Last week we shared the story about the Taliban claiming responsibility for the terrorist attack that killed three American contractors. The Americans, working as contractors for the North Carolina-based Praetorian Standards Inc., were shot and killed, and another was wounded by a member of the Afghan security forces — actually a Taliban infiltrator. And we thought combat operations were ended.

Now, what do you think the Obama administration had to say about the “aggression conducted by armed insurgents?”

Naturally, as reported by CNS News, “State Department Spokesperson Jen Psaki declined on Friday to directly say whether the murder of three U.S. civilians at the airport in Kabul, Afghanistan, on Thursday—which the Taliban claimed responsibility for–was an act of terrorism.”

“Obviously any attack that kills contractors, that kills individuals who are working there in harm’s way, is horrific and a tragedy but I’m not going to put new labels on it today.” She also said: “We see a difference between Taliban and ISIL.”

Hey, I know the difference: one group is regional to Afghanistan and Pakistan and mostly speaks Pashtun; the other is global and speaks a variety of languages. However, they are both Islamic terrorists, savage and barbaric in their actions, something seemingly lost on Jen Psaki. And for the Islamapologists who refute the idea that this current conflagration has anything to do with religion — well, some beg to differ, namely, the enemy.

As reported by the Washington Post, Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said that the killer was Ihsanullah bin Mullah Rahmatulla, who had infiltrated Afghan security forces. “He managed yesterday evening to attain his goal and opened fire with his rifle on a group of American occupiers,” Mujahid said, as quoted in the Post. The attacker was then killed. “The martyr was able to successfully defend his religion … and the glory of his country, and by giving himself away as a sacrifice, he cast a number of the occupying disbelievers into the abyss of hell,” said the Taliban spokesman, according to the Post.

At last Friday’s State Department press briefing, CNS News asked: “The Taliban has taken credit for murdering three American civilian contractors at the Kabul airport yesterday. Were those murders an act of terrorism?”

“Well, one, I think the Department of Defense has spoken to this a bit so I’d point you to their comments,” said Psaki. “There was a shooting at the North Kabul International Airport Complex yesterday. We’ve seen reports that the Taliban have claimed responsibility. There’s an investigation going on into this incident. Obviously, any attack that kills contractors, that kills individuals who are working there in harm’s way, is horrific and a tragedy but I’m not going to put new labels on it today.”

AP Reporter Matt Lee later returned to the question asking Psaki: “I’m just not sure why you wouldn’t just say of course it’s a terrorist attack.” “It’s an act of terror when American citizens are, individuals, are killed, like contractors, absolutely,” Psaki said. Later, Lee asked her: “Is there anything that has been uncovered in this investigation into what happened at the Kabul Airport to suggest that it was not in fact a terrorist attack?” “I was not suggesting that,” said Psaki, “but I think we have a responsibility as the U.S. government to let processes see themselves out and that’s what we’re doing.”

Ok, what processes? This is why we have an administration that is simply incapable of defending the American people against the Islamic terrorist threat. They’ve sought to reduce this enemy into some complex wire diagram when the entire time you have a simplistic linear equation.

Here are two examples:

“A reported asked Psaki, “It was an Afghan policeman who did this, obviously working for the Taliban. Are you concerned that this may happen time and time again?” Psaki responded, “I am not going to address your question.”

“Psaki continued, explaining that President Obama had made a determination not to target “belligerents” in Afghanistan because they were members of the Taliban. She said: “Also, back when we made our decision about our combat role in Afghanistan the president talked about how U.S. forces would continue to target the remnants of al-Qaida in Afghanistan, but the U.S. military forces will no longer target belligerents solely because they are members of the Taliban.”

So I want you all to understand what this means. Our troops remaining in Afghanistan will not be “targeting” any member of the Taliban. In other words, our men and women will be sitting duck targets who will allow the proliferation of the “armed insurgents.”  What mentality possesses the Obama administration that it can stand and issue such clearly delusional statements? I cannot understand any possible logic in a policy that says we’re not going to fight the enemy who is fighting us?

And recognize this is why President Obama and his ilk see no problem with the release of five senior Taliban leaders – it’s just no big deal. So why are we leaving a residual force in Afghanistan? Why are we exposing our troops to a policy of abject failure, one that refuses to recognize the enemy’s existence, or its intent? This inane game of redefining the enemy in order to fit your politically-driven ideology does not lend itself to success or victory — and certainly will lead to more deaths of our American troops, and in this case, security contractors.

If I’m al-Qaida — well, just say you’re Taliban and that’s your “get out of jail free card.” Who in the Congress, House or Senate Armed Services Committees has held a hearing to ascertain the viability of such a strategy as Obama is offering in Afghanistan? The Congress has oversight and if anything there should be a hearing requiring the Department of Defense and CENTCOM to explain this strategy.

Jen Psaki’s revelation should be disturbing for every American — unless you’re just a cheerleader for this current administration. This disclosure will not bode well for our residual force left in Afghanistan. Not only has Obama released and reconstituted the enemy and its leadership — he is providing them safe passage and the ability to once again reestablish sanctuary. After all, it was the Taliban who invited al-Qaida into Afghanistan and provided them comfort and aid in the first place. And we have a president who is also providing the enemy aid and comfort, as well as material support by way of returning their leadership — a violation of U.S. code.

But oh well. The Patriots won.