The slow motion U.S. response to the crisis on Mount Sinjar is not only understandable it’s actually quite predictable.

President Obama’s entire ideological outlook and world view is born amid the kitchens, coffee tables, and social organizations of his life.   Together with his compadre’s they view the Gaza conflict through the prism of righteous protests against U.S. engagements in Vietnam.

Bill Ayers famously views armed opposition to the U.S. government as a patriotic and loyal endeavor – what’s a few local bombs intended to do if not to prove a point.   The rockets from Gaza are no more radical in the mind of the radical left than Ayers pentagon bombing of another similarly oppressive entity, the United States.

But something happens at that very specific juncture where the presentation of Hope and Fundamental Change meets the more brutal reality of consequence.  (more…)

WASHINGTON DC – Kentucky GOP senator and likely 2016 presidential candidate Rand Paul is “not saying [he’s] completely opposed” to “maybe even bombing” the genocidal Islamist terrorists known as ISIS. But Paul also isn’t saying that he supports bombing ISIS. Politico reports Paul has “mixed feelings”: 

“I have mixed feelings about it,” the senator said Monday evening of the recent strikes against ISIL targets. “I’m not saying I’m completely opposed to helping with arms or maybe even bombing, but I am concerned that ISIS is big and powerful because we protected them in Syria for a year. Do you know who also hates ISIS and who is bombing them? Assad, the Syrian government.”

“So a year ago, the same people who want to bomb ISIS wanted to bomb Syria last year,” he continued in remarks were first reported by WBKO.

It’s not true, as Paul implies, that everyone who wants to take military action against ISIS supported military action last year against the Syrian regime.  (read more)

WASHINGTON — The U.S. is weighing a military mission in Iraq to rescue thousands of Yazidi refugees, a move that risks putting American forces in direct confrontation with Sunni fighters for the Islamic State.

The proposal is still under development and hasn’t been approved by President Barack Obama. U.S. officials said the rescue mission is one of many options the U.S. military is weighing after dropping food and water to dying refugees over the past six days.

“People are looking at ways to do something more than just drop water and supplies,” one senior U.S. official said. “You can only do that for so long.” (more…)

Solid evidence exists that both Secretary Clinton and President Obama were both heavily engaged in joint State Dept. / CIA operations in Libya and Syria.  
Two Presidential Authorization Findings were signed by President Obama.  One in March 2011 for covert CIA action in Libya, the second in the early part of 2012 for covert CIA action in Syria.  Both operations were to provide weapons to “rebels” in both countries.

We have outlined the entire construct in The Benghazi Brief

The Libyan operation was called “Zero Footprint”, the name of the Syrian operation is unknown.  Saudi Arabia (financier) and Qatar (intermediary) were used in both operations with the end destination for Zero Footprint being Benghazi, and the destination for the second operation being Turkey.   Both Hillary Clinton and President Obama were simpatico in both of these covert operations.   What’s going on now between them is parseltongue.
  
WASHINGTON DC – Hillary Clinton called President Barack Obama on Tuesday to clarify she did not mean to “attack him, his policies, or his leadership” in an interview with the Atlantic published last weekend wherein she made her first major, public criticism of the White House since leaving her position as secretary of state last year. (more…)

Put this into the memory file that holds evidence of why the White House was so totally disconnected when they decided to arm Libyan and Syrian al-Qaeda rebels in 2011.
Here’s John Brennan in June of 2011 about three months after the White House began arming the Libyan “rebels”:

“Our strategy is…shaped by a deeper understanding of al Qaeda’s goals, strategy, and tactics.  I’m not talking about al Qaeda’s grandiose vision of global domination through a violent Islamic caliphate.  That vision is absurd, and we are not going to organize our counterterrorism policies against a feckless delusion that is never going to happen. We are not going to elevate these thugs and their murderous aspirations into something larger than they are.”
~John Brennan, White House Senior Advisor to The President (for counterterrorism and national security) June 29th 2011

Rut Roh, what are the progs gonna do now ?   The libs were in a generally swoony state with the “progressive” Pope Francis.   However, now he’s calling up round #5 of the modern crusades – oh my.

LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) – You know a situation is bad when a pope calls for an armed response. Pope Francis, widely appreciated as a practical and realistic man, is not just calling for a cease-fire or negotiations. Instead, he is inviting an armed response to the terrorism of the Islamic State.
Such a call is virtually unprecedented for a pontiff in modern times, but our age is an extraordinary one and the Islamic State has no interest in a bargaining table. Instead, the Islamic State is bent on genocide and barbarism, ruthlessly exterminating anyone who opposes them.
On Sunday, Pope Francis said he held “dismay and disbelief” over what is happening in Iraq. He called the Islamic State fighters terrorists and said there was a need for “a professional, well-equipped army.” “The situation is going from bad to worse,” he warned.
Meanwhile, Chaldean Patriarch Louis Sako of Baghdad said, “There is a need of international support and a professional, well-equipped army. The situation is going from bad to worse.” (more…)

For those who pay attention to the dysfunction of Obama’s foreign policy you’ll note there’s currently a battle between Obama and Clinton to distance and blame the other for the rise of ISIS and radical jihad.

They both agree the origin of ISIS is the Syrian civil war 2011 and 2012.   The argument between them is one of “who’s policy is to blame”?

Clinton argues she wanted to arm the rebels early in the 2011/2012 Syrian uprising.   And if the “moderates” had been supported the “radicals” would not have been able to rise.

“The failure to help build up a credible fighting force of the people who were the originators of the protests against Assad—there were Islamists, there were secularists, there was everything in the middle—the failure to do that left a big vacuum, which the jihadists have now filled,”   ~Hillary Clinton

President Obama argues there was no option to arm the moderates because they were not capable of fighting.

The president rejected criticism that the military advances by ISIS in Iraq could have been prevented if he had been willing months ago to provide heavy armaments to the Syrian rebels who were fighting against ISIS and the forces of President Bashar al-Assad in that country.

“It’s always been a fantasy,” he said, “this idea that we could provide some light arms or even more sophisticated arms to what was essentially an opposition made up of former doctors, farmers, pharmacists and so forth.”  ~ President Obama

The answer to who is correct is actually neither. (more…)

As with all complex stories the valuable discoveries come with time.

This Brief has been updated to include the newly spotlighted research on Syria and ISIL.  Most importantly the previously unknown “Second Presidential Finding Memo” to the CIA in 2012 specifically directed to arm/aid ISIL in Syria.  The new information from the month before the Benghazi attack explains the motive of the Turkish delegation toward Chris Stevens.
Grab a cup of coffee and you’ll see how the Trey Gowdy special committee is really a waste of time.   There is no benefit to be gained from house hearings that will never be allowed to disclose the operational aspects of covert CIA intelligence ops.

We know from the Bret Baier interview with Hillary Clinton that she was physically located at her 7th floor office in Washington DC on the night of the attack. Unfortunately we also know during the November 2012 Thanksgiving holiday a mysterious fire took place in that building. Well, actually directly above her exact office – cause undetermined.
A “fire” which preceded an unfortunate slip and fall for the Secretary, resulting in a concussion, which led to the discovery of a blood clot, that ultimately delayed her congressional testimony before a Senate Hearing into the events of the night in question.
We know the Libyan uprising began on February 10th of 2011, and we also know that sometime around the end of February 2011 President Obama signed a presidential directive authorizing the State Dept and CIA to begin a covert operation to arm the Libyan “rebels”.
We also know of a Second Presidential Finding Memo authorizing additional CIA covert action in 2012, this time in Syria.   However, unlike the 2011 Libyan operation we do not know the operational name of the second action in 2012 Syria.
We know the Libyan “rebels” were positioned in two strategic places. Benghazi, and the port city of Darnah, both located in Northeastern Libya.
We know this 2011 Libyan covert operation came to be known as “Operation Zero Footprint“, and fell under the military command authority of NATO not (important to repeat), NOT, the U.S. Military. (more…)

President Obama gave Thomas Friedman an hour long interview before heading off on vacation to Martha’s Vineyard.    Within the interview the failure of a cohesive Obama foreign policy shines through despite the attempted cover from liberal reporters.
There’s actually two parts to this interview – the interview as reported – and the opinion piece from Friedman about the interview itself.
Within the Times Article you find the footprints of a dejected President staring boldly into the face of his own failure and shortcomings:

[…]  “We’re not going to let them create some caliphate through Syria and Iraq,” the president said in an hourlong interview with Thomas L. Friedman, a New York Times columnist, as American planes and drones began dropping bombs in Iraq. “But we can only do that if we know that we have got partners on the ground who are capable of filling the void.”

[…]  Mr. Obama offered his justifications for his latest use of military force in Iraq while lamenting the outcome of a similar decision he made to intervene militarily in Libya in 2011. He defended the desire to help oust the Libyan dictator, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, with American air power, but he acknowledged that he had “underestimated” the chaos that would follow after American forces left.

“So that’s a lesson that I now apply every time I ask the question, ‘Should we intervene militarily?’ ” Mr. Obama said. “Do we have an answer the day after?”

Oh that’s nice, as long as he readily admits his failure in Libya now.   Readers will note he’s essentially reaffirming the Bush policy in Iraq by saying the failure in Libya was a failure to stick around and nation build.

This, despite the fact Obama himself worsened the collapse in Iraq by pulling U.S. forces out ahead of structural governance in place which would insure their own security.

So failing to have a plan to stick around in Libya was a mistake, but pulling out from a plan to stick around in Iraq was, well, what exactly ? (more…)

In 2011 President Obama stated -to much controversy- he did not need to notify congress, or the American people, of his military engagements in Libya (which eventually he called R2P, Responsibility To Protect).   His own White House attorneys were perplexed.

However, since then, and perhaps because the political risk (ie. polling disapproval) in year 6 is too great, he appears to have found his notification pen. (more…)