As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Tag Archives: ISIS

Trump: Middle East Leaders Agreed to Stop Funding Islamism

President Trump today indicated that Muslim leaders he met with in Saudi Arabia earlier this week agreed to stop funding the ideologies that lead to to terrorism.

Trump said during remarks in Brussels:

This call for driving out terrorism is a message I took to a historic gathering of Arab and Muslim leaders across the region, hosted by Saudi Arabia. There, I spent much time with King Salman, a wise man who wants to see things get much better rapidly. The leaders of the Middle East have agreed at this unprecedented meeting to stop funding the radical ideology that leads to this horrible terrorism all over the globe.

My travels and meetings have given me renewed hope that nations of many faiths can unite to defeat terrorism, a common threat to all of humanity. Terrorism must be stopped in its tracks, or the horror you saw in Manchester and so many other places will continue forever. You have thousands and thousands of people pouring into our various countries and spreading throughout, and in many cases, we have no idea who they are. We must be tough. We must be strong. And we must be vigilant.

The Saudis, of course, have been particularly guilty of tolerating extremist ideology and spreading it throughout the world.

I doubt the funding is going to stop. But maybe some of it will. This is progress, and hopefully Trump will hold them accountable. His call for Arab leaders to cease supporting radicalism is based on an understanding that the Islamist threat is not just some extremist movement, but part of what is going on within Arab societies.

Nevertheless, Trump has backed off some of his campaign thinking on the topic, saying in his Saudi speech that, “Terrorists do not worship God, they worship death.” Unfortunately, that’s not correct. Thinkers from the activist moderate Muslim Hirsi Ali to Egyptian President Sisi understand that there is a problem within Islam that has to change. But it looks like National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster got to Trump with his insistence that the terrorism has nothing to do with Islam.

Or maybe not quite. Trump used the term “Islamic extremism,” which he was not supposed to do, during his address in Saudi Arabia. He was slated to say “Islamist,” which is a term held to be less intrinsic to the religion itself and more descriptive of radicalism that exists outside it.

“That means honestly confronting the crisis of Islamic extremism and the Islamists and Islamic terror of all kinds,” he said. The prepared remarks called for him to say: “That means honestly confronting the crisis of Islamist extremism and the Islamist terror groups it inspires.”

Anonymous White House advisors he was just tired. But I don’t think he’s as much of an idiot as some of his aides do. I think he knew what he was doing.

Nevertheless, frustrated that the president went off their carefully crafted script, the White House released Trump’s remarks as prepared for delivery. AFTER he gave the speech.

Normally the White House puts out the actual transcript of his remarks. In this case, as far as I can tell, they didn’t.

Hopefully Trump will continue to be Trump, despite voices within the administration trying to make him Jeb Bush.

Europe-Style ISIS Knife Attacks Come to Virginia

It appears that now it’s starting here.

A man who randomly stabbed two Virginia residents was apparently shouting “Allahu Akbar” as he tried to kill them. He has been on the FBI’s radar for some time and tried to go to Syria, apparently not for a vacation.

The consequences of the policies of President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, which resulted in the abandonment of Iraq and the subsequent rise of ISIS, will increasingly plague us.

Those who think Mrs. Clinton can solve this problem presumably believe in putting foxes in charge of chicken coops.

According to CBS News:

Police said Wasil Farooqui, 20, of Roanoke County, stabbed a man and woman in a random attack that left the victims severely wounded and hospitalized.

While officers were at the hospital with the victims, a male, subsequently identified as Farooqui, came into the emergency room with injuries of his own, authorities said. He met the description of the suspect in the stabbing, and further investigation by police led to his arrest, they said.

A U.S. intelligence source tells CBS News Farooqui has been on the FBI’s radar for months and is believed to be self-radicalized.

The source adds that Farooqui tried to go to Syria earlier this year but only got as far as Europe, then returned to the U.S., and the trip is what alerted law enforcement to him.

Trump’s Churchillian Moment

I do hate to compare Trump to Churchill.

One devoted his life to his country and was perennially in a precarious state of debt. The other devoted his life to himself and making money and, near the end of it, decided to try do something for the nation.

One viewed the English language as a palette with which to sketch art and wisdom, both in speech and in print. The other sees the language as a carcass onto which he can pound his cleaver and sever it into bloody lumps.

Donald Trump seems tethered to few ethics at all and will drop any lie and deploy and means to achieve his ends. Winston Churchill was a man of honor and would no doubt rather stay home and feed his geese at Chartwell than venture out anywhere to shame himself. I’m not aware of a time he was said to have seriously dissimulated.

But there are similarities. Churchill, like Trump, was perceived as a little unstable, unpredictable, and potentially dangerous with the levers of power. Churchill was also supremely self-centered and self-confident, and often showed his critics no rhetorical mercy, though in person he could be magnanimous and forgiving. Like Trump.

And both were warriors, Churchill in spirit and on the battlefield, and Trump, so far, in spirit alone. Churchill, like Trump, was a man of action, with original ideas that shock the “sensible” establishment thinking.

The “nativism” some find in Trump would have been attached to Churchill as “jingoism.” And cooperation with Russia to confront a mutual enemy is an idea common to each man, isn’t it?

With his speech Monday in Youngstown, Ohio about how he would go about defeating ISIS, Trump echoed the Churchill, a man who also understood the great threat of his time – Nazi Germany – and was willing to say unpopular things to try to stop it.

Like Britons in the 1930s, Americans today are only vaguely aware of the peril they face and that they are, in fact, already in a de facto war, even if they are not yet ready to accept it or fight it.

Trump recognizes that the battle against Islamism is the great contest of our time, comparable to the Cold War struggle against the Soviet Union and the World War II fight against fascism. Americans do not yet quite understand that there is a war between civilizations afoot, and they are, willy-nilly, part of it. Most Muslims aren’t Islamists, but enough are that the fundamentalists have the money, the manpower and soon — once Iran has its bomb or ISIS steals one — the means to completely destroy us and our way of life.

And enough Muslims are Islamists that, yes, we must perform Trump’s “extreme vetting” to discern those with “any hostile attitude towards our country or its principles, or who believed sharia law should supplant American law,” as he said. Trump will ensure those regions of the world where Islamists are ensconced and even popular don’t send their foot soldiers here.

This is not, as the New York Times sniffed, a McCarthyite “ideological test on newcomers” that would undermine “American values of tolerance and equal treatment.” The test is on foreigners, not Americans, and we have used such examinations routinely to weed out fifth columnists of all types. You know, in the interest of self-preservation.

Like the supposedly sensible men who ran Great Britain before World War II, the smooth, reasonable sounding memebers of the Washington establishment have politiely delivered us into an unholy mess, whether it involved ISIS or the accelerating national debt that threatens to cripple the country with unpayable financial burdens. Trump, like Churchill, stands against the catastrophes gradually sown by well-meaing, but ultimatley weak and unimaginative men and women.

Have a listen to these remarks below by Churchill, given in November 1934, a full five years before Hitler invaded Poland. See if you don’t notice some parallels to today and Trump’s warning to Americans.

For example, Churchill’s the reference to ruthless leaders teaching their children the glory of death in battle, minus the virgins, of course.

After all, my friends, only a few hours away by air there dwell a nation of nearly seventy millions of the most educated, industrious, scientific, disciplined people in the world, who are being taught from childhood to think of war as a glorious exercise and death in battle as the noblest fate for man.

Here Churchill references a weapon — in this case Germany’s air power — that could provide the kind of terror particularly disruptive to civilized societies.

Worse still, for with the new weapon has come a new method, or rather has come back the most British method of ancient barbarism, namely, the possibility of compelling the submission of nations by terrorizing their civil population; and, worst of all, the more civilized the country is, the larger and more splendid its cities, the more intricate the structure of its civil and economic life, the more is it vulnerable and at the mercy of those who may make it their prey.

It brings clearly to mind the Islamists’ weapon of choice, mass casualty attacks.

Make no mistake. Many who support Trump think he is hostile toward the interventionism of the Bush years. He is not. “My administration will aggressively pursue joint and coalition military operations to crush and destroy ISIS,” Trump said. In addition to boots on the ground, he will seek “International cooperation to cut off their funding, expanded intelligence sharing and cyberwarfare to disrupt and disable their propaganda and recruiting . . . It’s got to be stopped.” Sounds pretty damn reasonable, for someone so often cast as unstable.

Americans will, finally, understand that we are at war when there is a large-scale attack in this country, as even Obama administration officials have warned is practically inevitable. What Trump, like Churchill, is trying to do is to convince his compatriots of the stakes and get us on a war footing, before it is too late.

Obama’s ISIS Incrementalism Continues

Seriously, this is how Democrats fight wars. A little of this, then a little more, and OMG that’s not working, so add some more. Whatever happened to the Powell Doctrine, which, appropriating the lessons of Vietnam, stated we were supposed to either get fully in a war or not at all?

From the Washington Post:

The fight, however, is entering what Pentagon officials have called a new and potentially harder phase, one that will entail a deeper level of U.S. involvement but also tougher targets.

In an attempt to ramp up the tempo of the war, the U.S. military is escalating its engagement, dispatching an additional 450 Special Operations forces and other troops to Syria and Iraq, deploying hundreds of Marines close to the front lines in Iraq and bringing Apache attack helicopters and B-52s into service for the air campaign.

The extra resources are an acknowledgment, U.S. officials say, that the war can’t be won without a greater level of American involvement. The targets that lie ahead are those that are most important to the militants’ self-proclaimed caliphate, including their twin capitals of Raqqa in Syria and Mosul in Iraq and, to a lesser extent, Fallujah, a key concern because of its proximity to Baghdad.

Remember No Boots on the Ground?? Ah, another Obama promise, thoughtlessly cast aside.

Meantime, ISIS survives far longer than it should and gets to sit around plotting a major attack against the United States — coming soon to a heavily populated venue, possibly near you.

State Department Tries to Deny “No Boots on the Ground” Pledge

Even for the Obama administration, this one is deeply rich.

State Department spokesman John Kirby Monday said to an astonished Matt Lee of the Associated Press that the administration has not been saying there would be “no boots on the ground” in places like Syria in Iraq.

This after President Obama announced Monday that 250 special operations troops would be hitting the ground in Syria during the next several weeks.

Maybe they will not be wearing boots. Maybe Obama is having them don ballet slippers as part of the restricted rules of engagement.

Lee: For months and months and months, the mantra from the president and everyone else in the administration has been, “No boots on the ground,” and now —

Kirby: No, that is not true.

Lee: What?

Kirby: It’s just not true, Matt.

Lee: It is. It’s true!

Kirby: No it’s not. I just flatly, absolutely disagree with you.

At another point, Kirby claimed, “There was never this, ‘No boots on the ground.’ I don’t know where this keeps coming from.” Well. It keeps coming from here:

Obama Fights ISIS – by Letting ISIS In

President Obama wants to protect the United States from ISIS by taking measures that could — yes — allow more ISIS operatives into the United States.

In his weekly address Saturday, Obama suggested his policy of settling Syrian refugees in the United States could combat ISIS by giving the U.S. propaganda points for showing how much it cares. But his plan ignores that accepting Syrian refugees risks bringing into the country bad guys posing as needy migrants.

“As we move forward in this fight, we have to wield another weapon alongside our airstrikes, our military, our counterterrorism work, and our diplomacy,” Obama said. “And that’s the power of our example. Our openness to refugees fleeing ISIL’s violence.”

Obama plans to admit 10,000 Syrian refugees during the current fiscal year, which ends October 1 — and even more during fiscal year 2017.

Meantime, Europe, which has welcomed Syrian refugees with far more open arms — perhaps 1 million have entered in the last five years — is finding its empathy reciprocated with bombings and terrorism committed and planned in part by ISIS members who slipped into the European Union along with legitimate Syrian refugees.

GOP front-runner Donald Trump called Obama’s suggestion “insane,” telling Fox News, “I can’t even believe that he’s saying it. It’s inconceivable that he’s saying it.”

In the wake of last week’s attacks in Brussels, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz renewed his call to bar refugees from Syria.

The White House has previously justified admitting Syrians on humanitarian grounds. Now, Obama is suggesting that bringing people into the country from a terrorist breeding ground somehow benefits national security because people will start to like us.

Critics of the program complain the vetting process for Syrians is inadequate, and that it is impossible to obtain reliable records from the war-torn country.

“What the president is telling us is not true. We can’t vet the refugees … There is no vetting as a practical matter,” warned Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., in September after Obama announced his plan to admit 10,000 Syrians. “Unless we know who they are, we cannot allow them in. My job is to protect Americans, not to feel good about myself,” added King, former chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee and still a senior member of the panel.

It is unclear why Syrian refugees need to make their way to the United States, given the risks, and could not instead be housed in other Middle Eastern countries.

In his address, Obama also appeared to rebuff efforts to focus security programs on Muslims, such as suggestions by both Cruz and Trump that some mosques should be put under surveillance.

Obama indicated trying to protect the homeland by targeting the populations from which terrorists are most likely to emerge as anti-American.

“We have to reject any attempt to stigmatize Muslim-Americans, and their enormous contributions to our country and our way of life,” Obama said. “Such attempts are contrary to our character, to our values, and to our history as a nation built around the idea of religious freedom.”

A version of this piece also appears on LifeZette.

Video || Who Cares What ISIS Wants??

One thing I really don’t get: Whether you support sending troops to destroy ISIS or not, what’s the point of saying we shouldn’t do it because it’s what ISIS wants us to do, as President Obama and many others have done. The presupposition here is that ISIS would win, right? That we’d be playing right… Continue Reading

Obama to Deliver Oval Office Address on San Bernardino

From the White House: On Sunday, December 6th at 8:00PM EST, President Obama will address the nation from the Oval Office about the steps our government is taking to fulfill his highest priority: keeping the American people safe. The President will provide an update on the ongoing investigation into the tragic attack in San Bernardino.… Continue Reading

Stopping ISIS: Borders, Guns, and God

I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live. — Deuteronomy 30:19 A Republic, if you can keep it. — Benjamin Franklin, describing what had been created during the Constitutional Convention. “Ideologues,” “restrictionists” and… Continue Reading