One more time: the basics.
As I have written a zillion times the war against Islam is a 1400-year-old one. Better said, Islam has been attacking the West for 1400 years. Once upon a time, the West fought back, and Islam was confined to dusty, forgotten corners of the world. That has changed thanks to oil money, technology, and, of course, insane Western immigration policies that have allowed Muslim boots on the ground in the West.
We get lectured, in the face of all the evidence to the contrary, that Islam is not violent; that the mass killers in the growing list of cities around the world, are not real Muslims; that Islam is a "Religion of Peace." OK, sure. I have noted many, many times (here, for example), that we are told,
"99% of Muslims" are not terrorists. Is that true? I don't know. From where does that number come? I don't know. Let's, however, go along with the gag. Let's assume it is accurate, and come up with our own equally valid "99%" statistics. Some samples follow; I am sure you can turn this into a drinking game--but not around Muslims because drinking offends them (unless they are Saudi diplomats in Islamabad).
Did you know that,
-- 99% of the Japanese did not attack Pearl Harbor?
-- 99% of the Nazis did not kill Jews or Gypsies, or invade Poland?
-- 99% of the Communists did not engage in Stalin's or Mao's purges?
-- 99% of the Germans killed in Dresden had never bombed England?
-- 99% of the Italians did not invade Ethiopia?
-- 99% of the Iranians did not occupy the US embassy in Teheran?
-- 99% of the Al Qaeda membership did not fly airplanes into the World Trade Center or the Pentagon?
And so on, and on, and so what? What does that "99%" prove? Just one thing: There are consequences in the real world to belonging to organizations or following ideologies and leaders that commit atrocities. That's the way it works. If 99% of Muslims are not terrorists, and do not support terrorism (that's the big "if") where are they?Do we really need to go on?
President Obama, Islam is an existential threat to us and to our allies. Period. It seeks global domination. It will use openly military means, e.g., the ongoing battle in Syria and Iraq, guerrilla/terror means as we have seen on our own streets, and use our tolerance and belief in diversity against us.
You, the ostensible leader of the West, have failed miserably to identify the enemy and, of course, to develop a strategy, a total strategy not just a few bombing missions in Syria, to defeat this enemy. In fact, you have acted in a manner that makes many of us feel, wonder, and think if you're not rooting for the other side. You even go out of your way to encourage Middle Eastern Muslims to emigrate to the United States. Why?
How many more innocent people must die? It's Islam that is killing them.
President Obama you are a disgrace.
Don't wait too long to get that 870 ... jus saying.
ReplyDeleteYou bet.
ReplyDeleteAmen!! Thank you, DiploMad for your clarity.
ReplyDeleteConservative Boomer
In case this is of any comfort to you (I'm sure it's not), French media, while reporting on the first developments in the middle of this night, took great care to say that they did not know, yet, whether that was a terrorist attack (never mind a Muslim one).
ReplyDeleteYou see, this guy drove a big truck on the pavement of a city where thousands of people had gathered to watch the Bastille Day fireworks. He did this for 2 kilometers, mowing down the crowd, then getting out of his cabin to shoot people.
But the media were not yet sure this was terrorism. Maybe it was an accident, or the driver was in love, or he could not tell the gas pedal from the brake.
Journalists were still avoiding the T-word when the French Council of Muslim Faith issued a press release condemning this act of... whatever. Why the French Council of Muslim Faith, I wonder ? Why not the French Council of Truck Drivers ?
Terrorism, in fact, has come to mean Muslim terrorism. So you can't even say it's terrorism without some sort of official approval, because it might offend Muslims.
Then, President Hollande delivered a speech at around 3 a.m. and said that, yes, this was a big act of "T", so lesser individuals could state the bloody obvious without being racists, Nazis and whatnot.
We obviously need background checks for semi-trailer trucks ...
ReplyDeleteObama is surely a disgrace. But millions of people put him in office. Aren't they responsible too? And now HRC?
ReplyDeleteYour comment is a bit over the top, no? It did make me realize that as this war--that is now the right word I think--continues, there are more and more people even in the U.S. who have had friends and family members murdered and who are now utterly out of patience.
ReplyDeleteGeneral Flynn is now confirming that he was fired as head of DIA for calling radical Muslims our enemy.
ReplyDelete"Two years ago, I was called into a meeting with the undersecretary of defense for intelligence and the director of national intelligence, and after some “niceties,” I was told by the USDI that I was being let go from DIA. It was definitely an uncomfortable moment (I suspect more for them than me).
I asked the DNI (Gen. James Clapper) if my leadership of the agency was in question and he said it was not; had it been, he said, they would have relieved me on the spot.
Modal Trigger
I knew then it had more to do with the stand I took on radical Islamism and the expansion of al Qaeda and its associated movements. I felt the intel system was way too politicized, especially in the Defense Department."
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGeneral Flynn has conformed that he was fired for calling radical Islam our enemy,
ReplyDelete"Two years ago, I was called into a meeting with the undersecretary of defense for intelligence and the director of national intelligence, and after some “niceties,” I was told by the USDI that I was being let go from DIA. It was definitely an uncomfortable moment (I suspect more for them than me).
I asked the DNI (Gen. James Clapper) if my leadership of the agency was in question and he said it was not; had it been, he said, they would have relieved me on the spot.
I knew then it had more to do with the stand I took on radical Islamism and the expansion of al Qaeda and its associated movements. I felt the intel system was way too politicized, especially in the Defense Department."
A little bit OT--I just went to the facsimiles of the 28 declassified pages on Saudi Arabia on the CNN website. There are portions still blacked out, probably to protect FBI and CIA sources and operatives. Warning: the facsimile pages are hard to read for my old eyes, so I'm hoping to see a transcript. However, they're still quite revealing about the duplicitous role of the Saudi state. I now strongly suspect that whatever cooperation we may have gotten out of them post 9/11 was the result of some Bush administration [justified] blackmail against them.
DeleteOne of the things that really perked my own suspicion at the time was when the Saudis tried to get Giuliani to speak against the Jews in return for aid in rebuilding NY.
Simple solution--brand Islam a terrorist organization with all of the legal penalties that entails.
ReplyDeleteThe problem isn't that Johnny can't read. The problem isn't even that Johnny can't think. The problem is that Johnny doesn't know what thinking is; he confuses it with feeling.
ReplyDeleteThomas Sowell
Exactly so. There is a very good explanation of the inability of large segments of our political and cultural elites as well as our citizenry to think coherently and respond rationally to these events. They have been demoralized through a studied effort by leftist intellectuals who have taken over many public and private institutions. Former KGB propaganda expert and defector Yuri Bezmenov sums up the results of this effort here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlpODYhnPEo.
ReplyDeleteHe says once subjected to constant demoralization through the education process people are unable to process information rationally. Even if you shower them with facts and evidence they are unable to believe what you are saying.
He says we would need a whole new generation taught with traditional morals, values and the truth about American history to turn things around in this country. Similar efforts would be necessary in Europe.
Heh.. when you/blogger initially botches titles for articles, it comes across funny in the URL like: mow-much-blood-mr-president-how-much-do
ReplyDeleteMowing blood indeed...
- reader #1482
Y see Obama comes down on the side of the islamisya in Turkey.
ReplyDeleteCan't wait to hear your thoughts on the attempted coup in Turkey.
ReplyDeleteClearly, this shows that we need to regulate trucks more. We need background checks and waiting periods for trucks, and no one needs a truck with more then six cylinders, or one that holds more than ten gallons of gas. Its for the children, after all.
ReplyDeleteThe semi-automatic trucks should be banned.
DeleteIt should be noted that Malcolm X was killed around the time he started backing off from the Nation of Islam; and in fairness, the religion of the American abolitionists was also the religion of the American slaveholders.
ReplyDelete"over the top" in regards to France's need for slaughter?check out their PM mewlings and their Security chiefs comments.Viva la frances!teddy bears and james taylor urgently requested
ReplyDeleteFrom the 'Gee I wish't I'd thought of that' department.
ReplyDeleteA fellow down at a neighborhood flea market/traders show was selling tee shirts out of his van. The text on the shirts read:
Remember The Nice Muslim
(I bought two. I sure hope "all the better sorts" bear in mind its a town in France.)
***
Anonymous on July 16--your points are valid. But, what do you call the Muslim abolitionist movement? Western imperialism. And I still groan that Malcolm X's supposed "otterboggerfee" is still considered a classic.
ReplyDeleteNot that I am condoning anything, but as a point of understanding where the president is coming from when he will not say radical Islam, it is because he is trying to prevent mass violence against muslims who have nothing to do with the attacks. If people in this country would not start wholesale beatings on groups of people because a member of that group did something awful we would probably hear the term used more often. Do the police who kill people rather than arrest speak for the entire police force, NO. Does any member of any group speak for the entire group, NO. If there was not the potential for unrestrained violence against people who are innocent, the truth could come out faster, appropriate measures taken against those who commit these crimes.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I don't buy this. In the *best* case scenario, the 'religion of peace' crowd is trying to redefine Islam without first becoming adherents or experts. By 'asserting' the 'religion of peace' rhetoric, they assume that they can convince followers of the Koran that it *is* peaceful.
DeleteI do *not* believe there is a threat of 'mass violence against muslims' in the US. There *is* a threat of individual violence against muslims that might be due to the government speaking honestly about the problem, but even after 9/11, there was no 'mass violence' wave. The very worst the US public has done in response to an existential domestic threat was the internment of the Japanese, which *wasn't* a civilian/vigilante effort, but a government-authorized effort.
While that might be Obama's *pretext* for lying about the Koran, it represents yet another facet of Obama's fundamental misunderstanding (or deliberate misunderstanding) of America (which is unsurprising considering his early childhood, family, and professional background).
There's simply no significant history of 'mass violence' in America that wasn't led by the state.
- reader #1482
This is typical mushy liberal word salad without any factual basis. Just another Obama drone.
DeleteHere's the problem. When you continue to bring in hundreds of thousands of Muslims and deny people a day in the process, you are ramping up the day of justice. If Obama truly cared about the ones here, he would suspend immigration and let them assimilate. He doesn't want that. He will continue to stir up the violence here and with BLM. God help us if he thinks he can do martial law
Delete"he is trying to prevent mass violence against muslims who have nothing to do with the attack": but where is the evidence that this risk is a practical problem?
ReplyDeleteMany thanks for share your blog site here. Friendship in Islam
ReplyDelete