The Patriot Post® · Daily Digest
“It is a principle incorporated into the settled policy of America, that as peace is better than war, war is better than tribute.” —James Madison, 1816
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
By Mark Alexander
On Friday morning, Barack Obama peddled his failed Middle East foreign policy of appeasement in an interview with ABC. When asked about the strength of the Islamic State, Obama responded, “I don’t think they’re gaining strength. What is true is that from the start, our goal has been first to contain and we have contained them.”
Obama responded to the attack, saying, “I don’t want to speculate at this point in terms of who was responsible for this.” He continued, “Once again we’ve seen an outrageous attempt to terrorize innocent civilians.” No, actually this was not an “attempt.” They most certainly succeeded.
Obama declared, “We stand together with the French in the fight against terrorism and extremism.” Blinded by his admiration for Islam, Obama just can’t bring himself to say “Islamic terrorism” or “Muslim extremism.”
Of course his assertion that “we stand together with the French” is true, in the tragic sense that France’s Socialist President Francois Hollande has followed Obama’s model of appeasing Islamic Jihad. And for the second time this year, the French are paying a heavy price for such appeasement.
Obama and Hillary Clinton are a case study in foreign policy failure. They have squandered all the blood and treasure we expended in Iraq, resulting in a Middle East meltdown. Their policy legacy is framed by holocaust and humanitarian crisis, and a wave of unprecedented terror that is emigrating to Europe and the U.S.
Recall if you will the prophetic warning issued by George W. Bush in July 2007: “To begin withdrawing from Iraq … will be dangerous for Iraq, for the region and for the United States. It will mean surrendering the future of Iraq to al-Qa'ida. It means that we would be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It will mean we would allow terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they had in Afghanistan. It will mean that American troops will have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.”
President Bush took the battle to the enemy in order to keep the front on their turf, not ours. Obama has retreated, opening the door for Islamists to move the front to our homeland.
In my analysis last year on the threat to our homeland, “Islamic Jihad — Target USA,” I noted, “The most likely near-term form of attack against civilians on our turf, will be modeled after the conventional Islamist assaults in the Middle East, bombings and shootings, as we have now seen in Paris, London, Berlin, Sydney, Toronto, Boston, New York and Washington. This type of attack is low tech but effective in terms of instilling public fear with the long-term goal of civil acquiescence.”
Indeed, on the eve of the Paris attack, the “chatter” on Islamic websites was, “American blood is best, and we will taste it soon.”
Jihad has been around for 1,400 years, and having just celebrated the 1775 founding of the Marine Corps I note that one of the Marines’ earliest deployments after we became a nation was under Thomas Jefferson against the Islamist Barbary Pirates in 1801. Islamic Jihadists have been terrorizing the world for a long time, and in the last three decades they have emerged again with much deadlier consequences, most notably the 9/11 attack on our homeland — the masterminds of which came into the U.S. on Bill Clinton’s watch.
On Obama’s watch, there have already been numerous smaller attacks, among the more bloody Islamist assaults at Ft. Hood in Texas and here in Chattanooga. This is the result of appeasement — and the consequences are coming to a theater near YOU!
This year, the Islamic State has posted numerous online “kill lists” of U.S. military personnel with their names, addresses and photos. Perhaps we should reconsider Obama’s plan to seed 10,000 Syrian Muslims in communities across our nation, now that at least one of the terrorists entered France masquerading as a refugee. Of course, the first wave of “refugees” has already arrived, many of whom fit neatly into the Islamic terrorist profile. (Perhaps they should only be sent to “sanctuary cities.”)
And in a final gesture of appeasement, last week Obama approved the release of five more Islamist detainees from Gitmo. The Yemeni radicals arrived in their Middle East host country just hours after the Paris attack.
Power does not tolerate a vacuum, and Republicans better get it right.
By Louis DeBroux
Following the attacks in Paris Friday, French President Francois Hollande issued a statement calling them “a horror” and “an act of war,” vowing to be “merciless” in fighting terrorism. Calling the attacks to be “against us all,” the leaders of the European Union issued a joint statement, saying, “We will face this threat together with all necessary means and ruthless determination. Everything that can be done at European level to make France safe will be done. We will do what is necessary to defeat extremism, terrorism and hatred.”
It will be interesting to see if European leaders indeed keep these promises. Until now, these same leaders have responded to Islamic jihad with calls for tolerance, mutual respect, inclusion and even a level of introspection in order to determine how Western culture is to blame. It has been a policy of intentional weakness and capitulation, even as the Islamic State and other terrorist groups become bolder in their rhetoric, and their attacks more frequent and more violent.
Despite Obama’s claim in 2011, as he pulled out all American forces from Iraq, that he was leaving behind a “stable, sovereign and self-reliant Iraq,” the reality is that the Islamic State was born in the aftermath of America’s departure, filling the power void left in our absence. More violent even than al-Qaida, from which it came, the Obama-dubbed “JV team” swept across the region, taking and holding land, easily defeating military units in place to stop their advance, gathering up abandoned guns and combat equipment as they went.
In recent weeks, the Islamic State claimed responsibility for the mid-air bombing of a Russian airliner, resulting in the loss of more than 200 souls. With this wave of attacks it can no longer be denied that the Islamic State and its affiliated groups, and the so-called “lone wolves” they recruit, have the power to reach out and bring death to our cities. A response of fecklessness, hand-wringing and mea culpas will only increase the body counts each time we are attacked.
It is time for Obama to admit his central campaign theme in 2012 — that “al-Qaida is on the run” — was a blatant lie, and that we are in more danger now than at any time since the Twin Towers were brought down. It is a false narrative he is desperate to maintain.
Don’t miss the rest of this article here.
By Arnold Ahlert
Denialism was on full display Friday when Americans learned the first group of what will ultimately amount to 10,000 Syrian and Afghan “refugees” arrived in New Orleans, prior to their dispersal into other areas of Louisiana — and another 180 American communities. New Orleans FBI chief and anti-terrorism expert Jim Bernazzani voiced the obvious: “If I was in charge of ISIL, logistically I’d take advantage of this situation and put my people in, into the United States.” He then assured us the FBI and the joint Terrorism Task Force will thoroughly vet these individuals.
Really? Then why did FBI Assistant Director Michael Steinbach and DHS Director Matthew Emrich both admit there is no system to reliably screen these individuals? Moreover, what can the nation expect in terms of vetting from an administration so mired in political correctness, the FBI ignored multiple Russian warnings regarding the radicalization of Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev?
At least one of the jihadi attackers in France registered as a Syrian refugee. Think that won’t happen here? Barack Obama just opened the jihadi pipeline into the U.S.
Obama saved his most contemptible flight from reality for his speech to the nation as the attacks were unfolding. It was then he told America this cascade of orchestrated killing was “an attack not just on Paris, it’s an attack not just on the people of France, but this is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values we share.”
Universal values? Do we all behead children, enslave and rape women, throw acid in the faces of schoolgirls, hoist beheaded people up on crosses, murder them in cages set afire, or engage in genocidal ethnic cleansing of unbelievers? Yet it is not just our morally bereft president who perpetrates the despicable notion that “all cultures are equally viable.” Equally feckless leaders such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel, UK Prime Minster David Cameron and, yes, French President François Hollande have rolled out the multicultural welcome mat to millions of Middle Eastern Muslims, assuring their respective peoples that fears of terrorist infiltration are overblown at best, or xenophobic at worst. After the attack Hollande vowed that France “will be merciless toward the barbarians of Islamic State group” and promised his government would “act by all means anywhere, inside or outside the country.”
Too late, François. As columnist Mark Steyn so rightly notes, “The barbarians are inside, and there are no gates.”
Don’t miss the rest of this article here.
By Robin Smith
What did you miss on Saturday night?
All three Democrats seeking the nomination — Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley — are committed to chronicling problems through the lens of an expansive government, and they’re offering no actual solutions to any issue at hand: Islamic terrorism, employment, health care, government spending and the deficit, et al.
With the first hour focusing almost most entirely on national security and foreign policy, the rhetoric from Clinton was sharp and harsh toward the terror caused by jihadists. Contra Barack Obama’s foolish and unbelievably ill-timed boast that he had “contained” the Islamic State, Clinton proclaimed, “It cannot be contained. It must be defeated.”
Past the sweeping statement, however, the former secretary of state stood firm in refusing to use the terminology “radical Islam” when asked specifically. “I don’t think we’re at war with Islam,” she insisted. “I don’t think we’re at war with all Muslims. I think we’re at war with jihadists.”
So does she believe there are Christian “jihadists” beheading “infidels” and blowing themselves up with suicide vests?
More tellingly, Clinton insisted, “[I]t cannot be an American fight.” Only if Democrats abandon the field of battle.
Not one of the three representing Democrats would agree to acknowledge the need to fight and defeat “radical Islam.” In a sane world, such deliberate obfuscation should be disqualifying for anyone seeking to serve as commander in chief.
The declaration of the night that captured the complete folly of the Left on keeping Americans safe came during a similar line of questioning. CBS’s John Dickerson addressed Vermont Socialist Bernie Sanders: “You said you want to rid the planet of ISIS. In the previous debate you said the greatest threat to national security was climate change. Do you still believe that?”
“Absolutely,” Sanders responded. “In fact, climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism.” As this unfathomably absurd correlation rolled out of the mouth of a poster-child of the Left, Clinton and O'Malley were content to remain silent with no challenge or follow up to press Sanders’ lame-brained statement. Perhaps that’s because this trope accurately reflects the sentiments and priorities of both Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry. Sheer idiocy.
And they call us the deniers.
Don’t miss the rest of this article here.
MORE ORIGINAL PERSPECTIVE
- Senate Undermines UN Climate Change Treaty
- Iran Gains Upper Hand in Nuke Treaty
- Jihadi John ‘Evaporated’ in U.S. Airstrike, Officials Say
- Liberal Professor’s Choice Words for Student Fascists
BEST OF RIGHT OPINION
- Peggy Noonan: Republicans Are Ready to Rumble
- George Will: On Campus, a Freedom From Speech
- Jonah Goldberg: Forced Voting Follies
For more, visit Right Opinion.
- Payback: France Launches Airstrike on ISIS Capital of Raqqa
- Alabama, Michigan Governors Refuse to Relocate Syrian Refugees
- Paris Jihadi on the Run Slipped Through Police Dragnet
For more, visit Patriot Headline Report
OPINION IN BRIEF
Peggy Noonan: “It’s to the credit of Republicans that they are having [numerous policy] debates. But a party wrestling with these issues is by definition not unified. The Democrats, for all their small struggles, are. They are disciplined. Their central organizing principle is getting and holding power. The Republicans this year have more intellectual vitality and engagement. That they are split about ideas, stands, principles is to their credit. They are acting out what politics was meant to be. But that civic virtue is a political liability. At this point — early, but certain trends are obvious — the Democrats have the advantage. They want one thing. The Republicans want many serious and opposing things. … [I]s this the time for candidates to do to each other what Newt Gingrich did to Mitt Romney in 2012, grinding him up and handing him on a platter to the Democrats? I wondered last spring if 2016 would come down to Boring versus Bloody — a dull, peaceful Democratic coronation; a Republican rumble from which the nominee emerges damaged beyond repair. The Democrats are depending on the Republicans to bloody each other in that way. They’re depending on Republicans to be stupid.”
Insight: “I have witnessed five major wars in my lifetime, and I know how swiftly storm clouds can gather on a peaceful horizon. The next time a Saddam Hussein takes over Kuwait, or North Korea brandishes a nuclear weapon, will we be ready to respond? In the end, it all comes down to leadership, and that is what this country is looking for now.” —The Gipper
Upright: “Obama … on Friday morning told ABC News that ‘we have contained’ Islamic State. Some are saying Mr. Obama is guilty of bad timing, but the truth is worse: The remark is what he believes, or at least what he has wanted Americans to believe. … Mr. Obama’s every instinct has been to suggest that America will be safer if we stop provoking jihadists and treat them as common criminals. Paris shows how mistaken that is.” —The Wall Street Journal
Some ‘splaining to do: “The president was referring very specifically to the question of ISIL’s geographic expansion in Iraq and Syria. They had been on the march in both Iraq and Syria for some time. But starting a year ago, we were able to halt that expansion.” —Ben Rhodes (Memo to Obama: Jihadistan has no borders.)
Non Compos Mentis, part I: “[W]hen you have drought, when people can’t grow their crops, they’re going to migrate into cities. And when people migrate into cities and they don’t have jobs, there’s going to be a lot more instability, a lot more unemployment, and people will be subject to the types of propaganda that al-Qaida and ISIS are using right now. So where you have discontent, where you have instability, that’s where problems arise, and certainly, without a doubt, climate change will lead to that.” —Bernie Sanders, doubling down on the ridiculous assertion that global warming produces terrorism
Non Compos Mentis, part II: “In just two weeks, more than 100 heads of state will gather in Paris to negotiate the world’s first global agreement on climate change. Their job, in the aftermath of the tragic attacks, has never been more important.” —Slate’s Eric Holthaus in his article, “Bernie Is Absolutely Right: Climate Change Makes Terrorism Worse”
Annals of the absurd: “We are united in mourning all lives lost to gun violence.” —Moms Demand Action, an anti-gun group, on the Paris jihadi attacks
And last… “Nothing says 'tough on terrorism’ like taking 10,000 Syrian ‘refugees’ into the U.S, and releasing 5 Yemenis from Gitmo.” —Twitter satirist @hale_razor
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson
Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.