By now, we are quite familiar with the exploits of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) and the fact that their leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was released from detention by the Obama administration in 2009. These savages have cut a swath from northern Syria through northern Iraq, engaging in the most grotesque mass murder along the way, and by all accounts – including photographs and video footage of their own making – reveling in doing so.
While many, for some unfathomable reason, remain wedded to the idea that this and countless other developments involving the Obama administration are the result of its incompetence, others have reached the point where their ability to suspend their disbelief has been stretched beyond the breaking point, and they no longer believe it is a matter of political ineptitude or poor leadership.
As I have said before in this space, operating outside of the realm of believability has been a deliberate tactic of this regime, and a largely complicit establishment press contributed to its success.
Thus, despite overwhelming evidence, many Americans will still find it difficult to accept that the rise of ISIS was facilitated by the Obama administration.
As reported in WND this week, ISIS members were trained in 2012 by U.S. instructors working at a secret base in Jordan; this has been confirmed not only by officials in Jordan, but in both the German and British press.
Are Americans now expected to believe that ISIS is among the “moderate” Muslim factions the administration has maintained it is imperative to support, for which Obama went to the lengths of first clandestinely arming and supplying, and then unilaterally amending U.S. law so that he might do so overtly?
Both Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have had a lot to say on the subject of the ISIS campaign, the former because he can scarcely avoid it (not for lack of trying) and the latter because she wants to be president. In keeping with the narrative that the advent of ISIS was news to all involved, both chastised Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and the government of Iraq in general. Prior to flitting off for a weekend of golf last Friday, Obama admonished the Iraqi government to “set aside sectarian differences” with the advancing Islamist horde. On CNN and Fox News this week, Clinton went so far as to say that Malaki’s “purging” the military resulted in Iraq’s vulnerability to ISIS.
Their words are rather laughable in a maudlin sort of way, considering that thousands of people are dying as a direct result of their foreign policy, but even more so because the obliviousness being projected is so blatantly counterfeit; it belies the calculated evil that the administration (of which Clinton was recently a part) has employed to bring events to this juncture.
A few of us have maintained over the last few years that the goal of Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Islamists has been to establish a global caliphate – Muslim supremacy worldwide – starting with the Middle East. In fact, the “Arab Spring,” sold to us as a democratic movement and catalyzed by the Obama administration, was its coming-out party.
Well, that was just a conspiracy theory (liberals’ new schoolyard taunt), and those who advanced that sort of talk were just big, fat Islamophobes. ISIS has changed all that, inasmuch as they have plainly stated that establishing the caliphate is precisely their goal. Department of Homeland Security Senior Adviser Mohamed Elibary, Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood plant in the DHS, recently stated on social media it is “inevitable” that the caliphate returns.
Most Americans are unaware that the last caliphate, the Ottoman Empire, which encompassed Northern Africa, the entire Middle East, Turkey and parts of Eastern Europe, only ended in 1924. The Ottomans repeatedly made war upon Europe, enslaved and sold both Africans and whites, and engaged in piracy for 800 years beginning in the 13th century.
And then we have Benghazi. As many have already noted, it is quite interesting that amidst the flurry of the Select Committee investigating the attack of September 2012, the Veterans Administration scandal, the Berghdal-Taliban swap and the “humanitarian crisis” involving thousands of illegal immigrant children showing up uninvited on our southern border – all of which, by the way, are being widely seen as the fault of this administration – the White House just happens to find the stars aligned in such a manner that they are finally able to apprehend Ahmed Abu Khattala, the Ansar al-Sharia commander accused of playing a major role in the attack on the Benghazi compound.
All of the above has conspired to give the lie to Obama’s foreign policy rhetoric and render increasingly suspect the actions he’s taken in pursuing that policy. In a recent interview, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., said, “Never in my political career in my memory did it ever occur to me that we would have a president of the United States who would be doing things supporting the enemy. Our system isn’t set up for Congress to deal with this kind of a situation.”
Inhofe stopped just short of using the appropriate designation for this president’s actions, one which I pray will be applied soon enough: Treason.
Media wishing to interview Erik Rush, please contact [email protected].