![\"man](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/01\/man-with-head-in-the-ground.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
As the old saying goes, \u201cThis is BIG!\u201d ISIS came into being and has been successful in taking over large swaths in the middle east for one simple reason. Barack Obama. He pulled American troops out of the region before the Iraqi Military was fully trained to do anything more than throw down their weapons and run away.<\/p>\n
That SCoaMF, Obama denied for a year that ISIS was a threat, referring to them as the \u201cJunior Varsity team.\u201d We all knew that was a load of horse manure at the time, but King Putt continued pushing that lie until he was hit in the face, repeatedly, by reality. When that happened, he ordered air strikes with rules of engagement so bad that most of the time the planes were returning with their ordnance.<\/p>\n
The Obama Regime’s response to all this was to cite intelligence reports saying that we were cleaning ISIS’s clocks. Now it’s looking like Obama’s minions were cooking the reports. Here are some of the details from the Daily Beast<\/a>:<\/p>\n More than 50 intelligence analysts working out of the U.S. military\u2019s Central Command have formally complained that their reports on ISIS<\/a> and al Qaeda\u2019s branch in Syria were being inappropriately altered by senior officials, The Daily Beast has learned. <\/i><\/p>\n The complaints spurred the Pentagon\u2019s inspector general to open an investigation into the alleged manipulation of intelligence. The fact that so many people complained suggests there are deep-rooted, systemic problems in how the U.S. military command charged with the war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State assesses intelligence. <\/i><\/p>\n \u201cThe cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command,\u201d one defense official said.<\/i><\/p>\n This is a major issue. The military and political branches rely on accurate intelligence in order to make good decisions. Finding out that the reports have been altered to make the situation look better then it actually is literally puts American’s at risk, both Military and civilian. It’s one thing for the Intelligence systems to miss something or get it wrong, but to deliberately alter a report could be considered at worst to be treason.<\/p>\n Two senior analysts at CENTCOM signed a written complaint sent to the Defense Department inspector general in July alleging that the reports, some of which were briefed to President Obama, portrayed the terror groups as weaker than the analysts believe they are. The reports were changed by CENTCOM higher-ups to adhere to the administration\u2019s public line that the U.S. is winning the battle against ISIS and al Nusra, al Qaeda\u2019s branch in Syria, the analysts claim.<\/i><\/p>\n Why do I see the fine hand of Valarie Jarrett in cooking the Intelligence briefs?<\/p>\n That complaint was supported by 50 other analysts, some of whom have complained about politicizing of intelligence reports for months. That\u2019s according to 11 individuals who are knowledgeable about the details of the report and who spoke to The Daily Beast on condition of anonymity.<\/i><\/p>\n Normally, when you hear about something like this, it’s only one or two people making the complaint or actually supporting the complainant. To have fifty other people who are familiar with how the process is supposed to work backing them up is virtually unheard of in Washington.<\/p>\n Some of those CENTCOM analysts described the sizeable cadre of protesting analysts as a \u201crevolt\u201d by intelligence professionals who are paid to give their honest assessment, based on facts, and not to be influenced by national-level policy. The analysts have accused senior-level leaders, including the director of intelligence and his deputy in CENTCOM, of changing their analyses to be more in line with the Obama administration\u2019s public contention that the fight against ISIS and al Qaeda is making progress. The analysts take a more pessimistic view about how military efforts to destroy the groups are going.<\/i><\/p>\n I did a quick Google search but the most recent director I could find was 2009 and I don’t know if he is still in the job. I also don’t know if these are military officers or civilian appointees. If the former, courts-martial should be on the table. If the latter, summery dismissal from government services, stripping of all security clearances, black listing and if possible, criminal prosecution. Just how bad is the environment in CENTCOM’s intelligence department?<\/p>\n One person who knows the contents of the written complaint sent to the inspector general said it used the word \u201cStalinist\u201d to describe the tone set by officials overseeing CENTCOM\u2019s analysis. <\/i><\/p>\n Many described a climate in which analysts felt they could not give a candid assessment of the situation in Iraq and Syria. Some felt it was a product of commanders protecting their career advancement by putting the best spin on the war.<\/i><\/p>\n Why is the term \u201cFive O’Clock Follies<\/a>\u201d springing to mind? Perhaps it’s crap like this coming out of the Court of King Putt.<\/p>\n \u201cISIS is losing,\u201d John Allen, the retired Marine general charged with coordinating the ISIS campaign, said in July. <\/i><\/p>\n \u201cI am confident that over time, we will beat, we will, indeed, degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL,\u201d Secretary of State John Kerry said in March<\/a>, using the government\u2019s preferred acronym for the group. <\/i><\/p>\n \u201cNo, I don\u2019t think we\u2019re losing,\u201d President Obama<\/a> said in May.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n