The Real Obama

Apr 262015

By Raymond Ibrahim — April 24, 2015

As the world continues to look on in dismay at the barbaric atrocities committed against Christian minorities by the Islamic State—the self-proclaimed new “caliphate”—today, April 24, marks the genocide of Armenian and other Christian minorities by Turkey’s Islamic Ottoman Empire—the last caliphate.


Most American historians who have examined the question agree that what the Armenians experienced was a deliberate, calculated genocide:

“More than one million Armenians perished as the result of execution, starvation, disease, the harsh environment, and physical abuse. A people who lived in eastern Turkey for nearly 3,000 years [that is, 2,500 years before the Islamic Turks invaded and occupied Anatolia, now known as “Turkey”] lost its homeland and was profoundly decimated in the first large-scale genocide of the twentieth century. At the beginning of 1915 there were some two million Armenians within Turkey; today there are fewer than 60,000.”

One-and-a-half Armenians were eradicated. If early 20th century Turkey had the apparatuses and technology to execute in mass—such as 1940s Germany’s gas chambers—the entire Armenian population could well have been annihilated.

The atrocities suffered by Armenian and other Christian minorities are too long to list. As occurs under the current caliphate—the Islamic State—the Muslims of the Ottoman caliphate abducted, raped, and slaughtered or sold countless Christian women and children on the Muslim slave markets.

Armenian Christians were also sadistically tortured—as Christians are today under the Islamic State. On FrontPage Magazine, Lloyd Billingsley writes:

“Torture squads would apply red-hot irons, tear off flesh with hot pincers, then pour boiled butter into the wounds. The soles of the feet would be beaten, slashed, and laced with salt. Dr. Mehmed Reshid tortured Armenians by nailing horseshoes to their feet and marching them through the streets. He also crucified them on makeshift crosses.

The Muslims hacked Armenians to pieces and dashed infants on the rocks before their mothers. They burned bodies not for sanitary reasons but in search of gold coins they believed the Armenians had swallowed. The Muslims also tore apart the victims’ feces in the search for gold. U.S. consul Leslie Davis, a former attorney and journalist, documented the Islamic zeal.

Muslims butchered Armenian Christians during the Armenian Genocide of 1915.

Muslims butchered Armenian Christians during the Armenian Genocide of 1915.

“We could all hear them piously calling upon Allah to bless them in their efforts to kill the hated Christians,” Davis wrote. “Night after night this same chant went up to heaven and day after day these Turks carried on their bloody work.” Around Lake Goeljik, Davis wrote, “thousands and thousands of Armenians, mostly innocent and helpless women and children, were butchered on its shores and barbarously mutilated.”

In her memoir, Ravished Armenia, Aurora Mardiganian described being raped and thrown into a harem—akin to the experiences of today’s non-Muslims under Islamic State authority. Unlike thousands of other Armenian girls who were killed after being defiled, she managed to escape. She recalls seeing 16 Christian girls crucified in Malatia: “Each girl had been nailed alive upon her cross, spikes through her feet and hands, only their hair blown by the wind, covered their bodies.”

Because there is no dearth of evidence concerning the historical reality of the Armenian Genocide, 44 U.S. States have recognized it. South Dakota, which recently joined the list, passed a resolution in February 2015 calling on

“Congress and the president of the United States to formally and consistently recognize and reaffirm the historical truth that the atrocities committed against the Armenian, Greek, and other Christians living in their historical homelands in Anatolia constituted genocide and to work towards equitable, stable, and durable Armenian-Turkish relations.”

Turkey, of course, continues to deny that its forbears ever committed any genocide. As a group of American academics wrote back in 1995,

“Despite the vast amount of evidence that points to the historical reality of the Armenian Genocide—eyewitness accounts, official archives, photographic evidence, the reports of diplomats, and the testimony of survivors—denial of the Armenian Genocide by successive regimes in Turkey has gone on from 1915 to the present.”

Check out this (rather lengthy) video for more on the Armenian Genocide.

Nor is the Islamic government of Turkey alone in denying the genocide. President Obama still refuses to acknowledge it—even though when he was running for office in 2008 he professed his

“firmly held conviction that the Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion, or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence. The facts are undeniable…. [A]s President I will recognize the Armenian Genocide…. America deserves a leader who speaks truthfully about the Armenian Genocide and responds forcefully to all genocides. I intend to be that president.”

Armenian Americans Protest Genocide Denial at the Turkish Embassy

Armenian Americans protest genocide denial at the Turkish Embassy

Since taking office, Obama has refused to stand by his word. On Tuesday, April 21, the White House announced that it would again, for the seventh year since Obama’s pledge, not use the word “genocide,” thereby disappointing many human rights activists.

Writes the New York Times:

“The president’s continued resistance to the word stood in contrast to a stance by Pope Francis, who recently called the massacres “the first genocide of the 20th century” and equated them to mass killings by the Nazis and Soviets. The European Parliament, which first recognized the genocide in 1987, passed a resolution last week calling on Turkey to “come to terms with its past.”

The Armenian National Committee of America responded by saying “The president’s surrender represents a national disgrace. It is a betrayal of the truth, and it is a betrayal of trust.” The Armenian Assembly of America said “His failure to use the term genocide represents a major blow for human rights advocates.”

But the president’s actions are consistent in other ways. Put differently, it is no marvel that Obama denies the genocide of Armenian and other Christian minorities at the hands of Muslims from a century ago, when one considers that he denies the rampant Muslim persecution of Christians taking place under—and often because of—his leadership today.


via Obama Breaks Promise on 100th Anniversary of Armenian Genocide | Human Events.

Mar 112015

By Victor Volsky — March 11, 2015

Is Barack Obama a Muslim or even an Islamist? Or is there another explanation for his open, heartfelt affinity for all things Muslim?


There is a veritable mountain of indirect evidence that he is indeed an acolyte of Islam. His late father was a Muslim. At the tender age of six, little Barack was taken by his mother to her new Indonesian husband’s homeland where he spent four crucial, formative years in a Muslim environment.

As president, he openly indicates his reverence for Islam — from a carefully mimicked Arabic accent when pronouncing the word the Muslim Scripture, the Quran, invariably preceded by the obligatory qualifier “Holy”, and a dewy-eyed reference to “one of the most beautiful sounds on Earth at sunset”, the muezzin’s call to prayer, to his declaration from the U.N. General Assembly rostrum that “the future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam”. Obama’s long-time spiritual guide, the Reverent Jeremiah Wright, interviewed by Ed Klein for his book, related that when Obama had joined his church, he “was steeped in Islam, but knew nothing about Christianity.”

Obama012And what about his public tirades about America’s sins and apologies for its “crimes?” What about his ridiculous statement that “Islam has been woven into the fabric of our country since its founding” or that Muslims have made a tremendous impact on American history and culture? What about his order to reorient NASA from space research to building bridges to the world of Islam and extolling the (imaginary) contributions of Muslims to space exploration?

Obama’s first telephone call to a foreign leader was to the head of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmud Abbas; his first trip abroad was to several Muslim countries; his first public speech during that trip delivered in Cairo was an appeal to the Muslims of the world to be friends. When Obama broke the tradition and rules of etiquette by slavishly bowing to Saudi King Abdullah, was he honoring a monarch or the keeper of the greatest sacred sites of Islam? muslim-obama_gi

He took an active part in overthrowing Egyptian President Mubarak, an old, loyal friend of the United States, and eagerly supported the Muslim Brotherhood – so much so that to this day he refuses to forgive the Army and people of Egypt who threw Islamist President Mohamed Morsi out of office. Likewise, he helped destroy Col. Qaddafi, destabilizing Libya with grave consequences for the entire Middle East. His half-hearted aerial campaign against ISIS, a reluctant response to public pressure, is a joke, and he refuses to help Egypt and Jordan repel the Islamist threat.

He has been trying to ingratiate himself with Iran at the expense of America’s old Arab allies, but ignores the genocide of Christians in the region. He doesn’t like Israel, to put it mildly, and during last year’s Gaza War he all but openly took the side of Hamas even though it shows up on the State Department list of terrorist organizations. He demanded that Israel agree to a ceasefire on terms tantamount to capitulation; in the midst of fighting he instituted a partial embargo on military supplies to Israel and on a ludicrous pretext banned U.S. aircraft from using the Ben Gurion Airport, in effect declaring economic war on the Jewish state.

Watch the liar-in-chief tell us all about Islam’s greatness.


And to add insult to injury, he steadfastly refuses to acknowledge that the worldwide Islamist terrorist campaign has anything to do with Islam or even that terrorism exists. At least that’s the impression from the administration’s official vocabulary which bans such words as “terrorist”, “jihad” and the like. It’s always “violent extremism” or “workplace violence” or some such ludicrous euphemism. His Middle East policy can be summed up as antagonism toward America’s friends and appeasement of if not collusion with her enemies.

Worse, he insists that we have no right to get high and mighty about ISIS in view of the awful crimes committed in the name of Jesus Christ during the Crusades and Inquisition. The implication is that the 900-year-old campaign to liberate the Holy Sepulcher from the clutches of the Muslims is equivalent to the Jihadists enslaving and killing women and children, beheading Western journalists and “people of the Cross,” burning and burying prisoners alive. This is a page straight out of the Islamist playbook. 


So there is no escaping a highly plausible conclusion that Obama is indeed a Muslim, right? Not so fast. A pretty strong case could be made that rather than an acolyte of Islam, he is in fact a far-left radical with a destructive, anti-American agenda.

He was raised by his mother, a fanatical America-hater, and leftist grandparents. His early mentor was Frank Marshall Davis, a card-carrying Communist. He attended three colleges, Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard, all known hotbeds of student radicalism. He admits in his autobiography, Dreams from My Father, that in college he sought out the company of the most radical professors and students. Upon graduation, he went to Chicago, Frank Marshall Davis’s old stomping grounds and home of the country’s most powerful black political machine, where he again fell in with the revolutionary crowd. As president, he brought with him a large retinue of like-minded radicals, such as Eric Holder, Van Jones, etc. And the mainstay of his domestic policy is “social justice,” a barely disguised revolutionary program to radically transform America that he openly advocated running for president.

obama-Muslim1America is the source of all evil in the world; her prosperity was built on the sweat of black slaves and exploitation of the oppressed peoples of the Third World. America is the enemy of mankind and must be destroyed and her wealth returned to the rightful owners: African-Americans and the oppressed masses of the Third World. Israel is America Lite and likewise must be wiped off the face of the world. Muslims are part of the Third World and thus are always beyond reproach. They are innocent victims of U.S. imperialism; anything they do is justified by their suffering. Terrorism is a legitimate response to the depredations of America — in short, she deserves her fate.

And then there is a time-honored tradition of American revolutionaries colluding with their country’s enemies, from the North Vietnamese communist regime to the Muslim Brotherhood that openly describes its activities in America as “a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within…”  What’s not to like, if you are an American revolutionary? And so Obama and his circle are very cozy with this outfit and with its U.S. offshoot, CAIR, which the White House views as the go-to organization on all matters Muslim.

Hillary Clinton's deep connection to the Muslim Brotherhood through Huma Abedin.

Hillary Clinton’s deep connection to the Muslim Brotherhood through Huma Abedin.

Another case in point is Hillary Clinton’s long-time, confidential aide Huma Abedin (Mrs. Anthony Weiner) who belongs to an activist family with extensive Muslim Brotherhood and Wahhabist connections. By all accounts, Huma Abedin is extremely close to Hillary and was privy to the nation’s highest secrets when her boss was secretary of state. Thus it is likely that the Muslim Brotherhood was fully informed about the decision-making process behind the U.S. Middle East policy. Yet it appears that Secretary Clinton was not at all concerned about the penetration of the U.S. government by the Islamists. Huma Abedin still enjoys the prospective presidential candidate’s full confidence. On at least one occasion Hillary Clinton, at Huma’s behest, personally intervened to allow prominent Muslim Brotherhood leader Tariq Ramadan to enter the United States, overturning the ban imposed by the previous administration.

So tell me the difference between the Islamist enemies of the United States and its radical foes of the home-grown variety as far as their attitude toward America is concerned? Their ultimate goals dovetail to such an extent that from where I sit, it’s six of one and half a dozen of the other. Whether as a Muslim or a far-left radical, Obama is indifferent to the national interests of the country he swore to defend when taking an oath of office. His sympathies clearly lie with the world of Islam and his foreign policy for all intents and purposes boils down to the support of Islamism.

So is Barack Obama a Muslim or a Communist? What difference, at this point, does it make?! 


via Articles: Birds of a Feather: Obama, the Left, and Islam.

Feb 202015

By Pamela Geller – February 19, 2015

Obama is proselytizing and advancing Islam.

It is madness. My colleagues and I weren’t invited — we have been countering jihad for 13 plus years. But terror supporters and jihadists were in attendance.

Attendees at Obama's pro-Muslim propaganda event the Countering Violent Extremism Conference

Attendees at Obama’s pro-Muslim propaganda event the Countering Violent Extremism Summit

Remember, this was supposed to be a summit to address the global jihad — the war to impose an Islamic State across the world. Instead, Muhammad is using it to spread Islam. Muhammad — that’s what they call Obama on the Muslim street.

DC: American and European citizens and journalists are spurring jihadi violence by protesting the arrival of Muslim populations into their societies, President Barack Obama declared Thursday.

“We’ve also seen, most recently in Europe, a rise in inexcusable acts of anti-Semitism, or in some cases, anti-Muslim sentiment or anti-immigrant sentiment,” Obama told a Feb. 19 audience of U.S. and foreign officials and advocates, who met to discuss ways to minimize jihadi violence.


Peaceful criticism of Islamic culture is bad, he suggested. ”When people spew hatred toward others — because of their faith or because they’re immigrants — it feeds into terrorist narratives. … It feeds a cycle of fear and resentment and a sense of injustice upon which extremists prey,” he said.

So “we have to ensure that our diverse societies truly welcome and respect people of all faiths and backgrounds,” said Obama.

Obama delivering his lies at the CVE Conference

Obama delivering his lies at the CVE Summit

President Obama spoke on the third day of the White House three-day summit on countering violent extremism. He said the notion that the West is at war with Islam is an “ugly lie.” He also called on countries to have Muslim people in their country be more included in society. He said that when people feel marginalized that opens a door for the terrorist ideology. He called on countries to address the grievances of oppressed people because they fuel people to join with extremists.


Thanks to Kenneth (transcript of Obama’s remarks)

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Secretary General, distinguished guests, we are joined by representatives from governments, because we all have a responsibility to ensure the security, the prosperity and the human rights of our citizens. And we’re joined by leaders of civil society, including many faith leaders, because civil society — reflecting the views and the voices of citizens — is vital to the success of any country. I thank all of you and I welcome all of you.We come together from more than 60 countries from every continent. We speak different languages, born of different races and ethnic groups, belong to different religions. We are here today because we are united against the scourge of violent extremism and terrorism.

As we speak, ISIL is terrorizing the people of Syria and Iraq and engaging in unspeakable cruelty. The wanton murder of children, the enslavement and rape of women, threatening religious minorities with genocide, beheading hostages. ISIL-linked terrorists murdered Egyptians in the Sinai Peninsula, and their slaughter of Egyptian Christians in Libya has shocked the world. Beyond the region, we’ve seen deadly attacks in Ottawa, Sydney, Paris, and now Copenhagen.

Elsewhere, Israelis have endured the tragedy of terrorism for decades. Pakistan’s Taliban has mounted a long campaign of violence against the Pakistani people that now tragically includes the massacre of more than 100 schoolchildren and their teachers. From Somalia, al-Shabaab terrorists have launched attacks across East Africa. In Nigeria and neighboring countries, Boko Haram kills and kidnaps men, women and children.

At the United Nations in September, I called on the international community to come together and eradicate violent extremism. And I challenged countries to come to the General Assembly this fall with concrete steps we can take together. And I’m grateful for all of you for answering this call.

Yesterday at the White House, we welcomed community groups from the United States, and some from your countries, to focus on how we can empower communities to protect their families and friends and neighbors from violent ideologies and recruitment. And over the coming months, many of your countries will host summits to build on the work here and to prepare for the General Assembly. Today, I want to suggest some areas where I believe we can focus on as governments.

First, we must remain unwavering in our fight against terrorist organizations. And in Afghanistan, our coalition is focused on training and assisting Afghan forces, and we’ll continue to conduct counterterrorism missions against the remnants of al Qaeda in the tribal regions. When necessary, the United States will continue to take action against al Qaeda affiliates in places like Yemen and Somalia. We will continue to work with partners to help them build up their security forces so that they can prevent ungoverned spaces where terrorists find safe haven, and so they can push back against groups like al-Shabaab and Boko Haram.

In Iraq and Syria, our coalition of some 60 nations, including Arab nations, will not relent in our mission to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL. And as a result of a separate ministerial here yesterday, many of our governments will be deepening our cooperation against foreign terrorist fighters by sharing more information and making it harder for fighters to travel to and from Syria and Iraq.

Related to this, and as I said at the United Nations last fall, nations need to break the cycles of conflict — especially sectarian conflict — that have become magnets for violent extremism. In Syria, Assad’s war against his own people and deliberate stoking of sectarian tensions helped to fuel the rise of ISIL. And in Iraq, with the failure of the previous government to govern in an inclusive manner, it helped to pave the way for ISIL’s gains there.

The Syrian civil war will only end when there is an inclusive political transition and a government that serves Syrians of all ethnicities and religions. And across the region, the terror campaigns between Sunnis and Shia will only end when major powers address their differences through dialogue, and not through proxy wars. So countering violent extremism begins with political, civic and religious leaders rejecting sectarian strife.

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.

That narrative sometimes extends far beyond terrorist organizations. That narrative becomes the foundation upon which terrorists build their ideology and by which they try to justify their violence. And that hurts all of us, including Islam, and especially Muslims, who are the ones most likely to be killed.

Obviously, there is a complicated history between the Middle East, the West. And none of us I think should be immune from criticism in terms of specific policies, but the notion that the West is at war with Islam is an ugly lie. And all of us, regardless of our faith, have a responsibility to reject it.

At the same time, former extremists have the opportunity to speak out, speak the truth about terrorist groups, and oftentimes they can be powerful messengers in debunking these terrorist ideologies. One said, “This wasn’t what we came for, to kill other Muslims.” Those voices have to be amplified.

And governments have a role to play. At minimum, as a basic first step, countries have a responsibility to cut off funding that fuels hatred and corrupts young minds and endangers us all. We need to do more to help lift up voices of tolerance and peace, especially online.

That’s why the United States is joining, for example, with the UAE to create a new digital communications hub to work with religious and civil society and community leaders to counter terrorist propaganda. Within the U.S. government, our efforts will be led by our new coordinator of counterterrorism communications — and I’m grateful that my envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Rashad Hussain, has agreed to serve in this new role. So the United States will do more to help counter hateful ideologies, and today I urge your nations to join us in this urgent work.

Third, we must address the grievances that terrorists exploit, including economic grievances. As I said yesterday, poverty alone does not cause a person to become a terrorist, any more than poverty alone causes someone to become a criminal. There are millions, billions of people who are poor and are law-abiding and peaceful and tolerant, and are trying to advance their lives and the opportunities for their families.

But when people — especially young people — feel entirely trapped in impoverished communities, where there is no order and no path for advancement, where there are no educational opportunities, where there are no ways to support families, and no escape from injustice and the humiliations of corruption — that feeds instability and disorder, and makes those communities ripe for extremist recruitment. And we have seen that across the Middle East and we’ve seen it across North Africa. So if we’re serious about countering violent extremism, we have to get serious about confronting these economic grievances.

Here, at this summit, the United States will make new commitments to help young people, including in Muslim communities, to forge new collaborations in entrepreneurship and science and technology. All our nations can reaffirm our commitment to broad-based development that creates growth and jobs, not just for the few at the top, but for the many. We can step up our efforts against corruption, so a person can go about their day and an entrepreneur can start a business without having to pay a bribe.

And as we go forward, let’s commit to expanding education, including for girls. Expanding opportunity, including for women. Nations will not truly succeed without the contributions of their women. This requires, by the way, wealthier countries to do more. But it also requires countries that are emerging and developing to create structures of governance and transparency so that any assistance provided actually works and reaches people. It’s a two-way street.

Fourth, we have to address the political grievances that terrorists exploit. Again, there is not a single perfect causal link, but the link is undeniable. When people are oppressed, and human rights are denied — particularly along sectarian lines or ethnic lines — when dissent is silenced, it feeds violent extremism. It creates an environment that is ripe for terrorists to exploit. When peaceful, democratic change is impossible, it feeds into the terrorist propaganda that violence is the only answer available.

And so we must recognize that lasting stability and real security require democracy. That means free elections where people can choose their own future, and independent judiciaries that uphold the rule of law, and police and security forces that respect human rights, and free speech and freedom for civil society groups. And it means freedom of religion — because when people are free to practice their faith as they choose, it helps hold diverse societies together.

And finally, we have to ensure that our diverse societies truly welcome and respect people of all faiths and backgrounds, and leaders set the tone on this issue.

Groups like al Qaeda and ISIL peddle the lie that some of our countries are hostile to Muslims. Meanwhile, we’ve also seen, most recently in Europe, a rise in inexcusable acts of anti-Semitism, or in some cases, anti-Muslim sentiment or anti-immigrant sentiment. When people spew hatred towards others — because of their faith or because they’re immigrants — it feeds into terrorist narratives. If entire communities feel they can never become a full part of the society in which they reside, it feeds a cycle of fear and resentment and a sense of injustice upon which extremists prey. And we can’t allow cycles of suspicions to tear at the fabric of our countries.

So we all recognize the need for more dialogues across countries and cultures; those efforts are indeed important. But what’s most needed today, perhaps, are more dialogues within countries — not just across faiths, but also within faiths.

Violent extremists and terrorists thrive when people of different religions or sects pull away from each other and are able to isolate each other and label them as “they” as opposed to “us;” something separate and apart. So we need to build and bolster bridges of communication and trust.

Terrorists traffic in lies and stereotypes about others — other religions, other ethnic groups. So let’s share the truth of our faiths with each other. Terrorists prey upon young impressionable minds. So let’s bring our youth together to promote understanding and cooperation. That’s what the United States will do with our virtual exchange program — named after Ambassador Chris Stevens — to connect 1 million young people from America and the Middle East and North Africa for dialogue. Young people are taught to hate. It doesn’t come naturally to them. We, adults, teach them.

I’d like to close by speaking very directly to a painful truth that’s part of the challenge that brings us here today. In some of our countries, including the United States, Muslim communities are still small, relative to the entire population, and as a result, many people in our countries don’t always know personally of somebody who is Muslim. So the image they get of Muslims or Islam is in the news. And given the existing news cycle, that can give a very distorted impression. A lot of the bad, like terrorists who claim to speak for Islam, that’s absorbed by the general population. Not enough of the good — the more than 1 billion people around the world who do represent Islam, and are doctors and lawyers and teachers, and neighbors and friends.

So we have to remember these Muslim men and women — the young Palestinian working to build understanding and trust with Israelis, but also trying to give voice to her people’s aspirations. The Muslim clerics working for peace with Christian pastors and priests in Nigeria and the Central African Republic to put an end to the cycle of hate. Civil society leaders in Indonesia, one of the world’s largest democracies. Parliamentarians in Tunisia working to build one of the world’s newest democracies.

Business leaders in India, with one of the world’s largest Muslim populations. Entrepreneurs unleashing new innovations in places like Malaysia. Health workers fighting to save lives from polio and from Ebola in West Africa. And volunteers who go to disaster zones after a tsunami or after an earthquake to ease suffering and help families rebuild. Muslims who have risked their lives as human shields to protect Coptic churches in Egypt and to protect Christians attending mass in Pakistan and who have tried to protect synagogues in Syria.

The world hears a lot about the terrorists who attacked Charlie Hebdo in Paris, but the world has to also remember the Paris police officer, a Muslim, who died trying to stop them. The world knows about the attack on the Jews at the kosher supermarket in Paris; we need to recall the worker at that market, a Muslim, who hid Jewish customers and saved their lives. And when he was asked why he did it, he said, “We are brothers. It’s not a question of Jews or Christians or Muslims. We’re all in the same boat, and we have to help each other to get out of this crisis.”

Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, I thank you for being here today. We come from different countries and different cultures and different faiths, but it is useful for us to take our wisdom from that humble worker who engaged in heroic acts under the most severe of circumstances.

We are all in the same boat. We have to help each other. In this work, you will have a strong partner in me and the United States of America.

Thank you very much.


via Obama Speech at CVE Summit: Islamophobia fuels jihad | Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs.

Feb 052015

By F. W. Burleigh — February 5, 2015

It is hardly a surprise that immediately after news came out that ISIS had burned a captured Jordanian pilot to death that Barack Hussein Obama absolved Islam of the crime.

Burning alive of the Jordanian pilot by ISIS is nothing else but another practice inspired by Muhammad in the Sunna.

Burning alive of the Jordanian pilot by ISIS is nothing else but another practice inspired by Muhammad in the Sunna.

ISIS released a video on Tuesday of its execution-by-incineration of the pilot, who was captured in December after his plane crashed in ISIS controlled territory.  ISIS had been threatening to execute him if their zealots jailed in Jordan were not released.

CNN immediately reported Obama’s reaction to the news of the horrific slaying: “Should, in fact, that video be authentic,” Obama stated, “it’s just one more indication of the viciousness and barbarity of this organization, and I think it will redouble the vigilance and determination on the part of a global coalition to make sure that they are degraded and ultimately defeated.  And it also just indicates the degree to which whatever ideology they are operating off of, it’s bankrupt.”

Obama’s phraseology is an exercise in denial that Islam had anything to do with it.  By referring to ISIS as “this organization” and using a clunky circumlocution like “whatever ideology they are operating off of,” he has made it clear he believes that Islam has nothing to do with terror.  The cruel burning of the man was the action of a bankrupt “whatever.”

This of course is absurd.  ISIS is Islam 101.  Islam has a 14-century history of using terror to impose itself, starting with Muhammad, the creator of Islam.  Usually it was just matter of cutting throats, lopping off heads, running people through with spears and swords, or shooting them with arrows.  Islam is known as the “religion of the sword,” which was the weapon of choice.  But even this particular mode of killing by fire has precedents in Muhammad’s behavior, his Sunna, and therefore it is allowable to the people of ISIS, who strictly model their behavior on Muhammad’s example.

Christians burned to death in Nigeria by guess who. Why Muslims of course!

Christians burned to death in Nigeria by guess who… Why Muslims of course!

Take for example the Dirar Mosque incident, a mosque in Medina Muhammad denounced as the “mosque of dissidence” and ordered it burned down.  This occurred in A.D. 630 upon his return from the Tabuk raid at the head of 30,000 men who were disgruntled because nothing had been conquered so there was not any plunder to pay them with.  The operation had targeted the Byzantines, but they were nowhere to be found.  It is evident from the literature some of his people attempted to kill him on the return trip, and paranoid that dissatisfaction with him over lack of booty could get out of hand, he ordered the destruction of a recently built mosque as a warning to dissidents. 

This was a mosque that had opened just prior to the march against the Byzantines and had been constructed as an extension of a home belonging to a Christian known as “The Monk,” who had fled to Syria to keep from being killed.  Muhammad deemed it therefore a center of subversion and ordered it torched with occupants inside.  It is recorded that one man burned to death.  One of the zealots who carried out Muhammad’s orders gloated the victim had been burned “down to the scrotum.”

The video below describes the actions of Muslims in Nigeria as they continue to try to cleanse the country of Christians by burning their churches and them as well, if necessary.


Another documented burning took place just prior to the Tabuk raid. Muhammad ordered a house to be burned down where people had congregated who objected to joining the raid.  Zealots surrounded the house and torched it.  Most of the occupants escaped, some by jumping from the roof, but the owner, a Jew, was incinerated.

The traditions about Muhammad also contain a number of stories of him threatening to burn the houses down — occupants inside — of people who failed to show up for the obligatory prayers, and he may have actually done so on one occasion.

Islam is all about Muhammad’s Koran and his Sunna, the example of his behavior.  Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-declared caliph of the so-called Islamic State, is supposed to have the equivalent of a Ph.D in Islamic literature, meaning that he is well versed in these burning precedents.

An ISIS propaganda video showing this barbaric execution is entitled the “Healing of the Believers’ Chests.”  It is not immediately clear what ISIS meant by this, but it is likely related to Muhammad’s idea of purification through punishment, a concept that is central to Sharia law.  The idea is that if the sinner repents and accepts the punishment that is due in this life under “God’s law,” then Allah will forgive him and spare him the punishment of the fires of hell.  This perhaps explains the apparent calmness of the Jordanian pilot as he walks to the cage on his own and stands with resignation as the flames come toward him.  He had been under ISIS control for more than a month, enough time to convince him that he was an apostate who deserved death, but that he would be spared the flames of eternal punishment through repentance and purification through the death penalty.

His judge-killers calmly watch and feel satisfaction that the fires of this world are sparing this repentant soul from the fires of hell.

truth-about-islamIslam is indeed a bankrupt ideology.  Any ideology is bankrupt that has to rely on terror to impose itself and to ensure against defection.  This execution and other recent ISIS atrocities show the image of Muhammad, repugnant, corrupt, paranoid, grandiose, psychopathic.  It is the image of a man who could preside with gloating satisfaction over the beheading of 900 men and boys and order the assassination of others for refusing to accept him as their prophet.  A man who raided, and plundered, and enslaved . . . and burned people to death.


There is no mystery about Obama’s reaction to the ISIS atrocity.  He was raised in a Muslim environment during critical years of his childhod, and his actions of the past six years show he is in alignment with the Muslim agenda.  His pronouncement before the United Nations that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” is nothing if not a statement of his true belief.  He is the typical product of the brainwashing of Islam, which holds that Muhammad was the greatest and most perfect man ever to exist.

If you still have eyes that can open, then open them Obama.  Take a good look into the mirror that ISIS is holding up.  It is holding it up to you and to the entire world.


** F. W. Burleigh is the author of It’s All About Muhammad, A Biography of the World’s Most Notorious Prophet.  He blogs at


 via Articles: Obama’s Defense of Islam Burned Along with the Jordanian Pilot.

Feb 052015

By Victor Davis Hanson — February 5, 2015

Obama’s comments at the National Prayer Breakfast should help put who he really is in sharper perspective.


The real Barack Hussein Obama

President Obama, at the National Prayer Breakfast this morning, said:

Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.

This is banal.

The problem with all such high-horse declarations by Obama is his continual omission of historical context and, in this case, his conflation of the frequent with the rare. The Crusades began in 1095, almost a millennium ago; the Inquisition in 1478, now over 500 years past. When the president says “people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” he should remember that all religions at the time committed terrible deeds that shock the modern sense of morality — given the savage wars between Christendom and Islam, and the religious purifications and civil discord common to all the religious factional strife that played out, violently, in accord with the ethos of the times.

Slavery was outlawed in the U.S. in 1865. Jim Crow ended officially a half-century ago. Indentured servitude, however, continues, almost exclusively among some Islamic groups in the Middle East and Africa. The caste system and ethnic and religious tribalism that institutionalized discrimination and second-class status, quite akin to Jim Crow, persist in places in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. I doubt today whether a Jew of any nationality would be allowed to immigrate and buy real estate in too many corners of the Islamic Middle East. Outside of the West, women and homosexuals are often treated no differently than in the Seventh Century.
Christianity Vs Islam
In fact, Christian countries were the first to legally end the age-old human sin of the slave trade, and the first to outlaw slavery’s continuance. The president, is fond of historical sloppiness and moral equivalence (cf. the Cairo Speech). But what is the point of
citing sins of 1,000, 500, 150, or 50 years ago, without acknowledging 1) that such pathologies still continue today outside the West, especially in the world of Islam, and 2) that Christianity had a unique role in ending these wrongs?

So the question for the president is, why does such medieval violence persist to a much greater degree among so many Islamic extremists in the present world than among most zealots of other religions? (This is an empirical statement. Cf., for instance, the nature of recent global terror attacks in resources such as the Global Terrorism Database). And why search the distant past for examples of moral equivalence, unless the present does not offer suitable data?

Did Churchill point to the excesses of Oliver Cromwell, or did Daladier to the French Revolution, to remind their contemporaries that National Socialism in Germany was not doing anything differently in the 1930s than had their own countries in the distant past? Those of the 1930s who sought to make such facile comparisons between their own past and Germany’s present were written off as appeasers.

Areas of Central and Latin America are as poor as the Middle East, but Christian liberation theologists, unlike the Islamic State, are not beheading and burning prisoners alive to advance their redistributionist cause. Chinese imperialists and colonialists have absorbed Tibet, but the Dalai Lama is not sending suicide bombers into China. The children of East Prussians expelled from 1945-47 are not suiting up with suicide vests to attack Poles. Impoverished Hindu extremists, angry at centuries of British colonialism, do not hijack planes and ram them into high-rises in British cities. Jews are not blowing up cartoonists and satirists in Paris and Germany who deny or caricature the Holocaust.

No one has easy answers to the dilemma of contemporary violent Islamism; for brief interludes in the recent past, secular ideologies were more likely than radical Islam to be the expressed popular driving forces in the violent Middle East (e.g., fascism [1930s], Communism [1940s], Baathism and Pan-Arabism [1950s], which produced the Grand Mufti, Nasser, the Assads, Arafat, Saddam, and Qaddafi). The president and his advisers should be investigating why radical Islam is currently terrorizing the globe, rather than denying it entirely, hiding it by euphemisms, or excusing it by citing morally equivalent examples from the past.


** For the full transcript of Obama’s speech at the National Prayer Breakfast you can go here.



via Still More of President Obama’s Moral Equivalence | National Review Online.

Jan 132015

by Michael Walsh — January 13, 2015

By not sending anyone from the White House to the Paris rallies against Islamic terrorism the other day, President Obama has made his Muslim sympathies abundantly clear.

As I tweeted the other day: now we know which side he’s rooting for. But don’t just take it from me, take it from IBD’s editorial on the subject:

Barack Obama skipped the greatest anti-terror rally ever, the only Western leader to do so. Unlike France’s prime minister, he refused to condemn radical Islam, suggesting disinterest in defeating its spawn. The president and his top aides remain unusually deferential and accommodating to the Muslim community — despite the spike in threats from the Islamic State, al-Qaida and other Muslim terrorists…

Obama’s latest Islamist appointment is hijab-wearing Fatima Noor, who will help usher in more Muslim immigrants as the special assistant for U.S. citizenship and Immigration Services at Homeland Security.

Fatima Noor

Fatima Noor

The IBD continues:

Over the past three years, as Europe deals with Muslim immigrant no-go zones and spiking terror attacks, Obama waved more than 300,000 foreign Muslim nationals into the U.S. — including more than 88,000 from Saudi Arabia alone. Law enforcement can barely handle the terror threats it has without adding unknown foreign Muslims to the matrix.

In his first speech, Obama went to Cairo, invited Muslim Brotherhood leaders to sit front and center, and apologized to the Muslim world for America’s war on terror. Then in 2012, before the United Nations and the world, he declared “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet (Muhammad).”

Remarks such as these, along with his pro-Islamist policies, give a green light for jihadists to go ahead and kill in the name of Islam. Incredibly, our Muslim-sympathizing commander in chief is himself a big part of the terror problem. If America is attacked again, he will have a lot of explaining to do.

Only if the press asks him to explain. Which it won’t.


via Obama’s Muslim Sympathies: ‘Curiouser and Curiouser’ | PJ Tatler.

Nov 042014

By Jack Cashill — November 4, 2014

“In this country,” said Barack Obama in his victory speech six years ago today, “we rise or fall as one nation, as one people. Let’s resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long.”

Obama inauguration 2009 -- The lying begins!

Obama inauguration 2009 — The lying begins!


Nothing stopped Obama from fulfilling this promise, but he never meant what he said. Recently, former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele, who is himself black, summed up Democratic strategy in the 2014 campaign, a strategy abetted by Obama at every turn. “[Democrats] have been playing on this nerve in the black community,” said Steele, “that if you even so much as look at a Republican, churches will start to burn, your civil rights will be taken away and young black men like Trayvon Martin will die.”

After a fashion, the strategy has “worked.” In 2009, 76 percent of African Americans thought that blacks and whites got along “pretty well” or better. Today, that number is 64 percent. Whites and Hispanics also agree that black-white relationships have deteriorated.

Always insecure about his authenticity, Obama has, from the beginning, tried to reassure his base that he was a real African-American and not just someone who played one on TV. This anxiety has led to a series of distortions, none more outsized than his claim as a candidate in 2007 that the events at Selma, Alabama, in 1965 stirred his parents to ignore the obvious obstacles to their multicultural romance and give birth to baby Barack. racismjacksonsharptonobama

“They got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born,” said Obama to a largely black audience. “So don’t tell me I don’t have a claim on Selma, Alabama. Don’t tell me I’m not coming home to Selma, Alabama.” He didn’t, and he wasn’t. In reality, Obama’s father had long since abandoned the family by the time of the famous march. While protesters were confronting angry white state troopers in Alabama, the three-year-old Obama was collecting seashells with his white grandfather in Waikiki. In July 2009, an insecure Obama publicly signaled to his followers that he was a black man first and a president to all America only secondarily when he weigh ed in on the arrest of black scholar Henry Louis Gates. Although admitting he did not know all the facts, Obama had confidence enough in America’s “long history” of racial injustice to announce, “The Cambridge [Mass.] police acted stupidly.”

The moronic "Beer Summit"!

The moronic “Beer Summit”!


Obama knew less about the arresting officer than he did about the incident itself. Sgt. James Crowley defied the racist stereotype. He was not only a model officer, but also an Obama supporter. A black police commissioner had personally selected him to teach recruits about the pitfalls of racial profiling. As these facts and others emerged, Obama was forced into an awkward “Beer Summit” to pacify the nation’s police and the people who believe in them. There would be no Beer Summit for Hispanic American George Zimmerman, who shot and killed Trayvon Martin in self-defense in February 2012. To his great misfortune, Zimmerman had a “white” name. Were Zimmerman’s last name Zapata or his first name Jorge, Obama would not have risked alienating the Hispanic bloc he had also been cultivating through fear of the proverbial “other.” In October 2010, for instance, Obama urged the Latinos in his Univision radio audience to think of Republicans as “our enemies” and “to punish” them by voting. On a similarly discordant note, he told a 2008 campaign crowd in Philadelphia, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” This was the same Obama who was preaching the gospel of unity and civility. Unlike Officer Crowley, Zimmerman had no natural allies. Besides, too much was at stake in an election year in Florida, America’s most vital battleground state, for Obama to apologize or equivocate. “I can only imagine what these parents are going through,” said Obama solemnly after the shooting. Obama was referring here not to Zimmerman’s parents — who cared about them? — but to Martin’s.

Obama stirs up race hatred in the Trayvon Martin case.

Obama stirs up race hatred in the Trayvon Martin case.


By this time, the White House had access to all the information the Sanford, Florida, Police Department did. The courageous step for Obama would have been to defend the local police and to demand an end to the media/Justice Department lynching of George Zimmerman. As an African-American, he had more latitude to do this than a white politician. He chose not to. Concluded Obama after some meaningless temporizing: “But my main message is to the parents of Trayvon — If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon.”  Obama would not have known that Zimmerman was a civil rights activist who openly supported him for president. But even if he had, he apparently did not look enough like Obama to deserve justice. The August 2014 police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, gave Obama another chance to show that America was “one nation.” But three months before a potentially disastrous mid-term election, he had voters to motivate. “Too many young men of color feel targeted by law enforcement — guilty of walking while black or driving while black, judged by stereotypes that fuel fear and resentment and hopelessness.” An honest Obama might have added “guilty of strong arming a helpless store clerk while black” or “guilty of punching a cop in the face while black,” but truth did not play well to the base. As the campaign ran down, Obama found himself speaking largely to black audiences making specific appeals for the black vote. “You’ve got to get your family to vote. You’ve got to get your friends to vote. You’ve got to get your coworkers to vote,” Obama told a Maryland crowd in support of black gubernatorial candidate Anthony Brown last month.

Sharpton is White Houses go to Man on the Ground in Ferguson.

Sharpton is White Houses go to Man on the Ground in Ferguson.


Obama then awkwardly employed racial stereotypes to connect to his restless audience. “You’ve got to get that cousin Pookie sitting at home on the couch — he’s watching football right now instead of being here at the rally — you’ve got to talk to him and let him know it is not that hard to exercise the franchise that previous generations fought so hard to obtain.” So much for the “one people” claptrap. When Obama mentioned cousin “Pookie” or the “previous generations,” he was clearly not speaking to the white people in the audience. On the positive side, many of those in attendance at the Brown speech walked out. Said Steele, Democrats have begun to realize “that their most loyal constituency is not as loyal as they once were.” Maybe, as people’s eyes open a little wider, we can become “one nation” after all.


via Articles: Celebrating Six Years of Broken Promises.

Oct 232014

By Lloyd Marcus — October 23, 2014

Over twenty nations and counting have a travel ban to stop the spread of Ebola.



Senators, Congressmen, radio talk show hosts and assorted pundits on both sides of the aisle are clamoring for President Obama to implement a travel ban from Ebola hot zone countries. Stopping potential Ebola carriers from entering our country is only common sense.

I chuckled upon hearing Bill O’Reilly say that when one more American is reported to be infected, Obama will surely implement a travel ban. Even after six years, Mr. O’Reilly is still credulous about who Obama truly is (Mr No Spin is really Mr Yes Spin).

Remember the programmed cyborg assassin played by Arnold Schwarzenegger in the Terminator movies? Think of Obama as a cyborg programmed by socialist/progressives, unfeeling, relentless and laser focused on his mission to transform America as founded and dethrone her.


And nothing, I repeat, nothing, including American lives, will deter this machine from fulfilling its mission.

Consequently, Obama’s programming prohibits any possibility of him banning flights from the Ebola hot zone, no matter how many Americans are infected. Fundamentally transforming America as founded requires open borders and granting amnesty to several millions of unskilled needy illegals.

Eventually, illegals will be granted amnesty and the right to vote. Then, the Democrats’ insidious deception will begin; convincing the new faux Americans that they are victims of racist white rich Republicans. Step two is to seduce/addict them to government handouts. The Step three is a promise to keep their supposed evil Republican Nemesis at bay. And presto, millions of new Democrat voters.

As I stated, open borders are crucial to Obama’s termination of America as founded. A travel ban would concede the point that his y’all-come immigration policy is catastrophically dangerous. Gangs, drug dealers, murderers and carriers of contagious diseases that are infecting our kids in schools are flowing across our southern border daily at will.Ebola-Travel-Ban-Protester-570x342No way could an American president be so cold and calculating regarding the safety of his people, right? All one has to do is simply review Obama and his enforcer’s behavior over the past six years.  

Regular folks like you and me would be embarrassed if caught in a lie or compromising position. Not this bunch. Every time Obama or one of his enforcers have gotten caught in a scandal, an obvious lie or defending an outrageous policy, they double down. They look down their noses incensed that anyone would dare challenge them. They engage in even more outrageous scandalous behavior, tell even bigger lies and more vehemently attack their accusers.

For example, while in the midst of congressional hearings regarding the IRS targeting tea party groups, the IRS continued its illegal harassment of tea party groups. Folks, this is arrogance beyond the pale. Who are these people?

Our robotic terminator of America takes a screw-you, in-your-face double-down approach to every issue.

Military experts say it is preposterous for Obama to deploy our troops (4000) to the Ebola hot zone to do a job for which they are not qualified. Our troops are not social workers or construction workers.  Obama does not care. Remember the famous 1960s photo of an anti-war protester placing a flower in the barrel of a soldier’s rifle? I have an image in my mind of Obama doing the same thing to the rifles of our military.

Obama has much compassion for folks outside of America while displaying a cold callous disregard for U.S. citizens and the brave young men and women who serve in our military. It breaks my heart that Obama deems our troops acceptable collateral damage, sending them to the Ebola hot zone to fulfill his flower-child fantasy of what the military should be.

Unswayed by public outcry, Obama has doubled down on his misuse of our military. He signed an Executive Order for 500 National Guard troops to go to Ebola land.

Obama Hates the American Military ; Orders Military To Classify Christian Ministry As "Domestic Hate Group"

Obama hates the American Military as much as he hates Christians ; Orders Military To Classify Christian Ministry As “Domestic Hate Group”

Think about that folks. These guys signed up as weekend warriors to defend and protect our homeland, the National Guard. Obama has chosen to make them his “International Guard” — taking them from their jobs, businesses, communities and families to use as political pawns for his agenda.

Without apology, Obama told the biggest whooper in presidential history 29 times. If you like your doctor and health care plan you can keep them. Doubling down, this guy continues to lie through his teeth, claiming that Obamacare is extremely successful and folks are lovin’ it. Is he insane? No. Obama is a cold hardhearted cyborg laser-focused on his mission. Obamacare has been a nightmare for millions and the individual mandate has not even kicked in yet. Meanwhile, the MSM smiles and nods in agreement with Obama.

Here are more examples of our cyborg prez in action.

From the attack on our U.S. mission in Benghazi, the Ft. Hood terrorist attack, the Boston Marathon bombing terrorist attack, the recent terrorist beheading of a woman on American soil, the IRS scandal, the VA scandal, the NSA scandal, the invasion of our southern border by illegals (wait a moment folks while I catch my breath), the Fast and Furious gun running scandal, the Secret Service prostitution scandal and allowing someone to breach the White House scandal and more. Politics has been the Obama Administration’s sole concern in dealing with each of them.

Obama’s robotic underlings are equally cold and calculating — Josh Earnest, Lois Lerner, Eric Holder, Susan Rice and others all programmed to protect and fulfill Obama hates americaObama’s mission.

Despite Obama’s refusal to relent, the American people will demand and receive a travel ban from Ebola infected countries. It will happen as a result of adult politicians on both sides of the aisle stepping up and going around Obama. You will never hear Obama say he was wrong or that he changed my mind.

Obama is secretly setting the stage for amnesty for over 10 million illegals. While Obama cannot grant citizenship via executive action, but he can grant legal residence. It will take some time for them to be granted legal citizenship. Meanwhile, people can certainly vote illegally.

No, Mr. O’Reilly. The cyborg in the White House will not back down from his decree that the U.S. will not impose a travel ban from Ebola infected countries, no matter how many Americans get sick and die. God help us.


(WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW– OBAMA: My ‘Larger Role’ Than ‘Taking Care Of The American People’ Is ‘My Obligation To Make Sure Africans Are Safe’)


via Articles: Obama: They Still Don’t Get Who He is.

Oct 072014

by Robert Zubrin — September 30th, 2014

The Kurds are fighting bravely, but they need arms, and they need air support.

In his speech to the United Nations last week, President Obama pledged to the world that the United States would use its might to stop the horrific depredations of the terrorist movement variously known as the Islamic State, ISIS, or, as he calls it, ISIL.


Kurdish Peshmerga fighters.

“This group has terrorized all who they come across in Iraq and Syria,” the president proclaimed. “Mothers, sisters, daughters have been subjected to rape as a weapon of war. Innocent children have been gunned down. Bodies have been dumped in mass graves. Religious minorities have been starved to death. In the most horrific crimes imaginable, innocent human beings have been beheaded, with videos of the atrocity distributed to shock the conscience of the world.”

“No God condones this terror. No grievance justifies these actions,” he said. “There can be no reasoning — no negotiation — with this brand of evil. The only language understood by killers like this is the language of force. So the United States of America will work with a broad coalition to dismantle this network of death. . . . We will support Iraqis and Syrians fighting to reclaim their communities. We will use our military might in a campaign of air strikes to roll back ISIL. We will train and equip forces fighting against these terrorists on the ground.”

Obama addresses the nation regarding ISIS

Obama addresses the nation regarding ISIS

 These are brave words that well and truly denounce evil for what it is. Unfortunately, the president’s actions since then have been anything but consistent with his pledge to stop the terrorism.


As these lines are being written, some 400,000 Kurds in and around the town of Kobane in northern Syria, on the Turkish border, are being besieged and assaulted by massed legions of Islamic State killers armed with scores of tanks, armored personnel carriers, and heavy artillery. Against these, the Kurdish defenders have only AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades. The Kurds have called on the U.S. to send in air strikes to take out the jihadist forces. In response, the administration sent in two fighter jets Saturday, which destroyed two Islamic State tanks and then flew away. The Kurds are begging for arms. The administration has not only refused to send arms, but is exerting pressure both on our NATO allies and on Israel not to send any either. Over 150,000 Kurds have fled their homes to try to escape to Turkey, but they are being blocked at the border by Turkish troops. Meanwhile, Turkey is allowing Islamist reinforcements to enter Syria to join the Islamic State, while Islamist elements of the Free Syrian Army, funded and armed by the United States, have joined forces with the group in the genocidal assault on the Kurdish enclave.

Obama's co-conspirator Recep Erdogan - Prime Minister of Turkey

Obama’s co-conspirator Recep Erdogan – Prime Minister of Turkey

According to Kurdish sources, the Turks are massing troops on their own side of the border, with the apparent plan being to sit in place and allow the Kurds to be exterminated, and then move in to take over the region once they are gone. This is the same plan as Josef Stalin used when he allowed the Nazis to wipe out the Polish underground during the Warsaw rising of 1944, and only afterward sent in the Red Army to take control of what was left of the city. If anything, it is even more morally reprehensible, since it could be pointed out in Stalin’s defense that his forces were at least pummeling the enemy elsewhere while the Warsaw fight was under way. In contrast, the Turks are doing nothing of the sort. For an American administration to collude in such a mass atrocity is infamous.

If we are to win the war against the Islamic State, we need ground forces, and the Obama administration has rejected the idea of sending in any of our own. The Kurds, who have demonstrated both their bravery and their willingness to be friends with America, are right there, and already engaged in the fight. If supplied with adequate arms and backed by serious U.S. tactical air support, they could roll up ISIS as rapidly as the similarly reinforced Northern Alliance did the Taliban in the fall of 2001. Done right, this war could be won in months, instead of waged inconclusively for years.


The administration, however, has rejected this alternative, and has instead opted for a Saudi-Qatari plan to allow the Syrian Kurds to be exterminated while training a new Sunni Arab army in Saudi Arabia. Given the Saudi role in the new army’s tutelage and officer selection, the Islamist nature of this force is a foregone conclusion. At best it might provide a more disciplined replacement for the Islamic State as an Islamist Syrian opposition at some point in the distant future (current official administration estimates are at least a year) when it is considered ready for combat. Meanwhile the killing will simply go on, with the United States doing its part to further Islamist recruitment by indulging in endless strategy-free bombing of Sunni villages.


So now, to paraphrase the president, “Mothers, sisters, daughters will be subjected to rape as a weapon of war. Innocent children will be gunned down. Bodies will be dumped in mass graves. Religious minorities will be starved to death. In the most horrific crimes imaginable, innocent human beings will be beheaded, with videos of the atrocity distributed to shock the conscience of the world.”

Surely we can do better.


via Obama Betrays the Kurds | National Review Online.

Sep 142014

By Dustin Walker — September 12, 2014

CENTCOM Chief Urged Modest Combat Contingent   —   ‘The American people will once again see us in a war that doesn’t seem to be making progress’

military advice

As he laid out his strategy to combat the Islamic State in both Iraq and Syria, President Obama rejected the “best military advice” of his top military commander in the Middle East.

Quoting two U.S. military officials, the Washington Post reported on Wednesday that Army Gen. Lloyd Austin, commander of U.S. Central Command

General Lloyd Austin

General Lloyd Austin – Recommends best course of action on ISIS

(CENTCOM), said “that his best military advice was to send a modest contingent of American troops, principally Special Operations forces, to advise and assist Iraqi army units in fighting the militants.”

Austin’s recommendation was taken to the White House by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey. The White House rejected CENTCOM’s “advise and assist” contingent due to concerns about placing U.S. ground forces in a frontline role.

In a press briefing Thursday, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said that the president had rejected Austin’s recommendation because he believes “it is not in the best interest of American national security to send American combat troops in a combat operation to act on the ground in Iraq.”In a nationally-televised speech on Wednesday evening, President Obama repeatedly emphasized that U.S. forces will not have a combat role in Iraq. “We will not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq,” the president said. He specifically underscored that “this effort will be different from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,” and will resemble U.S. counterterrorism campaigns in Yemen and Somalia. 

general dempsey

General Martin Dempsey -Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Instead, President Obama opted for a more modest course, sending an additional 475 troops to assist Iraqi and ethnic Kurdish forces; 150 of those forces will form more than a dozen teams and embed with Iraqi Security Forces at the brigade level and above, according to the Pentagon. In other words, U.S. advisers are likely to remain inside bases assisting with issues like training, intelligence, and equipment. The remainder will be assigned to conduct intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions and oversee U.S. military activities at headquarters in Baghdad and Erbil.

Austin’s predecessor, Marine Gen. James Mattis, told the Washington Post that the president’s decision may place the mission at risk. “The American people will once again see us in a war that doesn’t seem to be making progress,” Mattis told the paper. “You’re giving the enemy the initiative for a longer period.”

Supporters of the president’s approach, such as Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), see U.S. combat troops as unnecessary, and could distract the Iraqi government and security forces from taking necessary steps to drive out ISIS militants. “Ranking Member Smith believes combat forces are not necessary in Iraq and would not help. The key is to reform the Iraqi forces and get the Sunnis to turn against ISIL,” said Michael Amato, spokesman for the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee.

Opponents of combat troops in Iraq say recent successes show the president’s strategy can succeed. U.S. airstrikes have helped repel ISIS advances on the city of Erbil, and aided Iraqi forces in recapturing the Mosul Dam and the city of Amerli. But the newest phase of the U.S. campaign against ISIS faces substantial risks, including a dependence on Iraqi political and military leaders. President Obama conditioned additional U.S. action against ISIS on the formation of an inclusive Iraqi government. Now, his strategy relies on the realization of equally inclusive governance under Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi. The president is counting on the prime minister to make substantial progress in healing sectarian wounds that festered under his predecessor, Nouri al-Maliki. But even if the new Shia-led government is determined to reconcile with Iraq’s Sunni minority, lingering resentment and mistrust could impair efforts to convince Sunni tribesmen to reject ISIS and assist in pushing the militants out of the country. Militarily, the United States is counting on an Iraqi military with a reputation for retreat to join forces with Kurdish and Shiite militias to wage a ground offensive to recapture territory held by ISIS. Many military experts are skeptical that the Iraqis – with ineffective military leadership and sectarian divisions throughout their ranks – will be able to defeat determined and ruthless ISIS militants without the kind of American military assistance the president has ruled out to date.

The president’s strict reliance on air power also carries risks. When the United States took on al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) during “the Surge,” the strategy included special operations forces, conventional units, and intelligence operatives on the ground. Those elements are absent from President Obama’s strategy, despite the fact that ISIS is arguably a more powerful enemy than AQI in terms of manpower, weaponry, financial resources, and territory.

Iraqi forces cut and run from ISIS-held Tikrit

Iraqi forces cut and run from ISIS-held Tikrit

The difficulties of relying on airpower are likely to present themselves as U.S. and Iraqi forces attempt to dislodge ISIS militants from major urban centers. In cities like Mosul, Fallujah, and Ramadi, ISIS can adopt a more covert, insurgency-style approach blending in with local populations. In such an environment, skilled ground troops will be required to sort out enemy forces and remove them block by block. If Iraqi and Kurdish forces prove unable to carry out such operations and progress against ISIS stalls, would the White House reconsider embedding U.S. special operations forces with frontline Iraqi units to advise and assist?  

White House press secretary Josh Earnest delivered a mixed message on that question Thursday. President Obama “is not contemplating deploying additional combat troops on the ground in either Iraq or Syria,” Earnest told reporters. But when asked if the president remains open to mission-specific applications of special operations forces if the need arises, Earnest said he was “not willing to broadly take anything off the table.”

via Obama Rejected “Best Military Advice” | RealClearDefense.

Aug 132014

By Dave Blount — August 13, 2014

Reagan’s bombing of Libya in response to terror attacks and W’s invasion of Iraq neutralized the Muammar Gaddafi regime, causing the Libyan dictator to renounce terror and the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, and even to cooperate with the West in the war against Islamic terrorism.

Reagan bombs Libya

Reagan Bombs Libya

But then Obama took power. With Obama’s illicit help, Gaddafi was overthrown. Now Libya is once again a hotbed of terror, as graphically evidenced by Benghazi.

By now we can read even this without surprise:

The Obama administration has lifted longtime restrictions on Libyans attending flight schools in the United States and training here in nuclear science, according to a final amendment of the ban recently approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

Less than two years after the deadly terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is poised to sign off on an amendment reversing the ban, which was enacted following a wave or terrorist attacks in 1980s and prevents Libyans from studying these sensitive trades in the United States. …

DHS said the prohibition is irrelevant now since the United States and Libya have worked to “normalize their relationship,” according to the directive approved by the OMB.

We had a normalized relationship with the regime that with Obama’s help replaced our ally Hosni Mubarak in Egypt too. But then the Egyptian people rose up and overthrew Obama’s repressive Muslim Brotherhood friends. Now Obama is in a snit toward Egypt, which also arguably crossed him by siding with Israel against Hamas (unlike our own more evenhanded government), and which is being driven back into the arms of Russia, undoing decades of American foreign policy work.

obama terrorist

Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt

The House Judiciary Committee is understandably appalled that we would provide sensitive training to a country brimming over with terrorists.

“The terror threat continues and numerous news reports document recent terror-related activities coming from Libya,” the Judiciary Committee said in a statement. “Recently, the employees at the U.S. embassy in Tripoli were evacuated due to violence between rival militias near the facility.”

“Since then, many foreign governments have closed their embassies in Libya and evacuated staff as the violence has spread throughout the country,” the statement said.

However, given the lawlessness of the Obama Regime, there isn’t much Congress can do about it without actually developing enough of a spinal column to impeach Obama or at least cut off his funding.

DHS officials had promised lawmakers in April that it would provide key documents necessary for Congress to perform its legal oversight on the proposal to overturn the ban. However, DHS never turned these documents over, according to the Judiciary Committee.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R., Va.), the committee’s chairman, accused DHS of stonewalling and lashed out at the administration for “turning a blind eye to real terrorist threats that exist in Libya today.”

Trey Goudy The esteemed countermoonbat Trey Gowdy (R-SC) chimes in:

“It is extremely concerning that DHS is moving forward with these plans, but has not provided information on the policy change despite repeated requests from Members.”

Under Obama donor Jeh Johnson, the DHS is as hyperpoliticized as the IRS and Justice Department. Its purpose is not to enhance American security, but to advance hard left ideology, according to which terrorists who want to kill us cannot be the bad guys, because we are the bad guys.

A debt-crippled economy, millions upon millions of unskilled, unassimilable illegal aliens, a destabilized Middle East, and the profound contempt of the world community may not be Obama’s only legacies. We may have a few mushroom clouds to remember him by too.

the Obama legacy

The ultimate Obama legacy.

Cross-posted at Moonbattery.


via Obama Regime Unilaterally Lifts Ban on Flight and Nuclear Training for Libyan Nationals | Right Wing News.

Aug 072014

by Ben Shapiro — 7 Aug 2014, 8:26 AM

In Iraq, the Islamic State has now grabbed control of the Iraqi city of Sinjar. Tens of thousands of residents, according to the UK Guardian, have fled to the mountains, where they face a choice: they can either die of dehydration, or they can risk death from ISIS in the city. “Food is low, ammunition is low, and so is water,” one Sinjar refugee said. “We have one piece of bread to share between 10 people. We have to walk 2 kilometers to get water. There were some air strikes yesterday [against the jihadists], but they have made no difference.” CNN national security analyst Peter Bergen says, “al Qaeda appears to control more territory in the Arab world than it has done at any time in its history.”


That’s somewhat surprising given that back in January, Obama told The New Yorker that ISIS was minor league:

The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant. I think there is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian.

President Obama has an unfortunate habit of making final and declarative pronouncements on foreign policy that are proved absolutely false within short time windows. Here are just a few of his pronouncements on foreign policy that went wildly wrong:

Al Qaeda Has Been Decimated.” Obama has said dozens of times that al Qaeda has been largely destroyed under his administration, adding that al Qaeda was “on the path to defeat.” That was clearly untrue, given the September 11, 2012 terror attacks in Benghazi. It’s even less true today, given the fact that al Qaeda now controls a record amount of territory.

“The 1980s Are Now Calling To Ask For Their Foreign Policy Back.” After mocking Mitt Romney for stating that America’s top “geopolitical foe” was Russia, and averring that al Qaeda was instead the top threat to America, Obama dropped that doozy during their presidential debate on foreign policy. Now that Russia has invaded Ukraine, Russian-backed forces have shot down a passenger airliner, and Russia has worked in tandem with Edward Snowden to reveal national security secrets, Obama’s line doesn’t look all that clever.

“Iraq’s Future Will Be In The Hands Of Its People.” Obama stated this at Fort Bragg in 2011. He routinely utilizes variations of the same theme to describe why America should not be involved in Iraq. Of course, Iraq’s future is not in the hands of its people; instead, Iraq’s future is in the hands of ISIS, springing from Syria, and Iran, which has now inserted Revolutionary Guard troops into the country.

Obama's foreign policy

“A Red Line For Us Is We Start Seeing a Whole Bunch of Chemical Weapons Moving Around or Being Utilized. That Would Change My Calculus.” Um, no it didn’t. After Secretary of State John Kerry threatened an “unbelievably small” military strike in Syria, Obama then negotiated a ridiculous deal that left Bashar Assad in power and completely failed to divest him of his weapons of mass destruction. That was just a few months after Obama said in his debate with Romney, “What we’ve done is organize the international community, saying Assad has to go.” Assad was recently sworn into a new seven-year term in Syria. The number of dead in Syria is climbing toward 200,000.

“Egyptians Have Made It Clear That Nothing Less Than Genuine Democracy Will Carry The Day.” Obama stated this upon the ouster of Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak in 2011, as part of Obama’s overall celebration of the so-called Arab Spring. After Muslim Brotherhood head Mohammed Morsi was elected president of Egypt in June 2012, Obama called him to congratulate him on his victory. Morsi quickly moved to shut down the courts and consolidate power. And he was ousted by the military. Which now runs the country. Which is good, since Morsi was disastrous for both America and her allies. So much for Obama’s brilliant stroke on the Arab Spring.

“To Take Out a Credit Card From The Bank of China In The Name of Our Children…That’s Irresponsible. It’s Unpatriotic.” President Obama was Senator Obama when he made this incredible statement in 2008. Over the same time in office as President Obama at this point in his presidency, George W. Bush had added $2.72 trillion in debt. President Obama has added over $7 trillion in debt. Obama called Bush “unpatriotic” for running up the debt.

“No Question That Libya…Would Be Better Off With Qaddafi Out Of Power.” Obama said that in October 2011. Things went great in Libya, as Chris Stevens can attest. America has now evacuated her embassy in Libya. Why? The current chaos in Libya is being led by “rival militias, made up largely of former anti-Qaddafi rebels,” according to Fox News.

“You know, they said we needed to triple the Border Patrol. Or now they’re going to say we need to quadruple the Border Patrol. Or they’ll want a higher fence. Maybe they’ll need a moat.” Obama said this, sarcastically, while visiting El Paso, Texas in 2011. Well, upping the Border Patrol might have helped quell the influx of tens of thousands of illegal immigrant minors from South American.

Please see the video below presenting some of Barack Obama’s greatest lies.

The list goes on and on. President Obama’s history of predicting world events isn’t too stellar. Perhaps that’s because neither is his policy.

via 9 Obama Foreign Policy Pronouncements That Now Look Especially Idiotic.

Jul 302014

By Sarah Palin –Published July 11, 2014

The next time you hear politicians denounce Barack Obama as a lawless, imperial president with a scandal-riddled administration, ask them what they’re going to do about it. Their gnashing of teeth over Obama’s self-granted omnipotence is repetitive.

impeach obama-palin

Sarah Palin

Let’s agree with our ninth president, William Henry Harrison, who said there is nothing more corrupting, nothing more destructive than the exercise of unlimited power. We understand the problem. The only way for politicians to fix it is with a little less talk and a lot more action.

The Constitution provides the remedy for a president who commits “high crimes and misdemeanors.” It’s impeachment.

The only thing necessary to transform America into something unrecognizable is for good men to do nothing!

To be clear, “high crimes and misdemeanors” are not necessarily ordinary criminal offenses. Our Framers used the term to signify a dereliction of duty, and the first duty of the president is to enforce our laws and preserve, protect, and defend our Constitution.

Alexander Hamilton described impeachable offenses as those “which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.” He explained that they are “political” offenses “as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

No serious person who is paying attention can deny that Obama and his administration have abused and violated the public trust and disregarded the Constitution. Let me count the ways.

Without notifying Congress as required by law, he set free terrorist prisoners at a time of war when they can return to the battlefield to kill our troops.

In violation of our Constitution, he regularly ignores court orders, changes laws by executive fiat, and refuses to enforce laws he doesn’t like, including our immigration laws.

When Congress declined to pass amnesty for illegal immigrants’ offspring, he unilaterally enacted his own version of it, which created the current crisis on our border as illegal youth pour into our country to receive what he illegally promised them.

He committed fraud on the American people when he promised that if we liked our health care plan we could keep it.

He got us into a war in Libya without Congressional approval. When our ambassador begged for security at the consulate in Benghazi, he was ignored and then murdered when the consulate was attacked as predicted. Americans were left behind to die, as the president did nothing to rescue our people there. Afterwards, he helped spread the lie that a spontaneous protest over a YouTube video was to blame for this highly organized, premeditated terrorist attack.

Obama’s IRS targeted his political opponents for harassment. Then the agency lied to and stonewalled Congress and likely destroyed subpoenaed evidence, while Obama falsely declared there’s no corruption there, not even a smidgen.

From the VA scandal to his unconstitutional recess appointments, to his DOJ wiretapping reporters and giving guns to Mexican drug cartels, to violating religious freedom exercised by businesses and ignoring in-house illegal fundraising, the list of abuse goes on and on.palin

Barack Obama’s administration is proving itself a festering boil of scandal. The Constitution is rock solid in holding the president responsible for the executive branch. He can’t just vote “present” while shrugging and feigning ignorance about all these abuses of the public trust, any more than a mob boss can claim innocence because he didn’t personally do the hit. The buck stops with the guy at the top.

Impeachment is the ultimate check on an out-of-control executive branch. It is serious, not to be used for petty partisan purposes; and it is imperative that it becomes a matter of legitimate discussion before the American people lose all trust in our federal government.

Impeachment requires moral courage to advance what is right, and it requires political will. A complacent or disheartened electorate may silently endure these abuses from the administration, the permanent political class is only too happy to maintain the status quo, and the mainstream media is not a fair watchdog. So, the nation’s last line of defense is for We the People to rise up and say, “enough is enough.”

Obama’s lawless encouragement of illegal immigration should be the tipping point for that political will because it impacts all Americans – native-born and legal immigrants of all backgrounds who followed the rules and now watch rewards go to rule breakers while they’re forced to compete for limited jobs and resources. It’s the tipping point because the forgotten working class is hurt most by this lawlessness; and these good Americans deserve the strongest, most effective tool to defend the livelihoods they’ve so honorably built!

Some are arguing for cautious inaction and dismiss even a discussion of impeachment. With Obama’s poll numbers in the tank and his liberal policies exposed as failures, why rock the boat? But that argument misses the point.

The president is radically changing the way the executive branch does business. He is setting a dangerous precedent that will fundamentally change us. With his “pen and phone,” he’s abrogating Congressional authority in violation of the Constitution’s separation of powers. He’s making himself a ruler, not a president. We had a revolution back in 1776 because we don’t like kings.

Some argue we should wait for midterm elections and hope a big victory by Republicans in both Houses of Congress will rein in Obama.

Been there, done that in 2010. If Congress refuses to use the power the Constitution gives it, Barack Obama will continue to rule however he wants.

Some argue that at best the House might vote for articles of impeachment, but the Senate is unlikely to convict. But that is no argument against holding a president accountable and sending the people’s message to all successors.

Obama can keep laughing and say, “so sue me” to the House’s tepid lawsuit threat. Let’s hear him laugh off impeachment. At the very least, despite his mocking the Constitution, this Constitutional process will put him on notice.

The only thing necessary to transform America into something unrecognizable is for good men to do nothing! If not these violations and the president’s promise to continue to “go it alone” in ignoring the separation of powers and rule of law, what will it take for you to take a stand? How bad does it have to get?

We live in an America where the NSA spies on our communications, the IRS targets us because of our political beliefs, the border is overrun by foreign nationals, terrorist leaders are released to the battlefield, our health care is taken from us and we’re forced to buy a plan we don’t want and can’t afford, Catholic nuns are targeted by the government simply because they adhere to their Catholic faith, the Justice Department arms Mexican drug lords, and the president keeps a “kill list” of people he’s authorized to be executed on sight.

If you’re comfortable with all that, then by all means sit back and hope for the best. Those concerned about America want change. That comes with healing the injuries done to society by an unchecked president; that starts with impeachment.

See the video below:

via The case for Obama’s impeachment: The Constitution’s remedy for a lawless, imperial president | Fox News.

Jun 122014

By Ed Lasky — June 12, 2014

The latest scandals from the White House have prompted speculation trying to determine why President Obama screws up so much. There is a simple answer.

Obamacare, a failed trillion dollar stimulus, sky-high food stamp usage, disability rolls soaring, our national debt mortgaging America’s future, our adversaries and enemies on the march. Obama has compiled quite a list of “accomplishment” as he fulfills one promise — to fundamentally transform America. Tragically, it has been a very damaging transformation.Obama-liar1

Some ascribe these failures to Obama’s inability to manage the presidency, to lead; others to a work ethic problem; others to a lack of experience (only on the fictional West Wing TV show would academia be seen as qualifying one for the presidency) and a sparse record of ever accomplishing anything of significance other than being …Barack Obama.

All these failures have been justified, explained away or caused by lies (you can keep your insurance, doctor, and save $2500 on premiums; ObamaCare will add not a thin dime to the deficit; a red line that was Orwellian-erased when it became an embarrassment; Al Qaeda was on the run; Benghazi was caused by a video; there was not a “smidgen of corruption” at the IRS). The lies are too numerous to list (here is a partial list from last year of 252 examples of lies, law-breaking and corruption) and that list ever-expanding because, as Victor Davis Hanson wrote, a man who would lie about his mother’s death will “fudge” the truth about anything. And so he has and will, indeed must, continue to do so.

George Will wrote two years ago that “that “Barack Obama’s intellectual sociopathy — his often breezy and sometimes loutish indifference to truth — should no longer startle.” If journalists had only fulfilled their responsibilities as the fourth branch of government perhaps Obama’s career would have never led to the presidency, because his lying started at the very beginning of his national career. His memoir was riddled with inaccuracies.  In a prime example of projection he repeatedly has warned Americans not to listen to his critics and opponents as they were trying to “bamboozle “people, while he bamboozled his way to the Oval Office.

He would be nowhere without the lying. That was all he really ever had.

 One suspects that he could pass a lie-detector test with honors. But why does he feel so comfortable lying? For the same reason a con man does: he thinks most people are suckers, dummies, and rubes. A con man has to know his targets to reap his “rewards”.

Joseph Curl in the Washington Times wrote in “Is Obama really that stupid” that Obama and his underlings must have known Bowe Berghdal was a deserter and the Taliban 5 were war criminals and murderers and concluded “The president may be incompetent, but he’s not stupid. He’s just counting on the American people to be.”  That is correct and has been true for years.

Two years ago I wrote “What Obama Thinks of Americans” outlining the many instances where Obama has insulted our intelligence. It may have started with the “bitter clingers” slur in 2008 but his contempt has flowed for years.  We don’t think clearly and “fear and frustration” drive voters; racism still corrupts our society; we have gotten “a little soft” and a “little bit lazy”; “have lost our ambition, our imagination”; we don’t appreciate him enough. No wonder he stayed in Pastor Jeremiah Wright Junior’s church; Wright was preaching to the choir.

liar-liarHe may be right to consider many Americans as being weak and not thinking clearly — as being vulnerable marks and suckers — after all, he won election to the presidency-twice!

By the way, his pejorative views of Americans are shared by Michelle Obama (who considers young people “knuckleheads”) and by former Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, who said about the Benghazi scandal, “people are tired of it, or don’t know anything about it” (especially risible for someone who pushed Obamacare on us without knowing what was in it). Liberals view Americans as dumb — hence the need for nanny-ism. And control from above by superior elites and intellectuals — liberal fascism, Jonah Goldberg has called this political philosophy – is Obama’s calling.

Another indicator of his views of Americans happened in 2012  when he spoke without a teleprompter and owned up to one fault: he had not been a good enough storyteller (in other words, Americans weren’t good enough listeners). So his policies and leadership were not the problems but the messaging (lying?) was the problem.

Obama has run the most insular of presidencies. Instead of listening to experts to formulate policy, instead of reading Daily Intelligence or Daily Economic Briefings or meeting with Cabinet members, he has preferred to meet with spinners and political hacks. Once in office, he placed campaign strategist David Axelrod in the office closest to the Oval Office (power is reflected by proximity) and made his campaign speechwriter (Hope and Change), Jon Favreau, the highest paid staffer in the White House. Those reveal Obama’s priorities.

 Kimberly Strassel recently wrote in “Meet Obama’s Kissingers” about Obama’s National Security Council:

NSC staff are foreign-policy grownups, and its meetings are barred to political henchmen.
Or that was the case, until the Obama White House. By early March 2009, two months into this presidency, the New York Times had run a profile of David Axelrod, noting that Mr. Obama’s top campaign guru and “political protector” was now “often” to be found “in the late afternoons” walking “to the Situation Room to attend some meetings of the National Security Council.” President Obama’s first national security adviser, former Marine General and NATO Commander Jim Jones, left after only two years following clashes with Mr. Obama’s inner circle.
He was replaced by Democratic political operative and former Fannie Mae lobbyist Tom Donilon. Mr. Donilon joined Ben Rhodes, the Obama campaign speechwriter, who in 2009 had been elevated to deputy national security adviser for strategic communications. Also present was Tommy Vietor, whose entire career prior to NSC spokesman was as an Obama spinmeister—as a press aide in the 2004 Senate run, and campaign flack for the 2008 Iowa caucuses, and assistant White House press secretary. In fairness, his credentials also included getting caught on camera in 2010 pounding beers, shirtless, at a Georgetown bar. America’s foreign-policy experts at work.
Not that Mr. Obama’s first instinct is even to rely on his now overtly political NSC. This paper reported in September 2013 that as the White House struggled with the question of military intervention in Syria, it summoned all the old “Obama loyalists” for advice. They included his 2008 campaign manager ( David Plouffe ), his former press secretary ( Robert Gibbs ), a former speechwriter ( Jon Favreau ), and Mr. Vietor (who had by then left the NSC to form a political consulting group).
A serious-minded NSC, in the tumultuous aftermath of Benghazi, would have responded with a sober assessment for its president of the real and continued terror threat, and of the failings that resulted in four dead Americans. Instead we find the deputy NSA, Mr. Rhodes, crafting an internal email advising his colleagues to spin, and blame it all on an Internet video. Mr. Rhodes had no interest in advising the president on hard realities. His only interest was ensuring his boss got re-elected.

So our commander in chief gets advice from political hacks when it comes to defending America. To quote Glenn Reyonolds of Instapundit, Americans are in the best of hands.

When Obamacare disasters were damaging his image in 2013, who did he call? Not Ghostbusters ; not experienced experts or professionals; not Republicans for their input but his campaign flacks, David Axelrod, David Plouffe and Jon Favreau. They were there to craft a message not fix a problem.

So Obama has stepped up his record-breaking hiring of journalists and their kin to staff his administration.  For example, Ben Rhodes’s brother is head of CBS News, a network that was accused by one of its star journalists, Sharyl  Attkisson, of having avoided criticism of the White House and stifling any investigation of Benghazi. At the same time, the White House has operated in an unprecedented manner to control the news flow — whether by intimidating and investigating (the secret subpoena of Associated Press phone records) journalists, coopting them by special invitations to the White House, tapping local and more pliable journalists (or even disk jockeys such as the Pimp With The Limp) rather than national figures for interviews, and relying on narrowcasting via social networks to deliver their version of reality. Facts are whatever Obama and his fellow Democrats tell you they are. Hence the relentless denial of reality we see displayed by the “Don’t Worry, Be Happy” president – he thinks we are easily bamboozled. Fictions and lies are the new truth.   liagra

But the spinning can only go on for so long. Eventually a juggler drops his plates and the spinning stops. A liar has to resort to increasingly absurd and easily punctured lies to sustain a story. Not every scandal can be dismissed as partisan witch hunts, distractions, “phony scandals,” or controversies whipped up in Washington. How many times can we hear “Dude that was like two years ago” as the stonewalling persists? Those become tiresome clichés with diminishing returns as time passes and people wise up. Every time Susan Rice appears on a Sunday news show won’t Americans just start thinking: she is lying? We have seen all these acts before.

 As was so well put in a quote attributed by many to America’s first Republican president Abraham Lincoln, “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time”.

As I wrote in “Obama The Storyteller

Successful con men, like sharks, need to keep moving They can move to an area, find and score against the marks and suckers, and move on to find a new group of innocent victims. But Obama has now been on the national stage for 7 years now; there is nowhere left to hide, no new suckers to find.  Reality is there for all to see.

A recent poll may offer hope. Most Americans have come to realize that Obama lies. Stop the presses! Maybe it is true after all that Americans will always do the right thing-after exhausting all the alternatives. According to a Fox News poll:

President Barack Obama has lost the trust of most Americans: a new poll shows that about six in 10 voters think he lies on important issues some or most of the time.

The Fox News poll found that 37 percent think the president lies “most of the time.” Another 24 percent say he lies “some of the time.”

Twenty percent say Obama lies “only now and then,” and 15 percent say he “never” lies, the survey found.

And to add insult to injury to Obama and his allies, a poll also shows that Fox News-anathematized by liberals- is the most trusted TV news source in America. No wonder Obama and others on the left have hectored America not to watch the network.

Obama will pass from the scene in two years; the damage he and his allies have caused will last for many years to come. Indeed, the lies he and his proxies have routinely engaged in for years have subverted democracy in America.   

They will continue to do so until Democrats are removed from power in Washington and elsewhere.

November 2016 cannot come soon enough.

via Articles: Obama Thinks You’re Stupid, that’s Why.

Jun 052014

By Anne Bayefsky (Fox News) — June 03, 2014

It is about time that pundits stop describing President Obama’s foreign policy as weak. There is a straight line between emboldening Syria’s Assad by calling him a reformer, Egypt’s Morsi a democrat, Turkey’s Erdogan a friend, Iran’s Rouhani a moderate, and now a Palestinian government that includes Hamas, a peace partner.

Monday’s speedy announcement that the United States will work with and pay for a PLO-Hamas coalition government is a strong and predictable step in an alarming  pattern


This undated image provided by the U.S. Army shows Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. Two of Bergdahl’s fellow soldiers are now reportedly claiming that the 28-year-old Idaho native willingly walked away from his post in Afghanistan on June 30, 2009. (US Army)

Monday’s speedy announcement that the United States will work with and pay for a PLO-Hamas coalition government is a predictable step in an alarming  pattern.

Every one of these moves has deliberately driven a wedge between Obama and Israel. President Obama’s priority is, and always has been, the Muslim world. It has made no difference to this partiality that in the latter world American hostages are languishing in prison cells, the killers of Americans are government insiders, official anti-Semitism is flourishing, and the locals are brutalized.

At the same time, President Obama has a recurring problem with his choice of best friends. There is an inconvenient discord between the terrorism and violence emanating from his BFF’s and his putative job as commander-in-chief.

The difficulty presents itself, for example, in the context of Benghazi. The anger over Benghazi is more than justified, but not because it is still a mystery why the president sent no one to bomb Libya in order to save Americans under attack.  He may have hurt somebody on the ground who was not American, or he may have stirred up local resentment.

President Obama has never made a secret of his “counter-terrorism” policy. In May 2013 he said quite clearly that even in the face of “terrorists who pose a continuing and imminent threat to the American people,”  “before any strike is taken, there must be near-certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured.”

Speaking at West Point on May 28, 2014 he reiterated that in taking direct action “against terrorism,” we may strike “only where there is near certainty of no civilian casualties.”

The problem is not that he’s unclear.  It’s that he isn’t right.  International law does not require planning for zero civilian casualties – which would simply encourage combatants to use more civilians as human shields. The Geneva Conventions test is one of proportionality: “An attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life [or] injury to civilians” is prohibited if it “would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.”

Imprisoned: The five Taliban detainees at the heart of the Bergdahl swap are the most senior Afghans still held at the prison at the U.S. base in Cuba. Each has been held since 2002.

Imprisoned: The five Taliban detainees at the heart of the Bergdahl swap are the most senior Afghans still held at the prison at the U.S. base in Cuba. Each has been held since 2002.

So international law is not what is driving President Obama’s foreign policy. What’s really eating him is that he believes we are our own worst enemy. As he said at West Point:  “our actions should meet a simple test: We must not create more enemies than we take off the battlefield.”  He is worried that if we defend ourselves, we “stir up local resentments.”

That’s a green light for the political enablers of terrorists everywhere to start writing UN speeches, mount new phony demonstrations, and concoct more bogus Islamophobia charges. If we are the ones responsible for creating more terrorists by fighting terrorists, then we may as well just go golfing.

The President’s release of top five Taliban terrorists from Guantanamo this past weekend fits the dogma.  As early as May 21, 2009, the President told us: “the existence of Guantanamo…created …terrorists…It is a rallying cry for our enemies.” Unsurprisingly, they prefer their terrorist buddies back in the field.

Similarly, our drone program is dwindling – nothing in Pakistan’s tribal areas since last December – because our enemies don’t like it either. But then, why would they?

Which brings us back to the President’s embrace of a Palestinian government that includes the terror organization, Hamas – just hours after the PLO-Hamas deal was done.

Why the rush?  Why was the issue of legitimizing a terror organization, dedicated to the annihilation of one of our closest allies, not worth more than a few seconds thought?

The answer is that for President Obama, it was just business as usual. His top priority is not delegitimizing terrorists and fighting to win, but avoiding stirring up local resentments.  And Palestinians have made fabricating resentment for every imaginable affront into an art form.  “A house is being built!” is a favorite, while Palestinian rocket-launchers and kidnappers and would-be suicide bombers are plying their wares.

Furthermore, the President never seriously tried to stop it. He could have threatened and ensured harsh economic and political repercussions, which Congress would have supported.  But he didn’t.  Just as he didn’t make any such threats when the Palestinians went to the UN in November 2012 to become a non-member observer state.   And just as he didn’t when the Palestinians started signing treaties this past April that legally are only open to states.

The ugly truth is that President Obama is happy to let the UN turn Palestine into a state, and thereby allow Palestinians to avoid negotiation, avoid recognition of the Jewish state, and avoid genuine commitment to peaceful coexistence with its Jewish neighbor. Unilateralism and the UN was always the back-up plan to Kerry’s egoistic globe-hopping.

Asked about Hamas’ continued commitment to militarism, Psaki responded “we’ll continue to evaluate the specifics here.”

The specifics are simple.  One more Jew-hating, Israel-bashing, American foe has been welcomed into Obama’s Islamist inner circle.

via Benghazi, Bergdahl and Hamas: The common thread in Obama’s foreign policy | Fox News.