Posted on 12/07/2015 12:03:23 PM PST by Servant of the Cross
President Obama addressed an anxious nation last night in an instantly-forgettable, perfunctory speech that was largely devoid of news and announced no meaningful changes to US policies or military strategy. In an effort to reassure Americans that he's confronting the terrorist threat aggressively (his public approval rating on handling terrorism and ISIS is weak) Obama said, "for seven years, I've confronted this evolving threat each morning in my intelligence briefing."
The public learned several years ago that this president skips his in-person briefings far more frequently than his predecessor, though his staff insists that he reads through the written version of the file on a daily basis. More important than how he ingests this information is what ends up in front of the president. We've been following serious, credible claims leveled by dozens of current and former US intelligence professionals who allege that their work product was regularly altered and manipulated to downplay the growing threat and alarming advance of ISIS. The former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency has stated that the current investigation into these accusations should start at the White House, which he says has subordinated accurate information to political narratives. Other American spies have alleged that the Obama administration also deliberately kept a lid on intel gathered during the Bin Laden raid that contradicted the White House's messaging about Al Qaeda. Yesterday afternoon, prior to the president's Oval Office remarks, a former NSA analyst and Naval War College professor with deep ties to the US intelligence community tweeted something provocative:
on Twitter: John Schindler @20committee
Talked 2 an old friend, snr IC official - who said on #ISIS: "If the public knew the truth, Obama would be impeached."
Friend's a Dem, btw.
Hmm. Could the truth somehow be worse than the Obama White House systematically dismissing or doctoring urgent national security assessments on burgeoning threats, for nakedly political reasons? With the public's attention focused on these issues after the massacres in Paris and San Bernardino, America's intelligence community seizing the moment to confirm what has already been painfully exposed by events -- ISIS is not "contained," as Obama wrongly asserted last month. The "new" take-away is fairly dire:
A new U.S. intelligence report on ISIS, commissioned by the White House, predicts that the self-proclaimed Islamic State will spread worldwide and grow in numbers, unless it suffers a significant loss of territory on the battlefield in Iraq and Syria, U.S. officials told The Daily Beast. The report stands in stark contrast to earlier White House assurances that ISIS had been "contained" in Iraq and Syria. And it is already spurring changes in how the U.S. grapples with ISIS, these officials said. It's also a tacit admission that coalition efforts so far - dropping thousands of bombs and deploying 3,500 U.S. troops as well as other coalition trainers - have been outpaced by ISIS' ability to expand and attract new followers, even as the yearlong coalition air campaign has helped local forces drive ISIS out of parts of Iraq and Syria. The White House commissioned the intelligence report prior to last month's deadly strikes in Paris, and long before last week's terror attacks in San Bernardino, California, three senior U.S. officials said...After reviewing its grim conclusions, President Barack Obama asked Secretary of Defense Ash Carter and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford to come up with new options to beat the group back.
Some of the intensified anti-ISIS measures outlined in the Daily Beast story sound like sensible steps, including an increased emphasis on tactical raids conducted by elite American military operators, described last week by Defense Secretary Ash Carter as discrete deployments of an "expeditionary targeting force." The president also recently beat a further rhetorical retreat from his "no boots on the ground" stance, explaining that his use of that phrase was merely intended to rule out a large-scale ground invasion and occupation. This recalibration appears to effectively concede that more American special forces will engage in direct combat with ISIS, which is quite literally the definition of boots on the ground. These changes were not clearly communicated in last night's presidential address, perhaps due to Obama's abiding aversion to admitting that his policies have created such a mess that he's now faced with no choice but to send combat troops back into a region he'd ostentatiously abandoned. These expanding operations were referenced only extremely briefly last night: "In both countries [Iraq and Syria] we're deploying Special Operations Forces who can accelerate that [anti-ISIS] offensive," the president said. The biggest problem with Obama's belated and partial about-face (his speech was mostly an endorsement of the status quo) is distilled in a revealing comment from an unnamed intelligence official quoted in the piece excerpted above:
"This intel report didn't tell us anything we didn't already know."
As Americans' awareness that the administration's ISIS strategy was not working increased, those shortcomings morphed into a political problem for the White House, which commissioned the intelligence analysis whose "grim conclusions" they'd been actively disregarding for years. A cynic might argue that Obama's shifting posture and speech last night are at least partially explained by numbers like these:
Additional tweets at link
I'll leave you with journalist Michael Weiss, who's written a deep-dive book on ISIS, just eviscerating President Obama's speech on CNN last night. It's well worth three minutes of your time. Brutal:
video at link ...
All Obama wants is to keep a lid on it until he is out of office. I would go so far as to suggest he is actively bribing ISIS, AQ ISIL, Boko Haram, and every other terrorist group on US soil to not do anything big until he is out of office. And if a republican wins Obama will be on every news channel with every democrat shill blaming the new acts of terror as a justifiably angry response to electing those evyil republicans.
Having followed/read Schindler and his blog for several years, I trust his info (though not his politics). What Schindler and he friend don’t understand is there no way in the world the Congress would ever even entertain the thought of the possibility of impeaching Barry. They have their powerful jobs and anything that would endanger that is automatically off the table.
True, but don’t expect the MSM to report this , except One America News who just as and Fox News.
Citizen to intelligence operative: “isn’t it your job to start those proceedings?”
Nail on the head.
The media see their job as protecting their investment. they have to lie, attack anyone who opposes him, and defend him.
That is why there are still too many people who support him, plus they are just ignorant, or dumb.
\
I saw a woman today on the TV, a liberal woman who actually stated how he shows strength , how he does not need to shout, and how he has protected us.
I kid you not.
I agree with that point.
Maybe that the pRESIDENT and his regime, working hand in glove with Turkey and possibly other NATO members, was instrumental in forming and training isis and continue to fund and arm this inhuman horde of 7th century savages.
That the soetoro regime is actively importing milions of mohammaden "refugees" in order to cause the destruction of the US and further the drive to islamize the West.
BTW, since he is our "elected representative" the American people are complicit in this horror.
Not sure how much of a "political problem" it could be for a pussy lame duck president who clearly doesn't give a sh** in the first place.
There, fixed it for you...guess that I won't be employable over at Fox, though. :>)
Tea Party?
Amish buggy-drivers?
Santa Claus?
Easter Bunny?
Liars can often find other liars to lie for them.
p i n g
ostentatiously
That word is in there.
ostentatiously abandoned
Ain’t no ‘ostentatiously’ about it.
We don’t need boots there. We need tactical nukes.
Do we need any more evidence that we're living in a banana republic?
The uniparty has Obama’s back, even funding his Isis relocation refugee program.
Nah.
Give the American public enough food and drink, and access to a color TV, and they’ll be passively murdered sitting there watching the tube without lifting a finger.
Stunning thing is that even whenhecalled them the JV team and they gained more ground.
Even when he said they were contained and they were not.
Even hours before the Paris attack he said ISIS was not a threat.
Even when being interviews minutes before the SB terrorist attack he said they could not launch an attack like that here.
The media lets him gets away with it and protects him for the ignorant, stupid masses in his cult who still follow him
The media thinks they have special protection from these types of terrorists; they don’t.
We are living in the old Soviet Union when it comes to propaganda. It’s unbelievable.
I am sure they have been warned that if they do, Obama will unleash Black Lives Matter riots along with signaling the terrorist cells to do their thing.
As it now stands both wings of the same political party have declared war on the producers. Instead of responsible individuals, they desire mind numbed drones that are easily ruled and controlled.
Intelligence Official on ISIS: 'If the Public Knew the Truth, Obama Would be Impeached'
Good article and comments are worth the read.
Thanks, SE Mom. (He can't be impeached; a person who is not eligible to an office does not hold the office even if he is procedurally installed in the office. Sorry.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
