So you’re telling the enemy everything you want to do. No wonder you’ve been fighting ISIS your entire adult life. (Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton, 1st Presidential debate, 2016)
What mission was so important the United States kept personnel in the jihadist hellhole of Benghazi in 2012? Specifically, did that mission involve arming the Syrian “rebels” — including al-Qaeda and forces that became ISIS — just as, at Mrs. Clinton’s urging, our government had armed Libyan “rebels” (again, jihadists) to catastrophic effect? (Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi Debacle: Arming Jihadists in Libya…and Syria)
In fact, the Middle Eastern security officials speaking to WND since last year describe the U.S. mission in Benghazi and nearby CIA annex attacked last September as an intelligence and planning center for U.S. aid to the rebels in the Middle East, particularly those fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime. (New Scandal Threatens Obama, Hillary)
Donald Trump’s remark about Hillary Clinton’s lifelong fight against ISIS is a good illustration of what makes it impossible for me to trust the pose he struck for the GOP primary season, as a champion of disgruntled conservatives fed up with the GOP’s quisling leaders. His remark made me think of Aaron Klein’s article on the GOP’s Benghazi report. Klein noted that report’s conclusion that the “CIA conducted no unauthorized activity in Benghazi and was not collecting and shipping arms to Syria.” But, as Klein pointedly remarks, “most mainstream allegations about weapons transfers did not claim any weapons were stored or transferred through the CIA annex.”
He notes a New York Times report “that from offices at “secret locations” American intelligence officers helped Arab governments shop for weapons…and have vetted rebel commanders and groups to determine who should receive the weapons as they arrive.” Did weapons (like the MANPADS mentioned in Klein’s article,) that Saudi Arabia helped to provide to Libya’s anti-Gadhafi Jihadist forces, (which included elements of al-Qaeda in Libya) end up in the hands of rebels against the al-Assad regime in Syria, including the al-Qaeda elements from which ISIS eventually developed?
When Donald Trump says to Hillary Clinton “you’ve been fighting ISIS your entire adult life”, the obvious overstatement should not be allowed to distract us from the fact that his assertion simply ignores the question of whether Hillary Clinton joined in implementing policies that helped to arm the forces from which ISIS took root. Though he seems to be criticizing Clinton for saying too much to our enemies, he’s actually mimicking the GOP quislings he professes to oppose. They studiously said too little about the policy Hillary Clinton helped execute, which gave aid and comfort to elements of the very organization that perpetrated the infamous 9-11 attacks on the United States.
In the most powerful governmental position she ever occupied, did Hillary Clinton contribute to building the armed forces of the ISIS organization? If so, that’s a far cry from fighting ISIS all her adult life. At the very least it shows an incompetent lack of foresight. At most it shows a deliberate commitment to policies that put foreign interests above the national security interests of the American people, giving deliberate aid and comfort to our enemies.
Since he has gulled many of his GOP supporters with his supposedly frank and outspoken attacks against Clinton, how could Donald Trump fail even to raise these implications of the Benghazi debacle? His own reference to ISIS shows their relevance to the debate discussion that was under way. Mr. Trump slyly questions Clinton’s competence, but in a way that lets her off the hook when it comes to the more important possibility that hangs over her deportment, and that of the whole Obama administration.
That is the ominous possibility that the aid and comfort they have given Islamic jihadist terrorists across the board (including the importation into the U.S. of a large numbers of refugees, likely to include a significant number of these terrorists) is not a matter of incompetence. It is a deliberate policy, driven by the de facto anti-Americanism inherent in the ideology that Hillary Clinton, like her erstwhile boss Obama, has espoused all her adult life.
If Donald Trump did not apprise himself of the potentially treasonous aspects of Hillary Clinton’s policy in aid of the anti-Assad jihadists, his failure to do so raises serious questions about his own competence. If he did so, but chose not to question her about it at the relevant moment, (fearing that she would quote the GOP House Intelligence Committee’s report purporting to debunk the issue) what has become of his supposedly frank opposition to the GOP establishment’s quisling leaders?
In this respect, Mr. Trump ends up surrendering to the de facto coalition between the Democrats and the quisling leaders of the GOP, the coalition many GOP voters who helped him to the nomination are trusting him to battle fearlessly. It appears that in the very matters of national security he himself acknowledged to be most crucial, his courage failed.
Hillary Clinton chose to implement a policy based on the notion that it was more important to fight Syria’s Assad, at the behest of the Saudis, than to wage implacable war against the forces that grievously attacked the United States in 2001 and that have maintained their active posture of enmity toward us ever since. Like many of Trump’s supporters, she chose to fight one evil with another, rather than think through and defend our nation’s common good.
Trumps’ willingness simply to ignore the consequences of Clinton’s policy choices—which have been fatal to all too many innocent people, in the Middle East and right here in the United States—is more than sufficient reason for his supporters to rethink the trust they are investing in his candidacy. Is he really an opponent of the elitist faction’s Democrat/’GOP quisling’ coalition? If elected, will he frankly oppose them, or blithely kick his conservative supporters to the curb in order to “govern” (as these would-be tyrants say) in collusion with them, just as Hillary Clinton will if she’s elected?
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Barb Wire.