If you’re experiencing cognitive dissonance over the mixed signals being conveyed by our government regarding the threat posed to the U.S. by the terror group known as ISIS, you’re definitely not alone.
As we know, the recent gruesome execution of American journalist James Foley and renewed threats from ISIS prompted worldwide shock and calls in America for decisive action on the part of the Obama administration in dealing with them. Foley’s execution topped off several weeks in which ISIS made significant inroads into Syria and Iraq, punctuated with atrocities so macabre that Pope Francis and other world religious leaders (including prominent Muslims) called for direct military intervention.
While the proclivity for jihadis and their surrogates toward outrageous bluster is well-known, given their track record for mayhem, one would be foolish to ignore ISIS members’ recent threats and intimations pertaining to strikes on American soil. When then-future ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi walked away from a U.S. detention camp in 2009, he had some choice – and chilling – words for his former captors: “I’ll see you guys in New York.”
Some U.S. officials continue to assert that despite all of this, there is no evidence of a credible plot against the U.S. at present. This would be laughable were it not for the potential loss of life.
As reported in several publications, including the Wall Street Journal, the Obama administration (in its infinite capacity for rewriting our laws) unilaterally modified the qualifications for foreign nationals seeking asylum last year, allowing thousands of un-vetted Syrians to resettle in the U.S. as “refugees.” According to the testimony of numerous experts, the recent “humanitarian” border crisis allowed the entry of an inestimable number of possible Islamic terrorists into the U.S. via our southern border.
Yet this week, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey insisted ISIS does not pose a direct threat to America, and that he would not recommend U.S. airstrikes in Syria. The president and others continue to avoid the question, claiming that it is Muslims in the Middle East who are at greater risk from the terror group.
On the other hand, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel warned last week that ISIS is “beyond anything that we’ve seen.” This is obviously quite odd considering that Hagel is a Cabinet official.
The FBI and Department of Homeland Security sent out a bulletin to law-enforcement officials Friday relaying their concern that U.S. airstrikes in Iraq could provoke retaliation by ISIS sympathizers in America. The warning was purportedly based on intelligence officials’ belief that foreign fighters have returned to their home countries from fighting abroad and started ISIS cells.
Also this week, Pentagon press secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby slammed the administration’s apathetic reaction to the ISIS threat, as did Sens. John McCain and Lindsay Graham. The latter went as far as to say that if Obama doesn’t get it together, ISIS will “come here” and “leave an American city in flames.”
One may have noted that some of those among the characteristically less assertive Republican leadership (I’m being polite here) are also those squealing most loudly as regards the ISIS threat to the American homeland – and if my use of the word “squeal” leads the reader to think of swine, that’s no accident.
Particularly ironic (if accurate) have been the admonitions of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., who warned that the direct threat from ISIS to America is extremely high because they are “one plane ticket away from U.S. shores.” This was in reference to the Middle Eastern nationals and those naturalized to the U.S. and Britain who have been flying back and forth from these countries to fight in Syria and Iraq. Obviously, the potential for them bringing the fight to America is very real.
For McCain, Graham and Rogers, there is probably an element of trying to save face politically, whether or not their warnings are sincere. McCain and Graham actually went to Egypt in August of 2013 to intercede on behalf of Muslim Brotherhood members at the behest of President Obama after the brutal Morsi regime was overthrown.
In Rogers’ case, it appears that he and his wife, Kristi, were hip-deep in events in Libya during the period from January 2011 (when the Arab Spring protests began) through Sept. 11, 2012 (when the attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi occurred). At that time, Ms. Rogers was vice chairman of the board of directors of Aegis Defense Services, an intelligence and defense contractor working in Libya. She left the company in December 2012.
Both Rep. Rogers and Ms. Rogers were keenly focused on security and intelligence in Libya in the months surrounding the Benghazi attack; the incestuous political connection between the defense contractor and the House Intelligence Committee chairman at that point in time having been adroitly avoided by so many is profoundly disturbing, to say the least.
When Rep. Michele Bachmann began publicly discussing the political affiliations of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s deputy chief of staff and Muslim Sisterhood operative Huma Abedin in 2012, it was Mike Rogers who stood up for Abedin and viciously excoriated Bachmann. He was also part of the obfuscation campaign surrounding the release of emails confirming the administration’s attempts to blame the Benghazi attack on a YouTube video.
The elephant in the room, of course, is the fact that for Obama, taking action against ISIS would be fundamentally self-defeating. He has facilitated the group’s rise, both overtly and covertly, whether through clandestine arms shipments via the CIA operation in Benghazi, conning Congress into approving funds for groups of “moderate” Syrian rebels, or unilaterally claiming the authority to waive provisions of the Arms Export Control Act, which was enacted to prevent the supply of arms to terrorist groups. His long association with Islamist groups (anti-American by definition), his insinuation of Islamist operatives within our government and his facilitation of their objectives speak for themselves.
While the establishment press has entirely avoided the subject of sleeper cells in America, and only a few conservative press outlets have addressed it, we know that there have been jihadi cells training on U.S. soil for years. Law enforcement has been barred from acting against them because federal authorities – some believe conveniently – have not designated them as affiliated with officially designated terror groups.
I honestly cannot say for certain from whence the conflicting accounts of the ISIS threat comes. I don’t know whether power players such as Hagel, McCain, Graham and Rogers are engaging in political damage control exclusively, or whether there is a full-on rebellion against Obama brewing among Washington elites.
I do know this, however: Obama’s word is not the law of the land, and “treason” is the only word that applies to his actions – no matter how many times he declares that they have been legal.
Media wishing to interview Erik Rush, please contact [email protected].