*Aiding Islamic Terrorists Is Our Foreign Policy*

Posted By *Daniel Greenfield* On February 20, 2015

Obama says that we are not fighting a war on Islam. What he leaves out is
that under his administration the United States is fighting in a civil war
that is taking place within Islam.

It’s not a conflict between the proverbial moderate Muslim and the raging
fanatic. That was an outdated Bush era notion. Instead Obama has brought us
into a fight between Muslim governments and Muslim terrorists, not on the
side of the governments we were allied with, but on the side of the
terrorists.

It’s why Egypt is shopping for French planes and Russian nukes. Yemen’s
government was run out of town by Obama’s new Iranian friends in a proxy
war with Saudi Arabia. And the Saudis are dumping oil.

Iran and Qatar are the regional powers Obama is closest to. What these two
countries have in common, is that despite their mutual hostility, they are
both international state sponsors of Islamic terrorism.

Obama’s diplomats will be negotiating with the Taliban in Qatar. Among the
Taliban delegation will be the terrorist leaders that Obama freed from
Gitmo. And Iran gets anything it wants, from Yemen to the bomb, by using
the threat of walking away in a huff from the hoax nuclear negotiations as
leverage.

In Syria and Iraq, Obama is fighting ISIS alongside Islamic terrorists
linked to Al Qaeda and Iran. In Libya, he overthrew a government in support
of Islamic terrorists. His administration has spoken out against Egyptian
air strikes against the Islamic State Jihadists in Libya who had beheaded
Coptic Christians.

At the prayer breakfast where he denounced Christianity for the Crusades
was the foreign minister of the Muslim Brotherhood government of Sudan that
has massacred Christians. Unlike Libya, where Obama used a false claim of
genocide to justify an illegal war, Sudan actually has committed genocide.
And yet Obama ruled out using force against Sudan’s genocide even while he
was running for office.

The United States now has a strange two-tier relationship with the Middle
East. On paper we retain a number of traditional alliances with old allies
such as Egypt, Israel and Saudi Arabia, complete with arms sales, foreign
aid and florid speeches. But when it comes to policy, our new friends are
the terrorists.

American foreign policy is no longer guided by national interests. Our
allies have no input in it. It is shaped around the whims of Qatar and
Iran; it’s guided by the Muslim Brotherhood and defined by the interests of
state sponsors of terror. Our foreign policy is a policy of aiding Islamic
terrorists.

It’s only a question of which terrorists.

Obama’s familiar argument is that ISIS and Al Qaeda fighters shouldn’t be
called Islamic terrorists. Not even the politically correct sop of “Radical
Islam” is acceptable. The terrorists are perverting Islam, he claims. The
claim was banal even before September 11, but it bears an entirely new
significance from an administration that has put Muslim Brotherhood
operatives into key positions.

The administration is asserting the power to decide who is a Muslim. It’s a
theological position that means it is taking sides in a Muslim civil war
between Islamists.

This position is passed off as a strategy for undermining the terrorists.
Refusing to call the Islamic State by its name, using the more derogatory
“Daesh,” denying that the Islamic terrorists are acting in the name of
Islam, is supposed to inhibit recruitment. This claim is made despite the
flood of Muslims leaving the West to join ISIS. If any group should be
vulnerable to our propaganda, it should be them.

But that’s not what this is really about.

According recognition to a state is a powerful diplomatic tool for shaping
world politics. We refuse to recognize ISIS, as we initially refused to
recognize the USSR. Obama resumed diplomatic ties with Cuba. His people
negotiate and appease the Taliban even though it was in its own time just
as brutal as ISIS.

Obama is not willing to recognize ISIS as Islamic, but he does recognize
the Muslim Brotherhood as Islamic. Both are violent and murderous
Islamists. But only one of them is “legitimate” in his eyes.

Those choices are not about terrorist recruitment, but about building a
particular map of the region. Obama refuses to concede that ISIS is
Islamic, not because he worries that it will bring them more followers,
this is a tertiary long shot at best, but because he is supporting some of
their rivals.

The White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism has brought a covert
strategy out into the spotlight. Despite its name, it’s not countering
violence or extremism.

The new director of the Center for Strategic Counterterrorism
Communications, the axis of Obama’s CVE strategy, is Rashad Hussain who
appeared at Muslim Brotherhood front group events and defended the head of
Islamic Jihad. In attendance was Salam Al-Marayati
<http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1402> of
the Muslim Public Affairs Council, yet another Muslim Brotherhood linked
group, who had urged Muslims not to cooperate with the FBI and defended
Hamas and Hezbollah.

In Syria, the United States is coordinating with Assad and backing the
Syrian rebels, who have their own extensive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood
and even Al Qaeda. This could be viewed as an “enemy of my enemy” alliance,
but this administration backed the Brotherhood before it viewed ISIS as a
threat. Top Democrats, including Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry, had focused
on outreach to Assad under Bush.

They’re not allying with Assad and the Brotherhood to beat ISIS. They’re
fighting ISIS to protect the Brotherhood and their deal with Iran.

In the White House, Obama has tried to shape an Islamist future for the
Middle East, favoring Islamist governments in Turkey and Islamist movements
such as the Muslim Brotherhood. He saw his role as paving the way for the
next generation of regional regimes that would be explicitly Islamist.

The Arab Spring was a deceptive code name for a clean sweep that would push
out the old leaders like Mubarak and replace them with the Muslim
Brotherhood and other likeminded Islamists. Islamic terrorism, at least
against the United States, would end because their mission had been
accomplished.

Stabilizing unrest by putting the destabilizers in charge wasn’t a new
idea. Carter helped make it happen in Iran. And the more violent an Islamic
terrorist group is, the more important it is to find a way to stop the
violence by putting them in charge. The only two criteria that matter are
violence and dialogue.

So why isn’t Obama talking to ISIS? Because ISIS won’t talk back. It’s
impossible to support a terrorist group that won’t engage in dialogue. If
ISIS were to indicate any willingness to negotiate, diplomats would be
sitting around a table with headchoppers in less time than it takes a
Jordanian pilot to burn.

And that still might happen.

Obama isn’t trying to finish off ISIS. He’s keeping them on the ropes the
way that he did the Taliban. Over 2,000 Americans died on the off chance
that the Taliban would agree to the negotiations in Qatar. Compared to that
price in blood, the Bergdahl deal was small potatoes. And if Obama is
negotiating with the Taliban after all that, is there any doubt that he
would negotiate to integrate ISIS into Iraq and Syria?

Obama’s foreign policy in the region has been an elaborate exercise in
trying to draw up new maps for a caliphate. The inclusion of terrorist
groups in this program isn’t a mistake. It’s not naiveté or blindness. It’s
the whole point of the exercise which was to transform terrorist groups
into governments.

Stabilizing the region by turning terrorists into governments may sound
like pouring oil on a fire, but to progressives who believe in root causes,
rather than winning wars, violence is a symptom of discontent. The problem
isn’t the suicide bomber. It’s our power structure. Tear that down, as
Obama tried to do in Cairo, and the terrorists no longer have anything to
fight against because we aren’t in their way.

Bush tried to build up civil society to choke off terrorism. Obama builds
civil society around terrorists.

Obama does not believe that the terrorists are the problem. He believes
that we are the problem. His foreign policy is not about fighting Islamic
terrorists. It is about destroying our power to stop them.

He isn’t fighting terrorists. He’s fighting us.

*
*Don’t miss The Glazov Gang’s recent episode: Obama: Deflecting for Islam:*

*Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: **Click here*
<http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&field-keywords=david+horowitz&rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&qid=1316459840&rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&sort=daterank>*.
*

*Subscribe* <https://www.youtube.com/user/TheFMPMG/featured>* to
Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, on **YouTube*
<https://www.youtube.com/user/TheFMPMG/featured>* and **LIKE*
<https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang>* it on **Facebook.*
<https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang>
------------------------------

Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: *http://www.frontpagemag.com
<http://www.frontpagemag.com>*

URL to article:
*http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/dgreenfield/aiding-islamic-terrorists-is-our-foreign-policy/
<http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/dgreenfield/aiding-islamic-terrorists-is-our-foreign-policy/>*




__._,_.___
 ------------------------------
Posted by: "beowulf" <[email protected]>
------------------------------


 Visit Your Group
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMnM4dGU2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0MjQ0NzYwODY->

   - New Members
   
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/members/all;_ylc=X3oDMTJncXIzdXJwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2bWJycwRzdGltZQMxNDI0NDc2MDg2>
   1

 [image: Yahoo! Groups]
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlYTlidjdnBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQyNDQ3NjA4Ng-->
• Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
Unsubscribe <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe>
• Terms of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>

__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to