"They are not jihadists, for jihad is a holy struggle, an effort to purify for a legitimate purpose, and there is nothing -- absolutely nothing -- holy or pure or legitimate or Islamic about murdering innocent men, women and children."
Such pee-cee drivel.
It's like claiming during the Cold War that the enemy were not communists
because "communism" was some noble struggle
that had nothing to do with the Soviet Union.
How one longs for the moral clarity of a Reagan.
Not that Bush had much clarity either.
He called it a "War on Terror".
visited the enemy state of Syria in Feb 2008 and
idiotically said that
Syria shared with America
"a common desire to achieve stability in the region".
Brezinski Calls for Obama to Shoot Down Israeli Jets, September 19, 2009.
Brzezinski says America should deny Iraqi airspace to any Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear weapons program.
He even implies America should attack its ally to protect its enemy.
That's the Obama Administration in a nutshell.
Brzezinski: "They have to fly over our airspace in Iraq. Are we just going to sit there and watch?"
Q: "What if they fly over anyway?"
Brzezinski: "Well, we have to be serious about denying them that right. That means a denial where you aren't just saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not. No one wishes for this but it could be a
Obama's Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs
Johnnie Carson, Apr 2012, denies that the Nigerian jihadists Boko Haram are motivated by religion!
I'm sure that would be news to them!
"I want to take this opportunity to stress one key point and that is that religion is not driving extremist violence either in Jos or northern Nigeria".
In March 2012 he said:
"It is important to note that religion is not the primary driver behind extremist violence in Nigeria".
deputy chief of staff and aide to the
US Secretary of State (Hillary Clinton).
was appointed Chief "Diversity Officer" at the Federal Communications Commission by President Obama in August 2009.
Here he praises South American thug
for shutting down the free press in Venezuela.
White House Special Advisor for "Green Jobs" by Obama in Mar 2009.
He resigned after controversy when Americans learned about his
communist and anti-police past.
(White House Communications Director)
admires Mao, June 2009,
and praises the butcher during his rise to power in 1947.
Imagine a Bush staffer praising the rise to power of Hitler this way,
saying that in prison he never gave up, and so on.
Shame on her.
Shame on her ignorance.
Unbelievably, she praised this satanic butcher of clergy and Christians in
a speech given in
Washington National Cathedral.
Search for more
Obama's Attorney General, puts on a painful display, May 2010.
9 years after radical Islam declared war on America,
Holder is asked about the three major radical Islamic attacks against the US
in Obama's term so far
has a hard time saying that all three attacks were motivated by radical Islam.
Hilarious comment here
after the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki in Sept 2011:
"When asked to comment on the killing, Director of National Intelligence
James Clapper stared blankly for several seconds before asking, "Who is al-Awlaki?""
We had the brilliant
a few years ago.
And now we've got this person.
These are dark days.
Samantha Power, April 2002 video above
talks about the need for the US to take a stand against Israel,
and spend billions of dollars arming its Islamic enemies:
"it may more crucially mean ... investing ... billions of dollars, not in servicing Israel's military, but actually investing in the new state of Palestine".
She talks about invading Israel, a liberal democracy and ally,
in order to stop some alleged human rights abuses!
"it would probably take .. what will have to be a mammoth protection force, not of the old Srebrenica kind
or the Rwanda kind, but a meaningful military presence. Because it seems to me at this stage
(and this is true of actual genocides as well, and not just major human rights abuses, which we're seeing there)
is that you have to go in as if you’re serious, you have to put something on the line.
And unfortunately, imposition of a solution on unwilling parties is dreadful. It’s a terrible thing to do".
She sleazily compares the elected Israeli democratic leader Sharon
to the terrorist Arafat.
She has contempt for Israeli democracy:
"It’s essential that some set of principles becomes the benchmark, rather than a deference to people who are fundamentally politically destined to destroy the lives of their own people. And by that I mean what Tom Friedman has called “Sharafat” [Sharon-Arafat]. I do think in that sense, both political leaders have been dreadfully irresponsible. And, unfortunately, it does require external intervention".
She sleazily implies that America only supports Israel because of the Jewish vote
(not because it is a liberal democracy and ally).
She phrases taking the wrong stand on Israel as standing up bravely to the Jews:
"putting something on the line might mean alienating a domestic constituency
of tremendous political and financial import".
I don't know why she bothers worrying about the Jews.
They all vote Democrat
no matter what.
They normally vote for the most anti-Israel party.
She really believes that America only supports Israel because of the Jews:
"Another longstanding foreign policy flaw is the degree to which special interests dictate the way in which the 'national interest' as a whole is defined and pursued. ... America's important historic relationship with Israel has often led foreign policy decision-makers to defer reflexively to Israeli security assessments".
She can't think of any other reason to support Israel?
Samantha Power claims, 23 Feb 2014, that
Daniel Pearl's death
was part of a "cycle of violence".
Just when I thought the Obama administration couldn't sicken me further,
they come out with this.
"Where does O. find these people?"
The cultural choices of many Obama staff and supporters
a lot about the mental world they inhabit.
The piously politically-correct
Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay
portrays US soldiers at Guantanamo as male rapists.
It also portrays US security chiefs as fanatical racists.
In Obama's worldview, this is all cool.
who plays Kumar,
was appointed by President Obama
as Associate Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement
in Apr 2009.
It seems that any slander of the troops is OK with this
Commander in Chief.
A White House - NEA conference call
is accused of trying to get the taxpayer-funded NEA
to promote the Obama political agenda.
What Did Kumar Know, and When Did He Know It?,
Alexander Marlow, 8 Sept 2009, says Kal Penn was the White House representative to the conference call.
"Meet the face of Obama's Ministry of Propaganda: Kal Penn.
A historical trend exists in totalitarian states where art lionizes its leadership, while in free states art holds power accountable. ...
Color me a narc, but let's bring him in for questioning."
Mao on the White House Christmas tree, Dec 2009.
Photo from here.
The Obama White House say they did not know about this.
The tree was decorated either by
"local community groups"
But even if the Obama people are innocent,
isn't it interesting that (a) they picked to design the tree
someone who thinks Mao is funny or cool,
and (b) the designer thought this would be acceptable to the Obama White House?
"spotting a right-wing dictator on ornaments in the Bush White House would have had Media Matters stumbling towards its fainting couch".
Who I block:
I will debate almost anyone.
I love ideas.
I will not debate (and will block) people who do the following:
(a) Make threats.
(b) Accuse me of crimes.
(c) Comment on my appearance.
(d) Drag in stuff about me not related to the topic. (My professional career, my personal life.)
(e) Complain to my employer.
Yes, people do all these things.