Non-Islamic terrorism spells denial

From Al Jazeera America:

The administration of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi must focus on economic development — not just regional security — in response to the recent beheading of 21 Egyptian Christian migrant workers in Libya, Egyptian economists and rights activists said Monday.

Tell us how adressing economic issues stops the caliphate-hungry Islamists from attacking and killing Christians and Jews? Of course they say that both need to be addressed: the terrorists and economic problems in Egypt. Well, duh, but to blame it mainly on economic plight is to miss the point. And last I checked, you need security to spawn the economic growth. Again, terrorists directly oppose that.

Here is a timeline history of ISIS atrocities.

The administration gave a watered down statement on the executions in Libya: (they call them Egyptian citizens)

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Murder of Egyptian Citizens

The United States condemns the despicable and cowardly murder of twenty-one Egyptian citizens in Libya by ISIL-affiliated terrorists. We offer our condolences to the families of the victims and our support to the Egyptian government and people as they grieve for their fellow citizens. ISIL’s barbarity knows no bounds. It is unconstrained by faith, sect, or ethnicity. This wanton killing of innocents is just the most recent of the many vicious acts perpetrated by ISIL-affiliated terrorists against the people of the region, including the murders of dozens of Egyptian soldiers in the Sinai, which only further galvanizes the international community to unite against ISIL.

This heinous act once again underscores the urgent need for a political resolution to the conflict in Libya, the continuation of which only benefits terrorist groups, including ISIL. We call on all Libyans to strongly reject this and all acts of terrorism and to unite in the face of this shared and growing threat. We continue to strongly support the efforts of the United Nations Special Representative of the Secretary-General Bernardino Leon to facilitate formation of a national unity government and help foster a political solution in Libya.

But they did not call them Christians. Couldn’t do that. To deny who they are, Coptic Christians, is to deny the motive for killing them. It’s very dishonest. Now at least they are admitting they are ISIS-affiliated terrorists. (progress for Libya I guess)

So what we have is the administration, and willing others, going out of their way not to address the direct source of the problem, radical Islamism. They won’t even call it what it is. But at the same time they can blame it on economic woes. “Yea, that’s the ticket!”

Unconstrained by faith? Let’s deny the central organizational and recruitment impetus is Islamic radicalism. But it is constrained under that central purpose, and loyal to it. In fact, it is constrained entirely under that auspice — except for opposition by military force.

By the time they get around to calling it Islamic terrorism it will be too late.(which is just great to the Islamic radicals)

And once again they call for a political solution to the problem. We just know you can sit down and discuss things rationally with irrational people hell bent on destruction. But to deny who and what Islamic terrorists are is to deny the causal source of the problem.

Not to even remind them that Obama and his enablers were a direct, willing contributor in the political problem in Libya. And they’ve have been lying about the effects ever since. Yet they’ll turn right around and blame Bush for Iraq’s turmoil. Plus all their support for Mo-Bros adding more accelerant to the fire.

The only conclusion is we have an Islamist-sympathizing administration. It’s hard to defeat an enemy by being sympathetic to it, regardless what atrocities they are committing.

Obama in the sea of denial

Now leaks from senior officials reveal a family feud engulfing the land of disenchantment. Not content sitting in his Ebola and national security meetings.

Leak week: Obama team shows signs of strain as anonymous officials take gripes to media

Published November 01, 2014 | FoxNews.com

WASHINGTON – The White House ship is springing some leaks.

Trouble-making personnel inside the Obama administration have taken to the press at a steady clip in recent days to badmouth senior officials, as well as a key American ally. And as President Obama enters his seventh year in office, the whispers and potshots are running the risk of undermining the once-cohesive image of the “no drama Obama” team.

Whether it’s a few leaky apples or the sign of a larger morale problem is unclear. But several stories with sharp-edged quotes attributed to unnamed administration officials have culminated in an embarrassing week for the White House — complete with plenty of backpedaling and clarifications to assert a polished narrative that all is well.

But the tarnish may be showing.

Frustrated officials have started to air their grievances on everything from the current relationship between the U.S. and Israel to the military response in Syria.

The latest batch of stories started on Monday, when The Atlantic magazine quoted an anonymous official describing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “chickenshit.” The comment follows weeks of heated exchanges between Netanyahu’s government and Washington over disputed settlement-building.

“The thing about Bibi is, he’s a chickenshit,” the official was quoted as saying.

The article caused a furor, as Republicans demanded accountability for the anonymous insult to America’s ally. White House and State Department officials insisted the remark does not reflect the administration’s views, and White House officials reportedly were calling lawmakers to hammer home that point.

Oh, the tarnish is showing all right.

Just when you think he reached an all time low, you have this which probably is more dear to Obama’s desires than anything.

The shots aren’t just coming from inside the administration, either. On a lighter note, another influential figure badmouthed the president this week — Michael Jordan.

When asked about the president’s golf game during a recent interview Jordan said, “I’ve never played with Obama, but I would.” He added, “I’d take him out. He’s a hack and I’d be all day playing with him … I never said he wasn’t a great politician. I’m just saying he’s a shi–y golfer.”

Obama is in direct conflict with himself.

As one NYT’s columnist preforms an autopsy on Obama’s demise, he says in “How Obama Lost America”: “The public’s confidence is gone, and it doesn’t seem to be coming back.

Well, yea but in listing possible causes he stumbles on a pertinent one. The big feather in Obama’s hat — as fictional as it was — was foreign policy. Like it or not, and I don’t, he was constantly trying to beat up Mitt Romney projecting his own steady hand on foreign policy. As with everything about Obama, it didn’t have to be true. Perception is king, long as you can make enough people believe it. So there were the carps to Romney about the 80’s calling and wanting their foreign policy back. Others misunderstood the real threats.

So now that the Obama dynasty is deconstructing faster than Humpty Dumpty can fall, he is left with the reality of nothing in his quiver of lies. The foreign policy component is now a proven failure. He has nothing left with which to throw at his opposition. So the best he could muster was that these are all the folks who supported me in 08, and reaffirmed it in 2012. In other words, I still won in the last election. As to actual accomplishments or successes, they matter not. And in other words, keep believing despite what you see all around. It is the echo of all infamous tyrants and dictators in the final scene.

NYT frames it this way:

The public trusted him on foreign policy. But that trust began to erode with the Edward Snowden affair, it eroded further during our non-attack on Bashar al-Assad last fall, and recent events in Ukraine and Iraq have essentially made Obama’s position irrecoverable: His approval rating on foreign policy is around 35 percent in most recent polling.

And so, once again, I have to ask about the sanity of that 35% who do find approval with his foreign policy? The piece goes on to add that this disapproval is not an indictment of the liberal ideology, but only on the misapplication of it. So salvage the ideology at the expense of Obama. That is the message.

In a Politico piece, “Another Obama veteran adds, “the bully pulpit is gone, maybe forever.”” Well, that is drastic!

But defiant Obama admits having plans, in the event of a Republican Senate, to roll out a bunch of Executive actions to set Republicans back on their heels. But with the bully pulpit gone?

And now his aides have nothing to look forward to except the “Obama comeback story.” Faulty caricatures be damned.

RightRing | Bullright