Obama switched sides

Mideast expert: Obama switched sides in war on terror

‘America has moved toward its Muslim enemies’
by Garth Kant | WND
August 28, 2014

WASHINGTON – It’s an explosive charge, one that puts the president’s motives into question.

A former CIA agent bluntly told WND, America has switched sides in the war on terror under President Obama.

Clare Lopez was willing to say what a few members of Congress have confided to WND in private, but declined to say on-the-record.

She said the global war on terror had been an effort to “stay free of Shariah,” or repressive Islamic law, until the Obama administration began siding with such jihadist groups as the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates.

Why the switch?

Lopez explained, when the so-called Arab Spring appeared in late 2010, “It was time to bring down the secular Muslim rulers who did not enforce Islamic law. And America helped.”

And why would Obama want to do that?

As she told WND earlier this month, Lopez believed the Muslim Brotherhood has thoroughly infiltrated the Obama administration and other branches of the federal government.

She also came to the conclusion Obama had essentially the same goals in the Mideast as the late Osama bin Laden: “to remove American power and influence, including military forces, from Islamic lands.”

Why would Obama order the killing of bin Laden?

Because the president “couldn’t delay any longer,” once the opportunity was presented, Lopez told WND.

There were “no more excuses” available to avoid it and he “thought it might look good,” she mused.

The former CIA operative’s perspective affects her prescription for what the U.S. should do about the terror army ISIS, as she called for caution and restraint.

While there has been a sudden chorus of politicians and military experts calling for the immediate elimination of the terrorist army after it beheaded American journalist James Foley last week, Lopez believes the U.S. should have an overall strategy in place before fully re-engaging in the Mideast militarily.

Any military action would be further complicated, she told WND, if it were not clear which side the U.S. is on, either in the short term or in the overall war on terror.

Lopez’s insights are backed by an impressive array of credentials.

Former CIA operations officer Clare Lopez

She spent two decades in the field as a CIA operations officer; was an instructor for military intelligence and special forces students; has been a consultant, intelligence analyst and researcher within the defense sector; and has published two books on Iran. Lopez currently manages the counter-jihad and Shariah programs at the Center for Security Policy, run by Frank Gaffney, former assistant secretary of defense for international security policy during the Reagan administration.

[…/]

Much more at: WND

Stupid policy tricks

More on Obama’s Libya adventure and Mid-East roadshow

Since Obama’s Libya adventure, and with the Mid-East on fire in what’s left of the Arab Spring, he has taken mostly to denying the very real results of his foreign policy foreplay. He avoids confronting the turmoil that he and his cohorts welcomed over a year ago. Results have not been fruitful, from Riyadh to Moscow, from Tripoli to Shanghai.

Post Obama’s little Libya intervention, which was supposed to be the model, we now have ISIS and the Islamic Caliphate State running wild from Damascus to Baghdad. Not to ignore all the other terrorist groups, it’s reported that there are 1200 terror groups just in Libya. Let’s forget South Africa for the moment. It was not an easy drive here.

Of course, there was Benghazi. But we‘ve moved on and terrorists have too. Then there was Obama’s version of a shell game with the vanishing red line in Syria — or was that a laser pointer in a Power Point presentation? Russia to the rescue, more on that later.

Then along comes the terrorists just when he was on a roll. Obama was forced to acknowledge ISIS, calling it JayVee in January after ignoring them for months.

‘The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant.”

Yes, and he did think it was accurate. He thought talking smack would cut it as he dismissed them as a threat. That provides a good illustration. So just because Obama was elected doesn’t make him a good president. Just because he has AF-1 doesn’t mean he will make superior decisions. And just because he gets elected doesn’t mean he is qualified. Obama is proving it everyday. But Obama thought talking smack and dissing an enemy out of hand would suffice because that is the way he always treated his opponents or potential opponents: like they were nothing, not up to it, or beneath him. That’s his M/O.

Now the irony and embarrassment of being forced to respond to those JayVee hoodlums with F-18’s and 500-pounders from the deck of USS George H.W. Bush carrier. Oops!

Along the way, we heard what I call the doctrine of ‘walk softly and carry a big script’ had morphed into Obama’s official doctrine: “don’t do stupid shit”— “stuff” in the public version. But looking back, what has Obama done that wasn’t stupid, whether abroad or here at home?

He insulted Israel how many times? His red line was a nightly punch line. His “more flexible” approach to Russia was the foundation for all sorts of actions from Putin, and our concessions. Obama’s arms-running across the Middle East may have backfired throughout. His comments toward Israel in the middle of a war were a combination of insensitive and stupid. His meddling in Israel’s self defense all the while neglecting our own security, especially at the border. And his Executive “Dream” pen started the nightmare on the border. Yet he was counseling Israel on their aggressive approach under attack. How many degrees of stupid are there? And he shut down air travel to Tel Aviv.

He reduced sanctions on Iran as the centrifuges spun away. He watched Crimea be gobbled up by Russia, while making backhanded remarks that must have given Putin chuckles. He sent out Kerry to make stupid remarks. What good is doing stupid stuff if you don’t talk up a good game? And if all else fails, he still has his denial doctrine.

Then there was the traveling Snowden sideshow and eaves dropping on Angela Merkel. There are stupid actions and consequences for inaction, too. Obama prefers a mixture.

RightRing | Bullright

Arab Spring has sprung, so has McCain

Arab Spring Egypt’s ‘Legal’ Persecution of Christians

by Raymond Ibrahim
Special to IPT News
May 29, 2013

Post “Arab Spring” Egypt continues exposing its true nature, including now legal persecution of Christians. Earlier this month, according to Fox News, Dimyana Abdel-Nour a “pale, young Christian woman sat handcuffed in the courtroom, accused of insulting Islam while teaching history of religions to fourth-graders.” Her accusers are 10-year-old Muslim children who say she “showed disgust when she spoke of Islam in class.”

According to Islamic law, the word of inferior Christians cannot stand against that of superior Muslims—even if they are resentful or confused children.

Released on bail, Dimyana is unable to talk and “suffering a nervous breakdown.”

The report continues:

Criminalizing blasphemy was enshrined in the country’s Islamist-backed constitution that was adopted in December. Writers, activists and even a famous television comedian have been accused of blasphemy since then. But Christians seem to be the favorite target of Islamist prosecutors. Their fragile cases — the main basis of the case against Abdel-Nour’s case the testimony of children — are greeted with sympathy from courtroom judges with their own religious bias or who fear the wrath of Islamists, according to activists. The result is a growing number of Egyptians, including many Christians, who have been convicted and sent to prison for blasphemy…. Part of the Salafis’ antagonism toward Christians is rooted in the belief that they were a protected group under Mubarak’s regime while they, the Salafis, were persecuted. Now empowered, they may be out to exact revenge on the Christians….

Read more at IPT : http://www.investigativeproject.org/4034/arab-spring-egypt-legal-persecution-of-christians

My commentary: Lesson #1- speak no truth

Is it strange then that any slight criticism of Islam in this country brings charges of Islamaphobia? Is what Muslims do called Christophobia? No. But its far worse than that. They use a term in the US for criticism of certain people, they call it “hate speech”.(more political correctness) But wait, that does not apply to anti-Christian speech. They apply the term “hate speech” TO Christians, not to those attacking Christians.(then it’s called freedom of religion) See how this twisted process works? Christians can be the butt of criticism but they aren’t immune from personal attacks, or discrimination because of their faith or Christianity. In that case it is legitimate grounds for it.

Recently, John McCain went to Syria to meet with rebels. Then someone noticed the pictures of the people he was meeting with and behold, one of them was party to a kidnapping plot of Christians by Islamists. He was asked about it and he claimed he was unaware of it and if, big if, one of them was part of that he said it would be “regrettable”. Hmmm, regrettable?

Remember this is a man who proposes to arm rebels believing there is no problem in knowing who is who. In fact, the legislation they propose says they will arm and supply “vetted” rebels. McCain stood right there not knowing who he was talking to or dealing with. Great photo-op, John. The irony is lost on McMaverick McCain though. What we can be fairly certain about is their animosity and hatred toward the US and Christians in general. But McCain says its easy to pick out the good ones to arm. (must be a no-brainer)

Nothing new for John McCain, as I was reminded recently on another blog. Back in 2000 McCain called Christians agents of intolerance. He was making a case of an inability to work with the Christian right, calling them a corrosive and corrupting influence on the Party and politics. He accused Bush of pandering to “agents of intolerance”.

Now he wants to arm factions he claims are good guys, even if their first priority is hating Jews and Christians, as the irony in that photo shows. Maybe John ought to figure out, by now, who the real “agents of intolerance” are — or agents of hatred for that matter. But in his typical religion of politics, he will go out to attack Rand Paul or others for suggesting caution is warranted.

The incredible lying machine

 

The only question I have is which lie will Obama lead off with tonight, in the last debate, and what new ones will he add to the list?

I especially look forward to one about his off-mic words to Medvedev where he promised him after his last “election” he could be more flexible. There is no way to parse that remark, like he always does, to try to mean anything else. The lie about that might be historical. 

    Private words recorded ...   Barack Obama with Dmitry Medvedev. (AP Photo)
I understand you. I transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you.”

“On all these issues, but particularly missile defence, this can be solved.
But it’s important for him to give me space. This is my last election…
after my election I have more flexibility.”

“I understand,” Mr Medvedev responded. “I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”

The one I always look forward to hearing is that he is so great on foreign policy. Maybe he will lead with that one, just to break the ice and try to raise expectations. But the best part of all will be the finale, it usually is. Which one will he end with to seal the deal? So many to choose from.
 

Let the spin begin.

[photo credit to AP]