How WikiLeaks Exposed Obama’s Incompetence

Pages: 1 2

One can only wonder how the Obama administration would consider a two-state solution the antidote to the increasing aggression of Iran against its Arab neighbors.

Another unfounded assumption the president makes regarding Islamic terror was revealed in a June 4 speech in Cairo, Egypt where he said that “the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.”  This harkens back to the idea that, because an advanced society is considered “hostile,” Muslim terrorists are largely primitive.

Such an assessment does not remotely square with the facts.  Many terrorists have come from wealthy families, have studied at Western Universities and have exploited many aspects of modern technology: the use of popular websites to spread their jihadist ideology; the manufacture of remote-controlled IEDs that kill American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan; the use computers to identify and analyze possible terror targets; and most recently, a collaboration between terrorist bomb-makers and terrorist surgeons in the attempt to create internal cavity explosive devices which elude even the most sophisticated detection devices at airports around the world. Hardly the picture of discontented cave-dwelling primitives the Obama administration portrays as the chief perpetrators of Muslim terror.

Yet in fairness to the president, there is one fundamental aspect of modernity Muslims do indeed reject:  they reject government based on reason,  science and individualism, in favor of one where divine revelation interpreted by the religious ruling elites demands collective adherence to Koranic scripture.  Such is the essence of Sharia Law, and one suspects that such a worldview is favored by far more Muslims than those merely associated with terror.  What percentage of Muslims?  Perhaps the ultimate question that should be posed to so-called moderate Muslims is this:

If a Muslim Caliphate could be imposed upon the entire word without terrorism, would you be in favor of such a development, or not?

The Obama administration–and again in fairness, the Bush administration as well–have done their utmost to make sure such a question never gets asked.  This effort is underscored by the determination of both administrations to expunge certain expressions from the government lexicon regarding Islamic terror.  With respect to the Bush administration, United Press international reported on May 6, 2008 that ”U.S. officials are being advised in internal government documents to avoid referring publicly to al-Qaida and other terrorist groups as Islamic or Muslim, and not to use terms like jihad or mujahedin, which ‘unintentionally legitimize’ terrorism.” With respect to the Obama administration, Fox News reported on April 7, 2010 that “President Barack Obama’s advisers will remove religious terms such as ‘Islamic extremism’ from the central document outlining the U.S. national security strategy and will use the rewritten document to emphasize that the United States does not view Muslim nations through the lens of terror, counterterrorism.”

Thus, both administrations have sought to placate what they view as the “great middle” of the Islamic world–without ever finding out if that great middle actually exists in anything other than the hopeful minds of Western government officials.

Certainly most Western nations would prefer to believe that we are engaged in a limited conflict with a relatively small group disgruntled malcontents, rather than a “clash of civilizations” with an entire religion.  Yet isn’t the essence of national security to hope for the best–even as we prepare for the worst case scenario?  One would like to think that behind the Obama administration’s public facade of accommodation and outreach towards the Muslim world, there exists are far more jaundiced view of radical and not-so-racial Islam, necessitated by those national security considerations. Unfortunately the information contained in Wikileaks release reveals a decided lack of circumspection by this administration.

How that accrues to American interests is beyond this writer’s comprehension.

Arnold Ahlert is a contributing columnist to the conservative website

Pages: 1 2

  • Sigthor

    Interesting article even though I think Obama is dealing with this situation pretty much like Clinton would do, an easier more thought process to see how the first days go.
    Bush would without a doubt react a lot harsher and demand execution and be on the Sarah Palin, he would also use this to rush another law through the senate to limit personal freedom with the argument that it was national security, and people would have supported cutting there own privacy because of an outrage that will last few months, but privacy cut will most likely be a permanent situation.

    Regarding terrorist funding, it is worth to point it out that the average European looks at Israeli as a terrorist group funded by the US, and look at Pakistan as a victim.

    • YeshuaisAdonai

      "Regarding terrorist funding, it is worth to point it out that the average European looks at Israeli as a terrorist group funded by the US, and look at Pakistan as a victim. "

      What the average European thinks about the situation with Israel is irrelevant given that many of those European nations have rolled over and allowed muslims to take over their neighborhoods. Israel is constantly condemned for taking the action other western nations should take against aggressive terrorist organizations.

    • sebyandrew

      Bush will always be there to kick around, won't he? The great mitigator.

    • davarino

      So you havent seen what is happening at the airports? This admin still wire tapping.

      So when Isreal defends herself, she is the terrorist? Pakistan is a victim of whom, itself?

    • Chiggles

      Ha! This pinhead doesn't even know the difference between Pakistan and Palestine. And Eurotwits like him call Americans ignorant.

  • Ross

    I agree, when people of Iran came to the streets and shouted "Obama Obama are you with us or with them" Obama choused to be with the Mullahs. He tried to shake hands with Ahmadinejad. He keeps Iranian main opposition PMOI in the list of FTO to appease Mullahs. He should stay on the side of Iranian people so Iranian people get rid of the Mullahs. In that case most of the problems in Middle East will disappear.

  • dennis

    Nothing new under the sun… osama is a muslim and the state department filled with people who harboured some of the worst nazis, aided islam's bloodthirsty quest for power in afganistan, bosnia and kosvo al for the sacred purpose of a 'juedrein' world… thanks lefties

    • trickyblain

      No problem, man! Enjoy!

    • TILIS

      On the contrary, the state dept is drapped in Israeli flags. Do a U tube on interviews with past employyees there and see what they say about Israeli/Jewish influence. They run the place. Stop peddling rubbish about Nazi's in the US Govt aiding muslim power. What you say couldn't be more ridiculous. Why do you think America gets stared down by Israel all the time??????

  • Jones

    Ross said: “… He should stay on the side of Iranian people so Iranian people get rid of the Mullahs. In that case most of the problems in Middle East will disappear.”

    That is like saying: “… He should stay on the side of Italian people so Italian people get rid of the Clergy. In that case most of the problems in Europe will disappear.”

    Just ain’t gonna happen. Reality check time.

  • SHmuelHaLevi

    I offer a view from the Middle East SHUK, or open air markets.
    Soetoro is without a doubt one step ahead of Bozo The Clown on an Islamic mode.
    I also find the "Little Shop of Horrors" very much alike the Nazi riddled SD.
    And to those which happen to be friends of the USA, he acts like "IT".
    Otherwise, what Foreign policy"?

  • ObamaYoMoma

    It is also the same Saudi Arabia with whom this administration is currently negotiating a $60 billion arms sale.

    Which is ludicrous because it will inevitably be used against us. Ultimately, we need to eradicate the House of Saud and confiscate its oil wealth and oil assets. Otherwise, they will use their oil wealth and oil assets perpetually against the West to wage jihad via violent jihad and stealth and deceptive non-violent jihad, which they have been doing already for many years.

    The fact that we consider our most mortal enemies in the world to be valuable allies is demonstrative of the gross incompetence that is endemic throughout our federal government and especially in our State Department, which has been thoroughly corrupted by years of Saudi bribes, and bribes that are a very effective form of stealth and deceptive non-violent jihad that the House of Saud has employed against us and our allies for many years, as they now wield enormous influence in America and throughout Europe today.

    Not to mention that pictures of US Presidents bowing down, holding hands, and even kissing Saudi rulers on the lips to demonstrate their fealty to the House of Saud also indicates that the office of President has also been thoroughly corrupted via this stealth treachery as well. Someone ought to investigate how much money GHWB, WJC, and GWB have all received from the Saudis and the Gulf States. Obama is obviously very implicit in this corruption as well as he has been the biggest Muhammadan sympathizer yet to hold the office, as witness to this proposed $60 billion sale demonstrates.

    This ever-increasing nuclear stockpile could be obtained by terrorists taking advantage of what the cables characterized as an “increasingly unstable” country.

    For all intents and purposes, Pakistan’s ever-increasing nuclear stockpile is already in the hands of terrorists, only they are terrorists of the stealth and deceptive non-violent variety, which is far more dangerous than even the violent variety because they operate for the most part below the level of scrutiny and completely undetected. In addition, one of the biggest reasons Pakistan’s nuclear stockpile, which consist of far more than what is needed to obliterate India, is ever-increasing is because of US financial aid, which frees up money elsewhere to be used for increasing that nuclear stockpile.

    In any event, if Iran is allowed to get a nuclear stockpile of its own, which seems to be the current trajectory, watch how fast Pakistan morphs into the nuclear supermarket of the Sunni world, thanks in large part to billions of dollars of US financial aid to our mortal enemies. We are financing our own demise thanks to the corruption and gross incompetence of the leaders we are electing. In addition, large parts of our federal government and also public institutions have also been corrupted and are also complicit in this treachery, including the so-called MSM.

    With respect to the so-called Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it is not a conflict between the Israelis and the so-called Palestinians as is portrayed by the media. Instead, it is a jihad being waged against the Jewish infidel state of Israel by the camp of Islam, and it is one of many such jihads being waged all around the world, both overt and stealth, that altogether comprises the greater global jihad at large. Furthermore, all peace processes aside, that jihad being waged against the Jewish infidel state of Israel is permanent like all other jihads and will continue perpetually as long as Israel continues to exist, just like the greater global jihad at large will also continue to be waged perpetually as long as unbelievers still control territory that hasn’t been rendered Dar al Islam via the imposition of Sharia.

    How that accrues to American interests is beyond this writer’s comprehension.

    Great article, but the problem encompasses both major political parties. The Dhimmicrat Party is beyond hopeless, and the few Republicans that are aware of the situation are marginalized as right wing extremists and even bigots. I don’t know about other conservatives but this conservative is not voting for any presidential candidate unless that candidate can demonstrate a suitable working knowledge of the global jihad. In fact, if the Republican Party weren’t already thoroughly corrupted, defending the West from the global jihad and this clash of civilizations would already be its number one issue, and turncoat saboteurs like Grover Norquist would be locked up for life or otherwise executed.

    • ApolloSpeaks


      • davarino

        Yup, this will demonstrate to all the knuckle heads that God is not with islam/terrorists.

    • Wesley69

      Though the House of Saud has been playing both sides against the middle, I would be hesitant about overthrowing it and occupying it. Such an occupation, first off, would not fly with the American people. However, making conditions for our continued support, I would demand that their contributions for Radical Muslim schools throughout the US and the world ends as well as their support for terrorist organizations. They would also need to renounce global Jihad. It would help if we could break out oil addiction without damaging our economy.

      I believe you are correct in your assessments of Pakistan and the Palestinians. Both countries have their eternal enemies: India and Israel. However, should the Iranians get nuclear weapons, this may change the equation in the region radically. All of a sudden, the enemy of my enemy is my friend may come into play and resolve certain conflicts and irritants to stability in this region.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        Such an occupation, first off, would not fly with the American people.

        I don’t understand why do we need to occupy Saudi Arabia? The last thing I would ever support is occupying another Islamic country. Hell, I don’t even support the occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, because they are both exceedingly fantasy based. However, I would support confiscating their oil assets and occupying those parts of the country, but nothing else. And the reason I would support such action is because if we don’t, they will just use the proceeds derived from the sale of oil to wage jihad perpetually against us per the dictates of Islam.

        However, making conditions for our continued support, I would demand that their contributions for Radical Muslim schools throughout the US and the world ends as well as their support for terrorist organizations. They would also need to renounce global Jihad.

        We’ve been demanding since 9/11 that they stop and they still haven’t stopped yet. The fact of the matter is it would be sacrileges for them to stop. As long as they have oil wealth, that oil wealth will be used to wage jihad perpetually against unbelievers until such time as there is no more land controlled by unbelievers. Hence, eradicating the House of Saud may sound a little extreme to the uninitiated, but they have been waging jihad, both overt and stealth, against the West for decades and nothing else will stop it other than eradicating them and seizing their oil wealth and oil assets. By the way, that also includes doing the same thing with respect to the Gulf States. In fact, nothing else will end the global jihad. As long as they have the means to wage jihad, they will wage jihad per the tenets of Islam.

        It would help if we could break out oil addiction without damaging our economy.

        Even if we did, it still would not stop the global jihad. There is only one thing that will stop it, see above.

        With respect to Iran, the nuclear genie must not be let out of the bottle as that will inevitably lead to a nuclear WWIII that will make WWII seem like nice picnic in the park.

        • Wesley69

          The key to Saudi Arabia is its oil wealth. The key for the US is to commit ourselves to Energy Independence using oil, coal, nuclear, wind, solar, oil sands, natural gas. We need all sources to achieve this goal. We could convert our cars to run on natural gas. The problem is extreme environmentalism and an administration totally in accord with these radicals. Any policy changes may have to wait two years until we get Obama out of office.

          The Saud family will still finance global jihad regardless of what we do. However, if we don't have to depend upon the Saudis, we could turn on them and play them as they have played us. As I stated their wealth is their oil. So we threaten it – just like they threatened to blow it up during the Oil Embargo of 1973 to prevent a US invasion. We don't have to hit Mecca and Medina to get them to understand.

          As for Iran, it will get its weapons if this administration has its way. The best things that can happen are sabotage and assassinations, and supporting regime change. But I agree, Iran must not get nuclear weapons.

  • ApolloSpeaks


    Click my name for the story

  • Wesley69

    The president, unlike the long line of his predecessors since Franklin Roosevelt, simply does not put national security at the centre of his political priorities.

    This line from the article is disturbing because it is true. Obama's ambition to be the leader of this world is astounding.
    To that end, he is willing to sell his soul and our security, our freedom.
    To that end, he calls terrorism man-made catastrophes and have extended terrorists rights in our courts.
    To that end, he announced a troop surge in Afghanistan with withdrawals to begin at a certain date which only encourage al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
    To that end, he has expressed his concern that should he continue operations in Afghanistan that he would lose his political base.
    To that end he demands that Israel give into Palestinian demands without reciprocity of the other side.
    To that end he junked the defensive missile shield in Eastern Europe to appease Russia.
    To that end he concluded an unfavorable treaty with Russia that would throw away our strategic edge in defensive missiles. Hopefully, the Senate will reject it.
    To that end he has said the US will not immediately retaliate against a country attacking us with biologicals with our nuclear weapons.
    To that end he has bowed before the leaders of China and Saudi Arabia. To this day and with the help of past administrations, we are subservient to China for money and Saudi Arabia for oil.
    To that end he has told the world the US is behind some of greatest evils in the world.
    To that end he has done little than talk with Iran about their development of nuclear weapons. Nor did he support Iranian dissidents who would replace the rule of the Mullahs.
    To that end, he wants NASA to focus on making Arabs feel good about their scientific & mathematical achievements of the past, instead of pushing a national effect to get our people into space without the aid of the Russians.
    To that end, he, like his predecessor, has done little to secure the border with Mexico allowing the drug war to spill into this country.
    To his credit, he has picked up the number of drone attacks into Pakistan killing al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
    To his credit, he appointed the proper general to head the military operations in Afghanistan.

    Does this sound like a leader dedicated to the security of his country? Better yet, is Mr. O. the type of leader whom other nations would respect and fear because of his resolve?

  • Wesley69

    WikiLeaks didn't really expose anything more about Obama’s incompetence, that we already didn't know. It just confirms it. Is he to blame for his short-comings? No, WE THE PEOPLE, did not do our homework. We voted as if we were participating in American Idol. Will WE THE PEOPLE make the same mistake again? Here’s hoping his charm and soaring rhetoric don’t fool a majority of us again!

  • Ret. Marine

    I don't believe this report told us anything other than what we already knew of the "won's" incompetence. We have had two years of his blundering, dictates, orders, and an assorrtment of disrespect for the American public at large. As far as the muslim population at large, they are all terrorist in waiting, they don't need an excuse to do what they do. It is what their religion of peices demands of all of them.

    When this Nation decides to elect real leadership, maybe then we should demand all funds going out of this country of terror supporters be paid back in full with interest. If not we just take their nukes away from them and be done with it. And by all means start bulldozing their headquarters ( mosques) to the ground, deport every last one of them and then maybe if they feel froggy we just get the bombers in the air without any warning and make a glass parking lot of of the whole m/e, problem solved, no apologizing for it either. What do we recieve out of our support, more terrorist in waiting demanding we change to their backwards culture, enough already. Some of us are really sick and tired of this whole mess and the COWARDS calling themselves our leaders.

    • TILIS

      This is such a helpful and insightful comment I really cannot imagine why you haven't stood for Congress yet



  • Carbon Dioxide

    Where the the author describes the approach of the Obama Administration (including Clinton and Bush) approach to foreign policy in the most troubled parts of the world as a "triumph of ideology over reality", is the ideology best described as PC, leftism or PC in support of leftism/progressiveism?