Disconnecting the Dots: Obama CVE Program Blocks Counter Terrorism Efforts

Posted by Tina

The Presidents refusal to speak about the Islamic terror threat with precision and conviction is beginning to make sense and guess what guys, WE”RE NOT CRAZY!

The Obama administration announced to the world when he first ran for president that he would fundamentally transform America. Who could have imagined that this context would include transforming the way our intelligence, military and law enforcement arms would fight the Islamic terrorist threat? Few can begin to fathom the idea, but that’s exactly what we are learning he did as more information comes out about the Orlando attack as well as the attacks in San Bernardino and Boston. The President has been unwilling to create a workable strategy and use all tools necessary to fight the Islamic terrorists war against the west.This is not a conspiracy in any way. The President signaled his plans from the beginning to anyone who was willing to hear and comprehend his message.

In February of 2015 FrontPage Magazine featured our governments policy, Countering Violent Extremism, as a plan to ignore any information that might clue the authorities to Islamic terror threats. The connect the dots policy that was put in place after 911 was dumped for a social justice policy that protects Muslims from scrutiny:

The whole premise of CVE subdivides “violent extremism” from Islam and then further subdivides violent extremism from extremism. Barbers split fewer hairs than this. CVE tells us that the best way to fight violent extremists is with “non violent extremist” Salafi clergy who have the most influence on them. We’re supposed to fight the ISIS Caliphate with supporters of another kind of Caliphate.

What it really comes down to is paying Muslims to argue with other Muslims on social media. And hope that the Muslims we’re paying to do the arguing are the good kind of extremists, like the Muslim Brotherhood, and not the bad kind of extremists, like ISIS. Even though they’re both vicious killers.

CVE not only doesn’t fight terrorism, it perpetuates the whole reason for it by outsourcing our interaction with domestic Muslims to the Saudis and the Muslim Brotherhood. That’s a big part of how we got a terrorism problem in the first place. CVE’s promoters have convinced us that the best way to fight Islamic terrorism is by partnering with Islamic terrorists.

Obama began by watering down terrorism from a military problem to a law enforcement issue. CVE waters it down even further by eliminating it as a law enforcement issue (the FBI chief was not invited to the summit to avoid making law enforcement the focus) and turning terrorism into a social problem.

The underlying problem with CVE is that it tries to transform a military problem into a civilian social problem. It bogs us down in debating Islamic theology while warning us not to mention Islam. These are not problems that we can solve. Even if there really were a definite split between Muslim moderates and extremists, rather than an immoderate Islam broken into different factions in a power struggle, the government is not the right tool for settling a religious dispute. And that’s what CVE tries to do. …

… [CVE] rejects the idea that Muslims should be expected to show their allegiance [to the United States] and instead demands that the United States show its allegiance to them. It inverts the balance of citizenship and invests the United States in an unspoken religious debate.

The problem isn’t just theoretical, either. The absurdly misguided approach behind CVE produces policies that endanger our safety.

For example, hoping to pacify Muslim leaders and secure the allegiance of Muslims, the government has watered down the FBI’s counter terrorism training materials, eliminating valuable information that would help agents identify terrorists. According to Patrick Poole, this “purge” has contributed to clues being missed by the FBI in major terrorism cases, including last year’s bombing of the Boston Marathon.

Obama refuses to recognize that Islamic terrorists are at war with us, he believes that their interested in debating about their radical interpretations, or engaging in internet therapy, but the Islamic terrorists have no such inclination. The way they see it is they are right, the rest of us need to convert or die. Obama is a fool.

CIA Director today:

“CIA Director John Brennan, in a chilling warning on the Islamic State’s growing influence, told lawmakers Thursday that U.S.-led efforts to strike at the terror group have not hampered its “terrorism capability and global reach” – a message that stands in stark contrast to President Obama’s more upbeat assessment earlier this week.

Brennan, testifying in a rare open hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee, said ISIS likely will “intensify” terror attacks around the world even as its core fighters come under pressure in Iraq and Syria, including by deploying operatives for further attacks on the West.

“The group is probably exploring a variety of means for infiltrating operatives into the West, including in refugee flows, smuggling routes, and legitimate methods of travel,” Brennan said.

THE COMMUNITY ORGANIZER IS NO COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF!

Side note: Democrats chose not to attend this briefing. The gun debate took precedence.

This entry was posted in Military, Religion. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Disconnecting the Dots: Obama CVE Program Blocks Counter Terrorism Efforts

  1. Libby says:

    And your alternative is?

    • Tina says:

      Connecting the dots.

      It works!

      Or, if you are not going to connect the dots, then go ahead and dismantle the CIA, FBI, Military intelligence and law enforcement, save the American people that WASTE of money, and just tell us, “You’re on your own,” because that’s the result when these agencies are restricted from doing their jobs!

      The “militia” will do as our founders advised and arm and defend themselves.

  2. Chris says:

    “In February of 2015 FrontPage Magazine featured our governments policy, Countering Violent Extremism, as a plan to ignore any information that might clue the authorities to Islamic terror threats.”

    You can’t possibly be stupid enough to believe this, can you?

    Do you really believe that the Obama administration doesn’t know that ISIS and similar terror groups are Muslim? He doesn’t call them Muslim as a political strategy that was developed under the Bush administration. You are so hung up on the words “Muslim terrorists” that you won’t acknowledge the Obama administration is, in reality, droning and killing Muslim terrorists. CVE was one strategy among many; it’s not as if all the government is doing is using more moderate Muslims to talk to ISIS. Finding the root of extremism is part of the overall approach which includes killing the assholes when necessary.

    The claims here are so hyperbolic as to be utterly detached from reality. The way you talk you’d think Obama was having ISIS over for dinner while ordering drone strikes against Christian gun owners. You are on another planet and your obsessive, fear-based and paranoid behavior has never been more nakedly displayed than it has in the past week. Take a break for a few days. Engage outside the bubble. This cannot be good for your health.

    • Tina says:

      Call me stupid all you want, Chris, the fact remains the President had language purged from national security manuals, instituted sensitivity training, and made sure the focus shifted to a community organizing approach that resisted putting the Islamic Terrorist Threat in a high priority position. The guidelines are generalize and non-specific other than nonchalant references to al Qaeda.

      DHS.cov – CVE Training Guidance:

      In recent years, the United States has seen a number of individuals in the U.S. become involved in violent extremist activities, with particular activity by American residents and citizens inspired by al Qaeda and its ideology. We know that violent extremism is not confined to any single ideology, but we also know that the threat posed by al Qaeda and its adherents is the preeminent threat we face in the homeland. It is important for law enforcement personnel to be appropriately trained in understanding and detecting ideologically motivated criminal behavior,/b>, and in working with communities and local law enforcement to counter domestic violent extremism. Training must be accurate, based on current intelligence, and must include cultural competency training.

      It’s good that the guidelines recognize al Qaeda and it’s ideology and the fact that it’s the preeminent threat we face.

      But, note that security personnel will also call this violent ectremist activities, crimianl behavior, and domestic violent extremism and that training must be based on accurate “current intelligence” (no past intellegence) and acurate ‘cultural competency”.

      Under trainers and Training:

      Thoroughly review the prospective trainer’s résumé to ensure he or she has subject matter expertise and subject -specific training experience. Contact other agencies who have received training to get feedback, check with knowledgeable community leaders, and research media coverage. Don’t assume that because a trainer has a particular cultural background, or has law enforcement experience, that he or she is a qualified cultural competency trainer.

      WhiteHouse.gov – Empowering Local partners: “As extremists (what extremist?) try to inspire acts of violence within our borders, we are responding with the strength of our communities, with the respect for the rule of law, and with the conviction that Muslim Americans are part of our American family.” – President Barack Obama, State of the Union, January 2011

      Why are we not responding with the full unadulterated power of our well-trained (long before Obama) intelligence and investigative agencies?

      Because we hired a boy to do a man’s job…because this man hasn’t a clue..ARGH!

      • Chris says:

        Tina: ” Chris, the fact remains the President had language purged from national security manuals,”

        Yes, for reasons I have explained ad nauseum, and which you refuse to address.

        “instituted sensitivity training,”

        And that’s wrong because…?

        “and made sure the focus shifted to a community organizing approach that resisted putting the Islamic Terrorist Threat in a high priority position.”

        Except that the quote you cite specifically says that groups like Al Qaeda are a high priority. You are literally condemning Obama for being *specific* about the exact groups which pose a threat instead of using the more general phrase “Islamic terror.”

        “The guidelines are generalize and non-specific other than nonchalant references to al Qaeda.”

        And again, your quote blatantly contradicts this:

        “We know that violent extremism is not confined to any single ideology, but we also know that the threat posed by al Qaeda and its adherents is the preeminent threat we face in the homeland.”

        How can calling something “the preeminent threat” possibly be read as “nonchalant?” No rational reader would say that this a nonchalant reference. Your bias against Obama has rendered you unable to understand tone.

        “current intelligence” (no past intelligence)”

        I literally LOLed. No, stating the need to rely on current intelligence does NOT mean ignoring past intelligence. That is desperate spin, Tina. You are trying so hard to find something damning in that text that you are sacrificing basic reading comprehension. It’s embarrassing to watch.

        Again, your claim that CVE requires the government to ““to ignore any information that might clue the authorities to Islamic terror threats” is blatantly false, as even your own citations prove. Please retract this false claim.

    • Tina says:

      “…all of us have a responsibility to refute the notion that groups like ISIL somehow represent Islam, because that is a falsehood that embraces the terrorist narrative. ”

      Nice words. Very presidential. Makes people like you think he actually intends to fight this enemy. Assures you that he’s doing everything possible to keep us safe. Ain’t he cool?

      Look at the actual record. ISIS has not become weaker under this policy they have become stronger: recruitment is UP, they have been emboldened to spread across the globe, they have been allowed to establish a base of operations, an actual state where they have control of oil, banking, taxation, black market and other political and support activities. Their “lone wolves” are striking successfully.

      This man is un-serious, with a strategy (?) that sucks, but he talks a good game. Woo-hoo!

      Sorry Chris it isn’t good enough that he’s careful not to insult Mulsims. In my experience by constantly lecturing us about not insulting Mulsims he has only managed to insult us. I am insulted that this community organizer thinks we don’t know there are good Muslims living in this country and around the world. It isn’t good enough to act as if the attacks perpetrated by Islamic terrorists around the world are equivalent to local school and theater shootings. This international menace is a significant step up from other acts of violence and MUST be addressed with greater determination, conviction, and rhetoric.

      People across the globe, in Little Rock, Fort Hood, Boston, Chattanooga, Texas, San Bernardino, and Orlando, and in Israel, Canada, Australia, England, France, Sweden, Germany, India, Russia, China, Bulgaria, US Benghazi Libya, Kenya, Nigeria, Philippines, Tunisia, Mali, Chad, and more have not been assaulted by random criminals, protesters, or nuts but by
      an enemy to civilization with the common thread being Islamic ideology.

      “And Muslim communities, including scholars and clerics, therefore have a responsibility to push back, not just on twisted interpretations of Islam, but also on the lie that we are somehow engaged in a clash of civilizations”

      Yeah? It may be true and necessary, but how’s it working out so far? Not all that well. We don’t have time, and we shouldn’t have the patience, for the great debate within Islam to solve the ideological divide within Islam…we have a war problem! The community organizer approach, the civil liberties restrictions are not helpful if they tie the hands of those who have the skills but cannot use them to stop these attacks.

      “You won’t acknowledge the Obama administration is, in reality, droning and killing Muslim terrorists.”

      That is an asinine accusation. I’ve never been critical of his drone strikes other than to say it wasn’t enough.

      When will you begin a “it’s not working” campaign or an “Obama’s stubborn and doesn’t learn” campaign similar to what was waged against Bush when the tough got going and things weren’t working well? You don’t criticize anything, even as the threats to us increase and the war grows larger.

      “Finding the root of extremism is part of the overall approach which includes killing the assholes when necessary. ”

      When necessary? Do you hear yourself. It’s always necessary, 24/7/365 until this cancer is cut completely out…Obama drags his heels, is ineffective, has no workable strategy, and people are dying because of his ineffectiveness not just because of the tragedies of war!

      Smug insults and faux concerns about my health do not change the fact that terrorism is a problem exacerbated by this president and fought, if you can call it that ineffectively her and in the Middle East.

      • Chris says:

        Tina, I’d respond to the above comment but you never respond to any of my counter-arguments; you just start throwing more stuff my way. It’s impossible to rebut everything you write and it isn’t even useful since you constantly move the goalposts and never acknowledge when you’ve said something untrue or nonsensical. You just throw stuff to the wall and see what sticks. It is exhausting.

  3. Chris says:

    ““In February of 2015 FrontPage Magazine featured our governments policy, Countering Violent Extremism, as a plan to ignore any information that might clue the authorities to Islamic terror threats.”

    Here are Obama’s remarks from the CVE summit last year. It is literally the exact opposite of what you claim CVE is:

    Second, we have to confront the warped ideologies espoused by terrorists like al Qaeda and ISIL, especially their attempt to use Islam to justify their violence. I discussed this at length yesterday. These terrorists are desperate for legitimacy. And all of us have a responsibility to refute the notion that groups like ISIL somehow represent Islam, because that is a falsehood that embraces the terrorist narrative.

    At the same time, we must acknowledge that groups like al Qaeda and ISIL are deliberately targeting their propaganda to Muslim communities, particularly Muslim youth. And Muslim communities, including scholars and clerics, therefore have a responsibility to push back, not just on twisted interpretations of Islam, but also on the lie that we are somehow engaged in a clash of civilizations; that America and the West are somehow at war with Islam or seek to suppress Muslims; or that we are the cause of every ill in the Middle East.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/19/remarks-president-summit-countering-violent-extremism-february-19-2015

    Does that really sound like the plan was “to ignore any information that might clue the authorities to Islamic terror threats?”

    Of course not; he states right there that the plan acknowledges terrorists are trying to radicalize Muslims.

    Your claim about CVE was a lie. Please retract it.

    • Tina says:

      Your claim about CVE was a lie. Please retract it.

      Not as long as there are people working within government and who retired from government that witnessed the change and worked under this policy and saw the failures first hand who are reporting these things.

      • Chris says:

        Wait, what are you talking about?

        Who was “working within government” who claimed that CVE was a plan to “to ignore any information that might clue the authorities to Islamic terror threats?” Phillip Haney didn’t say that. You’re conflating two totally separate things to justify the lie you told.

        Do you really think I won’t notice?

        • Tina says:

          YES!

          I think there are many things you “don’t notice.”

          Like the fact that it was THE intelligence officer who said he was asked to shred files that he had compiled who revealed this and that had they not been shredded, the San Bernardino and the Orlando attacks might have been prevented.

          You’re smug sense of superiority and all knowing is a poor substitute for curiosity and open minded inquiry.

          • Chris says:

            What on earth does that have to do with your lie about CVE?

            You claimed CVE was a plan to ““to ignore any information that might clue the authorities to Islamic terror threats.” I posted information from the CVE summit that says it does the complete opposite. You came back with allegations made about an entirely different subject, which has nothing to do with CVE.

            Why can’t you just admit that? Why must you always refuse to admit when you are wrong? I’m not asking you to renounce conservatism and call Obama’s overall strategy a success, I’m just saying you have this particular detail wrong. Why is that so hard to accept?

  4. Libby says:

    “Brennan, testifying in a rare open hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee, said ISIS likely will “intensify” terror attacks around the world even as its core fighters come under pressure in Iraq and Syria, including by deploying operatives for further attacks on the West.”

    Never say die!

    Tina, try this. ISIS is steadily losing men and ground, and this will provoke more attacks outside the Middle East. Because for that you do not need soldiers or artillery. All you need are your websites and a healthy supply of disaffected young men.

    Agreed?

    This is where the CVE comes in. Do you deter disaffected young men by overtly attacking their religion? Do you? Never mind that the religion in question may not manifest in a manner you approve. Is explicitly attacking the concept of Jihad going to work?

    It is not. Try to think of it as witnessing for the faith, which, non-violently, is what it is. We are at war with violent extremism … Christian, Muslim, makes no never mind.

    • Tina says:

      ISIS is steadily losing men and ground, and this will provoke more attacks outside the Middle East.

      That’s a matter of opinion. Obama wasn’t targeting effectively until Russia stepped in. Even so ISIS still holds significant ground and has significant resources. it’s an election year and the media will accommodate Hillary with spin. Besides you never accepted “we are making progress” before.

      “Do you deter disaffected young men by overtly attacking their religion?”

      Do you deter them by being so ineffective you inspire a critical backlash that wonders about who’s side you’re on and forces you to talk about it all the time. Obama has failed to use his so-called great oratory skills to both assure the people that he has a handle on this situation and reassure the truth that Americans DO NOT believe all Mulsims are engaged in this war. The President scolds and sens the message that we do and that is WRONG!

      “Is explicitly attacking the concept of Jihad going to work?”

      Yes if you explicitly attack the idea that jihad, interpreted as waging war and murdering the infidel in the west and people of other religions, races and social values, is wrong and will not be tolerated. Yes if it’s accompanied by the ultimatum that we intend to kill these enemies to peace wherever they hide.

      Obama’s message is that their target, their victims, WE are wrong…that is total crap!

      “Try to think of it as witnessing for the faith, which, non-violently, is what it is.”

      We did not hire Obama to be the nations preacher or prophet!

      “We are at war with violent extremism … Christian, Muslim, makes no never mind.”

      Not true Libby and here’s the great divide. Only Muslims extremism (at this time) presents a threat reaching the level of war. Thanks to Obama dismissing the Bush strategy as “stupid” and refusing to follow through on a strategy that was working, it is now a war that’s metastasized and we are losing. Obama basically asks the world to tolerate this enemy as mere criminals

      The generalizing (to avoid the truth) has to stop.

      • Chris says:

        “Obama’s message is that their target, their victims, WE are wrong…that is total crap.”

        Obama is not responsible for the delusional interpretations of his words you insist on manufacturing. This bears no resemblance to anything he has said, and your insistence on twisting his words so that you can reject a counter-argument shows the weakness of your position.

  5. Libby says:

    Oh, and it would also be good … I mean … if young men in this country, with their AA in Criminology, are going to be condemned to work as mind-numbing and soul- destroying as “security guard”, they should at least be paid enough to afford a little pink house for the missus, and then we would have less displacement of rage all around.

  6. Tina says:

    The little guard HAD a little pink house and the president has also stifled growth, wages, and jobs with his policies. That young , male, Muslim security guard slipped through the vetting process because the security community had its hands tied by the PC policies the community organizer put in place. Unacceptable, Libby.

    it’s not that your solutions are trash, it’s that they sit at the fringes of war policy and reside more strongly within economic policy…here too the last seven years under Obama have been unacceptable.

    We’d have a lot less “displacement of rage” in the whole populace if you on the left had the decency to admit that we on the right have valid points to make and might actually be smarter in some instances. Your strategy for years has been to never give an inch, never give the opposition any ground. “Bipartisan” and “cooperation” mean “the right caves to the left” with you people. You are now reaping exactly what you have sewn. I’m afraid we’re in for a long battle of wills…it’s no more Mr. Nice guy from here.

  7. Libby says:

    “That’s a matter of opinion.”

    No. It’s fact, as Brennan said. What do you think he meant by “pressure”?

    As to the rest of you response, it seems to add up to: “No. We want to attack their religion.” Well, thank goodness, you’re not in charge, because that would not be effective, and we’re not going to do it.

    You do own an AR-15, don’t you? Well if you use it on the clerk at the Seven-Eleven, or the security guard at the mall, you’re going up the river for a hate crime. So chill.

    • Tina says:

      No. It’s fact, as Brennan said. What do you think he meant by “pressure”?

      He meant Obama has finally stepped up his game a bit, as I wrote, “Obama wasn’t targeting effectively until Russia stepped in. Even so, ISIS still holds significant ground and has significant resources.”

      Your opinion about my arguments, ““No. We want to attack their religion,” is a typical lefty partisan dismissal and indication of your deep seated bigotry.

      “Well, thank goodness, you’re not in charge, because that would not be effective, and we’re not going to do it.”

      I see, effective for you is shredding vital intelligence to avoid appearing insensitive is more important that making sure the American people are kept safe from Radical Islamic terror attacks like we had in San Bernardino and Orlando…EVEN when one of the targets was an LGBT club. There’s a priority list when it comes to victim minorities.

      Effective to you is strict gun regulations like they have in Detroit, New Orleans, and Chicago even though more people are being slaughtered in the streets in those places than cities with open carry laws.

      Effective is creating gun free zones…the exact targets where mass slaughters of students, teachers and civilians have occurred.

      Effective is entering office as a new president and turning your back on previous efforts by the US to decimate al Qaeda, remove a ruthless dictator and sponsor of terrorism, and oversee the establishment of a new democratically elected government.

      Effective is creating a plan to show the world how much more effective at foreign policy and war you are than GWB AND Ronald Reagan and instead creating the rise of ISIS, the establishment of a state for ISIS that comprises territory in several countries and chaos in all, and that forces a surge in refugees to the west unseen before in modern times.

      I could go on but won;t repeat myself.

      “You do own an AR-15, don’t you? ”

      Not yet.

      “Well if you use it on the clerk at the Seven-Eleven, or the security guard at the mall, you’re going up the river for a hate crime. ”

      Oh Libby, I’m disappointed in you. You usually have a much more imaginative and entertaining retort. Are you slipping or just weary from the weight of the enormous failures of this administration?

      Chill yourself, dearie!

  8. Libby says:

    Check out the Trump flag. The article is fun too. Such language, really … our civilization crumbles.

    http://www.salon.com/2016/06/17/republicans_in_denial_they_still_cant_accept_that_years_of_festering_racism_made_trump_2016_possible/

    • Tina says:

      How about YOU check out the rainbow Gadsden flags, there popping up all over.

      Or the rise in membership for the Pink Pistols.

      Or the rise in gun sales to the LGBT community. There’s also a gun safety expert in Colorado that has stepped forward to offer training to the LGBT community in gun use and safety (couldn’t find the link).

    • Tina says:

      Ignorant and delusional…except some of the stuff about some of our elite representatives that seem to believe the tripe Salon types push.

      Your extremist accusations are sounding more and more ridiculous and absurd. Are you prepared to wear the label, “domestic terrorist” as a member/supporter of the Democrat Party? Does the Weather Underground, Ayers terror organization, define you?

      Progressives like to play that guilt by association game…it’s really stupid.

      • Libby says:

        Well, we’re just gonna have to see what happens in Cleveland. I went looking for the convention date and look what I found: a list of corporations that have decided to withhold or scale back underwriting of said convention:

        MetLife Inc.
        Walgreens
        Hewlett Packard Inc.
        JPMorgan Chase & Co.
        UPS
        Motorola
        Wells Fargo & Co.
        Ford Motor Co.
        Coca-Cola
        Microsoft

        Nobody wants to sully their brand. Actually, I doubt that’s it. Walgreens did not like that visa talk. Ford is not happy with The ELE’s talk of taxing foreign production. The others are probably equally self-interested. Sigh.

  9. Pie Guevara says:

    Re “You can’t possibly be stupid enough to believe this, can you?”

    Ooooo, Piss Chris is getting rough now! I’m a skeered! I would love to see Piss in a formal debate make that as an argument! 😀

    The facts speak for themselves. The language purged from Obama administration documents have had no effect on Islamic terrorism and neither has “instituted sensitivity training.”

    It is sad the Marines capturing Iwo Jima in WWII did not undergo sensitivity training, they would have had a much easier time defeating a determined enemy by avoiding insulting them or “legitimizing” their cause.

    I think Tina would agree with this, no? 😉

    Inside every progressive is an idiot-thug totalitarian screaming to get out.

  10. Dewster says:

    All this circle of spin, yes moving the goal posts and yak yak yak…The purpose is?

    hate Obama right? OK Then Obama is hated now what? More hate OK hate Obama More…Now what?

    Breaking News:
    Obama is starting Hillary’s wars for her…… The next corporate wars are starting! How about talk about that.

    #Syria and then pretend like the GOP has not been pushing for these wars all along.

    So here we go….. we need to cut revenue to pay for the wars by giving the elite another tax break, put the wars on a credit card like Obama inherited from GW, and cut all services for taxpayers, Right?

    The DNC is the old GOP and the GOP is Koch tea Party… Oh Joy Joy

    Notice how they are talking about a draft without implementing one? YET…cause people are not going to keep fighting for arms sales.

    And yet Branding is how we elect?

    #trolling by Blog to keep real facts and the real subject matter away from the conversation….. seems to be the purpose here right?

    Jeeze I can tell you what all sides of mainstream media is saying by reading blogs…glad I do not watch corporate news… Very sad

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.