It All Makes Sense Now, Obama Iran, and ISIS

    

February 3, 2015, ISIS burned Jordanian Military Pilot Moaz al-Kasasbeh to death. The video ISIS released showed him standing chained in a steel cage as the flames engulfed him. It was a video that shocked the world. Jordan's King Abdullah was actually in the United States at the time and cut his visit short to return to Jordan.

It wasn't long however before the King was back in the United States asking for ammunition, surveillance drones, as well as bombs and missiles for Jordan's planes. Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia were preparing to send in their military to take ISIS out. Permanently.  

They were turned down by the Obama Administration. Think about this. You had Sunni Muslim countries willing and able to go into Iraq and Syria and take out the predominantly Sunni Muslim ISIS. The Saudi's and other Gulf States were prepared to fund the military operation.  

I and other conservative commentators at the time questioned the decision by the Obama Administration to not only refuse to support their efforts, but also pressure them to stay out of it. It simply didn't make sense. Think of how many lives would have been saved had they been allowed to take ISIS out at that time. How many terror attacks across the world that may have been prevented.

I vividly remember writing an article questioning the decision by Obama and trying to come up with a legitimate reason why? I am pretty sure I know the reason now. Obama's failed Iranian Nuclear Deal. It is the only thing that makes sense. Especially when you see the lengths Ben Rhodes admitted in The New York Times he went too in order to manipulate and deceive the Press and the American People to get this "deal" done.

Had the Obama Administration allowed and supported the Sunni Muslim countries military to go in and take out ISIS there is no way Obama could get his horrible deal. The Iranian Mullahs would have been furious. Of course that is nothing new. They are always furious about something.

I hate to admit it but I didn't think of this while it was going on in early 2015. I wondered why the MSM was not asking the Obama Administration why they wouldn't support Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia in their willingness to destroy ISIS, but I must confess the Iranian "deal" never crossed my mind. Even when I read Ben Rhodes bragging in The New York Times it never crossed my mind. I even speculated it may be Valerie Jarrett's influence.

It wasn't until Prince Faisal Bin Farhan Al Saud, an advisor to Deputy Crown Prince Salman al Saud of Saudi Arabia, appeared with Bret Baier for an interview to discuss the Deputy Crown Prince Salman’s meeting with President Trump.

Farhan said that the Crown Prince was “keen to come and meet President Trump as early as possible” to “reinvigorate their strategic, longstanding partnership” of fifty years.
Baier asked him about paying their fair share of the cost of defeating ISIS and setting up safe zones in Syria as Trump has mentioned.

The next thing Farhan said is quite disturbing. They’re “more than ready to cooperate with the United States on countering ISIS in Syria and Iraq, across the region, not just financially but the Saudi government offered during the Obama administration’s time to send its troops into Syria to fight ISIS, that was not met with enthusiasm by the Obama administration.”

It was then it all clicked. It was more important to President Obama to make this terrible deal with Iran than to once and for all destroy the savages of ISIS. It was more important for his legacy. He would have got very little credit for Muslim countries destroying ISIS, but all the credit for the Iranian "deal." Or in my opinion, all the blame for the deal.

I encourage everyone, Conservative or Liberal to watch and listen carefully to the entire interview.

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Brett+Baier+interview+with+Saudi+Prince&view=detail&mid=C99689AD841B315D51CEC99689AD841B315D51CE&FORM=VIRE

The Hypocrisy From the Left On Trump's So-Called "Muslim Ban"

If it wasn't so serious it would almost be comical at the outrage and hypocrisy from the left. I wonder where the outrage was in 2011 when then President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton banned all Iraqi refugees for 6 months? Where was the outrage when President Carter banned refugees from Iran and even deported many who were already here?

These protests are nothing more than an attempt to try and take President Trump down. The same with the faux outrage from the media who didn't short circuit with Democrats who did basically the same thing.

From ABC News:

An ABC News investigation of the flawed U.S. refugee screening system, which was overhauled two years ago, showed that Alwan was mistakenly allowed into the U.S. and resettled in the leafy southern town of Bowling Green, Kentucky, a city of 60,000 which is home to Western Kentucky University and near the Army's Fort Knox and Fort Campbell. Alwan and another Iraqi refugee, Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, 26, were resettled in Bowling Green even though both had been detained during the war by Iraqi authorities, according to federal prosecutors.

As a result of the Kentucky case, the State Department stopped processing Iraq refugees for six months in 2011, federal officials told ABC News – even for many who had heroically helped U.S. forces as interpreters and intelligence assets. One Iraqi who had aided American troops was assassinated before his refugee application could be processed, because of the immigration delays, two U.S. officials said. In 2011, fewer than 10,000 Iraqis were resettled as refugees in the U.S., half the number from the year before, State Department statistics show.

No moral outrage then. No protests. Why the difference?

The other big outcry is President Trump said we would do whatever we can to help persecuted Christians get into the country under refugee status. Again, selective outrage. Where was the outrage over only 3% of the Syrian Refugees admitted to the USA being either Christian or Yazidi?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/17/us-unintentionally-discriminates-against-christian/

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426419/christian-refugees-syria-religious-minorities-united-states-resettlement-policy

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/syrian-christians-are-greatest-peril-least-likely-be-admitted

Below is the actual transcript of President Carter banning Iranians:

"Ever since Iranian terrorists imprisoned American Embassy personnel in Tehran early in November, these 50 men and women—their safety, their health, and their future—have been our central concern. We've made every effort to obtain their release on honorable, peaceful, and humanitarian terms, but the Iranians have refused to release them or even to improve the inhumane conditions under which these Americans are being held captive.
The events of the last few days have revealed a new and significant dimension in this matter. The militants controlling the Embassy have stated they are willing to turn the hostages over to the Government of Iran, but the Government has refused to take custody of the American hostages. This lays bare the full responsibility of the Ayatollah Khomeini and the Revolutionary Council for the continued illegal and outrageous holding of the innocent hostages. The Iranian Government can no longer escape full responsibility by hiding behind the militants at the Embassy.
It must be made clear that the failure to release the hostages will involve increasingly heavy costs to Iran and to its interests. I have today ordered the following steps.
First, the United States of America is breaking diplomatic relations with the Government of Iran. The Secretary of State has informed the Government of Iran that its Embassy and consulates in the United States are to be closed immediately. All Iranian diplomatic and consular officials have been declared persona non grata and must leave this country by midnight tomorrow.
Second, the Secretary of the Treasury will put into effect official sanctions prohibiting exports from the United States to Iran, in accordance with the sanctions approved by 10 members of the United Nations Security Council on January 13 in the resolution which was vetoed by the Soviet Union. Although shipment of food and medicine were not included in the U.N. Security Council vote, it is expected that exports even of these items to Iran will be minimal or nonexistent.
Third, the Secretary of Treasury will make a formal inventory of the assets of the Iranian Government, which were frozen by my previous order, and also will make a census or an inventory of the outstanding claims of American citizens and corporations against the Government of Iran. This accounting of claims will aid in designing a program against Iran for the hostages, for the hostage families, and other U.S. claimants. We are now preparing legislation, which will be introduced in the Congress, to facilitate processing and paying of these claims.
Fourth, the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly.
In order to minimize injury to the hostages, the United States has acted at all times with exceptional patience and restraint in this crisis. We have supported Secretary-General Waldheim's activities under the U.N. Security Council mandate to work for a peaceful solution. We will continue to consult with our allies and other friendly governments on the steps we are now taking and on additional measures which may be required.
I am committed to resolving this crisis. I am committed to the safe return of the American hostages and to the preservation of our national honor. The hostages and their families, indeed all of us in America, have lived with the reality and the anguish of their captivity for 5 months. The steps I have ordered today are those that are necessary now. Other action may become necessary if these steps do not produce the prompt release of the hostages.
Thank you very much."

Sounds a lot like President Trump's restrictions to me.

While we are on selective outrage, where was the outrage from the left when an American Jew, who was a member of the Whitehouse Press Pool was denied entry to Saudi Arabia because he was Jewish? He was an American Citizen. Did not have dual American and Israeli Citizenship and in fact had never even been to Israel! No protests. No outrage from the left. Nothing.

Source here:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/saudis-deny-visa-jewish-reporter-covering-obama-obama-still-going

So if you want to protest, fine. Just do your homework. If you are going to protest the actions of a politician on one side of the aisle for doing basically the same thing a politician from the other side of the aisle did and you said nothing, you might be a hypocrite.