Obama’s Politically Correct War On Terror

The Unorganized

American Militia

King George didn’t listen to us either!

 


Obama to 'Reassure' Muslims

by Robert Spencer


At last the triumphant day has come, and Barack Obama is President of the United States. Few presidents have taken office burdened with such high expectations -- and one of the chief items on the new Chief Executive’s to-do list is, as he himself put it, to “reboot America’s image in the world and also in the Muslim world in particular.”


Obama thinks of himself as uniquely- equipped to do this. He explained early in his presidential campaign that “I think the world would see me as a different kind of President, somebody who could see the world through their eyes….If I convened a meeting with Muslim leaders around the world, to discuss how they can align themselves in our battle against terrorism, but also put our, the relationship between the West and the Islamic world on a more productive footing, I do so with the credibility of somebody who actually lived in a Muslim country for a number of years.”


He has remained consistent in this belief. The Times of London reported Sunday that Obama “believes a personal initiative will dramatise his wish to reassure Muslims, and intends to give a speech in an Islamic capital during his first 100 days in office as a sign of his engagement.”


Reassure Muslims? But who will seek to reassure non-Muslims alienated by jihad aggression and Islamic supremacism? Why, no one, of course. That would be “Islamophobic.”


Nevertheless, Muslims are already feeling less than reassured by Obama’s backpedaling on his pledge to close down the Guantanamo Bay detention center for jihadis: now he is saying that it may take up to four years for him to do so. Of course, it would have been hard for him not to back away from this promise after the Pentagon’s revelation last week that 61 former Gitmo inmates have now returned to the jihad. This shouldn’t surprise anyone, since over the years nothing has been done at Guantanamo to disabuse inmates of their beliefs about the responsibility of Muslims to wage war against and subjugate unbelievers. The prevailing PC “Islam Is A Religion of Peace” line prevents that -- and makes for this recidivism.


Will Obama address that omission as he prepares to close down Guantanamo (however slowly), so as to ensure that those who are ultimately released don’t return to their murderous ways as well? Unlikely. Rather than confront the doctrines of jihad and Islamic supremacism that fuel jihad activity worldwide, Obama seems prepared to play Let’s Make A Deal with the Islamic world: “Very early on in the administration,” he has declared, “I will announce a team and an approach that allows us to get engaged in the Middle East on day one.


The American people and the players in the region are going to know that we are serious about dealing with the Middle East, dealing with Iran, dealing with Afghanistan and Pakistan on the diplomatic front and not just on the military front.”


Does Obama really believe that Afghanistan and Pakistan, if not Iran, haven’t been dealt with successfully on the diplomatic front? The U.S. has showered billions in foreign aid on Pakistan over the last seven years – while (as even the New York Times has recently documented) Pakistani officials at the highest levels have engaged in a full-scale double game, doing just enough to impede jihad terrorism to placate Washington and aiding jihad terror groups while Washington was looking the other way.


But the only solution to this that Obama has hinted at so far has been to…shower still more money upon Pakistan. And Pakistan is unlikely to be the only one: last May Obama declared that the jihad terrorist groups Hizballah and Hamas are “going down a blind alley with violence that weakens their legitimate claims.” Will President Obama, then, try to assuage what he thinks of as the “legitimate claims” of these groups? Will he do so by showering even more of the American taxpayers’ money upon them?


Barack Obama was elected promising change, and a new direction in both domestic and foreign policies. His statements about meeting the challenge of the global jihad, however, so far seem more like warmed-over Carterism than anything new. One wonders how many times the foreign policy establishment will beat its head against this particular wall before it realizes just how self-defeating it is.


Muslims Calling for Genocide

by Robert Spencer


The mainstream media has taken little notice, but at rallies in America and Europe this week protesting Israel’s actions in Gaza, protesters have more than once declared how happy they would be if the Jews were simply wiped out once and for all.


Los Angeles: Muslim demonstrators in front of the Israeli Consulate chanted, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” -- a vision that can only be realized by the total destruction of Israel. They waved the flag of the jihad terrorist group Hizballah. To cheers from other demonstrators, some shouted, “Long live Hitler! Put Jews in ovens! Jews are fossil fuel!”


Fort Lauderdale: Leftist and Muslim demonstrators chanted, “Nuke, nuke Israel!” One yelled: “Go back to the ovens! You need a big oven, that’s what you need!”


Toronto: A Muslim protester complained that “Hitler didn’t do a good job.” Another shouted at pro-Israel counter-demonstrators: “Jewish child, you’re gonna f****n die. Hamas is coming for you." Pro-jihad demonstrators berated and threatened those who came out to show support for Israel, saying: “I want the war to continue because I want Hizballah to wipe the state of terrorism [i.e., Israel] off the planet....You’re being wiped off the planet. That’s a promise.” Yet another Muslim demonstrator said of Jews, “You are the brothers of pigs!” -- recalling the Qur’an’s depiction of Jews who disobeyed Allah as being transformed into apes and pigs.


London: Muslim protesters, repeatedly shouting “Allahu akbar,” threw traffic cones and sticks at the police and taunted them, calling them cowards, swine and “kuffar” (unbelievers).


Copenhagen: Muslim demonstrators chanted, “Down, down Israel, down, down USA, down, down democracy, down, down Denmark.” One Muslim in the crowd ostentatiously made the Nazi salute. Another shouted, “We want to kill all the Jews, all the Jews should be slain, they have no right to exist!” The crowd repeatedly chanted, “Khaybar, Khaybar, ya Yahoud, jaish Muhammad sawfa yaoud” -- that is, “Khaybar, Khaybar, O Jews, the army of Muhammad will return.” That chant is a reference to a celebrated incident in the life of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, when he massacred a town full of Jewish farmers. Muhammad led a Muslim force against the Khaybar oasis, which was inhabited by Jews -- many of whom he had previously exiled from Medina.


The Muslims also chanted “Hitler! Heil Hitler! Hitler! Hitler! Hitler!” Demonstrators shouted “We must just kill all those Jews, man! Then we'd be rid of them, man!,” “Death to Israel,” and “Kill the Jews.”


Amsterdam: While Dutch parliamentarian Harry van Bommel of the Socialist Party and other Leftist useful idiots marched in a demonstration calling for an intifada against Israel, the crowd behind them chanted “Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas.”


While not everyone at these rallies expressed genocidal sentiments, it is noteworthy that there is no record of anyone who said these things being rebuked by his fellow demonstrators -- or by the authorities in the various countries where these demonstrations took place. Have American and European authorities rushed to condemn such declarations, and called upon Muslim advocacy groups and leaders to act energetically against the rampant Jew-hatred in Muslim communities in Western countries?


Not exactly. An emblematic incident took place in Duisburg, Germany, when a pro-Israel couple put an Israeli flag in their apartment window, overlooking a 10,000-strong pro-jihad demonstration on the street below. During the demonstration, German police actually broke into the couple’s apartment to remove the flag, explaining that they did so in order to forestall the apartment being broken into by the demonstrators themselves. When a police officer removed the flag from the window, the mob below applauded, cheered, and shouted “Allahu akbar.”


That same shout has echoed through these rallies all over America and Europe in recent days -- the one that Muhammad Atta advised his fellow hijackers to use frequently, since hearing it, he said, struck terror into the hearts of the unbelievers.


Ugly demonstrations have been an unfortunate but recurring feature of public life in America for decades, but open calls for genocide are something new. If American and European officials don’t react quickly now, the next round of demonstrations by the friends and allies of the global Islamic jihad will only be worse.

 

Obama’s Politically Correct Madness: Muslim Sensitivity Training

Chalk up another victory for the terrorists' Fifth Column – the Council on American-Islamic Relations. After much prodding and capitalizing on phony incidents of racial profiling, CAIR has achieved something few Americans have achieved – they got President Barack Hussein Obama to tell airport security officials to back off.


Obama's Transportation Security Administration announced a new training program – some may call it an indoctrination program – that will be mandated for more than 45,000 security officers and supervisors. No, it's not training that'll be used to identify terrorists or protect airline passengers. This training program is being billed as "Muslim Sensitivity Training."


In a press release sent to US media organizations, CAIR said it welcomed the "special training about Islamic traditions" including the Hajj, or pilgrimage to Mecca, which entails thousands of Muslims traveling to Saudi Arabia.


President Obama said the TSA cultural sensitivity training includes details about the timing of Hajj travel, about items pilgrims may be carrying and about Islamic prayers that may be observed by security personnel.


Earlier this month, CAIR advised those going on Hajj to be aware of their civil and legal rights as airline passengers.


CAIR's "Your Rights and Responsibilities as an American Muslim" pocket guide states:  "As an airline passenger, you are entitled to courteous, respectful and non-stigmatizing treatment by airline and security personnel. You have the right to complain about treatment that you believe is discriminatory."


"We welcome the fact that airport security officers nationwide will now be better informed about Islamic traditions relating to Hajj thanks to President Obama," said CAIR Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper. "This proactive effort on the part of the Obama Transportation Security Administration demonstrates that there is no contradiction between the need to maintain airline safety and security and the duty to protect the religious and civil rights of airline passengers."


Hooper said representatives of CAIR chapters nationwide have met with TSA, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials on issues related to cultural sensitivity and national security.


CAIR, America's largest Islamic civil liberties group, has 32 offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.


Perhaps American Christians and Jews should start complaining about their treatment at airports, as well. The current strategy of strip-searching elderly women and invalids appears to be a bit insensitive to this writer. Forcing women to drink their own breast milk also appears to be insensitive.


While CAIR continues to portray itself as a moderate organization, its history is filled with red flags that are ignored by the mainstream news media.


According to a report from the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security:


"The Council on American-Islamic Relations and its employees have combined, conspired, and agreed with third parties, including, but not limited to, the Islamic Association for Palestine , the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, the Global Relief Foundation, and foreign nationals hostile to the interests of the United States, to provide material support to known terrorist organizations, to advance the Hamas agenda, and to propagate radical Islam."


"The Council on American-Islamic Relations, and certain of its officers, directors, and employees, have acted in support of, and in furtherance of, this conspiracy," said the Senate report.


Dr. Daniel Pipes, a foremost expert on radical Islam and terrorism cites several criminal cases involving CAIR officials:


A senior staff member, Randall Royer a/k/a “Ismail” Royer, pled guilty and was sentenced to twenty years in prison for participating in a network of militant jihadists centered in Northern Virginia.  He admitted to aiding and abetting three persons who sought training in a terrorist camp in Pakistan for the purpose of waging jihad against American troops in Afghanistan.  Royer’s illegal actions occurred while he was employed by CAIR.


Their Director of Public Affairs, Bassem Kafagi was arrested by the US due to his ties with a terror-financing front group.  Khafagi pled guilty to charges of visa and bank fraud, and agreed to be deported to Egypt. Khafagi’s illegal actions occurred while he was employed by CAIR.


Ghassan Elashi, a founder of CAIR Texas chapter and founder of the Holy Land Foundation was arrested by the United States and charged with, making false statements on export declarations, dealing in the property of a designated terrorist organization, conspiracy and money laundering.  Ghassan Elashi committed his crimes while working at CAIR, and was found guilty.


CAIR Board Member Imam Siraj Wahaj, an un-indicted co-conspirator in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, has called for replacing the American government with an Islamic caliphate, and warned that America will crumble unless it accepts Islam.


Whenever CAIR is accused of wrongdoing, their spokesmen are quick to tell Americans that its leadership have been guests at President Obama's White House and that they are regularly consulted by US officials on matters involving homeland security.


Too be sure, the Obama Administration intentionally provides CAIR with cover, but the officials with whom CAIR staff claim they work are usually people such as Rep. John Conyers, a Democrat serving a large Muslim population in Michigan, and a long-time terrorist and Marxist sympathizer. CAIR and other Muslim groups have funneled campaign contributions to Conyers, who in January begins his tenure as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.


Many believe it was Rep. Conyers who aided CAIR in achieving their politically correct victory.


As a result of CAIR's influence, President Barack Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder announced recently that the term enemy combatant will no longer be used by the federal government to describe enemy combatants captured on the battlefield during counterterrorism and counterinsurgency military operations. To many law enforcement officers and military personnel, this action is the epitome of politically correct newspeak.


As time passes and the events of September 11th become more distant, the voices of America's political-correctness orthodoxy have increased their volume and intensity. They now feel safe in questioning Homeland Security tactics to combat terrorism and are attempting to turn public opinion against law-enforcement leaders.


A major weapon in their arsenal is the accusation of racial profiling by US police and security forces. Another weapon in the war against the war on terrorism is the distortions made regarding the Patriot Act. When one considers the risks to lives and property posed by terrorists, political correctness has now become a weapon of mass destruction.


Most clear thinking Americans were shocked when 9-11 Commission member and former US Secretary of the Navy John Lehman revealed a disturbing fact: the Federal Aviation Administration will be hitting US airlines with stiff penalties for even the appearance of any racial profiling of Middle-Easterners. One airline paid out a huge sum of money to Arab males who filed law suits alleging racial profiling, as well. Yet none of this appeared in the commission's final report.


This leaves many law-enforcement officers incredulously asking: What kind of terrorism war is this? It seems national security and public safety are taking a back-seat to political correctness which in turn thwarts our efforts to detect terrorists and their accomplices.


The National Association of Chiefs of Police's annual survey of our nation's police commanders and security directors provides evidence of the Obama Administrations insane infatuation with the politically-correct orthodoxy. The survey reveals that almost 60 percent of police departments enforce a written policy prohibiting so-called racial profiling. At the same time, the survey shows that 88 percent of American police and security executives believe our homeland will suffer a terrorist attack within the next year due the politically correct Obama directives.


Some of the same people complaining about the CIA and FBI deficiencies in combating terrorism are the very people responsible for handcuffing law enforcement and intelligence officers in the first place.


Criminal Profiling is a law-enforcement tool with a history that began in the early 1980s. The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Behavioral Sciences Unit developed the first profile for a serial-killer (which by the way indicated a white male among its criteria). Then, according to former-FBI special agent Robert Ressler, the BSU created profiles for other categories of crime including terrorism. Through the FBI National Academy in Quantico, Virginia, local law-enforcement officers were provided instruction in profiling, which they brought back to their respective police agencies.


Any cop worth his salt will tell you that criminal profiling is a valuable tool. As law enforcement learns more about the criminal mind and criminal characteristics, these profiles will continue to be enhanced and revised. But will there be any need for such research and development if cops are prohibited from using this tool because of Barack Hussein Obama and CAIR?


Sharia OK with Obama's Top Lawyer


President Obama has tabbed the former dean of Yale Law School, Harold Koh, to become the legal adviser for the State Department. Among numerous questionable and controversial statements, Koh has said that the “war on terror” -- a term which the Obama Administration has already quietly abandoned, was “obsessive.” And in a 2007 speech, according to a lawyer who was in the audience, Koh opined that “in an appropriate case, he didn’t see any reason why sharia law would not be applied to govern a case in the United States.”


Asked for comment, a spokeswoman for Koh waved the incident away: “I had heard that some guy...had asked a question about sharia law, and that Dean Koh had said something about that while there are obvious differences among the many different legal systems, they also share some common legal concepts.”


Probably Koh has something in mind akin to what the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, was thinking when he made his notorious statement that Islamic law was “unavoidable” in Britain. Williams didn’t mean that Britain would become a Sharia state, but only that Muslims could have recourse to private Sharia arbitration for marital disputes, inheritance matters, and the like. Stonings and amputations? Of course not. “Nobody in their right mind,” said Williams, “would want to see in this country the kind of inhumanity that’s sometimes been associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states; the extreme punishments, the attitudes to women as well.” But, he concluded, the idea that “there’s one law for everybody...I think that's a bit of a danger.”


Equality of treatment and equality of rights for all people? A dangerous concept!


One may hope that Koh wouldn’t go that far, but in saying that “in an appropriate case” Sharia legal principles could be applied in the United States, he seems to be opening the door to Sharia courts in the U.S., instituted after the pattern already established in Britain.


Sharia courts are already operating there, and multiculturalists dismiss concerns about them by insisting that they’re just private, voluntary arbitration tribunals, like similar arbitration panels for Jews and Catholics. The analogy, however, is not exact. Jewish family courts and Catholic marriage tribunals claim authority only over those who accept that authority, i.e., those who believe in the tenets of those faiths. What’s more, such courts claim no authority beyond their narrow purview, such that most legal matters are beyond their scope. Islamic law, by contrast, asserts itself as the only legitimate law for all areas of human life – not just marriage and family law, and by no means just religious law, but as the sole legal foundation for every aspect of social and political life.


As such, Sharia claims jurisdiction over non-Muslims as well as Muslims. The great Pakistani Islamic theorist of the twentieth century, Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi, whose writings remain internationally influential among Muslims today, wrote that non-Muslims have “absolutely no right to seize the reins of power in any part of God’s earth, nor to direct the collective affairs of human beings according to their own misconceived doctrines.” If they do, “the believers would be under an obligation to do their utmost to dislodge them from political power and to make them live in subservience to the Islamic way of life.” In accord with this, there is no concept in the Qur’an, Islamic tradition, or Islamic law of non-Muslims living as equals with Muslims in an Islamic state: Muslims must be in a superior position.


And so it comes as no surprise that those private Sharia courts in Britain are already coming into conflict with British law. Recently Sharia courts in Britain have been allowed to adjudicate cases of domestic violence rather than have those cases referred to the criminal courts, even though the Qur’an directs men to beat disobedient women (4:34) – a directive likely to find the battered woman’s complaint falling on deaf ears in a Sharia court.


Sharia is a complex and comprehensive unity that traditional Muslims believe to be the unalterable law of Allah. To open the door to one aspect of it is only to open the door to the rest  – which inevitably will result in the institutionalized subjugation of women and non-Muslims, and the extinguishing of freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. Consequently, all free people may hope that Koh, if his nomination is approved, will reconsider his earlier naïve approval of the coming of Sharia to the land of the free.


What is left for Obama and his Secular Socialists to destroy? It is going too far when you abandon the American Constitution for a backward group of knuckle dragging retards who subscribe to an ideology created by a Psychopathic Pedophile Prophet, whose teachings represent everything vile and corrupt in the nature of mankind.


Islam should not be considered to be anything but a cancer on civilization. For Obama and his secular socialist to turn their back on American laws and traditions are acts of treason against civilization and our values that come from our Judaic-Christian heritage.


Obama's ideology is that of a secular Marxist, he has lost the support of the American people, and if he continues he will be the cause of a second American revolution.

 
Obama’s PC War
War On TerrorThe_American_War_On_Terror.html
Patriots BlogThe_Patriots_Blog/The_Patriots_Blog.html
PC MilitaryObamas_PC_Military.html
PC TerrorismObamas_Politically_Correct_Terrorism.html





Dear Father, give us victory over tyranny and deliver us from oppression. Amen!