Obama Calls Cliimate Change An Immediate National Security Risk

Recently, President Obama told the graduating class of Coast Guard cadets that climate change and global warming are immediate risks to our national security.  Well, if that is true, and they truly endanger the security of the U.S., why aren't we at war with India and China over their massive increases in carbon output?

The fact is that, no matter how much we do to control our CO2 output, China and India will easily offset our lowered  levels.

And, I only made that "war" comment to show how ridiculous the President's "national security" argument is. Of course, if he truly believes what he is saying, then maybe we should be at war against the polluters.

References:

Obama: Climate Change an 'Immediate Risk' to National Security: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/05/20/obama-climate-change-an-immediate-risk-to-national-security

Global CO2 Emissions: Increases Dwarf Recent U.S. Reductions: http://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2013/07/global-co2-emissions-increases-dwarf-recent-u-s-reductions/

U.S. Carbon Dioxide Reductions Outpace Rest of World: http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/u-s-carbon-dioxide-reductions-outpace-rest-world/

Three Terrorist Acts, That Aren't Called Terrorism

I think most people would agree that the beheading of a female employee in Moore, Oklahoma by a radical Muslim male co-worker is a form of terrorism, though not the FBI or the local police.  They are both referring to this as an act of workplace violence.

The same is true with the Fort Hood Shooting.  Now, 5 years after the fact, it is still defined as  workplace violence.  Further, the U.S. Treasury has refused to label the Boston Marathon bombing a terrorist act.  As a result, in all these cases, the victims and their families are being denied access to federal funds under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program.

An important question though, is why aren't these horrendous events not being considered terrorism by The President?  Is it because Obama doesn't want to admit that, under his watch, there have been acts of terrorism on U.S. soil?  Something that never happened after 9/11 with Bush in charge. Or, is it because he doesn't want to admit that Al Qaeda and others still exist? After all, in November of 2012 he said this: “Thanks to sacrifice and service of our brave men and women in uniform, the war in Iraq is over, the war in Afghanistan is winding down, al Qaeda has been decimated, Osama bin Laden is dead.” 

The simple fact is that terrorism does exist and, the radicals that commit these acts are growing in strength and numbers.  The worst kind of terrorism that we have to deal with is that which is associated with radical Islam.  Radicalized Muslims not only believe that violence against "infidels" is a good thing but, also, that dying while committing this violence is an act of martyrdom and an immediate path to heaven.  Contrary to Obama's politically motivated lie that Al Qaeda was "decimated", the truth is that its still alive and growing.

I think this Administration needs to start recognizing terrorism where it exists.  Not to do so results in our President having to admit that he and his National Security Director James Clapper underestimated the ISIS threat.  It would also have meant that, perhaps, both the Boston Marathon Bombing and the Foot Hood Shooting could have been avoided because, in both cases, the FBI had the perpetrators in their sights but did nothing.  And, one also has to wonder why the Oklahoma beheader wasn't on the FBI's radar with all the radical postings on his quite public Facebook page.

References:

Scarborough Scalds FBI for Labelling OK Beheading 'Workplace Violence': http://townhall.com/news/around-the-web/2014/09/29/scarborough-scalds-fbi-for-labelling-ok-beheading-workplace-violence-n1898166

Boston Marathon Victims Denied Insurance Reimbursement Because Bombing Was ‘Not Act of Terrorism’: http://www.ijreview.com/2014/09/177128-administration-determines-boston-marathon-bombings-act-terrorism-reason-absurd/

Terrorism Risk Insurance Act: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_Risk_Insurance_Act

Boston bomb suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev penned confession in boat: report The 19-year-old, who was hiding from cops, left a message confessing to the Boston Marathon bombing. The confession reportedly said he and his brother planted the bombs in retaliation for U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/boston-bomb-suspect-left-confession-boat-report-article-1.1345642

Obama Has Touted Al Qaeda’s Demise 32 Times since Benghazi Attack: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-touts-al-qaeda-s-demise-32-times-benghazi-attack-0

Jihad Against Infidels and Democracy: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03637751.2010.495949#preview

Obama: U.S. underestimated rise of ISIS in Iraq and Syria: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-u-s-underestimated-rise-of-isis-in-iraq-and-syria/

‘SHARIA LAW IS COMING!!!!’ Oklahoma Beheader Celebrated Terrorists, Disparaged Non-Muslims On Facebook: http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/26/sharia-law-is-coming-oklahoma-beheader-celebrated-terrorists-disparaged-non-muslims-on-facebook/

Did the FBI miss a chance to stop Tamerlan Tsarnaev?: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/did-the-fbi-miss-a-chance-to-stop-tamerlan-tsarnaev/

Fort Hood Shooting: FBI Fights Claims It Ignored Intel on Hasan: http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1937574,00.html

Al-Qaeda hasn't gone away, and is gaining: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/01/07/al-qaeda-spread/4358845/

Obama On National Security: Hear No Evil and the Buck Stops Elsewhere

Ever since President Obama gave his '60 Minutes' interview and, basically, threw his national security team under the bus by claiming that "they" (not him) underestimated the ISIS threat, we have been seeing stories that expose a rather careless attitude by him on matters of national security.

However, even before the interview, there was that infamous JayVee team reference that he made about ISIS.  This was  8 months ago in January and it came just after ISIS flew their Black Flag over Fallujah.  This, again, after they had made massive gains in Syria and were on their way to Ramadi and Mosul.  Obviously, the taking of Fallujah should have been anyone's wake-up call since it had been one of the longest and bloodiest battles that our Marines fought in all of the Iraq war.  But ISIS was able to take that town in short order.  Not hardly a JayVee effort in contrast to our well trained Marines.

Then, since the '60 Minutes' comment, the DailyMail exposed the fact that Obama knew of the rising threat of ISIS prior to the 2012 elections.  Yet, because that threat didn't square with his Al Qaeda-on-the-run stump speeches, there was no effort to alert Americans to the threat or to take any action. 

Now, we find out from a report by the Government Accounting Institute, that the President only attends 42% of his Presidential Daily Briefings where he would have been informed of any national security issues.  I guess fundraising, speeches, and golf outings were more important than hearing about ISIS and other threats that we face.  Maybe that's why Obama is always being blindsided by scandals and international incidents and has to respond with a weak comment like: The first I heard of it is when you all head of it.

Our dedicated national security personnel are really upset with the President not owning up to having known about the ISIS threat.  In essence, his comment can easily be interpreted as him calling them incompetent.  And, if they didn't get it right on ISIS, shouldn't heads roll?  Doesn't this also mean that the Intel we're getting on other bad guy countries such as Iran, North Korea, Syria, Russia, etc. might also be underestimated?  And, if that be true, isn't America at serious risk?

My guess is that Obama was told but, chose not to hear.  This is a huge problem with this President.  As many have said, he sees the world the way he thinks it should be and not how it really is.  That's a clear recipe for disaster.

References:

Obama: “They underestimated” ISIS: http://hotair.com/archives/2014/09/29/obama-they-underestimated-isis/

Jihadist ISIS captures Fallujah from Iraqi forces: http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/18112

Al-Qaeda force captures Fallujah amid rise in violence in Iraq: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/al-qaeda-force-captures-fallujah-amid-rise-in-violence-in-iraq/2014/01/03/8abaeb2a-74aa-11e3-8def-a33011492df2_story.html

Obama has had accurate intelligence about ISIS since BEFORE the 2012 election, says administration insider: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2774122/Obama-accurate-intelligence-ISIS-BEFORE-2012-election-says-administration-insider.html

Government Accountability Institute Report: Presidential Daily Briefs: A Time - Based Analysis: http://www.g-a-i.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/GAI-Report-PDB-Update-9.29.2014.pdf

Obama Dismisses Al-Qaeda Resurgence: They’re JV: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/01/20/obama-dismisses-al-qaeda-resurgence-theyre-jv/

 'We did not know': 9 times the Obama administration was blindsided: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/20/obama-administration-caught-by-surprise/

In the Dark: Obama, Staff Learn of Scandals From News Reports: http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Obama-scandals-media/2014/07/11/id/582216/

Santa Claus, The Tooth Fairy, and the Gitmo5 Aren't a Danger to Americans

While in Europe, and in response to concerns that the release of 5 Taliban leaders might put Americans at risk, Obama said this:

'I wouldn't be doing it if I thought that it was contrary to American national security.'

Well, that statement would have been believable if there hadn't been the Benghazi attack on the U.S. mission in 2012; resulting in a dead Ambassador and 3 other dead Americans.

Prior to that attack there were all kinds of warning signs that said we shouldn't have even been in Benghazi.  The Red Cross, sensing an increasingly dangerous situation, pulled their people out. Following an RPG attack on their Ambassador, the Brits shuttered their doors and left.  Our mission in Benghazi had already seen two attacks prior to 9/11, and, Ambassador Stephens was so concerned about the situation there that he expressed it in various communiques back to the State Department.  Yet, we stayed, with only a dozen out-sourced security personnel; of which, only half were armed.

Now, fast forward to today and the Taliban prisoner swap for deserter Bowe Bergdahl.  Any sane person -- I guess except for Barack Obama -- understands that the release of these people is "absolutely" putting Americans at risk.   These aren't some grunt Taliban followers who fought against us in the Afghan war.  These are all smart people. These are Mullah Omar's top lieutenants who helped him take over Afghanistan; impose and execute the most extreme punishments of Sharia Law; and, who invited in and protected Bin Laden and the rest Al Qaeda to set up their training camps.  In essence, the Taliban is simpatico to the goals of Al Qaeda.

All of these people have spent more than a decade imprisoned by the United States.  They have had years to harden themselves against this country and its policies.  And, because they are the most dangerous of the Taliban, you can be assured that they spent every waking hour plotting against America and praying to Allah for help and guidance.  Just because they are going to spend a year under Qatari monitoring and surveillance doesn't mean that they can't conduct operations against the Afghanistan government; or, more importantly, against the U.S. and it's citizens.  For decades, in this country, mob bosses were able to run their operations from behind bars with less communication capability than these 5 Taliban leaders will have access to.

What Obama has done is show the entire world that we, as country, can be had.  That we are willing to negotiate with terrorists in order to get Americans back.  And, those Americans need not be military. Because of that, almost ever American overseas, is now at risk.  Some predict that the taking of American citizens will only escalate as a result of Obama's actions; with no amount of U.S. security available to protect most of them.

Lastly, the President said that "prisoner swapping" is the normal course of winding down wars.  Yes, but this country has never swapped such high level and dangerous personnel. Need I remind the President of the Nuremberg trials!  In fact, two of these released prisoners are wanted by the U.N. for war crimes.

References:

Obama defends trading five Taliban leaders:  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2647208/Obama-defends-efforts-rescue-deserter-Bowe-Bergdahl-insists-administration-did-consult-Congress-despite-GOP-claims-prisoner-swap-illegal.html

Libya: Red Cross pulls out of Benghazi fearing attack: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12767759

Benghazi timeline: How the attack unfolded: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/benghazi-timeline-how-the-attack-unfolded/

US consulate attack in Libya: the warning signs were there in Benghazi: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/9539148/US-consulate-attack-in-Libya-the-warning-signs-were-there-in-Benghazi.html

 Who Are The 5 Guantanamo Detainees In Prisoner Swap?: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/05/31/317704932/who-were-the-five-guant-namo-detainees-released-in-prisoner-swap

Obama's Speech On National Security

I just couldn't let this one pass by waiting to comment on it this weekend.

In another one of his "I'll make it all better with another one my patented B.S. speeches," Obama decided to give a near-impromptu speech on national security that everybody knew was an attempt to try and stomp on Cheney's speech that was already scheduled and that was to be given at that very time on the very same topic. But, Cheney smartly held his speech so that he could precisely counter everything that Obama was expected to say. Obama felt that he had to give this speech because, in the public forum, he was losing ground on the issue of national security to Cheney. Yesterday, Democrats and Republicans, alike, handed Obama a stunning defeat by not funding the closure of Guantanamo Bay. With Obama's national security policies looking pretty tarnished, Obama's only remaining tactic was to give a speech that would basically say that the previous Administration had made security decisions that were done in "haste" and without "forethought" and that had made this country less safe.

My only comment to that statement are these few examples of Obama missteps.

Obama, without any logic or forethought, was prepared to release interrogation photos that everybody in the world, except Obama, knew would result in a backlash that could jeopardize the lives and the safety of our soldiers, our diplomats, and our citizens around the world. Days before the release, he finally put some thought into his previous decision and decided to backtrack and not release those photos. Thank God he figured it out before his prior hasty decision became a disaster.

While on the campaign trail last year, Obama said he would abandon military tribunals to bring Guantanamo detainees to justice. After three months in office and, finally, with some actual and intelligent thought, he decided to proceed with the policy of the Bush Administration to try those detainees with military tribunals. Once again, it appears that Obama's mouth was running faster than his brain!

Two days after being in office, he declared that he would close Guantanamo Bay (a.k.a. Gitmo ) in one year. Now, a third of the way into that promise, he and his people are still clueless as to the "how" of closing that facility. That's why the United States Senate, yesterday, with a vote of 90 to 6, voted "no" to any funding without seeing a plan. If asking for money without a plan isn't haste and a lack of forethought then, I don't know what is. How much do you want to bet, that a year from now, Guantanamo will still be open and Obama will be giving another one of his speeches to make it "seem" like it was a good thing that we, not he, didn't close Gitmo?

To me, this blog survives because everything Obama does has been done, in my opinion, without any forethought. Haste? Well, you be the judge? He's only been in office for four months and he has made major decisions that may absolutely kill the economic and national security future of this country. Is that forethought? For this guy to criticize the Bush Administration for its haste and a lack of forethought is just laughable. Before Obama can claim that we are any more secure with his policies, he will have to back that statement up with time; not just four months of saying that it's so. For the last 7 years, we have been safe under the policies of Bush. Let's see how safe we are in the next three and three-quarters years that are still remaining in this guy's term in office!