The Obama administration allowed into government agencies Islamic groups and activists tied to the Muslim Brotherhood who now influence U.S. anti-terrorism policies and endanger the nation, charges a newly released book.
In “Impeachable Offenses: The Case to Remove Barack Obama from Office,” New York Times bestselling authors Aaron Klein and Brenda J. Elliott document Obama not only aided the rise to power of Islamic extremist groups in the Middle East but ushered likeminded extremists into the gates of the White House, with Muslim Brotherhood groups serving on important national security advisory boards.
The book further raises questions about whether the Obama administration exposed national security information to U.S. enemies through Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, who has deep personal and family associations with Islamic extremists and even terrorist organizations, according to Klein and Elliott.
Last night, the president granted interviews to six networks to make his case regarding the use of force in Syria. The same president who made the case that the Benghazi attack was all about a video, and who promised “to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.” Tomorrow will mark the one year anniversary of that attack, and no one has been brought to justice. Perhaps Obama may yet learn that once one has squandered one’s credibility, it is impossible to regain it.
By contrast, Vladimir Putin, who previously demonstrated his contempt for the president by granting Edward Snowden asylum, has taken control of the crisis in such a way that, at the very least, he has likely bought even more time for his Syrian ally to make preparation for any conflict with the U.S., even as he appears statesmanlike in the process. Putin’s ability to easily outmaneuver Obama will not be lost on other Middle East leaders.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon have until now patted themselves on the back for striking a balanced and cautious stance which kept Israel secure in the course of the nearly three-year old Syrian conflict. However, President Barack Obama’s decision to put US military action against Syria on hold - unveiled in six US TV interviews Tuesday, Sept. 10 - leaves Israel exposed to a major threat: Bashar Assad’s chemical warfare capability which is left intact.
By buying into Moscow’s proposal to place Syria’s chemical arsenal under international oversight (picked up from a possible throwaway comment by US Secretary of State John Kerry), Obama has in fact opened the door to the “Iranian syndrome.”
By buying into Moscow’s proposal to place Syria’s chemical arsenal under international oversight (picked up from a possible throwaway comment by US Secretary of State John Kerry), Obama has in fact opened the door to the “Iranian syndrome.”
For Israel this is a fiasco. The Netanyahu government’s rationale for sticking to the Obama administration’s line on the Syrian conflict was that it would eventually bring about the break-up - or at least the weakening - of the Iranian-Syrian-Hizballah axis.
But now, President Obama has led his Syria strategy into a blind alley, leaving the axis stronger than ever before and Israel in the lurch.
Kerry says that the mainrebel opposition, the Free Syrian Army, under General Idriss is secular and that the number of Islamist fighters is relatively small. Vladimir Putin says Kerry is lying, and the reports from the people on the ground tend to confirm Putin’s view that the majority of the rebel fighters are Islamists, and that if Assad is defeated they will easily rout General Idriss’ forces and take control of Syria. Is that the outcome we want
Assad has the support of Christians, Alawites, Alevi, Sufi and Shia. What happens to them if Syria becomes a Sunni Saudi like Wahabi theocracy under the control of Salafists? How have Christians fared in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia since the start of the so-called Arab Spring? Have we thought through what effect a military strike on Syria will have on Hezbollah, Hamas, the Kurds, Israel, Lebanon and Iran? Obama has expressed the opinion that by striking Syria the U.S. will be showing Iran that it had better not develop nuclear weapons. But would “an unbelievably small strike” really deter them, or would it just make us look impotent? What if the strike is ineffective? Is our commitment to prevent Assad from ever again using chemical weapons open-ended? Even if the strike is effective, might that not spur the Iranians to accelerate their nuclear weapons program as a deterrent against U.S. interference in their internal affairs? If we get involved in the Syrian war, do we have an exit strategy?
Mouaz Moustafa, patriot of four countries, none of which is the United States, appears to be holding McCain’s hand on Syria through the Syrian Emergency Task Force. And the Syrian Emergency Task Force appears to be funded by “prominent” Syrians in the United States. It’s not technically a foreign organization. Technically.
One member of the SETF’s Board of Trustees/Board of Directors, Dr. Jihad Qaddour, was also a trustee of the Muslim American Society, which is a front for the Muslim Brotherhood.
It’s strange that no one has called attention to the fact that a group headed by people with such extreme ties and beliefs is dominating American foreign policy on Syria and controlling the itinerary of senior senators like McCain.
As President Obama prepares to speak to the nation on his desire for war in Syria, critical attention is being focused on the conflicts of interest and hidden agenda of an influential writer for The Wall Street Journal who has argued for U.S. military intervention on behalf of the Syrian “rebels.”
The writer, an attractive young woman by the name of Elizabeth O’Bagy, has appeared on CNN, Fox News and PBS, but her controversial connection to one side in the Syrian civil war had been carefully concealed during these appearances.
As a result of the cover-up, she is now at the center of a growing controversy over whether Obama’s policy is being manipulated by foreign interests such as the Muslim Brotherhood, and whether military intervention could lay the groundwork for the obliteration of Christians in Syria. Some of her work, labeled disinformation by critics, has influenced such figures as Secretary of State John Kerry, Senator John McCain (R-AZ), and William Kristol. For example, McCain, who has praised Al Jazeera and also appeared on the channel, has called the Syrian rebels “moderates,”...
Iranian President Hasan Rouhani said Tuesday that his country “will not give up one iota” of its nuclear program.
Rouhani told clerics that his government wouldn’t cede “its absolute right” on what he called “the nuclear issue,” AFP reported, quoting the semi-state run Mehr news agency in Iran.
President Obama's push for congressional approval for military airstrikes in Syria ran aground Monday, forcing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to delay a procedural vote as opposition builds among senators in both parties.
Six senators, including five Republicans and one Democrat, announced Monday they would vote against a resolution authorizing the use of force -- a strong indication that the administration's efforts to build bipartisan support have been ineffective.
The Senate was scheduled to vote Wednesday on a procedural motion to begin formal debate on the resolution, but Reid announced late Monday the vote would be delayed in order to buy the president more time to make his case to senators and the public.
Arabic-language Russian news site Rusiya Al-Yaum has reported that Syrian rebels are planning a chemical attack on Israel.
In the report, it was claimed that "armed Syrian militants will use territories controlled by the Syrian regime to perpetrate their provocative plan."
Also see:
"Global Warming" Update:
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar