TODAY’S REC0MMENDED READING

AN OP-ED FROM THE ‘CANADA FREE PRESS’ WEB SITE, TRACKING THE MISTEPS OF BARACK OBAMA’S RESPONSE TO THE JIHADIST THREAT OF ISSA ... LEADING TO THE MOST RECENT BEHEADING OF  A  BRITISH AID WORKER

WHAT IS IT THAT THIS WISE & INSIGHTFUL COMMENTARY SAYS?

The basic text of this “op-ed” is reproduced below:

A LEGACY OF FAILURE

By Klaus Rohrich “Canada Free Press”, September 13, 2014

MR ROHRICH'S COMMENTARY STARTS IMMEDIATELY BELOW:

Back during the 2008 presidential campaign a lot of conservatives predicted that if Obama were elected president his administration would amount to Jimmy Carter’s second term. Little did anyone at the time realize just how prescient those predictions turned out to be.

After all, it was Jimmy Carter who enabled Islamic fundamentalism to take root in Iran through his support in deposing Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. It’s very likely true that the Shah was a son-of-a-gun that established SAVAK, a secret police force that brutally suppressed any political opposition against the regime. But in point of fact, he was our son-of-a-gun who supported progress and to a great degree, western ideals.

It was under the Shah’s rule that Iranian women gained the right to an education, a development that was much lamented by connoisseurs of fine Persian rugs, because young Iranian girls went to school instead of spending their days hand-tying thousands of tiny knots to form exquisite and expensive carpets.

Of course, the witless Jimmy Carter was very concerned about human rights abuses in Iran, and through his various machinations created the conditions under which Ayatollah Khomeini was able to seize power from the Shah, and thus replace the hated SAVAK with the SAVAMA, an organization whose brutality far exceeded that of SAVAK.

Khomeini rewarded the hapless Carter by invading the US Embassy in Tehran and holding American Diplomats hostage for 444 days, releasing them on the very day Ronald Reagan was sworn in as President. There’s little reason to ask why, because we all know what Reagan would have done had those hostages not been released.

Thus Jimmy Carter’s “foreign” “policy” is directly responsible for the resurgence of fundamental Islam in the Middle East, among numerous other disasters, both foreign and domestic.

Nearly 4 decades later another Democrat President took up where Jimmy Carter left off, naively and narcissistically believing that he could tame the Islamist beast. He started with his Cairo apology tour, recounting how evil America had in the past mistreated Islam and promising that under his administration this mistreatment would be rectified.

Of course, no such thing has happened. In fact, the damage this President has done far exceeds anything for which the clumsy and misguided Carter is responsible. The so-called Arab Spring was a Pollyanna fantasy that belied reality. And Obama’s claim that the Muslim Brotherhood was a secular organization was akin to claiming that the Vatican isn’t Catholic. And many Americans, as well as America’s traditional allies, believe that Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood and all it stands for.

How else could one explain the administration’s support for the ouster of Hosni Mubarak, who kept Egypt out of the grasp of Islamists for over 30 years? And when the Muslim Brotherhood finally gained control of Egypt, their policies revealed a dark and evil agenda that included the destruction of Israel, imposition of extreme Sharia law, and persecution of Christians and other religious minorities...

Thankfully, the Egyptian army couldn’t stomach Egypt regressing into a medieval cesspool and quickly eliminated the Islamists, including the despicable Mohammad Morsi, whose favorite names for Jews was “pigs” and “monkeys”...

If there wasn’t so much evidence of Barack Obama’s bumbling incompetence, one could believe that he had a hidden agenda to strengthen Islamist influence around the world.

Yes, he gave the order to kill Osama bin Laden, an order that many proclaim was an act of courage. I see nothing courageous about it, as it seemed more of an opportunistic move to garner political support. Hence Vice President Joe Biden’s endless crowing about GM being alive and bin Laden being dead during the 2012 election.

I once believed that Barack Obama was evil. I have since then become convinced that this is not the case:

BARACK OBAMA ISN’T EVIL, BUT MERELY HAPLESS, NAÏVE AND LOST IN A FANTASY WORLD WHERE HE BELIEVES THINGS ARE AS HE WISHES, RATHER THAN AS THEY REALLY ARE.

How else could one explain his insistence that al Qaeda was “dead” on the very day that American diplomatic properties were being stormed in both Egypt and Libya? And while on the subject of Libya, to what end did Obama want Muammar Kaddafi deposed? Granted, Kaddafi wasn’t a very nice person by western standards, but he was also harmless, having surrendered his weapons of mass destruction when the US took down Saddam Hussein.

Now Libya is a wasteland of warring factions. And the weapons that America supplied to the Libyan “rebels” are now in the hands of ISIS and Hamas to kill Jews and other Muslims...

In addition, Obama’s “red line” in the Syrian sands stands as one of the modern age’s all-time powder puff bluffs, as Bashar Assad blithely eradicated that line by using his chemical weapons against his enemies.

Obama's explanation that the red line wasn’t his, but was laid down by “the world” is demanding that everyone who has a computer or television suspend his or her disbelief!

Are people really this stupid, or IS OBAMA SO BESOTTED WITH HIS INFALLIBILITY THAT HE BELIEVES HE CAN JUST DICTATE REALITY THROUGH HIS TELEPROMPTER?

Now someone has finally convinced this "deer-caught-in-the-headlights" president that he needs to take action against ISIS before there is public demand for his impeachment.

But then, as they say at the Pottery Barn, “You break it; you pay for it”, since Obama is directly responsible for the situation in today’s Iraq:

Had he left a contingent of American troops on the ground there, as George W. Bush urged back in 2007, Iraq would not be at risk of descending into an Islamist hell hole.

Obama’s reaction to the ISIS outrages is also too little too late, in that most military experts believe that ISIS cannot be defeated through aerial bombardment: in addition to the bombs, there is also a need for boots on the ground. After all, does anyone really believe that the Iraqi or Syrian army can defeat ISIS? If they could, they would have done so already; and I fear that this latest tentative military step, by America’s president, will result in an even bigger disaster.

Having someone like Carter and Obama in the White House isn’t so much a reflection on either of the two, as it is on the American people. It appears that Americans are suckers for anyone that promises them an easy ride.

IT DIDN’T WORK WITH CARTER AND IT’S NOT WORKING WITH OBAMA!

[Klaus Rohrich is senior columnist for “Canada Free Press”. Klaus also writes topical articles for numerous magazines. He has a regular column on retirementhomes.com and is currently working on his first book dealing with the toxicity of liberalism. His work has been featured on the Drudge Report, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News and Lucianne, among others. He lives and works in a small town outside of Toronto and is an avid student of history. ]

MY OWN RESPONSE TO THE PRECEDING COMMENTARY

And what is the historical lesson which I think we can learn from the preceding “op-ed”?

Namely that a leader who embarks on the path of war -- with (1) an unrealistic military paradigm; (2) wishful thinking; and (3) the hubris of a “know-it-all” who doesn’t know much -- is doomed to military failure and defeat!

And what, among the many realities of the jihadist assault on the West is this unprepared commander-in-chief missing?

Most important, from my point of view, is that you can’t use the tactics of a community organizer (empathy, endless negotiation, and constant appeasement) in a battle against a vicious cabal of blood-thirsty murderers.

And secondly, it is definitively time to put the “I”-word back into the descriptions of America’s newest enemy – “I” for ‘ISLAMIST”

Message to America’s community-organizer-in-chief: the “I” in “ISA” stands for Islamic (State Authority).

And how about putting the “W”-word back into a description of the president’s promised military initiative – WAR!

But probably the most foolhardy omission of Barack Obama – and his obfuscating apologists in the Democratic establishment – is the refusal to acknowledge the “E”-word: namely that these radical Islamist jihadists are EVIL.

After all, in response to the recent beheadings of two American journalists, even America’s most politically-correct media outlets (for example, CNN, “The NY Times” and even “The Washington Post”) have begun to use the biblical term, “evil”, to describe Islamist jihadists’ actions.

In terms of the psychological & socio-cultural underpinnings of this global jihadist movement, how would I -- long ago educated as a sociologist (with a PH.D. equivalent) -- define “evil” in such contexts?

Well, as revealed to me by the viewing matter of my Ipad-savvy grandchildren – and the latest Hollywood box-office vampire-film hit (“The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn”) — teens in North America, these days, have become surprisingly (to me anyway) interested in vampires and zombies, and other forms of the so-called “Undead”.

And here, I believe, we can get our first hint about the nature of good and evil:

In fact, perhaps we should call our newest “biblical-like” source, “The New Hollywood Testament” ...

According to “Wikipedia”, vampires and zombies exist in some twilight, indeterminate zone between life and death; and I suspect that the same can be said of those humans who are genuinely evil.

These evil forces of darkness (particularly today’s fanatical Islamist jihadists) can only manage to live what I choose to call a quasi “inauthentic” life — in which they derive life from their own sufferings (grievances) and from the sufferings they inflict on others (others who symbolically -- in their minds anyway -- represent those who inflicted wrongs against them).

THE THEORY:

And, in such cases, they settle for an inner psychological experience of nothingness an inability to live authenticallyrather than risk the much more terrifying nothingness of having ceased to exist.

So, only by spreading chaos and nihilism in the world, are they able to fill the frightful vacuum at the center of their being.

And following this line of thinking, perhaps some of those whom we recognize as “evil” are individuals who simply can’t abide the empty vacuum of nothingness at their core: the hollow, empty humans that they are.

And hence, to try to stifle this vacuum of “inauthenticity”, they create even more nothingness around them — in the form of murder, destruction, ethnic cleansing and even inhuman beheadings (in the case of today’s Islamist jihadists).

Certainly, if there is any truth to his analysis, then that would explain why extreme jihadist groups – which practice inhumane actions to intimidate their perceived enemies (or perceived heretics from their religion) find it so easy to recruit followers from abroad – followers who finally find a setting in which their own murderous instincts are accepted and legitimized.

Of course, today’s fanatical jihadists frequently find their own version of evil in the world, embodied in some alien figures outside themselves: Jews, educated women, gays (“homosexuals”), or imperialist American foreigners.

But acting violently -- against those who embody your perception of evil -- will not bring you any closer to murdering the non-being at the heart of yourself, since that personal ‘inauthenticy’ is the core of your empty self.

WISDOM FROM THE ANCIENT CLASSICS?

“Am I now a man,” Homer’s classical god hero (Oedipus) asks, “only when I am now no longer human?”

And from my perspective, what Homer perhaps implies, in his classic tale, is that to be stripped of our culture and civilization is perhaps to cease to be human altogether -- because it’s this civilized instinct which constitutes authentic humanity.

Hence, the “moral” of Homer’s story may be that today’s “inhumans” (jihidists who fear the nothingness at the core of their being) may go to monstrous lengths to annihilate their sense of inauthentic self — and consequently annihilate every (perceived) human obstacle in their path!

So take note President Obama, in waging your military "plan", of "containment", against America's newest enemies ...

And nuff said, on this depressing subject, I would think.

Proudly powered by WordPress   Premium Style Theme by www.gopiplus.com