Just yesterday, the UK Daily Mail confirmed that Obama and his administration were given actionable intelligence as to the whereabouts of not only the beheaded Americans James Foley and Steve Sotloff, but also American aid worker Kayla Mueller, quite some time ago.
It has come to light that British intelligence knew, in June of 2014, the locations of where ISIS was holding hostages. Worse yet, it is been reported that the French also shared information about hostage locations as early as March 2014 - long before the beheadings.
The Daily Mail reports that "The United Kingdom gave the Obama administration intelligence in June 2014 about where in Syria the ISIS terror army was holding its American captives, but the White House dithered and missed its opportunity to rescue them."
The report asserts that both "U.S. and British officials said the administration sat on the information for nearly a month before launching a military raid…" Yet, by waiting until July to finally mount a rescue, they lost their window of opportunity, and by then, as we know, the hostages had been moved.
The Daily Beast added that an unnamed American official said Obama's people simply refused to launch or even plan a rescue from intelligence gathered by another government. The official said that "The issue was that they didn't trust it, and they wanted to develop and mature the intelligence, because it wasn't our own. They got the information. They just didn't trust it. And they did sit on it, there's no doubt about that."
They didn't trust it? They didn't trust intelligence gathered by our closest and most trusted ally and friend? Are you kidding?
Sadly, this official isn't kidding. What must the families of those three dead Americans think when they hear of Obama's dithering?
But this really isn't anything new and this revelation should come as no surprise to any of us. In 2013 the UK Telegraph reported that Professor Vali Nasr wrote a book entitled The Indispensable Nation: American Foreign Policy in Retreat.
In it he wrote: "The president had a truly disturbing habit funneling major foreign policy decisions through a small cabal of relatively inexperienced White House advisers whose turf was strictly politics. The goal was to spare the president the risks that necessarily come with playing the leadership role that America claims to play in this region. They want to control everything."
Now for any of you who have ever questioned what we mean by Obama "leading from behind," this is what we mean.
Way back in 2009, Ambassador John Bolton already determined that Obama may be the second coming of "Ethelred the Unready, the turn of the first millennium Anglo-Saxon king whose reputation for indecisiveness and his successful paying of Danegeld - literally, 'Danish tax' - to buy off Viking Raiders made him histories paradigmatic weak leader."
In 2012, retired General Jack Keane told Mike Huckabee on Fox News that thanks to the White House dithering, we almost lost bin Laden. He said "We actually had the target the summer before execution - in other words we had the target the summer of 2010, and it took until the following May to execute the mission," but he added that "My sources tell me that the White House was trying to verify that the target was actually there… They actually wanted a photo, they wanted to see him, that he was really there, and without that there was a lot of delay and procrastination about it because they wanted verification."
Prof. Nasr said that "Barack Obama is a dithering president who's controlling tendencies and extreme risk aversion attitude to foreign policy has damaged U.S. interest in the Middle East…"
With the Middle East on fire and as many threats as there are in the world today, this is what we in America get to look forward to - almost 2 more years of dithering and risk aversion.
Just imagine how our allies feel!Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.