Prescription for ISIS

Short of wiping out ISIS which is needed, fast and furious, I have another prescription for ISIS that Obama can do on top of that. I think you will like it.

First. Obama has several times said they are not Islamic. True, Bush made similar stupid remarks about al Qaeda. Second, the Saudis are even concerned and said if ISIS is left unchecked, they could be in Britain or the US in months .

So they are a threat to the world and other Muslim countries. They should be a threat to other Muslims. That’s what we hear anyway. But they definitely threaten the world and humanity, and the future of mankind. If you threaten a species you are singled out and scorned. If you threaten humanity, oh well.

Now for the prescription. But because Barry has been so adamant and defiant about it, I suggest that he personally carry it out himself, not delegate it to anyone else. It’s simple communication, so he can handle it. It will make his theory more credible.

Simply go to his Saudi friends to give them a message. Since they are an authority in Islam and Wahhabism, then they can have a fatwā created and issued on ISIS and what they’re doing — rejecting the Islamic legitimacy of ISIS, telling Muslims not to take part in it in any way. They should have no problem if they disagree with ISIS’s credo. The guys in Riyadh can come up with something that delegitimizes them. And revoke their Mecca card. Even get a qaļā, a legal ruling, conveying similar sentiments.

If Obama believes as he says, he should have no problem doing that. So this is your mission, Barack Obama, should you accept it.

RightRing | Bullright

Benghazi Blunder: the story won’t go away


New reports uncover the emails with initial information sent to Washington and the White House just after the start of the attack. Within 2 hours, the “2nd update” transmitted that the group Ansar al-Sharia had claimed responsibility and threatened to also attack the embassy in Tripoli.

We were told by Jay Carney on September 13th: “…the protests we’re seeing around the region are in reaction to this movie. They are not directly in reaction to any policy of the United States or the government of the United States or the people of the United States.” So it as not “directed at the US, or its citizens”. Why did they make such a point to tell us that?

After all it took place on 911, a time when terrorists attacked America killing innocent American citizens in their jihad against the US. Remember the fatwa in ’96, before 911. So a reaction and disclaimer that this was not directed at US policy or American citizens was totally without merit. Normally when events like this happen, especially to an embassy, they warn Americans of the circumstances. (who might choose to change travel plans etc) So why would they wish to make such an unfounded statement in this case?

Further, the twist of irony here is to have an attack on 911 on a mission with all the confusion and investigation 911 caused, dealing with initial responses to a terrorist attack. A result of which was to establish ways of handling information. But in this case it is as if 911 did not happen, at least no lessons learned. They just acted however and said whatever they liked. And we ended up being told stories to the point of not trusting anything they tell us – or questioning it at the least.

Then the icing on the cake is to have Obama’s campaign tell us the reason it is a political topic at all is because of Romney and Republicans. Then they skewer reporters for even thinking politics is influencing their actions. And then David Axelrod comes out to tell us Obama told us everything they knew and he is totally transparent. I’m sure no one can doubt that.

Still we hear no real explanations for any of it. If there’s any politics being played — and who can doubt that — then it is taking place in the White House, not on the campaign trail.