Did Obama Order the Hit on Russia’s Ambassador?
I’m just going to come out and ask the question, because there are people who already are thinking it: Did President Obama have anything to do with the assassination of Russian ambassador Andrey Karlov at an art exhibit in Ankara, Turkey?
Before consigning this thought to the tinfoil bin out of hand, it may be helpful to review some facts.
First, Obama hates Russian President Vladimir Putin. I think it’s personal. Putin, whatever evil lurks in his heart, projects an aura of capable leadership and confident manliness that has outshone the milquetoast Obama on the world stage for years.
Second, Obama hates Syrian President-for-life Bashar al-Assad. Assad is an Alawite, which means he belongs to a subset of the Shiite Muslims. While we all know Obama … is … NOT … Muslim (as we’ve been told, wink, wink, nudge, nudge), he has in his foreign policy been a consistent friend of the Sunnis, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood, and an enemy to Shiites. ISIS is composed of Sunnis. Obama’s foreign policy - retreating from Iraq, working with former al-Qaida mercenaries in Libya, gunrunning to Sunni “rebels” in Syria - contributed greatly to the growth and current prominence of ISIS.
The place where these twin hatreds of Obama’s converge is Syria, which recently has seen particularly bloody battles in the city of Aleppo. The Obama-fueled “civil war” in Syria has involved the U.S., Russia, Turkey and a number of other countries in various roles. Russia supports the Alawite government of Assad, a close ally for years.
Before Karlov was assassinated in broad daylight by Mevlut Mert Altintas, a 22-year-old member of Turkish law enforcement, in front of the press, the killer shouted that this was for Aleppo, and he shouted the requisite “Allahu akbar.” The first group suspected in the killing should probably be ISIS, which has proven adept at radicalizing even people in positions of responsibility.
However, the killer himself was killed (some might say conveniently), and there’s the Turkish government connection, which was commented upon by Putin political ally, Senator Frantz Klintsevich, deputy chairman of the Russian upper chamber’s defense and security committee. Klintsevich said he believed the killing was “a planned action.”
“Everyone knew that he was going to attend this photo exhibition,” Klintsevich said. “It can be ISIS, or the Kurdish army which tries to hurt Erdogan. But maybe - and it is highly likely - that representatives of foreign NATO secret services are behind it. What has happened is a true provocation, a challenge. It is a challenge for Russia.”
Turkey is a NATO member, but even if NATO was involved, that wouldn’t mean Obama had anything to do with the assassination.
There’s just one little thing, an annoying piece of information tapping away at our thoughts like a woodpecker, and that’s the fact that Obama basically threatened Russia and Putin a few days ago.
The excuse was the folderol about the CIA saying Russians hacked Hillary Clinton’s, John Podesta’s and the DNC’s computers and allegedly swayed the election. Sensible people realize that story is just another lame excuse liberals have conjured to avoid facing the facts about their poor election performance. But Obama either believes his Administration’s own propaganda, or he wanted to appear to believe it so he could persuade the American public.
“I think there is no doubt that when any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections … we need to take action. And we will - at a time and place of our own choosing,” Obama said on NPR last Thursday. “Some of it may be explicit and publicized; some of it may not be.”
Some of the actions may not be explicit and publicized. …
On the day when the United States electors confirmed the results of an election the Left has been pretending was thrown by Russian intervention, against the backdrop of an Obama-led war on a Russian ally, in light of a threat to “take action” against Russia by one of the most narcissistic and foolish presidents we’ve ever suffered, in his waning days in office, when he might no longer feel the weight of having to deal with consequences, shouldn’t we be asking some hard questions?
There’s obviously no solid evidence to prove any connection. But then, how many scandals have at first seemed unrelated to this White House, only later to be shown to have Oval Office fingerprints on them?
The recent election wasn’t just a blow struck against Hillary, but against the entire Democratic Party, and thus against the man who has been the Left’s leader for eight years. It was, in many ways, Obama’s legacy that was repudiated.
A petty, vindictive man, which I believe Obama to be, might be tempted to “take action” to hurt the people he feels hurt him, foreign and domestic. Let’s hope not, or else the few remaining weeks of the Obama Administration could prove to be more dangerous than the previous eight years combined.
__________________________________________
http://constitution.com/president-obama-order-hit-russias-ambassador/
Before consigning this thought to the tinfoil bin out of hand, it may be helpful to review some facts.
First, Obama hates Russian President Vladimir Putin. I think it’s personal. Putin, whatever evil lurks in his heart, projects an aura of capable leadership and confident manliness that has outshone the milquetoast Obama on the world stage for years.
Second, Obama hates Syrian President-for-life Bashar al-Assad. Assad is an Alawite, which means he belongs to a subset of the Shiite Muslims. While we all know Obama … is … NOT … Muslim (as we’ve been told, wink, wink, nudge, nudge), he has in his foreign policy been a consistent friend of the Sunnis, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood, and an enemy to Shiites. ISIS is composed of Sunnis. Obama’s foreign policy - retreating from Iraq, working with former al-Qaida mercenaries in Libya, gunrunning to Sunni “rebels” in Syria - contributed greatly to the growth and current prominence of ISIS.
The place where these twin hatreds of Obama’s converge is Syria, which recently has seen particularly bloody battles in the city of Aleppo. The Obama-fueled “civil war” in Syria has involved the U.S., Russia, Turkey and a number of other countries in various roles. Russia supports the Alawite government of Assad, a close ally for years.
Before Karlov was assassinated in broad daylight by Mevlut Mert Altintas, a 22-year-old member of Turkish law enforcement, in front of the press, the killer shouted that this was for Aleppo, and he shouted the requisite “Allahu akbar.” The first group suspected in the killing should probably be ISIS, which has proven adept at radicalizing even people in positions of responsibility.
However, the killer himself was killed (some might say conveniently), and there’s the Turkish government connection, which was commented upon by Putin political ally, Senator Frantz Klintsevich, deputy chairman of the Russian upper chamber’s defense and security committee. Klintsevich said he believed the killing was “a planned action.”
“Everyone knew that he was going to attend this photo exhibition,” Klintsevich said. “It can be ISIS, or the Kurdish army which tries to hurt Erdogan. But maybe - and it is highly likely - that representatives of foreign NATO secret services are behind it. What has happened is a true provocation, a challenge. It is a challenge for Russia.”
Turkey is a NATO member, but even if NATO was involved, that wouldn’t mean Obama had anything to do with the assassination.
There’s just one little thing, an annoying piece of information tapping away at our thoughts like a woodpecker, and that’s the fact that Obama basically threatened Russia and Putin a few days ago.
The excuse was the folderol about the CIA saying Russians hacked Hillary Clinton’s, John Podesta’s and the DNC’s computers and allegedly swayed the election. Sensible people realize that story is just another lame excuse liberals have conjured to avoid facing the facts about their poor election performance. But Obama either believes his Administration’s own propaganda, or he wanted to appear to believe it so he could persuade the American public.
“I think there is no doubt that when any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections … we need to take action. And we will - at a time and place of our own choosing,” Obama said on NPR last Thursday. “Some of it may be explicit and publicized; some of it may not be.”
Some of the actions may not be explicit and publicized. …
On the day when the United States electors confirmed the results of an election the Left has been pretending was thrown by Russian intervention, against the backdrop of an Obama-led war on a Russian ally, in light of a threat to “take action” against Russia by one of the most narcissistic and foolish presidents we’ve ever suffered, in his waning days in office, when he might no longer feel the weight of having to deal with consequences, shouldn’t we be asking some hard questions?
There’s obviously no solid evidence to prove any connection. But then, how many scandals have at first seemed unrelated to this White House, only later to be shown to have Oval Office fingerprints on them?
The recent election wasn’t just a blow struck against Hillary, but against the entire Democratic Party, and thus against the man who has been the Left’s leader for eight years. It was, in many ways, Obama’s legacy that was repudiated.
A petty, vindictive man, which I believe Obama to be, might be tempted to “take action” to hurt the people he feels hurt him, foreign and domestic. Let’s hope not, or else the few remaining weeks of the Obama Administration could prove to be more dangerous than the previous eight years combined.
__________________________________________
http://constitution.com/president-obama-order-hit-russias-ambassador/