Pres. Obama does not like his ideas about terrorism challenged. He also does not like Donald Trump to criticize his efforts to stop terrorism in the U.S., not matter how much of a failure it has been in stopping acts like Orlando. As a result, his White House speech was essentially a temper tantrum, giving clues to how he viewed the world of Islam. Instead of apologizing for not keeping America safe from terrorists like Omar Mateen, he said he was keeping us safe by attacking ISIL in the Middle East, Syria, Iraq. That's because he can't blame himself. He can't be the reason why terrorist acts keep happening in the U.S. What's left? Republicans, Trump, guns and ISIL.
The problem is that although ISIL claimed credit for the Orlando killing, there is no direct link between ISIL and the killer's actions. It's more likely that he was influenced by an Islamic cleric who recently visited a mosque and went on a tirade against homosexuals, suggesting that they be killed for transgressing the dictates of Islam.
Obama seems to be more comfortable with talking about people of various sexual orientation than getting serious about opposing terrorism in America.
“Friends who are lesbian gay, trans-sexual and transgender,” he says. He is willing to describe thusly, even though he does not know for sure whether there were any trans-sexual or transgender people at the Pulse nightclub in the early morning of June 13. “Our friends, allies all over the world, stand with you,” he says early in his speech. But even for the LGBT crowd, which obviously has a defender in Obama, is that enough?
One of Mateen’s coworkers, a security guard where he worked, reported him because of his outrageous and inflammatory mannerisms, he propensity for terrorist hyperbole. This was a nationally known security firm, G4S Secure Solutions USA, Inc. He reportedly complained to his supervisor more than once about his outbursts. The company did transfer his to an unarmed position after the complaint, but did not fire him.
Obama says he works to succeed 100 percent of the time. An attacker has only to succeed once, he says. Thus, the president wants to get credit for trying. We are trying. Give us credit for trying, even though 50 people are dead in Orlando. This is Obama’s problem: terrorism on U.S. soil since 9/11. How sophisticated have we, the U.S., become in stopping terrorism since 9/11, since Bush held office? We have a department of Homeland Security. An entire federal department devoted to fighting terrorism.
There have at least four terrorists attacks that have killed massive amounts of Americans since Obama became president. There was Ft. Hood, San Bernadino, Boston and Orlando. Each of these incidents had clues that they were about to occur, or that the person allowed into the country could possibly be converted to an Islamic extremist. None of these incidents showed that we have done enough to keep potential terrorists from entering the country, or stop them if they are already here. In fact, a noteworthy cleric spouting terrorist rhetoric visited a mosque in Orlando within a few months of the Orlando attack. Students come into the country and claim asylum. The U.S. is none the wiser.
Still, Obama persists with his ISIL theory to stop terrorism in the U.S.
Here is a list of all of the improvements:
* Special forces battling ISIL in Syria.
* Advisers to work closely with Iraqui security forces.
* Additional support for local forces in Northern Iraq.
* Aircraft launching air strikes from the U.S.S. Harry Truman.
* B-52 bombers are hitting ISIL with precision strikes, so far 13,000 strikes.
* Destroyed oil supply lines, cash supply areas.
“So far we have taken out more than 120 top ISIL leaders and commanders,” he said.
There seems to be a bizarre or codependent connection for the president, and one must surmise that America will never be safe from home grown terrorists like Mateen unless ISIL is destroyed. But is this really true? Perhaps he should claim that there are weapons of mass destruction, or that ISIL has a nuclear weapon.
If ISIL is such an imminent threat to the U.S., should the president not take most of the blame for the uprising in the Middle East, and the Arab Spring that brought such destruction, and terrorists threats, as well as the killing of American ambassador Chris Stevens? If Obama and SOS Hillary Clinton had no given the go ahead and support to overthrown dictatorships in Libya, Egypt and Syria, we would probably not be in the mess that we are in now, and the recruiting power of ISIL would be non-existent.
After a year, ISIL is cut off from the international financial community, and it has had to cut salaries for its fighters, he says. This by itself is bizarre - that Obama would mention the fact that ISIL recruits are being paid anything at all. If we are attacking ISIL, why should we care how much they are making? Should we also be concerned about ISIL health or dental benefits, and wether they have access to emergency care? Some of its leaders have been caught steeling cash and gold, he says. These are not religious warriors, they are thugs and they are thieves, he says.
Obama asks the American people to believe that ISIL is not doing what they are doing for religious reasons, when clearly they are. This is what is disturbing about Obama’s rhetoric. He seems not to have come to grips with the fact that they are Islamic extremists, that they claim the name of Mohammed and Allah. He is the ultimate apologist for terrorist activities, if it is done in the name of Allah. They can’t be extremists. They’re just confused.Muslims.
He wants the Senate to confirm his nomination for Undersecretary of Terrorism and National Intelligence. He is upset that Republican leaders in the Senate have not given him an up or down vote.
“It’s now been more than a year since I nominated him,” he says. There is no good reason for it, he says. By confirming this guy, Senate Republicans will be “putting our national security first . . . and help keep our country safe.”
One fighter (Obama's report) says, “ISIL is not bringing Islam to the world, and people need to know that.” He says Assad, Syria’s leader who has refused to step down, is at the heart of the suffering of the Syrian people. But Obama and Hillary Clinton have been AWOL in regard to stopping attacks on the Syrian people. He has ceded power to Vladimir Putin and the Russians. They have has flown thousands of flights through the country to bomb Syrians, killing innocent children. This makes Obama’s words as meaningless and amateurish as the red line that he attempted to establish to stop attacks by Assad against Syrian rebels.
He also wants the U.S. to support a transition of power “away from Assad.” In other words, another meaningless red line. With Russia and Putin controlling or backing Assad in Syria, it’s not likely that Russia will allow Assad to be toppled, anymore than the U.S. can fly jets on the northern border of Syria. Rather than nation building in one country, Iraq, which Obama abandoned with troop massive troop withdrawals and a clear departure deadline, he is attempting to nation build in four countries with major ISIL presence, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Egypt.
Obama admits the limits of the intelligence gathering capabilities of his administration, and his ability to protect Americans. Under Obama, the slew of home grown terrorism will not be prevented. Some are going to slip through the cracks.
“We can’t prevent every tragedy,” he says.
This is like a ride an exciting roller coaster ride saying, we cannot prevent every injury, every person flying out of the ride seat, every person from falling to the ground from the speed of the roller coaster. We have to add to that to our basic percentage of injuries that can’t be prevented. We don’t do 100 percent prevention of injuries. Obama does not do 100 percent prevention of home grown terrorism. In fact, his plan is to prevent about 99 percent of them.
People who can’t fly on a plane, should not be able to buy a gun, he says. The problem with this is that it’s a smokescreen. The radical cleric who incited hatred against LGBT people in Orlando did not need to buy a gun. This radical brother of Islam, Mateen, did it for him. Obama persists in saying that Islam is not the problem. It’s those other bad people. It has nothing to do with Islam. In fact, Islam is one of the world’s great religions. No wonder it is so hard to fire someone in the U.S. who is an Islamic terrorist. The president wants Islam to be good if not better than Christianity.
As evidence of his seriousness in his fight against Islamic terrorism, he points to how he ordered Special Forces soldiers to “get Bin Laden.” But as a movie about the raid depicts, he did not have a lot to do with finding Bin Laden. It wasn't his idea. Obama just sat and watched the action. A lone female CIA agent was just very persistent.
Obama would like to have a rational discussion with Islamic terrorists, as though there is some way to bring them to the table and convince them not to be terrorists. But sadly, this is not the case, and only points to why it is probably so hard for law enforcement in this country to combat terrorism in the U.S. He does not want to upset the terrorists by calling them a bad name, even though they claim responsibility for all kinds of terrorists acts - including the one in Orlando. This is exactly why Trump, and many others, do not think that Obama understands the gravity of the situation, and probably never will.
Obama says it’s important not to be “sloppy” about describing who we are fighting. Taking precautionary actions against Muslims in the U.S., or keeping Muslim immigrants out of the U.S. will only “fuel ISIL’s notion that the West hates Muslms.” But the problem is not that the West hates Muslims, it is that radical Islamic terrorists hate the West. Rather than embrace the West’s ideals of freedom of religion and education for girls, Islamic in Afghanistan, Iran, and other areas of the Middle East , as well as Africa, reject that ideal.
Actions in Germany, where dozens of white women were raped by Muslim immigrants proves otherwise. It has nothing to do with any label or whether the U.S. is “nice” to Islamic terrorists. This is lost on Obama, the supreme cleric of the world. He alone has the authority it seems, worldwide, to determine what Muslim extremists are called. Certainly Trump does not have this power. Some Muslim adherents not only want to subvert pluralism, the rule of law and our freedoms in their countries, they want to do it in the U.S. Yet, it upsets him that someone like Trump would suggest interrupting the immigration of all Muslims.
“We’re not judging people on the basis of what faith they are or what race they are or what ethnicity they are or what their sexual orientation is - that’s what makes this country great,” Obama says. ‘“That’s the spirit we see in Orlando. That’s the unity and resolve that will allow us to defeat ISIL. That’s what will preserve our ideals, that will define us as Americans. That’s how we’re going to defend our nation and our way of life.”
Despite all of his rambunctious verbiage, Obama is no closer to defending Americans from Islamic terrorism than before he became president more than seven years ago. The most feared leader in the fight of the U.S.Armed Forces against Nazi Germany, Gen. George Patton, was not the most eloquent leader. Quite the opposite. At times, he was crude in describing the enemy.He did not care about the feelings of the Nazis and whether he offended them.
Likewise, Trump is not concerned about the feelings of Muslim extremists. We may not want someone as undiplomatic as Patton as president. But America certainly needs someone who is willing to combat Muslim terrorists, instead of wanting to have them over for tea.
© 2016 Larry Ingram