday in Turkey, Obama slammed opponents of his agenda to flood our nation with Syrian refugees. “That’s shameful,” he lectured. “That’s not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have a religious test for compassion.”
The last was a reference to proposals to limit refugees to Christians — those who are worst persecuted in the Middle East.
If Obama’s moral preening wasn’t outrageous enough, he also told other world leaders that “slamming the door” shut to Syrian refugees “would be a betrayal of our values.” He went on, “Our nations can welcome refugees who are desperately seeking safety and ensure our own safety. We can and must do both.”
It’s hard to fathom the nonsense that comes out of Obama’s mouth. What’s actually shameful is that this commander in chief will not acknowledge the threat posed by radical Islamic extremists. (In fact, he mentioned climate change Monday before he got around to terrorism.) It is un-American to think that the safety of these refugees is more important than the safety of the citizens in our country whom he and countless others swore an oath to protect. |
