Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron does an effective job describing the danger of “extremism“, not just “violent extremism“, all extremism. (Cameron Speech Here)
However, anyone interested in actually following, researching and analyzing international action against radical Islamist extremism, must also note that Egypt’s President Fatah El-Sisi is about two years ahead in confronting the extremist ideology.

Almost everything both Obama and Cameron have stated in the past month can be viewed curiously against their unwillingness to hold such public views while El-Sisi was pushing back against extremism, and doing something about it.

~ At the root of all extremism lies the fertilizer of hatred ~

Hatred is an outcome of evil manifested.   Readers and visitors to the Treehouse community know full well we have watched Egypt intently. We continue to share that no international leader has done more to confront ALL the tentacles of radicalism than Fattah El-Sisi.
Yet he has also been the recipient of marginalization – at best, from both Obama and Cameron; and significant western political admonishment.   Through the past two years Sisi has consistently carried out a challenging mission to provide secular stability not only to Egypt, but as a direct consequence, also to the entire region. (more…)

EGYPT – In his speech to the United Nations on Wednesday, Egypt’s President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi said that the world has begun to understand the reality of the extremism that Egyptians revolted against last year.

“The world has started to grasp the reality and understand why Egyptians revolted against extremism that wanted to break the unity of the nation,” said El-Sisi.
At the beginning of his speech, El-Sisi saluted UN officials and also Egyptian expats who came from different cities to the UN headquarters to “say that a new Egypt is coming.”
El-Sisi said that since his election last June, he and other Egyptians have been working to build “a civil democratic state” by following the roadmap announced last year by different political forces soon after the ouster of Islamist president Mohamed Morsi.
He also stressed the need for an inclusive state that respects the law, the judiciary and human rights. (more…)

It was a United Nations event, so perhaps this was the audience:

Wednesday, First Lady Michelle Obama said that American women are suffering under “harmful cultural norms” at a U.N. education event.
Mrs. Obama said:
“Women here [in America] are still woefully underrepresented in our government and the senior ranks of corporations. We still struggle with violence against woman and harmful cultural norms that tell woman how they are expected to look and act.”
(link)

Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron does an effective job  describing the danger of “extremism“, not just “violent extremism“, all extremism.  (Cameron Speech Here)
However, anyone interested in actually following, researching and analyzing international action, against radical Islamist extremism, must also note that Egypt’s President Fatah El-Sisi is about two years ahead in confronting the extremist ideology.

Almost everything both Obama and Cameron have stated in the past month can be viewed curiously against their unwillingness to hold such public views while El-Sisi was pushing back against extremism, and doing something about it.
Readers and visitors to the Treehouse community know full well we have watched Egypt intently.  We continue to share that no international leader has done more to confront ALL the tentacles of radicalism than El-Sisi.
Yet he has also been the recipient of marginalization – at best, and admonishment – at worst, as he has carries out a challenging mission to provide secular stability not only to Egypt, but also to the entire region.
When David Cameron says “all extremism” must be confronted, he need to look no further than Egypt to see it confronted not only on the streets but also in politics, in the media, and within the places of worship where hatred is the tenet that fuels the congregation.
Both Cameron and Obama correctly identify and define extremism yet fail to acknowledge the root.   Extremism stems from a culture of hatred, that culture exists because the West will not confront it.   El-Sisi confronts the culture of hatred head-on.
El-Sisi is by no means perfect, nor is Egypt as a whole; however, the intellectual and cultural center of the Middle-East is once again rising like a Phoenix thanks -in no small part- to the grit and policy of one principled man. A man thoroughly committed to the stability of his nation, and to the broader, predominantly Muslim, nations surrounding it.
(more…)

In President Obama’s notification to congress you might note his reference to the 2002 AUMF Public Law #107-40 (underlined).

However, has anyone in the media noted that only two months ago, July 25th 2014, he requested that law to be repealed, citing “the 2002 Iraq AUMF is no longer used for any government activities”.?
(more…)

OK, now it’s all beginning to make sense. Let’s take a look at this pretzel logic legal authority to attack inside Syria shall we.    Sheesh.

Unlike Libya in 2011, the U.N. did not have a resolution permitting President Obama to launch offensive military attacks inside a foreign and sovereign nation, Syria. Without a U.N. resolution there was no international law permitting President Obama to attack ISIS inside Syria.
Without a legal basis in international law, President Obama needs to use U.S. law for his Syria ISIS campaign.
So unlike Libya in 2011, and absent of international law to support the legality, for his 2014 Syria attacks to be legal President Obama needed to use US law; specifically, the War Powers Act.
President Obama is using two constructs. #1) The War Powers Act -and- #2) AUMF The 9-11-01 Authorization for the Use of Military Force.
But there’s a catch or two.
First, because President Obama is going to use the War Powers Act, and is not acting to defend the U.S. homeland, and is engaging in offensive military actions, he has to notify congress in writing immediately – and then update in writing within 30 days. It’s how the law works. But note what’s missing.

There is no mention of ISIS, because legally there can’t be. In order for Obama to use the 2001 AUMF he has to be attacking “al-Qaeda”, specifically “al-Qaeda”.
The AUMF only applies to al-Qaeda, not ISIS or any other group or state. (more…)

…a senior Army official told me court-martialing Bergdahl would “make the president look bad.” In spite of damning evidence against him, the official expects Pentagon brass to separate him from the military with a less-than-honorable discharge, sparing Obama total embarrassment….

(New York Post) Three and a half months have come and gone and the Pentagon has offered no clarity on what happened to alleged Army deserter and Taliban collaborator Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. Fellow soldiers and other critics fear the military’s now-delayed investigation is shaping up to be a whitewash.
The case has become a political powder keg for President Obama.
Since he traded five imprisoned Taliban leaders for Bergdahl, the US Government Accountability Office has declared the swap illegal, and nearly two dozen House Democrats have joined Republicans in officially condemning the move for making “Americans less safe.” (more…)

Washington DC thinks we are stupid, they really do.  The professional political class has yet to grasp the understanding that “WWW” as a prefix in the internet stands for “World Wide Web”.   We are quite capable of connecting, collecting and digesting information directly from the heart of the issues being debated.
Despite all the DC pontifications, obfuscations, and professional talking points to the contrary, we know in Syria there are two options, support Bashir Assad or support radical Islamists, that’s it.   There is no mysterious “moderate” third option; the “rebels” are radical islamists.
President Obama and  Republican Senator John McCain are making the same argument in 2014 toward Syria they both made in 2011 toward Libya.   2014’s Secretary of State, John Kerry, is merely repeating the 2011 meme sold by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – the difference is within the audience.

In Libya 2011 there were two options, support Moamuar Kaddafi, or support radical Islamists under the nom de plume “rebels“.   The White House supported the “rebels“, Kaddafi was killed, and as a consequence right now in Libya chaos reigns as the islamists, now collected under the banner “Libyan Dawn”, are destroying the country.
(more…)

We had a strong suspicion Denis McDonough and Valerie Jarrett selected General John Allen (retired) for the ISIS campaign, because the White House knew Allen could be leveraged and easily controlled. The embarrassing files on Allen (retained for such a purpose) allow the administration to strong-arm compliance.

President Obama appears to have a singular goal in Syria, remove Bashir Assad.

Combating Sunni ISIS is not an objective President Obama, or Recep Erdogan, would EVER support or be comfortable with.

(Wall Street Journal)  The president hasn’t yet given the green light for an attack on Islamic State militants in Syria, but the U.S. military campaign against the group there is being designed to allow President Barack Obama to exert a high degree of personal control–going so far as to require that the military obtain presidential signoff for strikes.
The requirements for the strikes will be far more stringent than those targeting Islamic State in Iraq, at least at first. U.S. officials say it is an attempt to limit the threat the U.S. could be dragged more deeply into the Syrian civil war. (more…)