Trump O human casualties 1 Purple Heart Dog…McCraven well…and…

 

The moment you realize U really need to CYA. &.

Editor’s Note: For the clueless fascist puppets at CNN. U are 1000 steps behind. &. BART from EXTORTION 17 says HI ALOHA III.

SUA has proprietary information concerning the modus operandi of crime scene staging by the Deep State and the globalist fascists that do not have America First and do not want The Constitution to survive. Start thinking CNN.

 

READ: Trump Announcement On Baghdadi’s Death

Islamic state leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is dead, President Trump announced on Sunday. The ISIS founder died in a U.S. special operation on Saturday.

In an address from the White House, Trump said Baghdadi died after being cornered by U.S. forces and detonating his own suicide vest. Trump said Baghdadi’s remains had been positively identified.

“He died like a dog. He died like a coward,” the president said.

Trump also thanked Russia, Turkey, Syria, Iraq and the Syrian Kurds for supporting the mission.

Video and a transcript of the president’s full address, including his Q&A with reporters, is available.

Last night, the United States brought the world’s number one terrorist leader to justice. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is dead. He was the founder and leader of ISIS, the most ruthless and violent terror organization anywhere in the world.

The United States has been searching for Baghdadi for many years. Capturing or killing Baghdadi has been the top national security priority of my administration. U.S. Special Operations Forces executed a dangerous and daring nighttime raid in northwestern Syria and accomplished their mission in grand style. The U.S. personnel were incredible. I got to watch much of it.

No personnel were lost in the operation, while a large number of Baghdadi’s fighters and companions were killed with him. He died after running into a dead-end tunnel, whimpering and crying and screaming all the way. The compound had been cleared by this time, with people either surrendering or being shot and killed. Eleven young children were moved out of the house and are uninjured. The only ones remaining were Baghdadi in the tunnel, and he had dragged three of his young children with him. They were led to certain death.

He reached the end of the tunnel, as our dogs chased him down. He ignited his vest, killing himself and the three children. His body was mutilated by the blast. The tunnel had caved in on it, in addition. But test results gave certain immediate and totally positive identification. It was him.

The thug who tried so hard to intimidate others spent his last moments in utter fear, in total panic and dread, terrified of the American forces bearing down on him.

We were in the compound for approximately two hours, and after the mission was accomplished, we took highly sensitive material and information from the raid, much having to do with ISIS origins, future plans, things that we very much want.

Baghdadi’s demise demonstrates America’s relentless pursuit of terrorist leaders and our commitment to the enduring and total defeat of ISIS and other terrorist organizations.

Our reach is very long. As you know, last month, we announced that we recently killed Hamza bin Laden, the very violent son of Osama bin Laden, who was saying very bad things about people, about our country, about the world. He was the heir apparent to al Qaeda.

Terrorists who oppress and murder innocent people should never sleep soundly, knowing that we will completely destroy them. These savage monsters will not escape their fate, and they will not escape the final judgment of God.

Baghdadi has been on the run for many years, long before I took office. But at my direction, as Commander-in-Chief of the United States, we obliterated his caliphate, 100 percent, in March of this year.

Today’s events are another reminder that we will continue to pursue the remaining ISIS terrorists to their brutal end. That also goes for other terrorist organizations. They are, likewise, in our sights.

Baghdadi and the losers who worked for him — and losers they are — they had no idea what they were getting into. In some cases, they were very frightened puppies. In other cases, they were hardcore killers. But they killed many, many people. Their murder of innocent Americans — James Foley, Steven Sotloff, Peter Kassig, and Kayla Mueller — were especially heinous.

The shocking publicized murder of a Jordanian pilot, a wonderful young man — spoke to the King of Jordan; they all knew him, they all loved him — he was burned alive in a cage for all to see. And the execution of Christians in Libya and Egypt, as well as the genocidal mass murder of Yazidis, rank ISIS among the most depraved organizations in the history of our world.

The forced religious conversions, the orange suits prior to so many beheadings, all of which were openly displayed for the world to see, this was all that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi — this is what he wanted. This is what he was proud of. He was a sick and depraved man, and now he’s gone. Baghdadi was vicious and violent, and he died in a vicious and violent way, as a coward, running and crying.

This raid was impeccable, and could only have taken place with the acknowledgement and help of certain other nations and people.

I want to thank the nations of Russia, Turkey, Syria, and Iraq. And I also want to thank the Syrian Kurds for certain support they were able to give us. This was a very, very dangerous mission.

Thank you, as well, to the great intelligence professionals who helped make this very successful journey possible.

I want to thank the soldiers, and sailors, airmen, and Marines involved in last tonight’s operation. You are the very best there is anywhere in the world. No matter where you go, there is nobody even close.

I want to thank General Mark Milley and our Joint Chiefs of Staff, and I also want to thank our professionals who work in other agencies of the United States government and were critical to the mission’s unbelievable success.

Last night was a great night for the United States and for the world. A brutal killer, one who has caused so much hardship and death, has violently been eliminated. He will never again harm another innocent man, woman, or child. He died like a dog. He died like a coward. The world is now a much safer place.

God bless America. Thank you.

Any questions?

Q: When did you first hear that this was — operation was going to get started?

THE PRESIDENT: We’ve had him under surveillance for a couple of weeks. We knew a little bit about where he was going, where he was heading. We had very good information that he was going to another location. He didn’t go. Two or three efforts were cancelled because he decided to change his mind — constantly changing his mind. And, finally, we saw that he was here, held up here. We knew something about the compound. We knew it had tunnels. The tunnels were a dead-end, for the most part. There was one, we think, that wasn’t. But we had that covered too, just in case.

The level of intelligence, the level of work, was pretty amazing. When we landed with eight helicopters, a large crew of brilliant fighters ran out of those helicopters and blew holes into the side of the building, not wanting to go through the main door because that was booby-trapped. And there was something — it was something really amazing to see. I got to watch it, along with General Milley, Vice President Pence, others, in the Situation Room. And we watched it so clearly.

Editors Note:
Except the video feed was down during the Gameboy raid. Now back to all the activities being monitored during the Benghazi events.


Q
: They had body cameras? Or how did you watch the —

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I don’t want to say how, but we had absolutely perfect — as though you were watching a movie. It was — that — the technology there alone is really great.

A big part of the trip that was of great danger was the — it was approximately an hour and 10-minute flight, and we were flying over very, very dangerous territory. In fact, some of our leaders said that that could be the most dangerous — flying in and flying out. And that’s why, last night, we were so quiet about it. We didn’t say anything, and I didn’t make my remark until after they had landed safely in a certain area.

But the flight in, the flight out, was a very, very dangerous part. There was a chance that we would have met unbelievable fire. Russia treated us great. They opened up. We had to fly over certain Russia areas, Russia-held areas. Russia was great. Iraq was excellent. We really had great cooperation.

And you have to understand: They didn’t know what we were doing and where we were going, exactly. But the ISIS fighters are hated as much by Russia and some of these other countries as they are by us. And that’s why I say they should start doing a lot of the fighting now, and they’ll be able to. I really believe they’ll be able to.

Yes, Jennifer?

Q: Sir, can you say what role the Kurds played in this, just generally?

THE PRESIDENT: They gave us not a military role at all, but they gave us some information that turned out to be helpful, the Kurds.

Q: And can you tell us what the role of Turkey might have been, and Iraq?

THE PRESIDENT: Who?

Q: What was the role of Turkey? How did they help?

THE PRESIDENT: Turkey — we dealt with them. They know we were going in. We flew over some territory. They were terrific. No problem. They were not a problem. You know, they could start shooting, and then we will take them out. But a lot of bad things can happen. Plus, it was a very secret mission. We flew very, very low and very, very fast. But it was a big — it was a very dangerous part of the mission. Getting in and getting out too, equal. We went in identical — we took an identical route. We met with gunfire coming in, but it was local gunfire. That gunfire was immediately terminated. These people are amazing. They had the gunfire terminated immediately, meaning they were shot from the airships.

Q: I’m trying to understand the timing. You talked earlier — you know, several weeks — about pulling troops out, you know, and then troops were put back in. And then, you know — I’m trying to understand the timing of when this operation — how it fits —

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I’ll tell you, from the first day I came to office — and now we’re getting close to three years — I would say, “Where’s al-Baghdadi? I want al-Baghdadi.” And we would kill terrorist leaders, but they were names I never heard of. They were names that weren’t recognizable and they weren’t the big names. Some good ones, some important ones, but they weren’t the big names. I kept saying, “Where’s al-Baghdadi?” And a couple of weeks ago, they were able to scope him out.

You know, these people are very smart. They’re not into the use of cellphones anymore. They’re not — they’re very technically brilliant. You know, they use the Internet better than almost anybody in the world, perhaps other than Donald Trump. But they use the Internet incredibly well.

And what they’ve done with the Internet, through recruiting and everything — and that’s why he died like a dog, he died like a coward. He was whimpering, screaming, and crying. And, frankly, I think it’s something that should be brought out so that his followers and all of these young kids that want to leave various countries, including the United States, they should see how he died. He didn’t die a hero. He died a coward — crying, whimpering, screaming, and bringing three kids with him to die a certain death. And he knew the tunnel had no end. I mean, it was a — it was a closed-end — they call it a closed-end tunnel. Not a good place to be.

Q: So this was going on before you made the announcement that you’re pulling them out?

THE PRESIDENT: I’ve been looking for him for three years. I’ve been looking for him. I started getting some very positive feedback about a month ago, and we had some incredible intelligence officials that did a great job. That’s what they should be focused on.

Q: And about what time did this operation start yesterday, sir? And have you notified the leaders on —

THE PRESIDENT: Well, this operation started two weeks ago, in terms of the real operation, because we had him scoped. We thought he’d be in a certain location. He was. Things started checking out very well. We were involved, on our own team, with some brilliant people who I’ve gotten to know. Brilliant people that love our country. Highly intelligent people. And we — we’ve had it pretty well scoped out for a couple of weeks.

But he tends to change immediately. He had a lot of cash. He tends to change, like, on a dime, where he’ll be going to a certain location. All of a sudden, he’ll go someplace else and you’ll have to cancel.

But this was one where we knew he was there. And you can never be 100 percent sure because you’re basing it on technology, more than anything else. But we thought he was there, and then we got a confirmation. And when we went in, they were greeted with a lot of firepower. A lot of firepower.

I’ll tell you, these guys, they do a job. They are so brave and so good. And, so importantly, many of his people were killed. And we’ll announce the exact number over the next 24 hours. But many were killed. We lost nobody. Think of that. It’s incredible.

Q: And when you told the Russians, you requested permission —

THE PRESIDENT: Our dog was hurt. Actually, the K-9 was hurt, went into the tunnel. But we lost nobody.

Q: And so you requested to the Russians to fly over this area they controlled. What did you tell them —

THE PRESIDENT: We spoke to the Russians.

Q: What did you tell them you were going to do?

THE PRESIDENT: We told them we’re coming in.

Q: Okay.

THE PRESIDENT: And they said, “Thank you for telling us.” They were very good.

Q: But did you tell them why? No? You just —

THE PRESIDENT: No. They did not know why.

Q: Was any other country given —

THE PRESIDENT: We did tell them, “We think you’re going to be very happy.” Because, you know, again, they hate ISIS as much as we do. You know what ISIS has done to Russia. So, no, we did not tell — they did not know the mission, but they knew we were going over an area that they had — they had a lot of firepower.

Q: And have you notified the congressional leaders about this? Pelosi? Mitch McConnell?

THE PRESIDENT: We’ve notified some. Others are being notified now, as I speak. We were going to notify them last night but we decided not to do that because Washington leaks like I’ve never seen before. There’s nothing — there’s no country in the world that leaks like we do. And Washington is a leaking machine. And I told my people we will not notify them until the — our great people are out. Not just in, but out. I don’t want to have them greeted with firepower like you wouldn’t believe.

So we were able to get in. It was top secret. It was kept. There were no leaks, no nothing. The only people that knew were the few people that I dealt with. And again, Mark Milley and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were incredible. We had some tremendous backup. Robert O’Brien, Secretary Esper, Secretary Pompeo. Pence, I told you, he was great. There’s a very small group of people that knew about this. We had very, very few people. A leak — a leak could have cost the death of all of them.

Now, they’re so good that I think nothing was going to stop them anyway, if you want to know the truth. That’s how good they were. We had them also surrounded by massive airpower. Up in the air, yesterday, surrounded at very high levels. We were very low. We had tremendous airpower.

Q: And you watched all this from the Sit Room? Who were you with in the Sit Room when you watched this?

THE PRESIDENT: Secretary Esper, a few of the Joint Chiefs, Mark Milley, some generals. We had some very great military people in that room. And we had some great intelligence people — Robert O’ Brien. It was really great.

Yes.

Q: Was the pullout of the U.S. troops in Syria last month strategically tied in with this raid? Was it —

THE PRESIDENT: No, no, the pullout —

Q: Is this a red herring?

THE PRESIDENT: Right. Sure. It’s a great question. And you’re doing a great job, by the way. Your network is fantastic. They’re really doing a great job. Please let them know.

Q: Yes, sir. Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT: No, the pullout had nothing to do with this. In fact, we found this out at a similar time. It’s a very good question — because we found this out at a similar time.

No, we’re after these leaders. And we have others in sight, very bad ones. But this was the big one. This is the biggest one, perhaps, that we’ve ever captured, because this is the one that built ISIS, and beyond, and was looking to rebuild it again. Very, very strongly looking to build it again. That’s why he went to this province; this is why he went to this area.

You know, a lot of people — I was watching, this morning, and hearing, and they said, “Why was he there?” People were so surprised. Well, that’s where he was trying to rebuild from because that was the place that made most sense, if you’re looking to rebuild.

Yeah.

Q: You sent out your tweet last night. At what moment did you decide to send that?

THE PRESIDENT: So, I sent that right after I knew they had landed safely.

Q: When they had returned?

THE PRESIDENT: Right. And that was to notify you guys that you have something big this morning, so you wouldn’t be out playing golf or tennis, or otherwise being indisposed.

Q: Where did they land? Where were they safe? Where had they landed?

THE PRESIDENT: I’d rather not say. But we landed in a very friendly port in a friendly country.

Q: Does this give you any pause by your decision to withdraw the troops?

THE PRESIDENT: No, I think it’s great. Look, we don’t want to keep soldiers between Syria and Turkey for the next 200 years. They’ve been fighting for hundreds of years. We’re out. But we are leaving soldiers to secure the oil. And we may have to fight for the oil. It’s okay. Maybe somebody else wants the oil, in which case they have a hell of a fight. But there’s massive amounts of oil.

And we’re securing it for a couple of reasons. Number one, it stops ISIS, because ISIS got tremendous wealth from that oil. We have taken it. It’s secured.

Number two — and again, somebody else may claim it, but either we’ll negotiate a deal with whoever is claiming it, if we think it’s fair, or we will militarily stop them very quickly. We have tremendous power in that part of the world. We have — you know, the airport is right nearby. A very big, very monstrous, very powerful airport, and very expensive airport that was built years ago. We were in there — we’re in that Middle East now for $8 trillion.

So we don’t want to be keeping Syria and Turkey. They’re going to have to make their own decision. The Kurds have worked along incredibly with us, but in all fairness, it was much easier dealing with the Kurds after they went through three days of fighting, because that was a brutal three days. And if I — we would have said to the Kurds, “Hey, do you mind moving over seven miles?” Because, you know, they were in the middle, mostly. So you have seven or eight miles. “Could you mind moving over?”

Because, I have to say, Turkey has taken tremendous deaths from that part of the world. You know, we call it a safe zone. But it was anything but a safe zone. Turkey has lost thousands and thousands people from that safe zone. So they’ve always wanted that safe zone, for many years. I’m glad I was able to help them get it. But we don’t want to be there; we want to be home. I want our soldiers home or fighting something that’s meaningful.

I’ll tell you who loves us being there: Russia and China. Because while they build their military, we’re depleting our military there. So, Russia loves us being there. Now, Russia likes us being there for two reasons: because we kill ISIS, we kill terrorists, and they’re very close to Russia. We’re 8,000 miles away. Now, maybe they can get here, but we’ve done very well with Homeland Security and the ban, which, by the way, is approved by the United States Supreme Court, as you know. You know, there was a reporter that said we lost the case. And he was right, in the early court. He refu- — he didn’t want to say; just refused to say that we won the case in the Supreme Court. So, you know.

But we have a very effective ban, and it’s very hard for people to come to our country. But it’s many thousands of miles away, whereas Russia is right there, Turkey is right there. Syria is there. They’re all right there. Excuse me, Iran is right there. Iraq is right there. They all hate ISIS. So, we don’t — you know, in theory, they should do something.

And I’ll give you something else: The European nations have been a tremendous disappointment because I personally called, but my people called a lot. “Take your ISIS fighters.” And they didn’t want them. They said, “We don’t want them.” They came from France, they came from Germany, they came from the UK. They came from a lot of countries. And I actually said to them, “If you don’t take them, I’m going to drop them right on your border. And you can have fun capturing them again.”

But the United States taxpayer is not going to pay for the next 50 years. You see what Guantanamo costs. We’re not going to pay tens of billions of dollars because we were good enough to capture people that want to go back to Germany, France, UK, and other parts of Europe. And they can walk back. They can’t walk to our country. We have lots of water in between our country and them.

So, yeah. Go.

Q: You mentioned that you met some — gotten to know some brilliant people along this process who really helped provide information and advice along the way. Is there anyone in particular, or would you like to give anyone credit for getting to this point today?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I would, but if I mentioned one, I have to mention so many. I spoke to Senator Richard Burr this morning. And, as you know, he’s very involved with intelligence and the committee. And he’s a great gentleman.

I spoke with Lindsey Graham just a little while ago. In fact, Lindsey Graham is right over here. And he’s been very much involved in this subject. And he’s — he’s a very strong hawk. But I think Lindsey agrees with what we’re doing now.

And, again, there are plenty of other countries that can help them patrol. I don’t want to leave 1,000 or 2,000 or 3,000 soldiers on the border.

But where Lindsey and I totally agree is the oil. The oil is, you know, so valuable for many reasons. It fueled ISIS, number one. Number two, it helps the Kurds, because it’s basically been taken away from the Kurds. They were able to live with that oil. And number three, it can help us because we should be able to take some also. And what I intend to do, perhaps, is make a deal with an Exxon Mobil or one of our great companies to go in there and do it properly. Right now, it’s not big. It’s big oil underground, but it’s not big oil up top, and much of the machinery has been shot and dead. It’s been through wars. But — and — and spread out the wealth.

But, no, we’re protecting the oil. We’re securing the oil. Now, that doesn’t mean we don’t make a deal at some point. But I don’t want to be — they’re fighting for 1,000 years, they’re fighting for centuries. I want to bring our soldiers back home. But I do want to secure the oil.

If you read about the history of Donald Trump — I was a civilian. I had absolutely nothing to do with going into Iraq, and I was totally against it. But I always used to say, “If they’re going to go in…” — nobody cared that much, but it got written about. “If they’re going to go in…” — I’m sure you’ve heard the statement, because I made it more than any human being alive. “If they’re going into Iraq, keep the oil.” They never did. They never did. I know Lindsey Graham had a bill where basically we would have been paid back for all of the billions of dollars that we’ve spent — many, many billions of dollars. I mean, I hate to say it, it’s actually trillions of dollars, but many, many billions of dollars. And, by one vote, they were unable to get that approved in the Senate. They had some pretty big opposition from people that shouldn’t have opposed, like a president. And they weren’t able. If you did that, Iraq would be a much different story today because they would be owing us a lot of money. They would be treating us much differently.

But I will say, Iraq was very good with respect to the raid last night.

Q: Sir, just to pin down the timing a little bit better here: You got back to the White House around 4:30 yesterday afternoon. Did you immediately go to the Situation Room?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I knew all about this for three days.

Q: Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Yeah. We thought, for three days, this is what was going to happen. It was actually — look, nobody was even hurt. Our K-9, as they call — I call it a dog, a beautiful dog, a talented dog — was injured and brought back. But we had no soldier injured. And they did a lot of shooting, and they did a lot of blasting, even not going through the front door. You know, you would think you go through the door. If you’re a normal person, you say, “Knock, knock. May I come in?” The fact is that they blasted their way into the house and a very heavy wall, and it took them literally seconds. By the time those things went off, they had a beautiful, big hole, and they ran in and they got everybody by surprise.

Unbelievably brilliant, as fighters. I don’t — I can’t imagine there could be anybody better. And these, as you know, are our top operations people.

Q: And Baghdadi apparently had been in bad health for some time. Was there any indication of that? Or —

THE PRESIDENT: Well, we don’t know that. But he was the last one out, and his people had either been killed, which there were many, or gave up and came out. Because with the 11 children that came out, we were able to do that. We don’t know if they were his children. They might have been. But as I said, three died in the tunnel. And the tunnel collapsed with the explosion. But you had other fighters coming out also. And they’re being brought back. They’re being — they’re — right now, we have them imprisoned.

Q: I was going to ask whose children they were, but do you remember what time you went into the Situation Room?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I started at five o’clock. We were pretty much gathered at five o’clock yesterday. We were in contact all day long through, hopefully, secure phones. I’ll let you know tomorrow. But nothing seemed to leak, so I guess they were secure, for a change.

But we gathered more or less at five. The attack started moments after that. The — the liftoff started moments after that. Again, the element of attack that they were most afraid of was getting from our base into that compound. Because there’s tremendous firepower that we were, you know, flying over.

And I won’t go into it, but you had a very big Russian presence in one area, you had a Turkish presence, you had a Syrian presence. And you’re flying low. It’s very dangerous. And there were shots made, but we think these were people that were shooting that were indiscriminately shooting. The helicopters took some shots, but we think that these were people that were just random people that don’t like to see helicopters, I guess.

Q: Sir, was there any kind of DNA test done? Or where is the body? You know —

THE PRESIDENT: So, that’s another part of the genius of these people. They brought his — they have his DNA. More of it than they want, even. And they brought it with them with lab technicians who were with them. And they assumed that this was Baghdadi. They thought, visually, it was him. But they assumed it was him, and they did a site — an onsite test. They got samples.

And to get to his body, they had to remove a lot of debris because the tunnel had collapsed. But these people are very good at that. And — and they, as I said, they brought body parts back with them, et cetera, et cetera. There wasn’t much left. The — the vest blew up, but there are still substantial pieces that they brought back. So they did an onsite test because we had to know this. And it was a very quick call that took place about 15 minutes after he was killed, and it was positive. It was — it’s, “This is a confirmation, sir.”

Q: There was also a report that his wife had detonated — or one of his wives had detonated a vest. Is that —

THE PRESIDENT: So, there were two women. There were two women. Both wives, both wearing vests. They had not detonated. But the fact that they were dead and they had vests on made it very difficult for our men, because they had vests on. And it made it very difficult for our men. Because you never know what’s going to happen. They’re lying, they’re dead. They never detonated. But they were dead.

Q: And if (inaudible) on the successor — the possible successors, have you been briefed on who would possibly fill in the seats?

THE PRESIDENT: Yeah. We know the successors. And we’ve already got them in our sights. And we’ll tell you that right now, but we know the successors. Hamza bin Laden was a big thing, but this is the biggest there is. This is the worst ever.

Osama bin Laden was very big, but Osama bin Laden became big with the World Trade Center. This is a man who built a whole, as he would like to call it, “a country,” a caliphate, and was trying to do it again.

And I had not heard too much about his health. I’ve heard stories about he may not have been in good health. But he died a — he died in a ruthless, vicious manner. That, I can tell you.

Q: Were any prisoners taken, sir? Were any adults taken for intel purposes?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, we have people that were taken. We have — many of the people died on the site. But we have people that were taken, yes. And — and the children, we are — we left them under care of somebody, that we understand.

Q: Can you say how many? Or do you believe that these were —

THE PRESIDENT: Eleven children.

Q: Eleven children. How many adults?

THE PRESIDENT: I’d rather not say. I’d leave that to the generals. But —

Q: These were —

THE PRESIDENT: — a small group. More dead than alive.

Q: Which operations teams were involved? Which Special Operations teams were involved?

THE PRESIDENT: Many of them, and at the top level. And people that were truly incredible at their craft. I’ve never seen anything like it.

Q: And were there — as far as partnerships goes, were there any other forces involved? Or was this only American troops in this raid?

THE PRESIDENT: No, only American forces.

Q: And did the U.S. —

THE PRESIDENT: Only American forces. But we were given great cooperation.

Q: Did the U.S. rely on —

THE PRESIDENT: We told the Russians we’re coming in, because we had to go over them. And they were curious, but — but we said, “We’re coming.” How we said — one way or the other, “Hey, look, we’re coming.” But they were very cooperative. They really were good. And we did say it would be a mission that they’d like, too. Because, you know, again, they hate ISIS as much as we do.

Q: Sir, I meant for intel purposes, was there any foreign intel that proved useful along the way in this operation?

THE PRESIDENT: So, we had our own intel. We got very little help. We didn’t need very much help. We have some incredible people. When we use our intelligence correctly, what we can do is incredible. When we waste our time with intelligence, that hurts our country, because we had poor leadership at the top. That’s not good.

But I’ve gotten to know many of the intel people, and I will say that they are spectacular. Now, they’re not going to want to talk about it. They want to keep it quiet. The last thing they want, because these are — these are great patriots. But the people that I’ve been dealing with are incredible people. And it’s really a deserving name: “intelligence.” I’ve dealt with some people that aren’t very intelligent, having to do with intel, but this is the top people and it was incredible. It was flawless. And it was very complicated.

But — so, I do appreciate Russia, Turkey, Iraq, and Syria, to an extent, because, you know, we’re flying into Syria, and a lot of Syrian people with lots of guns.

So we had good cover for probably the most dangerous part. It would not sound to — you know, when you fly in, it doesn’t sound like that would be the most dangerous when you’re going into shooting nests and all of the things that happened once they broke into that pretty powerful compound. That was a very strong compound and, as I said, had tunnels.

But the most dangerous part, we had great cooperation with.

Yes, ma’am.

Q: Did you inform Speaker Pelosi ahead of time?

THE PRESIDENT: No, I didn’t. I didn’t do — I didn’t do that. I wanted to make sure this kept secret. I don’t want to have men lost — and women. I don’t want to have people lost.

Q: Do you anticipate inviting the Special Forces teams to the White House after this?

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, yeah. They’ll be invited. I don’t know if they’ll want to have their faces shown, to be honest with you. You know, they want to — they’re incredible for the country. They’re not looking for public relations.

But they love doing what they’re doing. I’ve seen it. The First Lady was out there, recently, looking at what they do. She came back, she said, “Wow, I’ve never seen anything like that.” The training — you know, all of the training — and the power of the people. The men and women, the strength, the physical strength, the mental strength. These are incredible people. These are very unique individuals.

Q: You mentioned whimpering. Could you hear that on your video hookup?

THE PRESIDENT: Mentioned what?

Q: The whimpering of Baghdadi. Did you hear it?

THE PRESIDENT: I don’t want to talk about it, but —

Q: Okay.

THE PRESIDENT: — he was screaming, crying, and whimpering. And he was scared out of his mind.

And think of James Foley. Think of Kayla. Think of the things he did to Kayla; what he did to Foley and so many others. And for those people that say, “Oh, isn’t this a little violent? Think of how many times have you seen men — I think, in all cases, men, for the most part — but in terms of this, where you see the orange suits, and you see the ocean and they’re beheaded. Or how many of you got to see — because it was out there — the Jordanian pilot whose plane went down, they captured him, they put him in a cage, and they set him on fire.

And the King of Jordan actually attacked, very powerfully, when that happened. They’ve never seen anything like that. But he set him on fire. This was al-Baghdadi. And you should never, ever hopefully see a thing like that again.

Now, there’ll be new people emerged, but this was the worst of this particular world. This was the worst. Probably, in certain ways, the smartest. He was also a coward. And he didn’t want to die. But think of it: Everybody was out, and we were able to search him down and find him in the tunnel. We knew the tunnel existed. And that’s where he was.

Q: And you’ve taken a lot of heat for the Syria pullout. Do you think this will change the standing — your standing —

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I don’t have a Syria pullout. I just don’t want to guard Turkey and Syria for the rest of our lives. I mean, I don’t want to do it. It’s very expensive. It’s very dangerous. They’ve been fighting for centuries. I don’t want to have my people — 2,000 men and women, or 1,000, or 28. We had 28 guards. And I said, “I don’t want them there anyway. I don’t want them.”

Now, I will secure the oil that happens to be in a certain part. But that’s tremendous money involved. I would love to — you know, the oil in — I mean, I’ll tell you a story. In Iraq — so they spent — President Bush went in. I strongly disagreed with it, even though it wasn’t my expertise at the time, but I had a — I have a very good instinct about things. They went in and I said, “That’s a tremendous mistake.” And there were no weapons of mass destruction. It turned out I was right. I was right for other reasons, but it turned out, on top of everything else, they had no weapons of mass destruction, because that would be a reason to go in. But they had none.

But I heard recently that Iraq, over the last number of years, actually discriminates against America in oil leases. In other words, some oil companies from other countries, after all we’ve done, have an advantage Iraq for the oil. I said, “Keep the oil. Give them what they need. Keep the oil.” Why should we — we go in, we lose thousands of lives, spend trillions of dollars, and our companies don’t even have an advantage in getting the oil leases. So I just tell you that story. That’s what I heard.

Q: Did Gina Haspel play a role in this? Can you talk a little bit about that? And I saw your NSC counter-terrorism director out in the hallway. Was there a role with NSC counter-terrorism?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Everybody. Gina was great. Everybody played a role. Joe was great. Gina was great. They were all great.

Q: Just to follow up, did your Syria pullout, did that generate the intelligence that led to this operation?

THE PRESIDENT: No. We were looking at this — look, as I said, Steve, I’ve been looking at this — I’m here almost three years. I’ve been looking at this for three years. They’d come in, “Sir, we have somebody under…” — I said, “I don’t want somebody. I want al-Baghdadi. That’s the one I want.” They’d said, “Well, we have somebody else.” I said, “That’s great. Fine. Take them out. But I want al-Baghdadi. That’s who I want. I don’t want other people.”

And then I also wanted Hamza bin Laden because he’s a young man, around 30, looks just like his father. Tall, very handsome. And he was talking bad things, just like his father.

You know, if you read my book — there was a book just before the World Trade Center came down. And I don’t get any credit for this, but that’s okay. I never do. But here we are. I wrote a book — a, really, very successful book. And in that book, about a year before the World Trade Center was blown up, I said, “There is somebody named Osama bin Laden. You better kill him or take him out.” Something to that effect. “He’s big trouble.”

Now, I wasn’t in government. I was building buildings and doing what I did. But I always found it fascinating. But I saw this man — tall, handsome, very charismatic — making horrible statements about wanting to destroy our country. And I’m writing a book. I think I wrote 12 books. All did very well. And I’m writing a book. The World Trade Center had not come down. I think it was about — if you check, it was about a year before the World Trade Center came down. And I’m saying to people, “Take out Osama bin Laden,” that nobody ever heard of. Nobody ever heard of. I mean, al-Baghdadi everybody hears because he’s built this monster for a long time. But nobody ever heard of Osama bin Laden until, really, the World Trade Center.

But about a year — you’ll have to check — a year, year and a half before the World Trade Center came down, the book came out. I was talking about Osama bin Laden. I said, “You have to kill him. You have to take him out.” Nobody listened to me.

And to this day, I get people coming up to me, and they said, “You know what one of the most amazing things I’ve ever seen about you? Is that you predicted that Osama bin Laden had to be killed before he knocked down the World Trade Center.” It’s true. Now, most of the press doesn’t want to write that, but you know — but it is true. If you go back, look at my book. I think it was “The America We Deserve.” I made a prediction, and I — let’s put it this way: If they would have listened to me, a lot of things would have been different.

Q: Sir, can you talk about some of the difficult decisions you had along the way here in this operation? Anything that weighed on you or that you had to —

THE PRESIDENT: Well, just death. I mean, you know, I’m sending a large number of brilliant fighters. These are the greatest fighters in the world.

Q: How many?

THE PRESIDENT: I’d rather let the generals tell you, but a large number. We had eight helicopters and we had many other ships and planes.

It was a large group. And again, this is a large group heading over very, very strong firepower areas where — that was decision one: Will they make it? And they made it, but they took fire, but they made it. They didn’t take — we don’t believe, again, it was nation fire; we believe it was individual group fire or gang fire, as they call it. So, they made it, so that was a big relief.

Then they went in, they blasted their way in — you’ve heard. They blasted their way in so quickly. It was incredible. Because this building was quite powerful, strong. They blasted their way in, and then all hell broke loose. It’s incredible that nobody was killed — or hurt. We had nobody even hurt. And that’s why the dog was so great. We actually had a robot to go in the tunnel, but we didn’t get it because we were tracking him very closely. But we had a robot, just in case. Because we were afraid he had a suicide vest on, and if you get close to him and he blows it up, you’re going to die. You’re going to die. He had a very powerful suicide vest.

Q: Did you have to make any decisions in the moment, while troops were on the ground?

THE PRESIDENT: No, they had it just incredible. We were getting full reports on literally a minute-by-minute basis. “Sir, we just broke in.” “Sir, the wall is down.” “Sir,” you know, “we’ve captured.” “Sir, two people are coming out right now. Hands up.” Fighters. Then, the 11 children out. Numerous people were dead within the building that they killed.

Then, it turned out, they gave us a report: “Sir, there’s only one person in the building. We are sure he’s in the tunnel trying to escape.” But it’s a dead-end tunnel. And it was brutal. But it was over. And as I said, when he blew himself up, the tunnel collapsed on top of him, on top of everything — and his children. I mean, so he led his three children to death. So, you know —

Q: And in the tunnel, that’s when the robot (?typo: kidney machine?) followed him in? That’s why no troops died?

THE PRESIDENT: The robot was set to, but we didn’t hook it up because we were too — they were moving too fast. We were moving fast. We weren’t 100 percent sure about the tunnel being dead-ended. It’s possible that there could have been an escape hatch somewhere along that we didn’t know about.

So we moved very, very quickly. I mean —

Q: Was he being chased then?

THE PRESIDENT: — these people, they were moving — they were chasing, yeah. They were chasing. But again, because the suicide vest, you can’t get too close.

Again, one of the reasons with the wives is if they have a suicide vest, you know, you have to be very, very careful. These vests are brutal. Brutal. And they go for a long distance.

Yes, please.

Q: Have you spoken or will you speak to the families, like the Foley family?

THE PRESIDENT: I’m calling the families now. It will be a pleasure to do that. The Foley family, who I know. We’ll be calling Kayla’s family. What — what he did to her was incredible. It’s a well-known story, and I’m not going to say it, but you know that. He kept her in captivity for a long period of time. He kept her in his captivity, his personal captivity. She was a beautiful woman, beautiful young woman. Helped people. She was there to help people. And he saw her and he thought she was beautiful, and he brought her into captivity for a long period of time and then he killed her. He was an animal, and he was a gutless animal.

Thank you all very much. I appreciate it. It’s a very great day for our country.

Article

White House Briefing

 

 

…”Stand beside her, and guide her, through the night with A light from above”…

 

 

 

 

 

 

US to go it alone in Libya against ISIS?

GENERALS FEAR BENGHAZI 2 IN LIBYA

By F. Michael Maloof – WND

WASHINGTON – As Washington prepares to take “decisive military action” in Libya against the alarming growth of ISIS, retired generals have told G2 Bulletin they are concerned that the United States may go it alone, according to a new report in Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.

They ask which allies, if any, will join a coalition and attempt to work with a Libyan government that barely exists.

The late Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi
The late Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi

At a news conference last week, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Marine Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr. said the U.S. is “looking to take decisive military action” against ISIS in Libya and that a decision would be coming “in weeks” but “not hours.”

“It’s fair to say that we’re looking to take decisive military action against ISIS in conjunction with the political process” in Libya, Dunford said. “The president has made clear that we have the authority to use military force.”

ISIS is thought to have more than 3,000 fighters, with more flowing into Libya from Syria and Iraq, where the U.S., Russia and other countries have been carrying out intense airstrikes against the jihadist fighters.

Another ‘trillion-dollar failure’?

In October 2011, the U.S., France and Britain launched attacks that led to the overthrow of the government of Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi. Since then, the country has not had a functional government. Warring factions of local jihadist groups are preoccupied fighting among themselves for dominance rather than taking on ISIS or coming together to form a government of national accord.

U.S. action in Libya, retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney told G2Bulletin in an email, “is the last thing we need to do!”

“Why spend (a trillion dollars) for another COIN (counterinsurgency) failure?”

Retired U.S. Adm. James Lyons Jr., who served as commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet from 1985-1987, told G2Bulletin that McInerney’s concern about the possibility of unilateral U.S. action is “Spot on!”

Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely expressed similar concerns to G2Bulletin, concluding Dunford’s comments represent a military invasion by the Obama administration.

“I can’t even see Obama taking any offensive action anywhere like that,” Vallely said.

Vallely is chairman of the non-profit Stand Up America and the private Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi, which is looking into the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi.

He said that if there is to be any such military action, it needs to include Egypt, which bombed ISIS locations in Libya after the February 2015 beheading of some 21 Libyan Coptic Christians who were working in the country.

Vallely also thought the Russians could join, especially if asked by Egypt, since Moscow has just concluded a $2 billion military arms deal with Cairo that includes helicopters, fighter jets, Kornet anti-tank weapons, the anti-ballistic missile system Antey-2500 and the Buk-2 surface-to-air missile system.

Get the rest of this report, and others, at Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/generals-fear-benghazi-2-in-libya/#cg3TDbtqr1Rm6Guz.99

IS 'Moles' as Refugees, Malik's Violent Jihad on Social Sites

Editor’s Note – As each day goes by since the December 2nd terror event in San Bernardino, California, the plot thickens and expands. The connections become more complicated and the fears that terrorists can get into America so easily has most frightened despite the President’s assurances. Of course, we think he is delusional, as is John Kerry and Hillary Clinton.

Say what you will about Donald Trump regarding a temporary ban on Muslims being allowed to enter the country, we are now seeing that our Homeland Security and State Departments have dropped the ball frequently. In fact, the NY Times reported today that they missed obvious issues with Tashfeen Malik when she was allowed to enter under a K1 fiance visa:

Tashfeen Malik, who with her husband carried out the massacre in San Bernardino, Calif., passed three background checks by American immigration officials as she moved to the United States from Pakistan. But none uncovered what Ms. Malik had made little effort to hide — that she talked openly on social media about her views on violent jihad.

… Had the authorities found the posts years ago, they might have kept her out of the country. But immigration officials do not routinely review social media as part of their background checks, and there is a debate inside the Department of Homeland Security over whether it is even appropriate to do so.

How confidant are you that those being brought in will not include ISIS “moles”? How about the knowledge that Canada just admitted its first contingent of Syrian refugees yesterday with our very open northern border?

With such political correctness controlling decision makers in the DHS who are more worried about “appropriateness” than your safety, we think it is time to worry more, not less. We wonder what the pond in San Bernardino will reveal and what will arise from the fact that Enrique Martinez bragged to his friends about ‘sleeper cells’ and that he was paid to be in a sham marriage.

Islamic State Manifesto: Sleeper Cells Sent To Europe Posing As Refugees

By John Rossomando – IPT News

The Islamic State claims it sent highly trained sleeper agents to Europe through Turkey posing as refugees as far back as 2012. A 99-page manifesto issued in January, “Black Flags from Rome,” also details the Islamic State (ISIS)’s desire to spark a Europe-wide Islamic insurgency using “Muslim No Go Zones” as bases of operations.

Syrian refugees check their baggage at the beginning of an airlift to Canada, at the Beirut International airport December 10, 2015 in a photo provided by the Canadian military. REUTERS/Corporal Darcy Lefebvre/Canadian Forces Combat Camera/Handout via Reuters
Syrian refugees check their baggage at the beginning of an airlift to Canada, at the Beirut International airport December 10, 2015 in a photo provided by the Canadian military. REUTERS/Corporal Darcy Lefebvre/Canadian Forces Combat Camera/Handout via Reuters

As an example, it claims that some Syrian refugees fled to Italy. “No doubt, some of these refugees were undercover fighters of Al Qa’idah and the Islamic State,” the manifesto says.

“They were quick to take the opportunity of entering into the different countries of Europe (most probably as early as 2012).

All this was happening under the nose of the European intelligence services whose job during this time (2012) was only to prevent European Muslims from entering Syria. (This shows how quick the Islamic groups were in planning ahead.

Years before Europe even knew where its Muslim citizens were going – experienced Islamic fighters had already found safety in Europe.)”

These highly trained fighters were instructed to form secret cells and wait until called on by the Islamic State’s self-proclaimed caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. At that time they would “continue the Jihad and … seek revenge for the Western occupation of Muslim lands.

“Black Flags From Rome” claims the sleeper agents were well-trained in urban combat tactics similar to this month’s Paris attacks. It proudly contrasts past Al-Qaida’s terrorists with its fighters, whom it describes as “untrained” and “vulnerable,” noting that Western intelligence agencies never faced professionally trained fighters with combat experience.”

“These young Europeans had been professionally trained, and given training most specific to the context of the war they would battle within Europe,” the manifesto says.

ISIS training included instruction on buying and firing weapons and making improvised explosives. Such training could explain the sophistication of the Paris attacks and the attackers’ competence in making suicide vests, which experts say takes weeks of training.

“Their locations were unknown, and police raids wouldn’t even have the same impact as unarmed lone wolf terrorists’ (sic), because these young men were armed and able to shoot back in groups. There were small armies of the Islamic State within every country of Europe by late 2014, and the intelligence agencies didn’t even know about it!” the manifesto says.

ISIS propagandists based in Syria were quick to take responsibility for the attacks. An updated edition titled “Black Flags From the Islamic State,” written in the past week,calls them “one of the first organised attacks done by the Islamic State in Europe which involved a Network of Cells working together in an organized way.”

Police described the Paris attackers as “seasoned fighters by the looks of it and perfectly trained, with witnesses describing them as quite young and cool-headed,” the London Daily Telegraph reports.

Furthermore, during the attacks, a mid-level Syrian Islamic State leader known as @Jazrawi_Oooud tweeted during the attacks: “… Syrian refugees sent by Islamic state carried out today’s offensive names battle of Paris. More to come.”

This statement came out a day before the media or French authorities mentioned any possibility that people who might have infiltrated the wave of refugees from Syria could have been responsible for the attacks. A fake Syrian passport bearing the name “Ahmad alMohammad” was found next to a suicide bomber who blew himself up at the soccer stadium. Two other stadium bombers arrived on Oct. 3, blending in with scores of refugees on the Greek island of Leros.

Several of the Paris attackers fought for ISIS in Syria and their leader, Abdelhamid Abaaoud, freely traveled to and from Europe. The Islamic State claims it selected Abaaoud to lead the mission and trained him in insurgency skills before sending him to France to create clandestine cells with the aim of starting a jihad in France. Abaaoud hid among the flow of refugees from Syria, and travelled to Turkey and Greece before making his way to France, according to “Black Flags From the Islamic State.”

 ISIS map claims to depict plans to "surround and capture Europe"

ISIS map claims to depict plans to “surround and capture Europe”

If what “Black Flags From Rome” and “Black Flags From the Islamic State” say is true, it could influence subsequent debate over the flood of refugees from Syria and Iraq into Europe and possibly America.

It could mean that the attacks in Paris weren’t just a sign of a wounded Islamic State lashing out at Europe in retaliation for lost territory in Iraq as some suggest.

The Black Flag manifestos, and a third called “How to Survive in the West: A Mujahid’s Guide,” all show a greater strategy to import the group’s jihad to Europe.

“Once the media attention dies down, the Islamic State will tell another “sleeper Cell” (secret Cell which has not yet activated) to do another attack again,” Black Flags From the Islamic State says..

Rome’s Apocalyptic Prophecy

The manifesto’s title, “Black Flags From Rome,” draws from the Islamic State’s apocalyptic theology. Islamic prophecy states that Rome will be conquered by Muslims before the appearance of Islam’s Antichrist, the dajjal, appears. ISIS hopes to help that along.

In a hadith found in Sahih Muslim, Muhammad says:

“You will attack Arabia and Allah will enable you to conquer it, then you would attack Persia and He would make you to conquer it. Then you would attack Rome and Allah will enable you to conquer it, then you would attack the Dajjal and Allah will enable you to conquer him. Nafi’ said: Jabir, we thought that the Dajjal would appear after Rome (Syrian territory) would be conquered.”

The Islamic State, however, interprets this hadith as referring to Rome, Italy, rather than a region controlled by the Roman Empire in Muhammad’s day.

The dream of conquering Rome appears in other Islamic State propaganda such as issue four of, which shows an Islamic State flag fluttering atop the obelisk in St. Peter’s Square.

“We have to defend our communities in Europe, and buy time for the Armageddon in Syria to finish and for the Roman invaders to be defeated. The day these Roman (NATO) armies set off with their 960,000 soldiers to fight the Muslims in Dabiq (Syria), they should realise half the prophecy has already come into effect. The 2nd half of the prophecy is that they will lose, and Muslims will take over Rome … The next stop? The Anti-Christ (al-Dajjal) in Israel,” a subsequent manifesto published in July, “Muslim Gangs: The Future of Muslims In The West,” states.

Both “Muslim Gangs” and “Black Flags” urge exploiting anti-Muslim sentiment to radicalize European Muslims to build an army to fulfill this prophecy. The authors of “Muslim Gangs” advise using propaganda to unite Muslims around local humanitarian efforts.1272

“The Propaganda Arm is using soft power techniques to build a united Muslim community which appreciates self-defence, a community which can support fellow believers in (future) times of difficulty and war,” “Muslim Gangs” advises.

It urges Islamic propagandists to claim that aspects of Islam are being criminalized, and to frame police as enemies of the Muslims. This, it says, helps to build a sense of alienation:

“Tell them stories of how we feel unsafe and how they make it a crime for us to morally support Muslims around the world, and they do not even let us leave the West if we want to. Tell them that they should not talk openly with the police, or else they could be taken away from their parents. These are realities Muslims face everyday, we need to make them aware. “This will make the young generation stay distant from the police. They will hate it. The police will try to come to their schools to win their hearts and minds, but tell the kids: ‘Who do you trust more? Your fellow Muslim brothers, or the ones who imprison Muslims?'”

It urges establishing “no-go zones” and creating a culture of hostility to the police where lawlessness reigns and the jihadists can flourish.

“Al Qa’idah, the Islamic State and many Mujahideen groups thrived in areas where there was lawlessness because they could buy smuggled goods from the blackmarket and train without fear of police. If police did come, the people in the area would inform everyone because this was a no-go zone for the police,” “Muslim Gangs” states.

Abaaoud and his fellow Paris attackers used such a place in the Brussels, Belgium suburb of Molenbeek, which has been the source of the highest concentrations of jihadi foreign fighters who have left to fight in Iraq and Syria. Belgian authorities admit they have lost control of the suburb.

Other tactics include aligning with left-wing activists to fight neo-Nazis and using them to do undercover work for Muslims to “pave the way for the conquest of Rome.” It suggests that Muslims can use leftists to fight and sabotage the “financial elite.”

“War: right now you can do lone wolf attacks, but the West is not fertile for a full on war yet. Rather, the increasing amount of attacks from both sides will gradually create a state of war,” “Muslim Gangs” states.

White Muslim converts are seen as the Islamic State’s “secret weapon” because they can blend in more easily.

Additionally, the Islamic State wants followers to infiltrate gangs to learn how they operate, then develop into larger militias by using fear as a tactic to intimidate enemies and inspire recruits, which observers call “jihadi cool.”

“Black Flags” suggests using mosques as operating bases and exploiting attacks by neo-Nazi groups. It predicts that Muslims and neo-Nazis will launch reprisals against each other.

Early stages of the proposed Islamic insurgency would use primitive weapons like Molotov cocktails, pellet guns and slingshots against neo-Nazi gangs. It suggests copying tactics used during the early stages of Syria’s civil war, such as making attacks using homemade weapons and capturing more advanced weapons.

Recruits are obtained by “showing the glamorous nature of Jihad” and emphasizing great spiritual rewards for those who engage in jihadi attacks. Video recordings of“spectacular attacks” can put potential recruits in awe of jihad, “Muslim Gangs” says. It also suggests using such recordings to fundraise among Muslims who “might be willing to donate” to defending Muslim neighborhoods.

In the process, “Black Flags” suggests forming militias that would take over buildings, roads and weapons depots.

“As the Islamic militias begin to arm themselves and train each other, they will be able to fight more battles … This will make them even richer and more financially independent, buy even more advanced weaponry from the black market and cause even more damage to the enemies,” “Black Flags” says.

Muslim gangs are urged to fight to seize territory outside Muslim neighborhoods and build alliances with other gangs with the goal of creating a large army.

“Muslim fighters from all European countries will continue the fight, breaking borders until they can reach; Northern Rome,” “Black Flags” says.

Adm. Lyons – Can you tell whose side Obama is on?

Editor’s Note – When it comes to National Security we really should be listening to those that are experienced military advisors, not political advisors pretending to be National Security advisors.

Obama’s distorted strategy

The president soothes anti-Western grievances at great cost

Washington Times

While France remains in a state of shock over the ISIS terrorist attacks in Paris, they are also most likely confused and disappointed over President Obama’s declaration that there will be no fundamental change to his current policy and strategy to “now contain and defeat ISIS.”

President Barack Obama speaks at the G-20 meeting in Turkey.
President Barack Obama speaks at the G-20 meeting in Turkey November 12th.

During his Nov. 12 remarks in Antalya, Turkey, Mr. Obama appeared to be petulant and arrogant when responding to legitimate reporter’s questions, perhaps a “crack” in the carefully constructed veneer that has concealed his true character and now has been exposed.

However, on Nov. 17, The New York Times editorial board quickly came to the rescue by declaring that Mr. Obama “hit the right tone” in his remarks.

But his remarks should leave no doubt that he has a far-reaching strategy. That strategy is embedded in his declaration to fundamentally transform America. Actually, the way we are restricting our operations in the Middle East today has its roots in America’s transformation.

Those who say the administration is incompetent — are wrong. With the complicity of our congressional leadership and the mainstream media, the administration has executed their strategy brilliantly.

In order to understand Mr. Obama’s strategy, you first have to understand the threat that has been deliberately distorted. When President Erdogan of Turkey was prime minister, he said it best — Islam is Islam. There are no modifiers, such as violent extremism.
Democracy is the train we ride to achieve our ultimate objective, Mr. Erdogan implied, which is world domination. It must be understood that Islam is a political movement masquerading as a religion. The Islamic movement will seize power as soon as it is able.

No matter how many times “progressives” try to rationalize or accommodate perceived Muslim grievances, the fact remains that Islam has been involved in a struggle for world domination for over 1,400 years.

• James A. Lyons, a U.S. Navy retired admiral, was commander-in-chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations.
James A. Lyons, a U.S. Navy retired admiral, was commander-in-chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations. He is now a member of the Legacy National Security Advisory Group with MG Vallely

What the world witnessed in Paris, and certainly here in America on Sept. 11, 2001, was a continuing clash of civilizations between Islam and the Judeo-Christian values of the West.

As the noted historian Samuel P. Huntington implied, Islam is fundamentally incompatible with Western values and cultures.

There can be no peace or co-existence between Islam and non-Islamic societies or their political institutions. Clearly, there must be a reformation of Islam.

Once the Islamic threat has been exposed and understood, then any thinking American should be able to grasp Mr. Obama’s strategy. It is anti-American; anti-Western; but pro-Islamic; pro-Iranian; and pro-Muslim Brotherhood.

This raises the question: Why would an American president with his country’s Judeo-Christian heritage, who professes to be a Christian, embrace Islam? Or for that matter, why would an American president embrace Iran, the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, which has been at war with the United States for over 35 years? They have caused the loss of thousands of American civilians and military lives.

Also, why would an American president embrace the Muslim Brotherhood, whose creed is to destroy America from within by our own miserable hands, and replace our Constitution with seventh century Shariah law? They have been able to penetrate all our national security and intelligence agencies. Consequently, they have had a major impact on our foreign and domestic policies as well as the way our military is restricted on fighting our wars.

It is not possible to list all of President Obama’s executive orders and policies that have imposed undue restraints on our military forces and first responders, but illustrative of those are the following:

  • The unilateral disarmament of our military forces. This makes no sense when we are being challenged throughout the world.
  • Compounding the unilateral disarmament issue is the social engineering that has been forced on our military to satisfy an ill-advised domestic agenda. It has adversely impacted the military’s moral fiber, unit cohesiveness, integrity and most importantly the “will to win.”
  • The purging of all our military training manuals that links Islam with terrorism. Our forces are being denied key information that properly defines the threat.
  • Emasculation of our military capabilities by imposing highly restricted Rules of Engagement. It makes our military look ineffective.
  • Curtailment of Christianity and its symbols in our military, e.g., restricting the display of the Bible.
  • Making our military forces in the Middle East either ignore or submit to the atrocities authorized by Shariah law, tribal customs and traditions, e.g. wife beating, stoning, sodomizing young boys.
  • Unfettered immigration with open borders, plus seeding Muslim immigrants throughout the country.
  • Shifting sides in the Global War on Terror by supporting al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood militias, and facilitating the removal of all vestiges of secular rulers who were in fact our allies in the war on terror.

When President Obama gave his June 4, 2009 speech at Cairo University, co-hosted by Al-Azhar University, the center of Sunni doctrine for over 1,000 years, he stated, “I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear,” that said it all.

Again, when he spoke at the U.N. on Sept. 25, 2012, after the Benghazi tragedy and stated that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” — case closed. Andy McCarthy, author and National Review columnist, made a compelling case for Mr. Obama’s impeachment in his book, “Faithless Execution.”

Clearly, the president has exposed where he stands when the issue is Islam versus our Judeo-Christian heritage. Certainly, the case is there to be made for his removal from office for his illegal, unconstitutional and treasonous acts.


James A. Lyons, a U.S. Navy retired admiral, was commander-in-chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations.

Obama Scolds, Kerry Says Hebdo Attackers Had 'Legitimacy'

Legitimate Fears in US Over Da’esh Attacks Possibly Here Next

By Scott W. Winchell

John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, President Obama, and Bernie Sanders live in an alternate universe – it is no longer in doubt. If it were not so sad and dangerous, one would have to laugh.

Talk about delusional people, it’s time we re-examine that old r/K selection theory again to understand people who cannot face adversity with the words necessary, yet they spout inanities and scold us when we do not agree.

Why didn’t Kerry and/or Obama show up for the unity parade in Paris last winter after the Charlie Hebdo attack while Mr. Kerry did say that the attackers had “legitimacy” and then immediately realize he had to correct himself now? Why, because that was what you really meant, delusional:

...open mouth, remove all doubt!
…open mouth, remove all doubt!

“There’s something different about what happened from Charlie Hebdo, and I think everybody would feel that,” Kerry said. “There was a sort of particularized focus and perhaps even a legitimacy in terms of – not a legitimacy, but a rationale that you could attach yourself to somehow and say, ‘Okay, they’re really angry because of this and that.’ This Friday was absolutely indiscriminate.” (Read the rest here at the Daily Caller.)

Benjamin Netanyahu showed up, and dared to march arm-in-arm despite very serious threats to his well-being, while we get our own President once again complaining about our Republican candidates and anyone who just wants to keep their families safe here while he is on foreign soil.

It is just amazing how Obama bad-mouths Americans for wanting to be safe when 53% indicated they do not want any refugees here after what happened. Embarrassing displays both – again. Are you watching the same planet we are Mr. Obama?

“Widows and children,” really Mr. Obama? Where was Kerry and Obama when Al Assad was barrel-bombing women and children, or gassing them with chlorine in Syria?

What about the female terrorist who blew herself up killing a police dog today in a wild firefight with French authorities. Can’t women strap on suicide vests and aren’t children being trained by Da’esh now? Didn’t we hear that over 5,000 rounds were fired in that Saint Denis raid in France today where she blew herself up after learning that another attack was imminent?

The worst thing is the manner in which Obama spoke in yesterday, his delivery, the facial expressions, body language – he is a very petty man, just embarrassing, and so reprehensible. He scolds a very large swath of his own countrymen, no wonder Josh Earnest and the White House were walking their statements back today.

ied-isis-dabiqRemember, this was followed up by the Russian admission that their plane was blown up in the air and Da’esh even showed us a similar version of the bomb they used in their Da’biq magazine.

All this just in the last several days while our own homeland officials talk of Da’esh threats to Washington, D.C. and fears of major misdeeds over our holiday season.

What happens when a real bomb goes off on a plane in someone’s luggage over Kansas, or Ohio like it did over the Sinai? With TSA failing test after test, what’s to say another Sharm-el-Sheikh moment does not visit us here?

Didn’t two French planes that where threatened today have to abort their planned trips to Paris to return to the ground for inspection?

Da’esh has proven they can strike anywhere, are we next? Just now we learn that another video came out with threats to New York City and Las Vegas.

But Obama scolds us over the refusal of so many governors and American citizens for taking Syrian refugees in and Kerry says the attacks last January were legitimate. All while Sanders and Hillary can’t utter the words “Islamic Terror” in the Debate last Saturday night like Obama and Kerry.

What would the state of fears be if Da’esh or any terror group pulled off something as the busiest flying days approach next week or a football stadium has to be cleared on Thanksgiving Day or any other day on national television like what Germany had to do last night in Hannover? Will we be allowed to express our fears then?

America may have “bought crazy” in 2008 and 2012, but we ain’t buying anymore on this street corner – go sell crazy somewhere else Mr. Obama, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Clinton, and Mr. Sanders.

It would be insane to accept refugees now so take your strawman arguments somewhere else as well – in our universe, our citizens’ safety comes first. We are just insulted and embarrassed.

White House on defense over Kerry, Obama comments on terror threat

By Fox News

The White House was on the defense Wednesday morning for statements made by President Obama — who labeled Friday’s Paris massacre that left 129 dead a “setback” — and Secretary of State John Kerry’s claim that the terrorists who in January attacked Charlie Hebdo had a “rationale.”

Asked about the comments during a contentious interview on Fox News, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest suggested too much attention was being paid to officials’ words.

“I would encourage you to spend just as much time focusing on the president’s actions as you do his words,” Earnest said on “Fox & Friends.”

Earnest noted that Obama, speaking in Turkey on Monday, also called the attacks “sickening.” Plus he said Obama called the French president to offer support — while strategizing with his own security advisers on the U.S. response.

President Barack Obama speaks at the G-20 meeting in Turkey.
President Barack Obama speaks at the G-20 meeting in Turkey.

Earnest said the president is consulting on “what sort of military steps we could take to ramp up our efforts inside of Syria and make sure we can support our French allies.”

But the words of both Obama and Kerry have stirred concerns about the gravity with which the administration is treating the threat.

Kerry discussed the Charlie Hebdo attack — an Al Qaeda affiliate attack against employees at a satirical publication that had published Prophet Muhammad cartoons — during remarks on Tuesday to U.S. Embassy employees in Paris.

He at first suggested there was “legitimacy” to those attacks but then corrected himself and said they had a “rationale.”

He said: “There’s something different about what happened from Charlie Hebdo, and I think everybody would feel that.

%CODE%

There was a sort of particularized focus and perhaps even a legitimacy in terms of — not a legitimacy, but a rationale that you could attach yourself to somehow and say, okay, they’re really angry because of this and that.

This Friday was absolutely indiscriminate. It wasn’t to aggrieve one particular sense of wrong. It was to terrorize people.”

Afterward, State Department spokesman John Kirby defended the secretary’s remarks.

The administration’s comments on the terror threat, though, have even started to draw some Democratic criticism.

After Obama said, in an interview shortly before Friday’s attacks, that ISIS is “contained,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told MSNBC that “ISIL is not contained.”

“ISIL is expanding,” she said.

Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, who typically aligns with the president, scolded Obama in an op-ed.

“Obama’s tone in addressing the Paris atrocity was all wrong,” he wrote. “At times he was patronizing, at other times he seemed annoyed and almost dismissive.

The president said, essentially, that he had considered all the options and decided that even a large-scale terrorist attack in the heart of a major European capital was not enough to make him reconsider his policy.”

Meanwhile, Earnest continued to defend the military strategy and stand by plans to bring Syrian refugees into the U.S.

“That is still the plan,” Earnest said of the refugee plan. “The reason for that is quite simple. The first thing that people should understand, refugees who are admitted to the United States undergo more rigorous screening than anybody else who tries to enter the country.

Typically, it takes between 18 and 24 months for people to be cleared. … These are the victims of ISIL. These are the victims of that terrible war inside of Syria.”