Warning Pamphlets Dropped on Islamic State ‘to Minimize the Risks to Civilians’

In an earlier post Pilots confirm that Obama blocks 75 percent of ISIS strikes, the absurd seemed to know no limits. But apparently not so. We now drop leaflets 45 minutes ahead of bombing sorties in order to “to minimize the risks to civilians.” Are we at war or not? Dresden, the bombing of Japan and turning their cities into glass apparently are remnants of a once great world power who was willing to protect its people at all costs.

“The bottom line is that we will not stoop to the level of our enemy and put civilians more in harm’s way than absolutely necessary,”

A U.S. Central Command official confirmed to the Washington Free Beacon on Monday that warning pamphlets were dropped on Islamic State targets 45 minutes before bombing sorties in order “to minimize the risks to civilians.”

The confirmation comes on the heels of disclosures that U.S. military pilots were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their ordinance on likely targets due to concerns about harming civilians.

“You went 12 full months while ISIS was on the march without the U.S. using that air power and now as the pilots come back to talk to us they say three-quarters of our ordinance we can’t drop, we can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us,” Royce said at the time. “I don’t understand this strategy at all because this is what has allowed ISIS the advantage and ability to recruit.”

When asked to address Royce’s statement last week, a Pentagon official defended the Obama administration’s policy and said that the military is working to prevent civilian casualties.

“The bottom line is that we will not stoop to the level of our enemy and put civilians more in harm’s way than absolutely necessary,” the official told the Free Beacon, explaining that the military often conducts flights “and don’t strike anything.”

More at Free Beacaon

Pilots confirm that Obama blocks 75 percent of ISIS strikes

Let me know just how one “wins” a war, or otherwise degrades an enemy if seventy-five percent of the bombing runs are blocked? Does Obama really want to win anything other than degrade America? I happened to be on the road and heard the full miserable speech, given on foreign soil, castigated the GOP and otherwise showed the man to be the petulant, angry little man that he is. I urge everyone to catch it. Delusional is too kind a word.

U.S. military pilots who have returned from the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq are confirming that they were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their ordnance on terror targets because they could not get clearance to launch a strike, according to a leading member of Congress.

The policy is being blamed for allowing Islamic State militants to gain strength across Iraq and continue waging terrorist strikes throughout the region and beyond, according to Royce and former military leaders who spoke Wednesday about flaws in the U.S. campaign to combat the Islamic State.

“You went 12 full months while ISIS was on the march without the U.S. using that air power and now as the pilots come back to talk to us they say three-quarters of our ordinance we can’t drop, we can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us,” Royce said. “I don’t understand this strategy at all because this is what has allowed ISIS the advantage and ability to recruit.”

More at Free Beacon . The Picture below is from a tweet from the WH..Your child would have been thrown out of school for this move                             Your child would have been thrown out of school for this move

Or would you rather have this man for your leader?

jordan king

                                                              King Abdullah

 

Was ISIS behind a possible attempt on two lives of France train heroes?

Anybody see this connection between Alek Skarlatos and the Roseburg Massacre? Skarlatos said he was supposed to be present that day in Snyder Hall, the same building where Harper-Mercer carried out his massacre.

So two of the heroes from the Muslim Terrorist train attack are back in the news. Just a coincidence that two of them so far either had a brush with violence, or were stabbed seriously. Strange isn’t it that the topic is gun control with us getting few details of the happenings. So here are the two stories, with the full American Thinker piece worthy of a full read. Here we go:

Was last week’s massacre at Umpqua Community College in Oregon a failed attempt to assassinate a Christian American hero for thwarting a Muslim terrorist train attack this summer in France?

Islamic State (a.k.a. ISIS, ISIL, and Daesh) apparently claimed responsibility on Twitter for the killings Harper-Mercer carried out at Umpqua.  The tweet states, “Again #Oregon #USA #WashingtonDC #IslamicState #ISIS #USA[,]” and displays a graphic with the words “Slay Americans” in front of an image of a man in the process of being beheaded.

There may simply be a series of unlikely coincidences at play, or there may be circumstantial evidence suggesting that anti-jihadist hero Alek Skarlatos was an intended target of Chris Harper-Mercer, who put several Christians to death in an Umpqua classroom on Thursday, Oct. 1 for being Christian.

As USA Today reports

In a taped interview with Ellen DeGeneres on Thursday, Skarlatos said he was supposed to be in the building where Thursday’s shooting took place.

“I had classes in Snyder Hall,” said Skarlatos.  “It’s a fairly small community college, the town in general, everybody knows each other.  So with that many deceased, I mean everybody’s going to know at least one person.” […]

“I would have been there today if I didn’t agree to do this show,” he said.  “I had classes picked out and everything.”Read more: American Thinker

Then we have this:

France Train Hero Spencer Stone Stabbed, In ‘Serious Condition’

Airman 1st Class Spencer Stone, celebrated as a hero for helping to stop a terror attack on a French train over the summer, was stabbed and seriously wounded outside a bar in his hometown early Thursday in what police said was an alcohol-related brawl.

Stone, 23, was knifed repeatedly in the upper body but was expected to survive, authorities said. He was taken to UC Davis Medical Center.

A press conference from about the stabbing is scheduled for 4:15 p.m.. It will be streaming live at cbs13.com/raw.

“This incident is not related to terrorism in any way,” Deputy Police Chief Ken Bernard said. “We know it’s not related to what occurred in France months ago.”

(No question about it and let us not have even a thought on the matter.)

More at Sacremento CBS Local

42 Million plus support ISIS, US blocks attempts by allies to arm Kurds

Figure this one out. The Islamic State rolls on and we are assured that Islam is a religion of peace. Thus we are trucking in thousands of them to the United States from the Middle East as refugees without so much as attempting to vet them. How about these numbers? Millions think of ISIS positively. And the Kurds? Obama refuses to allow even our allies to arm them directly. Whose side is Obama on? Here we go:

The study, based on four recent polls, reveals the shocking level of support for the caliphate around the world.

Ryan Mauro of the Clarion Project, which carried out the research, warned that “ISIS is only a fraction of what it could potentially become”.

He said: “If we don’t act quickly, this is still going to grow – and what we’re looking at today is going to look like the good old days compared to the future.”

More than 8.5million people view ISIS positively, and around 42 million view them somewhat positively, according to the data.

Read more: Express

Meanwhile, Obama refuses to help the Kurds.

The United States has blocked attempts by its Middle East allies to fly heavy weapons directly to the Kurds fighting Islamic State jihadists in Iraq, The Telegraph has learnt.

Some of America’s closest allies say President Barack Obama and other Western leaders, including David Cameron, are failing to show strategic leadership over the world’s gravest security crisis for decades.

They now say they are willing to “go it alone” in supplying heavy weapons to the Kurds, even if means defying the Iraqi authorities and their American backers, who demand all weapons be channelled through Baghdad.

High level officials from Gulf and other states have told this newspaper that all attempts to persuade Mr Obama of the need to arm the Kurds directly as part of more vigorous plans to take on Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) have failed. The Senate voted down one attempt by supporters of the Kurdish cause last month.

The officials say they are looking at new ways to take the fight to Isil without seeking US approval.

“If the Americans and the West are not prepared to do anything serious about defeating Isil, then we will have to find new ways of dealing with the threat,” said a senior Arab government official. “With Isil making ground all the time we simply cannot afford to wait for Washington to wake up to the enormity of the threat we face.”

The Peshmerga have been successfully fighting Isil, driving them back from the gates of Erbil and, with the support of Kurds from neighbouring Syria, re-establishing control over parts of Iraq’s north-west.

But they are doing so with a makeshift armoury. Millions of pounds-worth of weapons have been bought by a number of European countries to arm the Kurds, but American commanders, who are overseeing all military operations against Isil, are blocking the arms transfers.

One of the core complaints of the Kurds is that the Iraqi army has abandoned so many weapons in the face of Isil attack, the Peshmerga are fighting modern American weaponry with out-of-date Soviet equipment.

Keep reading

WH: ISIL A TERRORIST GROUP, BUT TALIBAN IS AN ‘ARMED INSURGENCY’

Just in case there is any confusion as to who is who and what is what, we have this clip from the latest presser with the new mouthpiece by the name of Schultz. Anyone want to bet he will be put in mothballs? No wait, this is the Obama policy. Charles Krauthammer gives us his rebuttal.

“The Taliban is an armed insurgency,” began Schultz. “ISIL is a terrorist group. We don’t make concessions to terrorist groups.”

“You don’t think the Taliban is a terrorist group?” ABC’s Jonathan Karl asked.

“I don’t think that the Taliban… the Taliban is an armed insurgency,” Schultz continued haltingly, pointing out that the United States negotiated Berghdal’s release during the “winding down” of the war in Afghanistan.

Schultz reiterated that the prisoner swap with the Taliban was an “end of conflict” action in support of the president’s commitment to “leave no man/woman behind.”

H/T and more: Breitbart

Then we have Charles Krauthammer’s reaction to this absurdity- short version

Published on Jan 28, 2015

Charles Krauthammer on Fox News’ ‘Special Report’: It slits throats. It attacks buses. It drives car bombs into markets and it isn’t a terrorist organization. Look, you can’t parody this administration. The idea that the United States would not do this is preposterous. Of course we do. And also, the idea that the war is winding down, tell that to anybody who lives in Afghanistan.

This is a fantasy. Obama pretending that the war on terror, the war in Afghanistan, the war in Iraq are all winding down, and the wars are all back. I mean, this is sort of embarrassing.

DHS: ‘Americans ‘Susceptible to Claims That We Have an Open, Porous Border’

Don’t you just love it when we are treated like idiots? This story caught my eye only because last week this fellow DHS Johnson was on Fox News, and Bret Bair asked him what had become of the four suspected terrorists that were caught on our Southern border. His answer was “I don’t know.” Then during a break when the interview began again, someone had slipped him a note saying they were in detention. I was determined to see where this story was going to go. No doubt Eric Holder has lawyered them up. Note the operative word. “Will” be deported. Will? Doubt it. And even if they are, they will be coming back full-bore. Apparently we just don’t appreciate the DHS enough. Here we go:

Our southern border is much more secure than the American people think it is, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson told a gathering in Washington on Thursday.

“Not enough has been said publicly by our government in a clear, concise way, about our border security efforts on behalf of the American people. And in the absence of facts, the American public is susceptible to claims that we have an open, porous border, through which unaccompanied minors and members of terrorist organizations such as ISIL may pass.”

“In September, the public heard a claim that four individuals with suspected ties to terrorism in the Middle East had attempted to cross our southern border. Far fewer know that, in fact, these four individuals were arrested, their supposed link to terrorism was thoroughly investigated and checked, and, in the end, amounted to a claim by the individuals themselves that they were members of the Kurdish Workers Party, an organization actually fighting against ISIL and defended Kurdish territory in Iraq.

Johnson said the four people will be deported. (Get out the old laugh-o-meter)

If the numbers are dwindling, why is the government opening new detention facilities? a reporter asked.

“Well, as I said in my prepared remarks, a lot of migration is seasonal,” Johnson said. “And so, we’ve got to, in my view, guard against the same thing happening again. And so, we want to build additional capability that can be converted from one type of use to another on pretty short notice.

More over at CNS

Kerry wanted U.S. boots on the ground in Syria, has anything changed?

This was published 2013. Has anything really changed?

SYRIA John Kerry Wants Option To Place “Boots On The Ground” For Phony Limited Strike

Just for the record from these lying weasels. Of course Kerry doesn’t want to limit boots on the ground because our boots are already there.  Just for the record. This administration talks out of both sides of their mouth. Below are notes from the clip.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Secretary of State John Kerry said on Tuesday that a resolution in Congress on the use of military force in Syria should not remove the option of using U.S. ground troops, although he stressed there was “no intention” of inserting American soldiers into Syria’s civil war.

At the first public hearing in Congress on potential military action in Syria, Kerry said “it would be preferable” not to preclude the use of ground troops to preserve President Barack Obama’s options if there was a potential threat of chemical weapons falling into the hands of extremists.

“I don’t want to take off the table an option that might or might not be available to a president of the United States to secure our country,” Kerry told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Kerry: We’re not looking for any countries to put boots on the ground

Regardless what the news reports are, there is no denying what Lerch said on Face the Nation. Huh? Not asking anyone for boots on the ground? But this is not the first time he acted like a you know what. Almost to the day last year when ratcheting up for war. I was stunned when I saw this yesterday. Anyone still wondering what we have going on in the WH? At least last year the WH admits we have zero allies for Syria attack September 9, 2013.

I guess this time we are not even going to ask. Here we go:

Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Secretary of State John Kerry when asked if any nations have volunteered to supply combat troops to fight ISIS on the ground said, “We’re not looking to put troops on the ground.”

Bob Schieffer asked, “Mr. Secretary, you’ve gotten any specific commitments for military help? For example, have you found anybody that is willing to put troops on the ground in to this fight?”

Kerry answered, “We’re not looking to put troops on the ground. there are some who have offered to do so. but we are not looking for that at this moment anyway. The answer is, yes, there are some that have said that. There are some that are clearly prepared to take action in the area alongside the United States, and to do airstrikes if that’s what they’re called on to do.”

He added, “There are troops on the ground that don’t belong to us they’re called syrian. the syrian opposition is on the ground. one of the regrettable things is, it has been fighting ISIS by itself over the course of the last couple of years.”

Video over at Breitbart

John Kerry gets Zero support for Syrian non-war from ‘our’ Middle East ‘Allies’

Lerch has been once again tooling around the Middle East, searching for “the willing” to support Obama and his almost plan. The Brits, Germany and Turkey were quick to say “count us out”. They have had enough of this foolishness. The Libya and Egypt fiasco should have taught all of “the willing” how far throwing in with a loser will take them. Still looking for someone to put those ole boots on the ground. Why would Egypt and the UAE even be involved after just a few weeks ago, Obama and the EU reamed them out for trying to save the Tripoli airport from the Terrorists. Recall this nonsense?

Obama’s wacko Libyan policy. Attacks UAE and EGYPT for trying to save Tripoli? August 26, 2014

The New York Times, citing unnamed American officials, reported that neighboring Egypt and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have launched airstrikes against Islamists in Libya twice over the past week.

The US and EU governments “strongly condemn the escalation of fighting and violence in and around Tripoli, Benghazi, and across Libya, especially against residential areas, public facilities, and critical infrastructure, by both land attack and airstrikes,” the statement said. (They tried to save the Airport from the terrorists)

But I digressed.

To understand and to try and figure out who these “willings” will be and how Lerch is making out, I turned to the foreign news sources. So let’s take a look at what the Turkish media has to say about how the so-called coalition is working out. How are our friends stacking up?

The header reads:  Arabs back anti-ISIL statement as Turkey abstains. Let’s look at how the words are parsed. Grab this one first:

Squabbling among Washington’s allies in the region has complicated efforts to present a united front to beat back the militants.

Saudi Arabia, the Emirates and Egypt are at odds with Qatar and Turkey because of the latter two countries’ support for the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist groups in the region.

Egypt’s foreign minister, Sameh Shukri, emphasized that rift in his opening remarks, saying regional chaos is the result of a number of factors, including the tolerance of some in the region and the West with “so-called political Islam” – a clear dig at supporters of the Brotherhood.

Salman Shaikh, the director of the Brookings Doha Center in Qatar, said the Sept. 11 meeting was important because it signaled a U.S. reengagement in the region – something many Mideast allies feel has been lacking under the Obama administration.

“How the U.S. can play this role will be absolutely crucial,” he said. “It has to act as a keen leader for its friends and allies, but also act as a referee between Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Iran, particularly when it comes to the issue of Iraq and the issue of Syria.”

Key Arab allies of the United States agreed Sept. 11 to “do their share” to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL),promising to take action to stop the flow of fighters and funding to the insurgents and possibly to join military action.

NATO member Turkey refused to join its Arab neighbors in their public pledge, however, signaling the struggle the West faces in trying to get front-line nations to set aside political feuds and work together against a common enemy, according to the Associated Press.

The announcement followed a meeting between U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and his regional counterparts in the Saudi Red Sea coastal city of Jiddah. His visit, on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, was aimed at pinning down regional allies on what support they are willing to give to U.S. plans to beat back the ISIL, which has seized large chunks of Iraq and Syria.

The meeting ended with Saudi Arabia, other Gulf states, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon pledging in a joint statement to stand against terrorism. They promised steps including stopping fighters and funding, repudiating the ISIL’s ideology, providing humanitarian aid and “as appropriate, joining in the many aspects of a coordinated military campaign.”

More at Hurriyet Daily News

The first clip gives us a flavor of the meeting and a view of the lying characters involved. The short second clip is even better. No wonder no one wants to get involved in this nonsense.

John Kerry to CNN: U.S. Is Not ‘at War’ with ISIS

Published on Sep 11, 2014

CNN’s Global Affairs Correspondent Elise Labott caught up with Kerry during a summit in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia Thursday and asked him if America is “at war” with ISIS, “because it sure sounded in President Obama’s speech that we were.

 

John Kerry: No need for “war fever” in ISIS operations

 

Obama blames U.S. for rise of terrorist threat by “feeding extremism”

I admit it. I watched Zero address the American Legion yesterday. I had some degree of hope that the Legion members might set Obama back on his heels a bit. He snoozed the members with his usual non-emotional tone, and they remained somewhat polite. All and all his remarks were ridiculous and made little sense. This was the high point. Of course, it is our fault for the terrorism, Forget that Jefferson and Adams held the view that these Muslim fellows would always be a problem

Via Breitbart:

Monday at the American Legion’s 96th National Convention, President Barack Obama said the answer for ISIS’s “evolving terrorist threat” is not for America to “occupy” countries and end up “feeding extremism.” […]

“The answer is not to send in large-scale military deployments that over stretch our military, and lead for us occupying countries for a long period of time and end up feeding extremism.”

Part of an earlier post:

Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and the Middle East

In 1786, Jefferson, then the American ambassador to France, and Adams, then the American ambassador to Britain, met in London with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the “Dey of Algiers” ambassador to Britain.

The Americans wanted to negotiate a peace treaty based on Congress’ vote to appease.

During the meeting Jefferson and Adams asked the Dey’s ambassador why Muslims held so much hostility towards America, a nation with which they had no previous contacts.

In a later meeting with the American Congress, the two future presidents reported that Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja had answered that Islam “was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Quran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

For the following 15 years, the American government paid the Muslims millions of dollars for the safe passage of American ships or the return of American hostages. The payments in ransom and tribute amounted to 20 percent of United States government annual revenues in 1800.

Not long after Jefferson’s inauguration as president in 1801, he dispatched a group of frigates to defend American interests in the Mediterranean, and informed Congress.

Declaring that America was going to spend “millions for defense but not one cent for tribute,” Jefferson pressed the issue by deploying American Marines and many of America’s best warships to the Muslim Barbary Coast.

 

%d bloggers like this: