Posts Tagged ‘CIA’

Why Saying The ‘Magic Word’ ‘Radical Islam’ Matters: Even Obama’s Own CIA Says Obama Has Done NOTHING To Slow Down Islamic State

June 17, 2016

Just understand in preface that Barack Obama is a liar at heart and if he can’t lie about the nature of the “JayVee” threat of Islamic State terrorism because now hundreds of thousands of people have been tortured and murdered by beheading, by crucifixion, by being burned alive, just as they are dying in unprecedented numbers by bombs and shootings – if he can no longer minimize that horror – then he will lie about the extent to which that horror has succeeded by falsely and dishonestly claiming he has minimized a threat that in fact has EXPLODED because of his failed policies.  And if that doesn’t work he will lie yet again and claim it isn’t terrorism but guns.  Obama will argue that it is our founding fathers murdering us from the grave; it’s our Constitution that is murdering us; it is our Bill of Rights and specifically our 2nd Amendment that is murdering us.  And our only hope is to dive into the wisdom of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin and Chairman Mao and confiscate the people’s right to defend themselves against the true threat that Obama has done NOTHING to so much as slow down.

And all the while this failed fool plays demonic games with WORDS to conceal REALITY.

If you don’t know who your enemy is, you can’t fight him, let alone have any chance of defeating him.  You can’t even know who he is or what he is doing.  What Obama has had us doing the last seven years is tantamount to a fighter putting a blindfold over his eyes and then going into the ring and swinging wildly in all directions while his opponent lines up his jaw for a vicious knockout.

Obama is denouncing “magic words.”  I can document that Obama has used more “magic words” than ANYBODY.  And this fascist thug is now upset that somebody else would dare use “magic words”???  And the difference between OUR words and Obama’s “magic words” is that OUR words are DESCRIPTIVE and describe REALITY whereas Obama’s “magic words” are DISINGENUOUS and mask reality.

Obama says:

(CNSNews.com) – President Barack Obama rejected calls Tuesday for him to use the phrase “radical Islam” when talking about the war on terrorism, calling it “a political talking point” and “not a strategy.”

“There’s no magic to the phrase radical Islam. It’s a political talking point. It’s not a strategy, and the reason I am careful about how I describe this threat has nothing to do with political correctness and everything to do with actually defeating extremism,” Obama said in reaction to criticism by Republicans and notably presumptive GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump.

It is NOT “magic words” to denounce ISLAMIC TERROR as “Islamic terror.”  It is rather for the first time accurately describing the nature of our enemy so we can expose him for who and what he is and begin to combat our true enemy.

You keep reading and I’ll show you how Obama the prince of hypocrisy LOVES “magic words” when it comes to dealing with terrorism.  You need to understand why that statement is so beyond-pathologically stupid that it amounts to proof that Satan is alive and well for the simple reason that no human being could be that damn FOOLISH without a truly evil demonic intelligence using him like a puppet.

There’s that Dr. Phil question, “How’s that working out for you?”  So let’s examine the fruit of this failed fool’s “strategy”:

Terrorism Toll 800% Higher Since 2010
“I don’t think people have grasped how significant these numbers are.”
3.29.2016 |
News | Mark Tapson

A new report blames the rapid expansion of Islamist groups across the Middle East and Africa for the booming death toll of terrorism worldwide: a nearly 800 percent rise since 2010.

According to Fox News, terrorism expert Steven Emerson’s nonprofit Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) found that an average of nearly 30,000 people per year have been killed by terrorists since 2010, when terrorism’s death toll was 3,284. The study identifies two troubling trends: more attacks are happening, and they are deadlier than ever.

Emerson, the executive director of IPT, said,

“Everyone has known that terrorist attacks have generally been increasing yearly since 9/11. But the magnitude of the increase of the attacks surprised us, especially in the past five years. Even if you look back at the annual reports issued by the most senior analysts in the top five intelligence and counter-terrorism agencies, there is not one report that predicted or forecasted that we would likely see such a massive escalation of attacks.”

The study credits the rise in part to the fact that Islamist terror groups like Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al Shabaab in Somalia, a resurgent Taliban, Palestinian terrorists, and President Obama’s JB team ISIS are operating in more countries than ever, especially in the Middle East and Africa.

Fox reports:

IPT’s report used data collected by the University of Maryland’s Global Terrorism Database. Looking at various intervals following the 9/11 attacks, and sorting out deaths caused by clear acts of terrorism — not simply war involving known terrorist groups — IPT found annual terror deaths have jumped 774 percent since the 2007-11 average.

‘[The numbers] are striking when you take into account where the numbers were at the beginning period,” said Pete Hoekstra, who chaired the House Intelligence Committee when he represented Michigan in the U.S. Congress. “I don’t think people have grasped how significant these [death toll] numbers are.” […]

You keep reading and you’ll see WHY there hasn’t been “one report that predicted or forecasted” the stunning massive escalation of attacks.  Because Obama sugar-coated America’s intelligence so it would make this degenerate liar falsely appear to be succeeding when in actual fact he was radically failing.

If that isn’t enough, consider this from the UN News Centre:

UN warns of ‘record high’ 60 million displaced amid expanding global conflicts

18 June 2015 – The international community is experiencing a dramatic shift in the situation facing the world’s refugees as a global surge in war, conflict and persecution has caused a record number of people to flee their homes in search of safety, the United Nations refugee agency reported today.

According to data gathered by Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) over the course of 2014, the number of people forcibly displaced during the reporting year swelled to a staggering 59.5 million people compared to the 51.2 million from the previous year. The figures, collected by the UN agency for its latest Global Trends: World at War, suggest that one in every 122 humans is now either a refugee, internally displaced, or seeking asylum. If this were the population of a country, says UNHCR, it would be the world’s 24th largest.

“We are witnessing a paradigm change, an unchecked slide into an era in which the scale of global forced displacement as well as the response required is now clearly dwarfing anything seen before,” UN High Commissioner for Refugees António Guterres declared in a press release issued earlier today and marking the report’s release.

“It is terrifying that on the one hand there is more and more impunity for those starting conflicts, and on the other there is seeming utter inability of the international community to work together to stop wars and build and preserve peace,” he added.

In a detailed analysis exploring the range of conflicts that have given rise to the current mass diaspora of refugees, the UNHCR report notes that in the past five years, at least 15 conflicts have erupted or reignited.

Our enemies have never been more emboldened and our allies have never been stunned and shocked into worse apathy.  And Obama has done NOTHING but incite our enemies’ viciousness and degenerate our allies into cowardice.

It’s not enough to say that Barack Obama has utterly failed America; it’s not even enough to say that this fool has failed the world any more:  Barack Obama has failed the entire human species; he has failed any semblance of reason or morality whatsoever.  Barack Obama standing between those Greek columns as a god was literally Lucifer spreading his wings across the planet.

SO HOW HAS OBAMA’S OWN “STRATEGY” WORKED???  I MEAN, JUST HOW DAMNFOOL STUPID ARE YOU PEOPLE???!!!???

When you click on that graph and seriously consider it, one thing very quickly leaps out: terrorism has essentially been doubling every 2 years throughout the entire cancer a.k.a. the Obama presidency.  And so between 2012 and 2013 there were 15,000 deaths each year when there had been only 3,000 deaths a year back in 2010 before Obama’s failed policies had taken hold.  Compared with 30,000 deaths each year by 2014 and 2015.  So it is a simple matter of extrapolation to know how many deaths there will be each year due to terrorism by the next period of 2016 and 2017.  We are looking at 60,000 deaths a year and a 1,700-PLUS percent increase under Obama by the time this arrogant, depraved, degenerate, metastatic fool leaves office.

I mean, understand, if terrorism had merely doubled and increased a hundred percent, it would have proved Obama had utterly failed and Bush’s strategy worked and his didn’t.  But one thousand-seven hundred percent???

So let’s get to Obama’s love affair with “magic words”:

It is frankly beyond stunning even to me that the Democratic Party has become so pathologically demon-possessed that they actually view Obama’s wild FAIL as “success” in the “overseas contingency operation” against “man-caused disasters” that has mysteriously [to them] found our shores and is attacking us here.

This goes to show you how yes words DO matter.  Would you like to see what “magic words” actually look like?  Just consider it was OBAMA who refused to acknowledge we were in a “war on terror” and instead coined the euphemistic phraseology “overseas contingency operations” to replace it.  And now terrorism has SKYROCKETED.

Obama decided that if he quit referring to “terrorist attacks” and instead used the PC-phrase “man-caused disasters” it would somehow make the world a prettier place.  And we can now acknowledge the FACT that “prettier” here means fifty mangled bodies in an American nightclub gunned down by an “Allahu Akbar” laughing fanatic Muslim terrorist.

Now, those terrorism statistics are simply a grim FACT.  They are what liberals most despise because they are actual, cold-blooded REALITY.

Consider another reality: even Obama’s own hand-picked CIA Director now says unequivocally that Obama has wildly failed and his “strategy” amounts to a load of unicorn poop:

CIA director grave warning: ISIS dangerous as ever
By Barbara Starr, CNN Pentagon Correspondent and Ryan Browne
Updated 7:09 PM ET, Thu June 16, 2016

(CNN) — ISIS can draw on a “large cadre of Western fighters” that could attack in the U.S. and the terror threat posed by the group remains as dangerous as ever despite efforts to crush it militarily, the director of the CIA said Thursday.

“Unfortunately, despite all our progress against ISIL on the battlefield and in the financial realm, our efforts have not reduced the group’s terrorism capability and global reach,” CIA Director John Brennan testified to Congress using another acronym for the group.

“The resources needed for terrorism are very modest, and the group would have to suffer even heavier losses of territory, manpower and money for its terrorist capacity to decline significantly,” Brennan added. “In fact, as the pressure mounts on ISIL, we judge that it will intensify its global terror campaign to maintain its dominance of the global terrorism agenda.”

Brennan warned that the group already is preparing more attacks, including by infiltrating refugees into western nations.

“We judge that ISIL is training and attempting to deploy operatives for further attacks,” he said. “ISIL has a large cadre of Western fighters who could potentially serve as operatives for attacks in the West. And the group is probably exploring a variety of means for infiltrating operatives into the West, including refugee flows, smuggling routes, and legitimate methods of travel.”

The CIA director, appearing just days after the massacre in Orlando that left 49 people dead, told the Senate Intelligence Committee that lone wolf attackers who are inspired by but not under the direct control of terror groups represent “an exceptionally challenging issue for the intelligence community.”

Two giant, key admissions from Director Brennan: 1) Islamic State – which exploded into being under Obama and which Obama has done nothing to so much as slow down – is as powerful as EVER; and 2) Islamic State is using Obama’s Muslim refugee immigration program to infiltrate TERRORISTS into America.

Obama is even now plotting to escalate the pipeline of Syrian refugees into America.  And Hillary Clinton defiantly says she wants to massively INCREASE THE NUMBER OF TERRORISTS BROUGHT INTO AMERICA.  Now BOTH the CIA and FBI Directors have said that the terrorists will exploit this program, but Democrats literally don’t give a rat’s hairy ass how many mangled American bodies it causes; their political correctness trumps all rational thought.  FBI Director Comey has repeatedly said there is NO WAY we can screen the wave of Muslims Obama and Hillary are hell-bent on bringing into America.

So what does Obama do?  Fast-track the refugee process such that he’s let in more “refugees” in weeks than had been allowed in over months even though the FBI says there is absolutely no way to vet these people who have no papers especially when Islamic State has their own passport machines and thousands of blank official Syrian passports which they seized so they can make their own documents.  Democrats say no refugees have committed a terrorist attack here YET.  It doesn’t MATTER that “refugees” have already launched massive terror attacks in Europe and have boasted that they’re coming here and will be using Obama’s and Hillary’s refugee system to bring in terrorist killers.

Now, what does Obama do with the gargantuan refugee crisis that HE CREATED???  Remember the Democrat Party adage, “Never allow a serious crisis to go to waste” (especially when THEY created it); Democrats are now exploiting the crisis they created to export Muslim terrorism all over the world, including to America.

And so now let’s get to precisely WHYthere is not one report that predicted or forecasted that we would likely see such a massive escalation of attacks.”

What we find is that Obama and the Obama administration have been LYING to us about their “success” on what they for years even refused to acknowledge was “terror” and even now won’t rightly call “Islamic terror.”  Obama mocked Islamic State and called them “JayVee” EVEN WHILE THEY WERE OWNING HIS WORTHLESS ASS.

Then we found that somehow, somebody had ordered U.S. intelligence analysts to doctor their intelligence reports to make it falsely appear Obama was succeeding while in reality he was failing:

More than 50 intelligence analysts working out of the U.S. military’s Central Command have formally complained that their reports on ISIS and al Qaeda’s branch in Syria were being inappropriately altered by senior officials, The Daily Beast has learned.

The complaints spurred the Pentagon’s inspector general to open an investigation into the alleged manipulation of intelligence. The fact that so many people complained suggests there are deep-rooted, systemic problems in how the U.S. military command charged with the war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State assesses intelligence.

“The cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command,” one defense official said.

Two senior analysts at CENTCOM signed a written complaint sent to the Defense Department inspector general in July alleging that the reports, some of which were briefed to President Obama, portrayed the terror groups as weaker than the analysts believe they are. The reports were changed by CENTCOM higher-ups to adhere to the administration’s public line that the U.S. is winning the battle against ISIS and al Nusra, al Qaeda’s branch in Syria, the analysts claim.

That complaint was supported by 50 other analysts, some of whom have complained about politicizing of intelligence reports for months. That’s according to 11 individuals who are knowledgeable about the details of the report and who spoke to The Daily Beast on condition of anonymity.

The accusations suggest that a large number of people tracking the inner workings of the terror groups think that their reports are being manipulated to fit a public narrative. […]

Any one who doesn’t realize that Obama is behind this is a pure fool.  HE IS THE ONE SPOUTING THE NARRATIVE.  HE IS ORDERING ANALYSTS TO LIE SO HE CAN REPORT THEIR LIES AS HIS TRUTH.

Still other intelligence analysts in other Obama Administration departments say the same thing, that they were and are being ordered to ignore reality to conform to an obviously LEFTIST political narrative that has been time-and-time again proved FALSE and DISHONEST.

News reports are just coming out now that FIFTY senior State Department officials in Obama’s OWN administration have signed a document notifying this failed fool of a president that his entire foreign policy is in absolute shambles.

And this apparently came BEFORE it was learned that Russia just cluster-bombed US-backed Syrian troops in total contempt of the United States and our totally failed commander-in-chief.  We find that the second massive Russian airstrike came AFTER a panic-stricken U.S. used all emergency channels to contact Russia and plead with them to stop.  But Russia couldn’t give less of a damn, because Obama deserves absolutely zero respect whatsoever from ANYONE wishing to do America harm.

The wheels of Obama are starting to come flying off as the United States of America under Obama struck another iceberg and is taking on water fast.

So now let’s go back to the article that describes the explosion of terrorist killings to the tune of over 800 percent and consider the quote, “if you look back at the annual reports issued by the most senior analysts in the top five intelligence and counter-terrorism agencies, there is not one report that predicted or forecasted that we would likely see such a massive escalation of attacks.”  Why is that?  Because Obama wouldn’t ALLOW his intelligence to produce an accurate report that depicted the situation the way it actually was.  He pimped the numbers because he is a liar and the father of lies.

Obama’s handpicked Attorney General – the same one whom we can safely say WON’T indict corrupt Hillary Clinton for her CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY – is on public record having directly threatened anyone who says anything bad about Islam.  In San Bernardino, citizens were AFRAID to speak out about what they knew.  We don’t DARE cross a demonic Barack Obama and his satanic Attorney General.  We now see the same damn thing as warnings were either ignored by the government or people were terrorized into silence by Obama and his leftist PC thugs.

The heroes who weren’t heroes because their warnings went ignored by the Obama Administration was a NON-PC GUN SHOP because they saw this Muslim terrorist was a psychotic murderer and refused to sell him ammunition and called the FBI to report him.

Warning after warning after warning went ignored because Barack Obama is our Terrorist-in-Chief and political correctness is the official religion of his realm.

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee noted that Omar Mateen had been under not one but TWO FBI investigations that had both been dropped and forgotten.  Nothin’ to see here, folks.  And in spite of ALL KINDS of warning signs and people trying to warn the government about this radical Muslim thug, nothing was done.  Why?  Because he was a MUSLIM, that’s why.  Huckabee asks:

“So why in the world did they drop the investigation and walk away after 10 months? They bought his claim that he was teasing his co-workers because he thought they were trying to marginalize him for his Muslim faith,” Huckabee said.

And then Huckabee put the reality of the Obama administration’s “strategy” this way:

To sum up the Obama Administration’s counter-terrorism strategy in 13 words:

Feds: “If you see something, say something!”

Citizen: “I see something.”

Feds: “Bigot!”

We go back in time and in 2009 a terrorist Muslim Major named Nidal Hasan shot up his Army base screaming “Allahu Akbar!” and murdered thirteen soldiers and wounded another 30 and it was “workplace violence” to the Obama Administration even after it became known he was spouting terrorist gibberish to his fellow officers who were afraid to speak out due to political correctness; even after it became known he had been in email contact with known terrorist mastermind Anwar Awlaki; even after it became known that he was walking around with business cards identifying himself as a “Soldier of Allah.”  And we’ve seen these despicable lies and denials from Obama and his regime over and over and over again since then, because the truth is a very inconvenient thing when everything Democrats believe are lies, LIES, LIES.

And so ALL the Democrats have is a diversionary tactic: THEY HAVE FAILED AND IT IS OBVIOUS THEY HAVE FAILED AND ALL THEY CAN DO IS TRY TO DISTRACT STUPID PEOPLE FROM REALIZING THEY HAVE FAILED by waving a completely different red-herring in front of the news cameras (the 2nd Amendment and the guns our Constitution and our American way of life guarantees).

Howard Stern nailed it yesterday:

Howard Stern Dismantles Calls for Gun Control After Orlando Attack With Chilling ‘Sheep’ and ‘Wolves’ Analogy
Jun. 16, 2016 10:14am   Dave Urbanski

In the wake of the deadly Orlando terrorist attack, radio icon Howard Stern spent part of his Wednesday program berating those calling for gun control as the way to prevent further carnage in the future.

“I’m so upset about Orlando and what went down,” Stern said, “but I can’t believe these people would come out afterward and their answer to Orlando is to take away guns from the public. It’s f***ing mindblowing to me.”

Stern then illustrated his point with an analogy equating the public to sheep, the terrorists to wolves and the military and police as sheepdogs. And even as Stern humorously imitated a generally passive, sheep-like populace with bleating noises — baaaa — his analogy was chilling at a deeper level.

“Now, let’s say I walked up literally to a sheep herd, and they know that every night the wolves pick off a couple of them,” Stern said. “What if I went up to the sheep and I said, ‘You wanna have a shot at the wolves? I’m gonna give you a pistol. You can actually even the playing field with these wolves whose fangs are out — you could shoot them and save your family.’”

Stern then took on the role of the passive sheep: “Well, baaaa. We’re not gonna do that. We don’t want to fight baaaack. He didn’t hurt uuuus. He only hurt the family down the streeet. And the shepherd will protect us, the sheepdogs are out there, they’ll protect us.”

Stern’s hypothetical reply? “Well, the sheepdogs are protecting you, but some of them can’t be with you all day. There’s not a sheepdog for every citizen, and a wolf is still eating one of you every night.”

Against that backdrop, Stern continued the analogy with the sheep insisting on their guns being taken away as a way to protect themselves:

Now, why would the sheep — baaaa — say, “Oh, we’ve got an answer to all the terrorism, all these bad wolves that are coming after us. We’ll hand in all our guns. We’re gonna hand ‘em in. Baaaa. You know who’ll protect us? The government. Or the police. Baaaa.”

Stern then declared — now out of sheep mode — “That’s a baaaad f***ing idea.”

“I don’t like violence — I don’t like any of this stuff — but I consider myself a sheep, and I want the police to protect me. I support the police. And I want the government to protect me,” he explained. “But guess what? Most of your politicians … all have private security. … So they’re OK. Those are sheep that are very well protected. You on the other hand, you’re a sitting duck.”

“If you’re a sitting duck,” he asked, “do you want a fighting chance or not?”

“I’m not for taking away people’s rights. I’m not,” Stern continued. “I think the answer doesn’t lie in taking any kind of ability of the sheep to protect themselves from the wolves. I really don’t. I wish it was that simple.”

“In France they’ve done it very effectively,” he added, “the population is not armed — but unfortunately the wolves are.”

If you think that gun control works, then how do you explain the fact that it has wildly failed everywhere it’s been tried???  Chicago has gun-control laws as tough as any in the nation, but there are at least 3,000 shootings every single damn year because the criminals and gang members have been emboldened with the knowledge that THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES WITH ANY GUNS.  And it should not be shocking that liberalism failed to solve those gun crimes NINETY PERCENT OF THE TIMEIn San Bernardino, California kept the assault weapons ban, and yet somehow the terrorist had no trouble getting his hands on one.  In related recent news, we find that leftist Oakland – whose police department has been under federal control for the entire Obama presidency because of abuses and scandals up the whazoo – just fired their third police chief in about a week.  How does this not prove that “federal oversight” not a complete joke???

Meanwhile, the police in most of the rest of the nation are TERRIFIED to do their jobs and POLICE their neighborhoods because of a bowel movement spawned out of the wicked heart of Obama and the left called “Black Lives Matter.”  They have rioted all over everywhere and the FBI Director refers to the total police passivity in the aftermath of liberal cities cracking down not on the criminals but the cops as “the Ferguson Effect.”

In my own local newspaper JUST THIS MORNING we have this:

Authorities arrested 22 suspects on Thursday during the final sweep of a nine-month investigation that targeted gangs, guns and drugs in Desert Hot Springs.

Operation Desert Impact, the latest anti-gang effort in the Coachella Valley, led to the confiscation of 23 weapons – including semi-automatic military-style rifles, sawed-off shotguns and a silenced submachine gun – plus two empty rocket launchers. Most of these guns were bought by undercover police officers during months of investigation, but the final few were seized during early morning raids. [… The Desert Sun, Friday, June 17, 2016, p. 1A]

This is California where we have the toughest gun laws in the nation.  This is the Palm Springs area where we have the toughest local gun control laws in California.  HOW THE HELL DID THESE GANG MEMBERS GET THESE GUNS???  Are you a stupid enough Democrat jackass to believe that these criminal gang members bought them legitimately???  They had a silenced submachine gun.  Dude, it’s ILLEGAL to have a silencer OR a submachine gun.  They had a couple ROCKET LAUNCHERS.  Do you have any idea how freaking illegal those things are???

Criminals can get their hands on anything they want because there is something called a black market that law abiding people don’t have access to and they don’t obey laws BECAUSE THEY ARE CRIMINALS.  And these gangs have plenty enough guns of their own; these weapons are being SOLD to any criminal who wants to buy them.

The ONLY people who will be denied guns because of liberal gun laws is law-abiding people.  Because to be a Democrat is to demand that rich people like Hillary Clinton can afford to have armed body guards while the rest of us cower in fear praying to our god Obama to protect us.

So yeah, turn over your guns.  That way you can rest assured that the bullets will only be coming from ONE direction.  The bad news is it WON’T be from yours.

So the leftist argument is that what spectacularly fails to work locally and regionally ought to be imposed nationally so we can spectacularly fail nationally.  Because “Democrat” means “DEMOnic bureauCRAT” and these liberal fools are truly evil.

There is frankly only one possibility these days: the left – which on the one hand has practically shut down local law enforcement even as they are going after the 2nd Amendment right of the people to own and bear guns and protect themselves – is determined to create a national police force similar to the old Soviet-style People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs (NKVD).  That way an Obama or a Hillary Clinton can do to the “police” what Obama did to the IRS and turn it into an Internal Revenge Service against the left’s political enemies.

Democrats are just that evil these days.

I denounce these fools with the Word of God that they mock:  Isaiah 28:15 says, “You boast, we have struck a bargain to cheat death and we have made a deal to dodge the grave.  The coming destruction can never touch us, because we have built a strong refuge made of lies and deception.”  Colossians 2:8 says, “Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ.”  Everything these failed fools say amounts to “empty philosophies” and “high-sounding nonsense” if there ever was ANYTHING that has EVER amounted to nonsense.  Every so-called “strategy” these failed fools are spouting is nothing more than a bargain to cheat death and a deal to dodge the grave.  Barack Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s ways are DEMONIC.  They are leading us to our doom.

We are literally voting this November on whether we want to continue to survive as a nation, or whether we want to perish by PC.

And PC was a rhetoric tactic invented by COMMUNISTS.  And it was the COMMUNISTS and the NAZIS who first took away guns from their people so they could terrorize their disarmed people who no longer had the power or capability to resist.

Hillary Clinton is pointing to her “experience” to argue that she would make a better president.  BUT SHE PRESIDED OVER THIS SKYROCKETING TERRORISM, SHE PERSONALLY FAILED IN BENGHAZI, AND HER “EXPERIENCE” IS GETTING EVERYTHING IMAGINABLE WRONG OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND VOWING TO REMAIN STUCK ON THE SAME SETTING OF DEMONICALLY STUPID.

 

Advertisements

Remember The Ginned Up Outrage Over Valerie Plame (A Virginia DESK JOCKEY)? Obama Just Outed The CIA’s Top Secret Station Chief!

May 27, 2014

I still remember the shock, the horror of the Valerie Plame “outing.”  You’d have thought that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney had finally degenerated even the depths of Lucifer himself in their sheer moral evil.

The story, as the left breathlessly told it, was that George Bush sent his attack dog Dick Cheney to destroy a petty diplomatic official named Joseph Wilson because this courageous man had the courage to stand up against Bush’s claims of WMD.  And so Cheney used his wife’s career to accomplish his agenda.

Cheney’s chief of staff was convicted in THE most liberal district in America for being a Republican.  HE didn’t have ANYTHING to do with outing Valerie Plame, however.

Only it turned out to be a complete load of crap.  Among other things, Valerie Plame wasn’t even a true “spy” at the time her “secret identity” was outed; she was working at a desk in Virginia.  Pretty safely, too, in spite of way she tried to transform herself into some kind of heroine-martyr for the sake of liberalism.

The left wanted to make a movie out of Valerie Plame’s life.  Until they realized that her life as she and her husband had dishonestly claimed it was was an even bigger fiction than any MOVIE could have been.

We ultimately find out that there is legitimate reason to doubt that Plame was ever a “covert agent,” and that several years of history now proves that she was a DESK JOCKEY rather than a field agent who was ever in any danger.

It wasn’t Dick Cheney who outed Valerie Plame, contrary to the liberal theology; it was a JOURNALIST named Robert Novak.  Furthermore, it came from somebody who

But in fact it was Joe Wilson HIMSELF who “outed” his wife.  He had basically blabbed all over Washington to anyone who would listen to him because he was trying to exploit his wife’s career to give his own sagging prospects a leg up.

Anyway, what you have to take away from this is that it is a very, very bad thing to out a secret agent and risk that agent’s life.  And anyone who does it ought to go to prison and have the key thrown away.

Unless a damned DEMOCRAT does it.  THEN it’s fine:

White House mistakenly leaks name of top spy in Afghanistan
Christian Today ^ | 26 May 2014 | Brownie Marie
Posted on ‎5‎/‎26‎/‎2014‎ ‎4‎:‎54‎:‎48‎ ‎PM by xzins

The White House mistakenly leaked the name of one of their top spies to nearly 6,000 journalists on Sunday.

The CIA officer’s name was included on a press tip sheet that was given to the White House’s pool reporter, who then forwarded the list to the entire press pool—about 6,000 email addresses.

The list contained the names of 15 people President Obama was scheduled to meet with during a visit to Bagram Airfield, a U.S. military base in Afghanistan. Mistakenly included was the name of the top U.S. spy in Kabul, identified on the list as the “Chief of Station.”

Washington Post White House Bureau Chief Scott Wilson has been identified as the person who filed the pool report, although he told the Post that he copied the list from a White House press email.

A revised list with the spy’s name removed was quickly distributed to the press pool, and White House officials asked the media outlets not to publish the officer’s name for fear of harm to the officer and his family. It is unclear whether the officer will remain in Afghanistan.

The incident marks the fourth chief of station to have his identity leaked in recent years. Two CIA station chiefs in Pakistan were outed by the Pakistani media in 2011 in retaliation for U.S. raids in the area. Last year, another station chief in Pakistan was exposed by a Pakistani political party in protest of U.S. drone strikes.

Relations between the U.S., Pakistan, and Afghanistan have been increasingly strained following the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the death of Osama bin Laden. The Al-Qaeda leader was killed in a U.S. raid in Pakistan on May 2, 2011.

The relationship between the countries was compared to a bad marriage by Cameron Munter, the U.S. ambassador in Pakistan.

“There is a certain amount of resilience built into the relationship, and I don’t think it’s going to collapse,” he told NBC News after the November 2013 station chief leak.

“I just think it’s going to be difficult. It’s going to be like a bad marriage that continues.”

We don’t need enemies like Pakistan; hell, we’ve got FRIENDS like Obama to do our enemies’ dirty work for us!

For the record, I’ve seen this agent’s name and even his picture flashed on the news.  Basically, Obama betrayed his identity to 6,000 people whose job is literally to betray secrets and then asked them to be hush-hush.  Not going to happen.

Now, to whatever extent that it WASN’T Joe Wilson who VERY DELIBERATELY leaked the former identity of his wife, it was without any question basically an “accident” on the part of the Bush administration.  Richard Armitage had virtually nothing to do with anything “White House.”

But in any event, unless liberals are demon-possessed hypocrites, the left ought to be howling mad at Obama and heads ought to roll and people ought to go to prison.  I want to see the Scooter Libby treatment for the person who betrayed this agent whose compromise makes the “Valerie Plame incident” look like a kindergartner telling on another kindergartner who stole somebody’s cookie.

But of course, liberals ARE demon-possessed hypocrites.  So never mind.  But just let this little walk down memory lane remind you of how rabid Democrats and the mainstream media were when Bush was president versus how determined they are to ensure Obama gets away with scandal after scandal after scandal after scandal.

Anyway, while Valerie Plame had ALREADY HAD her secret agent career and was safely working behind a desk in a secure building in America, the poor bastard Obama just outed was still very secret indeed and was living in Afghanistan – where we kind of needed him to be.  Now his life is at risk, his wife and children’s lives are at risk, and oh, well, oopsie.

Liberalism means never having to be treated like Bush.  No matter how much worse than Bush you are.

According To Mike Morell Testimony In Obama Admin, Professionals On Ground Useless While Analysts 1000s Of Miles Away Make Up ‘Facts’ In Vacuum

April 2, 2014

Why should professionals risk their lives out in the field to gather accurate information when analysts in offices thousands of miles away are going to completely ignore them anyway?

If you’re going to believe the testimony of the Deputy Director of the CIA at the time of the Benghazi attack, the answer is they shouldn’t bother.

You need to understand this: at this point, it is obvious to EVERYONE that when Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, Jay Carney and a host of other Obama types came out and said that the Benghazi attack that murdered the first United States Ambassador since the failed Carter debacle in 1979 along with three other Americans was the result of a protest over a video rather than a planned and coordinated terrorist attack, that they were NOT TELLING THE TRUTH.

Everyone on the ground, along with the CIA station chief’s report from the region (Tripoli), proclaims that the attack had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with any video or any protest, and in fact explicitly denies that any protest was going on at the time of the attack.

So why the bogus talking points?

The House asked the man who prepared them.

It should be noted that this man who prepared them, former Deputy Director of CIA Mike Morell, has played a game of revolving chairs.  While Obama put one of his own damned LAWYERS into the job that Morell left, Morell suddenly joined Obama’s Intelligence Advisory Board.  Oh, and took a cushy job with the mainstream media that has pathologically refused to ever once be fair or objective.  He was rewarded well for misleading and in fact betraying America, I assure you.

IF you believe that Morell was telling the truth and he did NOT cook the books in the form of the talking points that Obama, Clinton, Rice, Carney et al cited when they said over and over again that the Benghazi attack resulted from a protest over a video (even though it wasn’t), this is what you HAVE to now believe about the way Obama makes decisions about foreign policy: he makes them ENTIRELY based on what analysts sitting at desks thousands of miles away from what is happening write about.  He does NOT pay any attention to what the people on the ground say.  If the people on the ground at the scene say the opposite of what the analysts say, well, who cares?

Let me wrap this in a bow for you: as Deputy Director of the CIA, Morell had ALL the intelligence available to him.  That is why his office is charged with preparing the White House talking points memo to begin with.  Mike Morell KNEW what the CIA and military people on the ground watching the attack unfold were saying.

Again, that’s what you HAVE to conclude if Morell didn’t alter the talking points for political reasons.  He acknowledged that the professionals on the ground were screaming that the attack was a planned, coordinated terrorist attack having nothing to do with any stupid video.  But he pointed out that none of that mattered because what mattered was what the analysts said and the analysts said that it was a video protest and so that’s what the Deputy Director of Obama’s CIA went with.  And it was nothing beyond a random coincidence that the bogus output of the analysts was exactly what the political aspirations of Obama needed.

Obama had been saying he’d decimated and wiped out al Qaeda.  He had been saying the war on terror was over and he’d won it.  He did NOT want to have to explain a terrorist attack against the United States and one of its ambassadors.

And so he didn’t.

Sadly, for Obama not to have committed high crimes and misdemeanors in the form of making his personal politics trump national security, what we are instead being told is that Obama blatantly ignores the facts on the ground and instead trusts to the spin of theorists in Washington.

If that makes you liberals feel good about Obama, fine.  It makes me sick to my stomach either way.

What do I believe Morell did?  I believe he deliberately chose to ignore the facts being screamed from the ground and influenced his analysts to cook the books the way Obama wanted instead.

With Obama having gutted our military we are truly week.  With Obama ignoring the experts on the ground who are seeing the events unfold, we are truly blind.  And under Obama, the CIA is no more “independent” than his thug IRS.  Both agencies and numerous others are merely political wings of the Obama political machine rewarding Obama’s friends and punishing Obama’s enemies.

When It Was 3 AM And The US Consulate In Benghazi Was Being Attacked, Where Was Barack Obama???

November 3, 2012

I thought this needed to be framed and took a screen shot. The last picture has a GIF animation that makes the picture worth clicking on to take you to the original.  Just hit the back button to come back here:

The guy that just nailed Obama right to the wall with this did one of those GIF animation jobs to provide priceless animation of Hillary Clinton furiously scrubbing the wall to clean the famous bloody handprints on the column:

The al-Qaeda-linked terrorist attack on the United States Consulate in Benghazi, Libya began at 9:40 p.m. local time.  The battle that ultimately killed an American ambassador, two incredibly heroic former SEALs and one other American went on for an agonizing seven hours during which time the CIA support site nearby repeatedly begged for permission to go in and help their fellow Americans under attack and were ordered to stand down.  So it was 3 AM in Benghazi, and Obama was sound asleep and continued to sleep contentedly through the night while Americans died during an enemy attack on foreign soil.

And what did Obama do the next day (September 12)?  He climbed aboard Air Force One and took a trip to Las Vegas so he could do a fundraiser.  He really was in Las Vegas on September 12, all right.  Meanwhile his crew of Chicago thugs was already lying up one side and down the other that what happened was NOT a terrorist attack or any kind of preplanned act of war against the United States on United States soil.  Nope.  It was just a bunch of unfortunately-violence-prone Muslims going as nuts as a bunch of monkeys because they saw a video that had been made in America which proved that our First Amendment needs to be abolished.  And of course it was just out of the blue, and couldn’t be foreseen, and the fact that it happened on the VERY significant day of “9/11” clearly didn’t have anything at all to do with anything.  All their information, they claimed, said that’s all it was and they had absolutely zero information that terrorists had anything to do with it.

It turns out that the “spontaneous protest” that top White House spokespeople in fact never occurred.  It was a lie.  It never happened.  As history now records in Benghazi, Libya at the US Consulate according to the Associated Press:

Around 8:30 p.m.

Stevens finishes his final meeting of the day and escorts a Turkish diplomat outside the main entrance of the consulate. The situation is calm. There are no protests.

Around 9:40 p.m.

Agents hear loud noises, gunfire and explosions near the front gate. A barracks at the entrance housing the local militiamen is burnt down. Agents viewing cameras see large group of armed men flowing into the compound. Alarm is sounded. Telephone calls are made to the embassy in Tripoli, officials in Washington, the Libyan authorities and a U.S. quick reaction force located at a second compound a little over a mile away.

Obama’s people lied.  There was no spontaneous protest that went bad.  There was no protest at all, in fact.  And no stupid video that they kept talking about had anything to do with anything when it came to that attack in Benghazi where the first United States Ambassador since 1979 was murdered at his post.

Obama claimed in his third debate with Mitt Romney that he was claiming that he referred to the Benghazi attack was what he described as “acts of terror” in a brief statement he gave just before jetting off to fundraise in Las Vegas.  But a couple of “buts”: first he referred to “acts of terror” immediately AFTER referencing the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.  Isn’t it kind of possible that he was referring to THAT attack?  And second when he gave his address to the United Nations on September 25 (two full weeks AFTER the attack on Benghazi), Obama clearly pooh-poohed “terrorism” as the cause of the Benghazi attack.  He never ONCE used words like “terrorist” or “terrorism” but SIX TIMES decried the Youtube video that was filmed by an American as being responsible for the attack that tragically killed an American ambassador.  So bullcrap to Obama claiming that he says that he clearly meant that Benghazi was a terrorist attack.  He’s a lying weasel doing what lying weasels do.

Where was Obama as the former SEALs who had violated their “stand down” orders to save the lives of thirty Americans at the ultimate cost of their own?  Yeah, probably on a golf course in Las Vegas talking crony-capitalist grease-my-palm shop-talk with some rich liberal bigwigs.  Just as the collage picture above says.

When we find out that Ambassador Chris Stevens and his security team were BEGGING for increased security in a Libya that was in the process of INCREASINGLY falling to al Qaeda, the Obama administration was deciding to FURTHER REDUCE the security staff.  Why?  Because Obama wanted to sell the bogus delusion that Obama was the man who killed bin Laden (based on intelligence developed by George W. Bush), and that in killing bin Laden Obama had destroyed al Qaeda.  And in destroying al Qaeda Obama the messiah had won the war on terror.  And that meant “normalizing” relations with Libya and pulling our armed security guys out no matter that the country was falling apart and there were literally hundreds of “incidents” to prove it was falling apart.   That was the cynical political delusion that Obama was pimping.

The fact of the matter is that Obama keeps saying “no one gets left behind” when it comes to giving more people more socialism, but he was all too ready to let those Americans who perished in Libya get “left behind” as the orders from the Obama administration were to “stand down” and not help the Americans at the besieged US Consulate.

The fact of the matter is that Ambassador Chris Stevens had begged for more security from Obama.  And he got his security REDUCED in violent and chaotic Libya while his Svengali stand-in Valerie Jarrett got to enjoy the status of being the first political advisor EVER to get a full Secret Service detail when she was on vacation at Martha’s Vineyard.

The fact of the matter is that the intelligence and security professionals were warning Obama for MONTHS that sovereign US territory in Libya was under threat and that the United States Ambassador’s life was at riskAND OBAMA DID NOTHING that wasn’t incredibly stupid and even more incredibly wrong-headed during those months.

The fact of the matter is that we further learn that in fact Obama had THREE FULL WEEKS OF WARNING that the very attack by the very terrorists who killed Ambassador Chris Stevens was going to happenAND HE DID NOTHING.

The fact of the matter is that Obama has attempted a cover-up that is FAR worse than anything Nixon did during Watergate.

And the fact of the matter is that this will be God damn America until Obama is exorcised out of the American people’s White House.

If Evil, Orwellian Republicans Come To Power, They Will Force Terrorists To Drink ‘Ensure’ – And Mainstream Media Asks How Can That Not Be Evil?

May 11, 2012

This bit is almost as funny as it is revealing about just how psycho and how radically propagandist your average mainstream media “journalist” is:

Lesley Stahl Insulted to No Longer Have a Monopoly on the News
May 07, 2012

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: This is gonna be close to my all-time favorite or this is close to my all-time favorite. I can’t say it is my all-time favorite ’cause I don’t remember them all, but this is clearly in the top five. On April 29th, Lesley Stahl, 60 Minutes, interviewed Jose Rodriguez who is the chief interrogator of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed at Club Gitmo. And I love this bite because, as I listen to it, I firmly believe that Jose Rodriguez knows exactly who he’s dealing with and is having fun with her and she doesn’t know it.He knows he’s talking to somebody who thinks raising your voice at somebody is torture. He knows he’s dealing with somebody who thinks that he committed atrocities and crimes. So he describes the harmless activities he engaged in with Sheikh Mohammed as “dire techniques,” these “dire techniques.” That’s my favorite line in this bite: “Oh, yes, it was one of those dire techniques.” Here it is, her question. “So what happens? Did the Sheikh break down? Does he cry? Does he fall apart after your waterboarding?”RODRIGUEZ: No. He gets a good night’s sleep. He gets his Ensure. By the way, he was very heavy when he came to us and he lost 50 pounds.STAHL: What, his Ensure? You mean like people in the hospital who will drink that stuff?RODRIGUEZ: Yes. Dietary manipulation was part of these dire techniques.STAHL: So sleep deprivation, dietary manipulation, I mean, this is Orwellian stuff. The United States doesn’t do that.RODRIGUEZ: Well, we do.

RUSH: “Well, we do.” (laughing)

“Dietary manipulation was part of these dire techniques.” Dietary manipulation! Ensure. A product that keeps cancer patients alive in the hospital considered “torture” by Lesley Stahl. And I think Jose Rodriguez knew it and when he calls “dietary manipulation … part of the dire techniques,” he was taunting her and she didn’t even know it! So I pointed this out. We played it two or three times, maybe more. We played it again just now. This past Thursday in New York City at the New York Historical Society, they had a panel discussion there about the 2012 presidential race. The moderator… (interruption) Snerdley, stop screening for a minute. You gotta listen to this in case we get phone calls about it. New York Historical Society on Thursday, Lesley Stahl moderating a panel discussion on the 2012 presidential race, said this about the campaign and the media…

STAHL: Here’s something that’s happened over the last couple of years that’s frustrating to me, and that is when you say “we, the press” and then the press is this big salad bowl, and who’s in the press? It’s Rush Limbaugh is in the press. Fox is in the press. MSNBC. I mean, all these people who are devoting themselves to little slices of the pie are in with the so-called “mainstream media.” We’re all the same thing now to the public. We’re not the same thing.

RUSH: Awww. See, they used to have a monopoly. And now the monopoly is gone. And I’m now considered to be in the same business as Lesley Stahl. I can’t tell you how insulted I am. That’s right: A little slice of the pie. All these people have little slices of the pie. I would dare say that the EIB Network rivals CBS News, CBS Evening News. I’d say our audience is larger than the CBS Evening News is. I don’t think there’s any question about it if you want to start talking about slice of the pie.

But that’s not the point.

The point is, I am the turd in the salad bowl. That’s what the point is. I am the [Baby Ruth] in the swimming pool at Caddy Shack. And she just can’t stand it because the salad used to be pure and clean and now, ladies and gentlemen, their monopoly has been destroyed. And it’s no longer ABC, CBS, NBC, the New York Times and the Washington Post manipulating the minds of the American people. Now there’s too much freedom in the media. But I guarantee you I got mentioned first because I keep playing this sound bite with Jose Rodriguez that “dietary manipulation” is part of their “dire techniques.”

I love it.

I just love it.

END TRANSCRIPT

My personal favorite segment:

RODRIGUEZ: No. He gets a good night’s sleep. He gets his Ensure. By the way, he was very heavy when he came to us and he lost 50 pounds.

STAHL: What, his Ensure? You mean like people in the hospital who will drink that stuff?

RODRIGUEZ: Yes. Dietary manipulation was part of these dire techniques.

STAHL: So sleep deprivation, dietary manipulation, I mean, this is Orwellian stuff. The United States doesn’t do that.

RODRIGUEZ: Well, we do.

The actual terrorists love Lesley Stahl, mind you.  And given what she thinks about how evil it is to give terrorists “Ensure,” you can kind of understand why.

Lesley Stahl joins Andrea Mitchell in showing us how “journalism” has become an outright disgrace of leftist propganda.

Hopefully, you agree with me that mainstream media “journalists” ought to be regarded with contempt and suspected of being liars and propagandists unless and until they prove otherwise.

Just Asking: How Much Credit For Getting Osama Bin Laden Does Obama Truly Deserve?

May 7, 2011

When I first heard about the assault on the compound in Pakistan that resulted in the death of Osama bin Laden, I was happy and proud as an American.  And willing to give Obama credit where credit was due.

It seemed like a gutsy move – which the mainstream media narrative quickly seized upon: the political consequences for Obama would have been quite negative if the mission had failed.  It would have reminded everyone yet again that Obama is a reincarnation of Jimmy Carter.  And the whole “Desert One” fiasco would have surely been remembered.

But take just a second and look at it from the opposite perspective; you know, the one that the mainstream media has never once considered for even a nanosecond.  What would have happened had Barack Obama decided NOT to try to take out bin Laden?  What would have happened – more to the point – when the American people were informed that Barack Obama had known for certain where Osama bin Laden was, and refused to try to get him?

Wouldn’t that have had even MORE DISASTEROUS consequences???

And, the thing is, it is a near certainty that that information would have gotten out.  There would have been sufficient disgust in both the CIA and in the Pentagon that somebody would have made sure that the news got out that Barack Obama – who had PROMISED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE that he would go into Pakistan to get bin Laden – had cowardly refused to keep yet another promise.

Imagine for just a second the abundant campaign ads: slow-moving video of Osama bin Laden, followed by footage of the twin towars collapsing, followed by Barack Obama giving his word to get bin Laden, followed by the evidence that Obama knew for at least half a year where bin Laden was hiding, and refused to even try to get him.

It would have been just as “bold” for Obama to decide that an operation to get bin Laden was too risky, and jeopardized critical U.S.-Pakistani relations to too high a degree.

Barack Obama was forced into a position where he had to rely on the U.S. military to save his political hide.  And the U.S. military came through for him.

And how does Obama repay that military?  By literally gutting their budget, that’s how:

President Obama has targeted the Department of Defense to absorb more than 80 percent of the cuts he has proposed in next year’s budget for discretionary programs.

Does Obama deserve credit for that?  Really?  Is he out right now campaigning as the guy who just gutted the military he commands, or is he out campaigning as the commander-in-chief of a glorious military?

People should hear that RIGHT NOW Barack Obama is taking an axe and gutting the Navy SEALs, and the Nightstalkers who brought them in and out of that compound, and the Screaming Eagles he visited yesterday, and the entire rest of the military.

People should know that Barack Obama demonized the primary means of interrogation that got us Osama bin Laden.  And there is no question that waterboarding and other “enhanced interrogation” methods led us to the breakthroughs we needed to get bin Laden:

Ex-CIA Counterterror Chief: ‘Enhanced Interrogation’ Led U.S. to bin Laden
By Massimo Calabresi Wednesday, May 4, 2011

A former head of counterterrorism at the CIA, who was investigated last year by the Justice Department for the destruction of videos showing senior al-Qaeda officials being interrogated, says the harsh questioning of terrorism suspects produced the information that eventually led to Osama bin Laden’s death.

Jose Rodriguez ran the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center from 2002 to 2005, the period when top al-Qaeda leaders Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) and Abu Faraj al-Libbi were taken into custody and subjected to “enhanced interrogation techniques” (EITs) at secret prisons overseas. KSM was subjected to waterboarding, sleep deprivation and other techniques. Al-Libbi was not waterboarded, but other EITs were used on him.

“Information provided by KSM and Abu Faraj al-Libbi about bin Laden’s courier was the lead information that eventually led to the location of [bin Laden’s] compound and the operation that led to his death,” Rodriguez tells TIME in his first public interview. Rodriguez was cleared of charges in the video-destruction investigation last year.

Even career Democrat and Obama appointee for Director of Central Intelligence Leon Panetta has openly acknowledged that waterboarding was an instrumental part of this intelligence effort:

Asked by NBC-TV’s Brian Williams about the information obtained from detainees that led to the bin Laden takedown, Panetta replied:  ‘We had multiple series of sources that provided information with regards to this situation.  … Clearly some of it came from detainees [and] they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of those detainees.”

When Williams asked whether “waterboarding” was one of those techniques, Panetta replied:  “That’s correct.”

We have the following from the CIA analysts and the CIA director at the time, describing how essential the enhanced interrogations were to the knowledge that the CIA learned:

CATHERINE HERRIDGE, FOX NEWS NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): March 2003, Rawalpindi, Pakistan, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured and according to U.S. officials, the self-described architect of 9/11 was immediately taken into the CIA enhanced interrogation program and waterboarded. It was three to four months later, according to U.S. officials, that KSM was asked about the courier who was known only by an Al Qaeda alias. He downplayed the courier’s importance. The top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee says the implications of the CIA’s early leads are clear. […]

A former senior intelligence official says the waterboarding of KSM, quote, “took his spirited defiance into a zone of cooperation,” adding that the harsh interrogation tactic critics described as torture was not used to elicit information but rather to alter the detainee’s mindset. Philip Mudd is a former CIA analyst.

PHILIP MUDD, FORMER CIA ANALYST: Having seen this stuff on the inside, that’s not a debate. That is a done deal. The information we got was invaluable. So debate the cultural side and the political side, but please don’t debate the intelligence side.

HERRIDGE: In a radio interview with FOX, former CIA Director Michael Hayden said there is no question the CIA program including waterboarding laid the foundation for bin Laden’s capture.

MICHAEL HAYDEN, FMR CIA DIRECTOR ON FOX NEWS RADIO (via telephone): That database was kind of like the home depot of intelligence analysis. You know, it was incredibly detailed stuff.

HERRIDGE: As for its role in identifying this compound in Pakistan —

HAYDEN: It would be very difficult for me to conceive of an operation like the one that took place on Sunday that did not include in its preparation information that came out of the CIA detention program.

HERRIDGE: 2004 and 2005 are described as turning points. Both Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Faraj al-Libi, a gatekeeper for Osama bin Laden, were both in the CIA secret prisons. U.S. officials say for a second time, KSM downplayed the courier significance and al-Libi denied knowing him. The men’s adamant denials appeared to be an effort to protect the courier and U.S. officials say it, quote, “sent up red flags for the CIA” because other detainees consistently claims the courier maintained bin Laden’s trust.

And if you don’t believe EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE KEY PEOPLE INVOLVED, just accept that Bush and HIS gutsy decision to approve waterboarding led us to the knowledge that Osama bin Laden (UBL) was using couriers, the pseudo-names of those couriers that led to intelligence ultiamtely finding their actual names, and even the very city where Osama bin Laden was hiding:

Which is to say that the entire Obama presidency was spent mining information from waterboarding that Obama personally demonized and from a program that Obama shut down.

And we now know that Osama bin Laden was in this compound that we learned about from waterboarding for at least five years.

Every single major fact that we learned we learned from waterboarding and from enhanced interrogation techniques.  And the rest of it was simply a matter of confirming what we knew from waterboarding and from enhanced interrogation techniques.

People should KNOW that Barack Obama demands that the United States of America should be nearly blind.

People should also know that on his second day in office Barack Obama shut down and terminated the CIA intelligence program that actually developed the information that got bin Laden.  They should know that America no longer has that capability, and that thanks to Barack Obama we could never even begin to do that again – likely for years to come, given the difficulty of developing such intensive programs.

And people should know that RIGHT NOW Barack Obama is continuing to try to criminally prosecute the incredible men and women who gave us the intelligence breakthroughs that got Osama bin Laden:

In normal times, the officials who uncovered the intelligence that led us to Osama bin Laden would get a medal. In the Obama administration, they have been given subpoenas.

On his second day in office, President Barack Obama shut down the CIA’s high-value interrogation program. His Justice Department then reopened criminal investigations into the conduct of CIA interrogators — inquiries that had been closed years before by career prosecutors who concluded that there were no crimes to prosecute. In a speech at the National Archives in May 2009, Mr. Obama accused the men and women of the CIA of “torture,” declaring that their work “did not advance our war and counterterrorism efforts — they undermined them.”

Now, it turns out that those CIA interrogators played a critical role in the killing of Osama bin Laden, which the president has rightly called “the most significant achievement to date in our nation’s effort to defeat al-Qaida.”

Even NOW Obama is refusing to do anything to stop the prosecution of the men and women who gave us bin Laden, even as he flies around taking credit for getting bin Laden.  Should we be giving Obama credit for that???

This nation should be grateful to George W. Bush, and for his courage and foresight to develop the programs and to create the capabilities that ultimately won us this victory against Osama bin Laden.  It was the courage of George Bush that resulted in waterboarding – which Bush and his key advisors KNEW would be used by vile cowards like Barack Obama to demonize them.  But they knew it had to be done, and they did it.

In the same way, Bush created the Guantanamo Bay (“Gitmo”) detention facility.  Bush expanded the rendition program that had been used by Bill Clinton.  Bush created the Patriot Act.  Bush approved of domestic surveillance.  Bush set up the military tribunals that had been used by Democrats like FDR in previous time of war.  Bush established the indefinite detentions of the most hardened terrorists.

Barack Obama personally demonized and vilified all of these things.  But he is using them to this day because they had to be done.

I would argue that the hero of this is George Bush; and that Barack Obama is a self-aggrandizing coward who was forced to use virtually all of the programs that he self-righteously demagogued for political advantage in a way that is frankly treasonous.

Right now we have a treasure trove of intelligence that is likewise nearly entirely the result of the work of George W. Bush.  But be advised: if we don’t shut down al Qaeda now, we probably never will due to the massive failures of the man who sits in the Oval Office as we speak.

In terms of Mr. bin Laden himself, we’ll get him running. We’ll smoke him out of his cave and we’ll get him eventually.” — George W. Bush, October 11, 2001

It was always just a matter of time.  And the time came during the misrule of a hypocritical fool.

How Obama Managed To Screw Up Even The Killing Of Osama Bin Laden

May 6, 2011

It’s really quite amazing: Barack Obama is a near-total failure even when he finally manages to get something right.

Obama’s disasterous bungling of the aftermath of the killing of bin Laden makes me think about that proverbial idiot who managed to kill the goose that laid the golden eggs.

From the UK Telegraph:

10 ways Barack Obama botched the aftermath of the masterful operation to kill Osama bin Laden
By Toby Harnden World Last updated: May 5th, 2011

The past few days have seemed like an extended amateur hour in the White House as unforced error after unforced error has been made in the handling of the US Government’s message about the killing of bin Laden.

We should not forget the bottom line in this: bin Laden was justifiably and legally killed by brave and skilled US Navy SEALs. The operation was audacious and meticulous in its planning and execution. President Barack Obama made the call to carry out the raid and his decision was vindicated in spades.

Having said that, the messiness since then has taken much of the sheen off this success, temporarily at least. Here’s a summary of what went wrong once the most difficult bit had been achieved:

1. It took nearly three days to decide not to release the photographs. I think there was a case for not releasing the pictures, though on balance I think disclosure would have been best. But whichever way Obama went on this, the decision should have been made quickly, on Monday. By letting the world and his dog debate the issue for so long and then say no made the administration look indecisive and appear that it had something to hide. It will fuel the conspiracy theories. And the pictures will surely be leaked anyway.

2. To say that bin Laden was armed and hiding behind a wife being used as a human shield was an unforgiveable embellishment. The way it was expressed by John Brennan was to mock bin Laden as being unmanly and cowardly. It turned out to be incorrect and gave fuel, again, to conspiracy theories as well as accusations of cover-ups and illegality. Of all the mistakes of the week, this was by far the biggest.

3. It was a kill mission and no one should have been afraid to admit that. Bin Laden was a dead man as soon as the SEAL Team landed. There’s nothing wrong with that but the Obama administration should have been honest about it rather than spinning tales about bin Laden having a gun, reaching for a gun (the latest) and resisting (without saying how he resisted).

4. Too much information was released, too quickly and a lot of it was wrong. When it made the administration look good, the information flowed freely. When the tide turned, Jay Carney, Obama’s spokesman, clammed up completely. I’m a journalist; I like it when people talk about things. But from the administration’s perspective, it would have been much better to have given a very sparse, accurate description of what happened without going into too much detail, especially about the intelligence that led to the compound (an account which is necessarily suspect).

5. Obama tried to claim too much credit. Don’t get me wrong, he was entitled to a lot of credit. but sometimes less is more and it’s better to let facts speak for themselves. We didn’t need official after official to say how “gutsy” Obama was. Far better to have heaped praise on the CIA and SEALs (which, to be fair, was done most of the time) and talked less about Obama’s decision-making. And a nod to President George W. Bush would have been classy – and good politics for Obama.

6. Proof of death was needed. The whole point of the SEAL operation, rather than a B2 bombing that levelled the compound, was to achieve certainty. The administration has DNA evidence, facial recognition evidence and photographic evidence. Some combination of that evidence should have been collated and released swiftly. It’s not enough to say, effectively, “Trust me, I’m Obama” – especially given all the misinformation that was put out.

7. The mission should have been a ‘capture’ one. Notwithstanding 3. above and the legitimacy of killing bin Laden, I think a capture of bin Laden was probably possible and, in the long term, would have been better – not least because of the intelligence that could have been gleaned from interrogating him and the couriers. My hunch is that Obama didn’t want him alive because there would have been uncomfortable issues to address like whether he should be tried, where he should be held (it would have been Guantanamo – obviously) and the techniques for questioning him.

8. Obama’s rhetoric lurched from jingoistic to moralistic. During the initial announcement, Obama said that by killing bin Laden “we are once again reminded that America can do whatever we set our mind to”. If Bush had said that, he would have been mocked and laughed at, with some justification. But by today Obama was all preachy and holier than thou saying: “It is important for us to make sure that very graphic photos of somebody who was shot in the head are not floating around as an incitement to additional violence or as a propaganda tool.  That’s not who we are.  We don’t trot out this stuff as trophies.”

9. Triggering a torture debate was an avoidable own goal. Following on from 3. by discussing the intelligence, the administration walked into the issue of whether enhanced interrogation techniques yielded important information. That was certainly something they could have done without. Politically, it gave something for Republicans to use against Obama.

10. The muddle over Pakistan. Everyone I talk to with knowledge of these things tells me that Pakistan had to have given the green light for the raid in some form. But the Pakistanis, for good reasons, would not want this made public. Rather than say it would not comment on whether Pakistan had harboured bin Laden or was playing a double game, the White House poured petrol on the flames by encouraging criticism of Pakistan. That might have been deserved, but in terms of managing the region it was impolitic. The Pakistanis are clearly riled and the contradictions between the US and Pakistani accounts, again, fuel the conspiracy theories.

All this has meant that this week’s media story has become one about Obama and the White House more than one about the SEALs, the CIA and what killing bin Laden means. That’s exactly the wrong way round.

It’s not enough to say that Obama arrogantly and falsely took too much credit, or even that Obama didn’t give Bush and the programs Bush developed enough credit: Obama personally demonized programs that were essential to finally getting Osama bin Laden, and even launched a vendetta to destroy the professionals who gave us the vital information via his attorney general.

Waterboarding and “enhanced interrogation” were absolutely vital to nailing bin Laden.  Even the career Democrat who was Barack Obama’s handpicked man to run the CIA openly acknowledged that:

Asked by NBC-TV’s Brian Williams about the information obtained from detainees that led to the bin Laden takedown, Panetta replied:  ‘We had multiple series of sources that provided information with regards to this situation.  … Clearly some of it came from detainees [and] they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of those detainees.”

When Williams asked whether “waterboarding” was one of those techniques, Panetta replied:  “That’s correct.”

General Michael Hayden, the career intelligence professional who had directed the CIA prior to Leon Panetta, speaking about the CIA program Obama terminated on his second day as president, had this to say:

Michael Hayden said there is no question the CIA program including waterboarding laid the foundation for bin Laden’s capture.

MICHAEL HAYDEN, FMR CIA DIRECTOR ON FOX NEWS RADIO (via telephone): That database was kind of like the home depot of intelligence analysis. You know, it was incredibly detailed stuff.

HERRIDGE: As for its role in identifying this compound in Pakistan —

HAYDEN: It would be very difficult for me to conceive of an operation like the one that took place on Sunday that did not include in its preparation information that came out of the CIA detention program.

It is a well-documented fact, confirmed by both the Republican- and Democrat-appointed Directors of Central Intelligence, that waterboarding led to the breakthrough that finally resulted in nailing Osama bin Laden.

Barack Obama wants to demonize the people and procedures that led to Osama bin Laden’s killing even as he takes credit for what could not possibly have happened without the people and procedures that he demonized.  It is a disgrace.

And Obama is STILL continuing to persecute the CIA professionals who got us the intelligence that got bin Laden via his attorney general attack dog.  He won’t even so much as talk to Holder about his rabid attack dog’s rabid determination to criminalize the professionals whose work led to the result Obama is taking credit forAnd that makes Obama a disgrace.

Then there’s the fact that so many of the events surrounding Barack Obama were staged propaganda.

Of the famous photo supposedly showing Obama and his national security team monitoring and directing the SEAL Team that got Osama bin Laden, we now know that:

Leon Panetta, director of the CIA, revealed there was a 25 minute blackout during which the live feed from cameras mounted on the helmets of the US special forces was cut off.

A photograph released by the White House appeared to show the President and his aides in the situation room watching the action as it unfolded. In fact they had little knowledge of what was happening in the compound.

In an interview with PBS, Mr Panetta said: “Once those teams went into the compound I can tell you that there was a time period of almost 20 or 25 minutes where we really didn’t know just exactly what was going on. And there were some very tense moments as we were waiting for information.

“We had some observation of the approach there, but we did not have direct flow of information as to the actual conduct of the operation itself as they were going through the compound.”

Which is to say that much of the hubub of Obama as commanding figure was simply staged.  It wasn’t real.

Nor were the photos of Obama’s speech announcing that Osama bin Laden had been killed.

And while a liberal might argue that what Obama did has been done before, my response is that there are times when you’ve got to be real and not propaganda, and this was clearly one of those times.

In light of what George Bush did to create programs, build special operations capabilities capable of performing the Pakistan mission that got bin Laden, and even what Barack Obama said during his campaign for president, the decision to capture or kill Osama bin Laden was a no-brainer.

I mean, just imagine the fecal matter that would have struck the rotary oscillator had it emerged that Barack Obama had known for at least six months where Osama bin Laden was – and refused to get him????

That said, the man acted brainless before the decision to get Osama bin Laden, and he’s clearly returned to his brainless form since.

Justice Finally Comes To Osama Bin Laden, American-Style

May 1, 2011

It had to happen eventually.  And it finally has.  Osama bin Laden is in hell where he belongs, where seventy-two very un-virginal demons will tear his flesh for all eternity.

And it came the best way: by the trigger fingers of individual heroes, rather than by the faceless push of a button to activate a missile by a Predator drone.  It is fitting that bin Laden died at the hands of Americans who got to look him in the eye as they facilitated his journey to the eternally burning trash pit in the sky.

And just to add some icing to the cake, the reports are that they killed Osama bin Laden’s oldest son in the attack, too.

Osama bin Laden Killed; ID Confirmed by DNA Testing
By DEAN SCHABNER and KAREN TRAVERS
May 1, 2011

Osama bin Laden, hunted as the mastermind behind the worst-ever terrorist attack on U.S. soil, has been killed, sources told ABC News.

Bin Laden was killed in a ground attack by Joint Special Operations Command forces working with the CIA, not a drone strike, a national security source told ABC News.

According to a national security source, a compound in Pakistan where  the terrorist mastermind was believed to be had been monitored for months. When the decision was made to move on it, special operations forces were sent across the border from Afghanistan to launch a ground attack and take the body.

DNA testing confirmed that it was bin Laden, sources told ABC News.

Vice President Biden has reached out to congressional leadership to update them on the news tonight.

“This is a terrific day for America and quite frankly the whole world that cares about winning the war on terror,” former Bush chief of staff Andy Card told ABC News. Card said the news is “particularly significant” for the intelligence community.

“They’re the ones who kept their nose to the grindstone and worked very hard to allow this day to be realized … finally,” he said.

[The rest of the ABC story is mostly biographical on who bin Laden was and what he did.  You may read it here].

My congratulations and heartfelt appreciation go out to all the intelligence and military professionals who brought about this fitting end.

As President George Bush put it on October 11, 2001:

In terms of Mr. bin Laden himself, we’ll get him running. We’ll smoke him out of his cave and we’ll get him eventually.”

It was just a matter of time.

Anyone who has read one paragraph of my blog knows that I am a fierce critic of President Barack Obama.  But he and his administration deserve credit for approving the actions that led to this day of reckoning.  Obama also displayed some class in how he first called former President Bush and then cited him in his announcement of bin Laden’s killing.  

That said, the city where bin Laden was killed – Abbottabad – was a military district headquarters.  And the early releases are claiming that the Pakistani government was not informed prior to the raid that got Osama bin Laden.  And the fact that bin Laden was staying in a large walled security compound only 100 yards from a Pakistani military facility tells you that bin Laden was almost certainly being protected by at least a faction of the Pakistani military.

Given how badly we need Pakistan and other key Muslim countries to cooperate with us if we are to be able to use anything other than a “Kill them all; let God sort them out” policy, Pakistan’s apparent duplicity and its cooperation with al Qaeda is not good news.

The war on terror isn’t over.  It might even intensify, as the terrorist network al Qaeda looks for vengeance.  It’ s who they are; it’s what they do.  Here, for instance, is a story that al Qaeda threatened a “nuclear hellstorm” if America killed or captured bin Laden.  Rest assured, al Qaeda will be determined to do something that will seek to restore their honor and credibility in the Islamic world as a result of this raid.

What will happen as a result of this raid and the killing of bin Laden?  Will Pakistan be embarrassed into more cooperation with the U.S., or will they be embarrassed into LESS cooperation with the U.S.?  Did conducting a massively consequential military operation in a foreign country without notifying its leaders make that country a better friend, or a less trustworthy foe?  Under the presidency of Barack Obama, U.S.-Pakistani relationships have soured to an all-time low.  Did this attack on their country improve those relations?  What will happen as a direct result of this attack?

I don’t even want to think about what would have happened had a Pakistani military or police unit fired on the U.S. special operations forces.

If liberals are consistent, they will immediately denounce President Obama and demonize him for further antagonizing the Islamic world and for risking an escalation of terrorism.

The problem with that is that it is total crap.  And whether liberals like it or not, we are in a war for the survival of our culture against a culture of hate.

George Bush put it best describing countries and their attitude toward the United States: “You’re either with us or against us in the fight against terror.”  That statement was met with incredible criticism and condemnation from the left.  And yet, in what way did Obama’s actions today do anything other than reinforce that that was the only attitude we could realistically take?

The left has been proven fundamentally and profoundly wrong in its attitude toward the war on terror.  And it should be obvious by now that the only way to be successful is to not just follow George Bush’s example, but to actually try to “out-Bush” Bush’s example.

And Obama has largely “out-Bushed” Bush in Pakistan.  President Bush did not want to cause a deterioration in U.S.-Pakistani relations, because he viewed Pakistani cooperation as key in the war on terror.  Obama, in using drone attacks and now direct military action, has been far more aggressive in “taking the war” to Pakistan.

Another example of “out-Bushing Bush” would be the Libya attack.  George Bush – decried as the “imperial president” for his attack on Iraq – at least had constitutional authorization for that action (i.e,. the Iraq War Resolution).  Obama took the “cowboy” route in Libya without bothering to obtain permission from any constitutional authority whatsoever.  Except the “world.”  Obama’s actions should serve to amply demonstrate just how hypocritical and utterly vacuous George W. Bush’s liberal critics truly were.

Liberals said that Bush’s attack on Iraq was a provocation that would make the war on terror worse.  They said that the war on terror was a provocation.  They said the surge was a provocation.  And we shouldn’t be provoking the Muslim world like that.

Let me assure you, what those spec op warriors just did in their raid on that compound in Pakistan was an in-your-face provocation.

What’s the long-term effect of this degraded relationship with Pakistan going to be?  I have no idea.  But any liberal who wants to tell me that “cooperative” liberal policies are working where “confrontational” conservative ones have failed is simply an imbecile.  Because what just happened clearly proves the exact opposite.  And when you consider the fact that Obama has already pursued Bush’s policies on Guantanamo Bay, rendition, domestic eavesdropping, the Patriot Act, military tribunals, indefinite detentions and a host of other polices, George Bush and Dick Cheney stand as men proven correct.

We cannot relent.  Because our enemies will not relent.  They are determined to murder.  It is a virtue for them.  It is a religious duty.  And the 9/11 attack was a religious act.

If these terrorists want to get in America’s face or try to intimidate the American people, America should make sure that its warriors give them a giant shot to the nose that they will never forget in response.  Whether we speak softly or loudly, I don’t really care; just make sure that we always carry one big giant stick, and demonstrate the willingness to use that big giant stick on anyone who wants to make trouble for us.

And so there is one more thing to say: if President Obama tries to take political advantage of the killing of Osama bin Laden, we should make sure the American people know that Obama is planning to gut the budget of the U.S. military that just killed bin Laden.

Our warriors should smile and give one another hearty high-fives for this victory.  And then they need to get right back to work.  Because what they do is vital for their country, whether their country has the moral intelligence to understand that or not.

What I most like about this is that it sends a message.  Even ten years later, the United States of America will continue to hunt you down and kill you if you kill her citizens.  And that is a message that Republican and Democrat alike ought to be able to unite around.

Update: we are now learning that it was a squadron of forty U.S. Navy SEALs from Team 6 who conducted the raid that got bin Laden.  God bless you guys.

And now we are even beginning to learn that “enhanced interrogation” may very well have given us the information breakthrough that got us bin Laden.

Obama Orders Spec Ops To Go Barefoot Into Libya (No Boots On The Ground)

April 1, 2011

Associated Press, March 18: Obama has declared that the U.S. will not deploy ground troops in Libya or use force beyond protecting people.

New York Times, March 31: “President Obama’s top two national security officials signaled on Thursday that the United States was unlikely to arm the Libyan rebels

Reuters, March 30:

President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing covert U.S. government support for rebel forces seeking to oust Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, government officials told Reuters on Wednesday.

Obama signed the order, known as a presidential “finding”, within the last two or three weeks, according to government sources familiar with the matter.

Such findings are a principal form of presidential directive used to authorize secret operations by the Central Intelligence Agency. This is a necessary legal step before such action can take place but does not mean that it will.

As is common practice for this and all administrations, I am not going to comment on intelligence matters,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said in a statement. “I will reiterate what the president said yesterday — no decision has been made about providing arms to the opposition or to any group in Libya.”

A couple of things. 

1) Obama said “the US will not … use force beyond protecting people.”  He said that on March 18.  Less than two weeks later, Obama signs a “secret order” (note to self, see if the meaning of “secret” includes having four White House sources blabbing about it to the press) “seeking to oust Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.”

Conclusion #1: Obama is a gigantic liar.  But anyone who’s been following this weasel’s career has known that since he began his run for the presidency by breaking his personal promise to fill his entire six-year Senate term.

Conclusion #2: Obama is also a rather awful secret-keeper.

2) “President Obama’s top two national security officials signaled on Thursday that the United States was unlikely to arm the Libyan rebels.”  Compared with, “no decision has been made about providing arms to the opposition or to any group in Libya.”

Conclusion #1: Wtf?!?!

Conclusion #2: Eventually somebody over there is going to get some kind of clue as to what is going on in the “Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride” of Obama’s brain.

3)  “Obama has declared that the U.S. will not deploy ground troops in Libya” compared to the “presidential directive used to authorize secret operations by the Central Intelligence Agency

Conclusion #1: Does anybody not realize that a lot of military guys are military one day and “CIA” the next?  It’s called “TDY,” temporary duty.  And even the CIA guys who will be performing these “secret operations” are going to almost certainly be Special Activities Division guys.  And the SAD doesn’t get its applicants from clown school: they get them from the baddest Delta, SEAL, Special Forces, Force Recon and sniper guys.  And these guys tend to wear boots.

There might be a few tweed-jacketed agent-man types going in.  But most of them will be special operations guys.  France and Britain have openly acknowledged that they’ve got their military spec ops guys.  Contrary to our Liar-in-Chief, our guys are in there, too.

That’s in addition to the 2200 Marines who were ordered to float around off the Libyan Coast, btw.

It’s also in addition to the boots that were already on the ground rescuing the pilots who bailed out of a U.S. Navy fighter.

Conclusion #2: Maybe we can get Obama to sing us the rap song “Boots on the Ground” to a tune with a similar name and beat:

On How Obama Will Damage America For Decades To Come

September 30, 2010

Obama is a disaster in every possible sphere of leadership.

But the question then becomes, “In which particular sphere does Obama’s disastrous failure of leadership represent the greatest danger to America?”

Thomas Sowell answers the question:

September 28, 2010
A Warning from Thomas Sowell
Anthony Kang

Frankly, there aren’t enough words or superlatives in the English dictionary to describe the great Thomas Sowell. With an unparalleled gift to explain even the most complicated subjects in simple and easily understandable terms, few can match the pedigree and contributions of the Hoover Institute senior fellow. Author of the new book, “Dismantling America,” Sowell recently sat down for an interview with Investors Business Daily’s David Hogberg. And along with a few priceless jabs at Michelle Obama, sociology, Newsweek, and the public education system, Dr. Sowell discussed why he (like Niall Ferguson) believes America may be entering a prolonged period of decline.

“The only analogy I can think of from history is when the Norman conquerors of England published their laws in French for an English-speaking nation,” Sowell says about the Obama administration’s governing style, a style he characterizes as unconstitutional.

As someone who, if forced to, would label himself as more libertarian than conservative — though he has irked many with his support of American combat missions in Iraq — most noteworthy (and a bit shocking) about the interview is what Sowell believes the greatest threat is — terrorism, Iran’s nuclear ambitions and the international scene. Questioned as to what some of the current markers of national decline are, it isn’t “huge bills that fundamentally change the way the economy operates,” reckless government spending, social engineering programs and the national debt which worry the economist the most, it is national security and President Obama’s foreign policy.

And Sowell makes a few not-so-subtle Neville Chamberlain analogies that are almost impossible to ignore:

Of course, the one that trumps them all is on the international scene. That’s where Iran is moving toward nuclear weapons. I’m just staggered at how little attention is being paid to that compared to frivolous things. If a nation with a record of sponsoring international terrorism gets nuclear weapons, that changes everything and it changes it forever.
Someday historians may wonder what were we thinking about when you look at the imbalance of power between the U.S. and Iran, and we sat there with folded hands and watched this happen, going through just enough motions at the United Nations to lull the public to sleep. That, I think, is the biggest threat.

Sowell also condemns the president for affronting our allies (in particular, the British and Israelis) in “clever” yet unmistakable ways the general public may not notice, further hastening America’s decline:

His first foreign policy gambit was to fly to Russia and offer to renege on the American commitment to put a missile shield in Eastern Europe…All he really got out of that was a demonstration of his amateurishness and of his willingness to sell out allies in hopes of winning over enemies. That ploy was tried in the 1930s and didn’t work all that well.

These are no ordinary times, with no ordinary president. Leading up to the historic “Hope and Change” election, commentators on the Right could not possibly have attacked Obama and his intentions to fundamentally change the identity and economy of America more than they already had. Even so, not only has President Obama fulfilled every single “fear-mongering” indictment down to a tee, he’s exceeded them — making even some his most extreme opponents look clairvoyant. So with keeping that in mind, and considering all the new challenges we face domestically, that one of the greatest economic minds of our time would still elevate national security and terrorism to such a level truly speaks volumes about the reality and situation of Iran.

Also citing the lack of expertise and national discussion in international issues, former U.S. Ambassador John Bolton confirmed to Greg Gutfeld that he was seriously considering a presidential run on Red Eye last week. Bolton-Sowell 2012? One can only dream. But hey, if a community organizer can get elected, why not someone with ten times the accomplishments and wisdom?

I’ve said many of the same things, myself.  Just not as well, and not as succinctly.  For example, I said:

If Iran gets its nukes, it will be able to do a number of things: 1) attack Israel, assuring Israel that if it uses its nukes against Iran, Iran will use its nukes against Israel; 2) shut down the Strait of Hormuz, which would immediately drive up the price of oil.  The cost of gasoline in the U.S. would soar above $15 a gallon; 3) dramatically increase Iranian-sponsored terrorism worldwide.

If you don’t believe that a nuclear-armed Iran would pick a minimum of one of these options, you’re just nuts.

Just as I also pointed out that Obama was enraging our enemies even as he alienated our allies.

It shouldn’t take a rocket scientist to see that Iran is employing a lot of rocket scientists to create a ballistic nuclear missile capable of striking the United States and Israel.  But when Democrats are in charge, even the most trivial aspects of common sense are akin to the most sophisticated form of theoretical mathematics.

It is a fact – a FACT – that George Bush tried to deal with the threat of Iran when it was possible to avert their nuclear ambitions; but that Democrats did everything they could to prevent him from succeeding against the insane jihadist regime.  I quoted an LA Times article from just three years ago in which every single Democrat presidential candidate stated that Iran was not a meaningful threat, and in which they denounced Bush’s efforts to draw attention to the danger posed by Iran:

“DES MOINES — Democratic presidential candidates teamed up during a National Public Radio debate here Tuesday to blast the Bush administration over its policy toward Iran, arguing that a new intelligence assessment proves that the administration has needlessly ratcheted up military rhetoric.

While the candidates differed somewhat over the level of threat Iran poses in the Mideast, most of them sought to liken the administration’s approach to Iran with its buildup to the war in Iraq.”

But the fact that the failure to deal with Iran rests ENTIRELY in Democrats’ hands won’t stop them from blaming Bush when Iran rears its vicious head against the world.  Any more than it stopped them from blaming Bush for the 2008 economic collapse in spite of the fact that they had had total control of Congress for the previous two years, and even though they had repeatedly prevented Bush from regulating and reforming GSEs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – which were at the epicenter of the disaster.

It’s just what cowards do.  And the Democrat Party is the party of moral cowardice going back to at least the Carter years, if not dating back to the waning days of the LBJ administration.

You can go back and review the record.  Nearly 60% of the Democrats in the U.S. Senate (29 out of 50) voted to authorize the Iraq War Resolution.  Furthermore, virtually every single top Democrat was on the factual record agreeing with George Bush and supporting his reasoning to attack Saddam Hussein –

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/bushlied.htm
http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html
http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

– and yet Democrats en masse cowardly, despicably, and I would argue treasonously, turned on Bush and turned on our troops in time of war.  For no other reason than to treacherously obtain a cheap political advantage aided and abetted by a mainstream media propaganda apparatus that could have come right out of the vile brain of Joseph Goebbels.

In addition to their opposition to the Iraq War (which again 60% of Senate Democrats voted for, only to repudiate and claim Bush deceived them), Democrats opposed the Patriot Act; opposed Domestic Surveillance which allowed the US to track calls from international terrorists into the United States; opposed Gitmo, even though it is the clearly the ONLY reasonable place to hold incredibly dangerous terrorists that no country wants; opposed allowing terrorists to be tried in military tribunals to safeguard intelligence techniques and personnel, and to prevent the court system from being hijacked by enemies of freedom; opposed  even the most reasonable use of profiling to weed out terrorists intent upon murdering Americans; and even declared surrender in the vile “I believe that … this war is lost” statement of Harry Reid, the Democrat Senate Majority Leader.  I could go on.  It boils down to the fact that the left despise anything that help us win the war on terror or protect us from terrorism.

"RUN AWAY!!!"

"RUN AWAY!!!"

To the extent that Barack Obama has done anything – ANYTHING – right at all in the war on terror, it has only been because he repudiated himself and demonstrated that he was either an incompetent fool or a lying hypocrite.  Obama – after publicly denouncing, undermining and alienating the CIA – has continued the policy of “torture” by continuing the policy of “rendition” in which terror suspects are sent to other countries that use torture.  Obama – after continually denouncing Bush over Gitmo – has STILL not closed the facility down two full years after usurping the office of the presidency with lies.  Obama is using a surge strategy in Afghanistan after denouncing Bush’s successful surge strategy in Iraq and blatantly predicting it would fail.  And Obama is now continuing the Bush policy of using predator drones to attack terrorist positions inside Pakistan that US Special Operations forces cannot reach.

That said, Obama – in denouncing Iraq (the war we could and did win) while demanding we massively build-up in Afghanistan (our second Vietnam) may well prove to be the most disastrous military quagmire since the LAST time Democrats led us into the actual Vietnam.

Iran WILL get the nuclear bomb.  Democrats guaranteed that Iran would be able to do so.

Iran will become a plague upon global peace and security unlike anything the world has ever seen at least since the rise of the Nazis and the abject failure of FDR and Neville Chamberlain to deal with the clear and present danger.

And when that day comes, America will be unable to meaningfully deal with it because Barack Obama and the Democrat Party made us economically incapable of rising to any significant occasion.