NEW YORK, September 19, 2013 — Some believe that an expert is simply a person who visits from out of town.
Until recently, America had few acknowledged experts on the Middle East and fewer still whose loyalties remained above suspicion. Looking critically and fairly at how America’s interests throughout this region stand diminished, precious few experts rise to share blame for our evident failures.
Before we let Hillary Clinton select drapes for the White House and Huma Abedin envisage ruling that roost administratively, cooler heads need to ferret out answers to more tough questions.
Why is America Still Funding the Jihadist Agenda in Syria, Libya, and Egypt?
The Obama Administration has embraced Islamic organizations like no other Administration in history. Without doubt, a majority of those who worship Allah world-wide is peace loving.
Yet, 4,393 days ago, radical Islamist Jihadists hit America hard. These fighters are not brave enough to wear a uniform or to swear allegiance to any government among the community of nations—they respect no secular state, law, or tradition. Like cockroaches grown impervious to insecticide, they swarm and carry pestilence when we let our guard down. They seem relentless and lately, it appears, we are growing tired.
As legislators turn attention to Benghazi, they had better pay attention—a groundswell is uniting the political divide between left-leaning and right-leaning Americans. Those who gave George W. Bush a veritable blank check to take America’s fight to our indistinct enemies are finding common cause with inveterate peace-lovers—not out of personal dislike for President Obama, nor for puny partisan motives.
Principled, patriotic Americans across the political divide never embrace “unbelievably small” battle tactics. We do not risk our bravest hoping to achieve a stalemate. When Americans go to war, we do so to trounce an enemy. If that enemy is motivated by an evil and morally reprehensible ideology, we also fight, using logic, to rebut the argument that animates our foes.
While our right hand fights in Afghanistan, our left hand is still embracing radical Islamist elements, this ugly truth is evident to all those except those who are determined to accept delusion.
Quite recently, President Obama paved the way so that weapons and other assistance may flow to myriad rebel groups in Syria.
His latest suspect decision comes after claims by pro-Syrian War proponents that rebels we support are “moderates” seem more and more questionable.
For example, Elizabeth O’Bagy, the analyst whose op-ed in the Wall Street Journal apparently led Secretary of State Kerry and Senator John McCain to push the United States towards military action against Syria’s President Assad, now stands plainly exposed as a serial embellisher of credentials.
Meanwhile, the leader of Syria somehow captured strategic high ground following Obama Administration policy pirouettes that defy logic and gravity.
How, in days, has a “war criminal”, who operated immorally and well past stark red lines, maneuvered into position where only he can do the bidding of the international community and demolish a gigantic stockpile of chemical weapons?
If the dizzying path we have been on concerning Syria defines success, perhaps it is time to choose failure. We are doing, in Syria, what failed us in Libya and exactly the opposite of what may finally be working in Egypt.
In error, America is backing jihadists and crowing over this “inspired” tactical move. Reviewing multiple reports of atrocities committed by various rebel groups, our foreign policy experts must know that intervening to help these dissolute, unreliable bands cannot even be seen as doing “the right deed for the wrong reason”.
This brings us back to Senator John McCain, a fan of supporting rebels. In July 2012, Senator McCain also defended Huma Abedin against “unfounded allegations” made by Michele Bachmann concerning Ms. Abedin’s sympathies. Bachmann’s allegations should now be evaluated dispassionately and far more carefully in proper context—a place to start is the English language website that is operated by the Muslim Brotherhood:
Do Americans who care to visit this website and study its contents truly wish for us to borrow money we do not have to advance the professed goals of this decidedly non-secular entity?
Exactly who carried water for the Muslim Brotherhood from January 20, 2009 forward? How much financial and other assistance has this organization and its affiliates received? Who, working in league with the wider family of Muslim Brotherhood groups, has had what contacts with which influential Obama Administration figures over what time frame?
We know that someone must have cleared Huma Abedin to work simultaneously for Secretary Clinton, for a consulting firm called Teneo, and for the Clinton Foundation. Beyond the obvious point that triple dipping during persistent unemployment seems more than a bit odd, who cleared these conflicts? In the sane world, Hillary Clinton could not have rendered final judgment. Who actually did so and why?
To be continued.
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.