As I have said before in this space, operating outside of the realm of believability has been a deliberate tactic of this regime, and a largely complicit establishment press contributed to its success.
Thus, despite overwhelming evidence, many Americans will still find it difficult to accept that the rise of ISIS was facilitated by the nObama administration.
As reported in WND this week, ISIS members were trained in 2012 by U.S. instructors working at a secret base in Jordan; this has been confirmed not only by officials in Jordan, but in both the German and British press.
Are Americans now expected to believe that ISIS is among the “moderate” Muslim factions the administration has maintained it is imperative to support, for which nObama went to the lengths of first clandestinely arming and supplying, and then unilaterally amending U.S. law so that he might do so overtly?
Both nObama and former Secretary of State dHillarious Clinton have had a lot to say on the subject of the ISIS campaign, the former because he can scarcely avoid it (not for lack of trying) and the latter because she wants to be president. In keeping with the narrative that the advent of ISIS was news to all involved, both chastised Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and the government of Iraq in general. Prior to flitting off for a weekend of golf last Friday, nObama admonished the Iraqi government to “set aside sectarian differences” with the advancing Islamist horde. On CNN and Fox News this week, Clinton went so far as to say that Malaki’s “purging” the military resulted in Iraq’s vulnerability to ISIS.
Their words are rather laughable in a maudlin sort of way, considering that thousands of people are dying as a direct result of their foreign policy, but even more so because the obliviousness being projected is so blatantly counterfeit; it belies the calculated evil that the administration (of which Clinton was recently a part) has employed to bring events to this juncture.
A few of us have maintained over the last few years that the goal of Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Islamists has been to establish a global caliphate – Muslim supremacy worldwide – starting with the Middle East. In fact, the “Arab Spring,” sold to us as a democratic movement and catalyzed by the nObama administration, was its coming-out party.
Well, that was just a conspiracy theory (liberals’ new schoolyard taunt), and those who advanced that sort of talk were just big, fat Islamophobes. ISIS has changed all that, inasmuch as they have plainly stated that establishing the caliphate is precisely their goal. Department of Homeland Security Senior Adviser Mohamed Elibary, nObama’s Muslim Brotherhood plant in the DHS, recently stated on social media it is “inevitable” that the caliphate returns.
Most Americans are unaware that the last caliphate, the Ottoman Empire, which encompassed Northern Africa, the entire Middle East, Turkey and parts of Eastern Europe, only ended in 1924. The Ottomans repeatedly made war upon Europe, enslaved and sold both Africans and whites, and engaged in piracy for 800 years beginning in the 13th century.
And then we have Benghazi. As many have already noted, it is quite interesting that amidst the flurry of the Select Committee investigating the attack of September 2012, the Veterans Administration scandal, the Berghdal-Taliban swap and the “humanitarian crisis” involving thousands of illegal immigrant children showing up uninvited on our southern border – all of which, by the way, are being widely seen as the fault of this administration – the White House just happens to find the stars aligned in such a manner that they are finally able to apprehend Ahmed Abu Khattala, the Ansar al-Sharia commander accused of playing a major role in the attack on the Benghazi compound.
All of the above has conspired to give the lie to nObama’s foreign policy rhetoric and render increasingly suspect the actions he’s taken in pursuing that policy. In a recent interview, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., said, “Never in my political career in my memory did it ever occur to me that we would have a president of the United States who would be doing things supporting the enemy. Our system isn’t set up for Congress to deal with this kind of a situation.”
Inhofe stopped just short of using the appropriate designation for this president’s actions, one which I pray will be applied soon enough: Treason.