Finally, some Democrats are standing up for Barack Obama and his decision to free five Taliban commanders who provided the support and the staging ground for Osama bin Laden to carry out his 9/11 mission, wantonly murdered thousands of opposition Afghanis and killed untold numbers of U.S. military personnel before being captured.
It’s not just Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid backing the decision to trade the five psycho-killers for deserter and turncoat Bowe Bergdahl.
Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said it was only the compassionate thing to do: “We saved this man’s life. The commander in chief acted within his constitutional authority, which he should have done. I’m very proud that we have no POWs left in Afghanistan, and the president should be proud of it also.”
Do you agree with McCaskill? Remember, she’s the woman who saved America from a fate worse than death – a seat in the Senate occupied by Todd Akin. He is still vilified on a daily basis for a simple, perhaps slightly inelegant, but spirited pro-life statement made in the heat of the 2012 election. Even many Republicans jumped the shark in their self-serving denouncements of Akin, virtually ensuring McCaskill’s election.
Let’s analyze her statement:
- “We saved this man’s life.” She is presumably talking about Bowe Bergdahl. We saved his life? Is she too stupid to recognize his life was never in danger from the Taliban with whom he was fully cooperating for five years – even while they occasionally staged their demands for the release of their assassin leadership? Bergdahl was with the Taliban for five years. If they had wanted him dead, he wouldn’t have lasted five minutes.
- “The commander in chief acted within his constitutional authority, which he should have done.” Actually, no. Obama clearly broke the law in trading enemy combatants for Bergdahl. It was a law the administration previously acknowledged as valid and one which the executive branch assured the people he would follow to the letter.
- “I’m very proud that we have no POWs left in Afghanistan, and the president should be proud of it also.” The problem here is that Bergdahl was never recognized as a prisoner of war. He went over the hill. He joined the enemy. He gave them aid and comfort. He denounced his country, long before he made his decision to defect.
Here’s another of the handful of Democrats defending Obama’s indefensible action: Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut had this to say: “Really sad to watch Obama haters attack this kid who CHOSE to fight to protect the rest of us, just to score political points.”
Let’s analyze what this genius is saying:
- “Really sad to watch Obama haters attack this kid …” Obama haters? Is Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California one of those Obama haters? She is irate about this deal, as are many other knee-jerk supporters of Obama. The broad brush Obama critics have painted with for six years just got quite a bit broader. Disagree with anything Obama does and you are now officially an Obama hater in the eyes of Murphy.
- “[T]his kid who CHOSE to fight to protect the rest of us …” It’s very clear now “this kid” chose not to fight to protect the rest of us but instead chose to join the bad guys. He abandoned his post. He wrote a note explaining why. At least six, possibly more, brave men lost their lives in an effort to search for him and rescue him. How many more were wounded and maimed may never be known. What about them? What about their memory? What about their family members and loved ones?
- “[J]ust to score political points.” This is not a game, senator. It’s not about scoring points. This is a debate over the national security interests of the United States. It’s about decency and honor and the rule of law.
What’s clear now is that Obama wasn’t motivated by compassion for a POW, as his small band of Kool-Aid drinkers would have you believe. Bergdahl was hanging out with the Taliban because he chose to do so. It’s what he wanted to do.
So what was his motivation?
Was Bergdahl an excuse to do what Obama had long pledged to do – free all the Gitmo psycho-killers?
I’m going to suggest Obama has a long history of siding with the Muslim Brotherhood, of which the Taliban is a part.
Obama’s first action as president on foreign soil was to pull the rug out from under Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak by supporting a Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt – one the people of Egypt quickly regretted.
He bowed disgracefully to the king of Saudi Arabia, the primary sponsors of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Taliban.
He oversaw the fall and death of Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi at the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood.
He stood by as the Muslim Brotherhood murdered Ambassador Chris Stevens and other Americans in Libya – blaming a YouTube video for inspiring a “spontaneous uprising.”
He tried to go to war with Syria, where a regime that offered, by Middle East standards, a modicum of stability and protection for religious minorities was under siege from the Muslim Brotherhood.
He also recently announced publicly the precise dates by which the American military will be leaving Afghanistan, no matter the conditions on the ground, so the Taliban can prepare to take over the country on a specific timetable.
I could go on and on, but you get the idea. Obama has been an unlikely friend and ally of the Muslim Brotherhood ever since he took office.
But let’s further consider the “compassion” defense of his action in Afghanistan.
What about the other Americans held captive through no fault of their own by Muslim Brotherhood forces around the world. Where is Obama’s compassion for them?
- Warren Weinstein, 72, remains in a Pakistani lockup because, according to a 2013 statement from the U.S. State Department, “The U.S. government doesn’t make concessions to people who kidnap U.S. citizens.”
- Then there is Meriam Ibrahim, a Christian in Sudan who has been sentenced to death for leaving Islam, even though she grew up Christian. It was her father who was Muslim. The U.S. has not lifted a finger to help her in any way, even though she is married to an American and is the mother of two American children.
- Then there is Victor Lynn Lovelady and Gordon Lee Rowan who were captured by Muslim Brotherhood terrorists in Algeria more than a year ago. The terrorists demanded the release of blind sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, convicted of trying to blow up the World Trade Center in 1991 in return for the Americans. The Obama administration rejected the idea.
And those are just some of the Americans held captive by Muslim Brotherhood forces.
Where’s the compassion for Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi, 25, taken into custody after making a wrong turn and driving into Mexico – with his legal guns in his truck? Tahmooressi did two tours of Afghanistan, and now he is imprisoned a few miles from the U.S. border. Obama hasn’t said a word publicly about the abduction.
Where’s the compassion for Saeed Abedini, the American pastor jailed in Iran over his faith? Obama hasn’t mentioned his name let alone bargained for his release.
No, the compassion argument just doesn’t ring true.
There’s something going on here, and we don’t know quite what it is. Do we, Mr. Obama?
Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact email@example.com.