Category Archives: appeasement

Islam, Jihad and Terrorism: A Gem From Mark Steyn

From the 2013 archives, specifically from October 2013, this might be the best article on Islam and Jihad during the course of the year…by the indomitable Mark Steyn:

http://www.steynonline.com/5809/whose-islam

 

Hezbollah Hails Obama’s Nuke Deal with the Ayatollahs

In case you had any doubts as to whether the “interim” agreement with Iran on nuclear technology that Barack Obama and John Kerry foisted on the world in the dead of night over the weekend was a terrible development, the world’s foremost Shia Jihadist terrorist organization has provided confirmation:

Lebanon’s Hezbollah on Monday hailed a nuclear deal between its patron Iran and world powers as “a major victory” for Tehran.

“What was achieved through this agreement is a major victory for Iran and to all the people of the region and it is a defeat for the enemies of these people,” Hezbollah said in a statement.

“(It is) a model victory and world class achievement which the Islamic state adds to its record which shines with victories and achievements.”

There are many people in America who don’t know just who Hezbollah is. For those of you who need a reminder, Hezbollah is the Jihadist terrorist wing of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Their stated goal is to establish an Islamic state in the Middle East ruled by Shariah. They have a long record of killing Americans, stretching back to 1982 and 1983 with Islamikaze truck bomb attacks on the US embassy and US Marine Barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, a host of hostage-takings and murders of Americans in Beirut in the remainder of the 1980s and active involvement in the insurgency against US forces in Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom.

This is not the first time that Barack Obama has pleased Hezbollah. Not long ago, he allowed Ali Mussa Daqduq, a high-level Hezbollah operative responsible for torturing and killing several US Army soldiers, to go free in Iraq…

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2012/nov/16/picket-lawyer-iraq-kept-wanted-hezbollah-man-under/

Now Hezbollah is once again jumping for joy over the actions of President Barack Obama…

http://freebeacon.com/hezbollah-says-nuclear-deal-a-victory-for-iran/

 

 

 

Chuck Hagel is Weak on Jihad and Terrorism

hagel-profile-in-courage

By Christopher Holton

President Obama has selected one of the worst possible candidates imaginable to become Secretary of Defense. Chuck Hagel has a history of being weak on Jihad and terrorism, the greatest threat to American lives and national security today.

Hagel’s nomination should become a “teaching moment.” Just because someone served honorably in the uniform of the United States military or has an “R” instead of a “D” after his name, does not automatically mean that the person is strong on national security policy.

Chuck Hagel is as bad on the threat of Jihadist terrorism as anyone in America. Not only has he been on the wrong side of votes on the issue, but his votes demonstrate a lack of commitment on the issue, as well a tendency to enable Jihad:

• Wrong on Iraq

A graphic depiction of the impact of the surge on Al Qaeda in Iraq

A graphic depiction of the impact of the surge on Al Qaeda in Iraq

Initially, then-Senator Hagel voted in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom to overthrow Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. But when the insurgency did not go so well, Hagel flip-flopped and called for a withdrawal of US troops in just 120 days back in 2007.

Had such a policy been implemented, Al Qaeda and other Jihadist elements would have emerged victorious in Iraq and the US would have been seen as clearly losing Iraq to Al Qaeda. This would have energized Al Qaeda and given it the biggest recruiting boost since the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States homeland. This would have essentially allowed the global jihad to morph at an accelerated rate.

Then, when the US announced the surge counteroffensive in Iraq, Senator Hagel said it would be “the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam, if it’s carried out.”

Hagel is clearly no military strategist. The surge broke the back of the insurgency, drastically reduced the violence in Iraq and allowed the US to draw down its force levels in a secure manner.

To be sure, Iraq is no utopia today, but violence levels there are no where near what they were during the insurgency and, most importantly, Al Qaeda was denied victory in Iraq due to the surge.

Wrong on Hezbollah

In 2006 Hagel was one of a just 11 senators who refused to sign a letter urging the European Union to designate Hezbollah a terrorist organization. Hezbollah not only killed 241 Marines, soldiers and sailors in Beirut, Lebanon on 23 October 1983, they also kidnapped and murdered US Marine Colonel William Higgins in 1988 when he was on UN Peacekeeping duty. More recently, Hezbollah was active in fighting US GIs in Iraq and Hezbollah members captured, tortured and killed US GIs in Iraq.

US Marine Barracks bombing--Beirut, Lebanon--23 October 1983. 241 Americans killed by Hezbollah Islamikaze bombing

US Marine Barracks bombing–Beirut, Lebanon–23 October 1983. 241 Americans killed by Hezbollah Islamikaze bombing

 

Colonel William "Rich" Higgins, USMC--Kidnapped and murdered by Hezbollah in 1988.

Colonel William “Rich” Higgins, USMC–Kidnapped and murdered by Hezbollah in 1988.

Ali Mussa Daqduq: Hezbollah leader captured in Iraq in 2007. He planned a raid in which 4 US soldiers were captured, subsequently tortured and killed in Karbala, Iraq. He was captured by US Special Operations Forces, but was released from custody when President Obama refused to have him remanded to the US prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Ali Mussa Daqduq: Hezbollah leader captured in Iraq in 2007. He planned a raid in which 4 US soldiers were captured, subsequently tortured and killed in Karbala, Iraq. He was captured by US Special Operations Forces, but was released from custody when President Obama refused to have him remanded to the US prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Wrong on Iran

Iranian "art" in Tehran

Iranian “art” in Tehran

Chuck Hagel has a shamefully weak record on Iran, the world’s foremost state sponsor of Jihadist terrorism and a serial proliferator of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles.

His weakness on Iran goes way back to August of 2001 when he was one of just two US Senators to vote against renewal of the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act. The Iran-Libya Sanctions Act was set up to punish entities for investing in Iranian or Libyan petroleum industries, aiming to prevent Tehran or Tripoli from gaining petroleum profits that could be used to develop or acquire weapons of mass destruction or to finance terrorism.

In September 2007, Hagel voted against designating the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. 76 Senators voted for the bill in an overwhelming bipartisan vote.

In July 2008, Hagel voted in the Senate Banking Committee against legislation imposing sanctions on countries conducting certain business with Iran. The legislation passed 19-2.

In October 2008 Hagel single-handedly killed Senator Gordon Smith’s (R-Oregon) S.970 Iran Counter-Proliferation Act, a bill that had 71 co-sponsors, 36 Republican and 35 Democrat. This act would have strengthened the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (now referred to simply as the Iran Sanctions Act).

Chuck Hagel: Wrong for America

Leftist pundits are creating a straw man argument by promoting the meme that only the “Jewish lobby” is opposed to Hagel because of his record of not supporting Israel.

This dishonest tactic is merely meant as a smokescreen to mask Hagel’s shamefully weak, longstanding record on Jihad and terrorism primarily directed against the United States and its citizens.

Call and write your Senator and tell him/her to oppose the nomination of Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense. America cannot afford to have someone as weak on Jihadist terrorism as Chuck Hagel.

The Muslim Brotherhood, the Clinton State Department, John McCain and Today’s Lax Security Mindset

 

By Christopher Holton

There was a time when it was considered necessary and proper to be concerned about possible foreign influences in US government and military service. Way back in 1981 when I first filled out forms as part of the process for joining the US military (it was a DOD form, I don’t remember the number) I had to answer a specific question regarding travel. The question asked if I had traveled to any of a list of nations after certain dates (all communist bloc countries) with a date listed by each nation (the date that each country had turned communist).

Anyone who joined the military in the Cold War era probably remembers this form and this question. If the answer to the question for any of the nations involved was “yes” you had to provide a complete explanation for the reason for the trip, when it took place, etc. Having never visited countries like Cuba, North Korea, East Germany, the Soviet Union, etc., I can’t say that I know what the process would have been had I answered yes.

But the point is, if you wanted to join the US military and you had even visited any communist countries, the Department of Defense wanted to know about it.

Fast forward to today. We are locked in a mortal struggle against a force not unlike communism. In fact, it has been called “communism with a god.” That force is Islam as defined by the Shariah doctrine which forms the basis for it. There are certain countries and organizations that are prominent in the enemy threat doctrine. Yet, to my knowledge, today we have no similar safeguards in place to what the DOD had during the Cold War years to check on the influence of foreign powers on American institutions. For instance, are any questions ever raised about travel to Iran, Syria or Sudan, three countries on the State Department’s list of terrorist sponsoring nations? For that matter, what about travel to Yemen, like Carlos Bledsoe did where he was indoctrinated to wage jihad in the USA by Anwar al-Alwaki? What about travel to the tribal areas of Pakistan, where the Times Square bomber traveled and received training? For that matter, how about travel to Saudi Arabia? After all, the Salafi strain of Islam that gave birth to Al Qaeda has its seat there and most of Al Qaeda’s cannon fodder seems to come from Saudi Arabia.

Then there is the whole present question of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood is best described as the forefather of all modern Jihadist terrorist groups. Its apologists and proponents claim that the Muslim Brotherhood has completely eschewed violence, yet the available evidence proves otherwise. HAMAS was founded as a Muslim Brotherhood wing and has been designated a foreign terrorist organization by the US State Department. HAMAS is one of the deadliest Jihadist organizations in the world, having carried out numerous Islamikaze bombings. And make no mistake, HAMAS has a large presence inside the USA.

There seems to have developed in recent years some romanticized view of the Muslim Brotherhood among certain naive political factions in the USA–and not just Democrats. Rather than being viewed as an organization in the political wing of a global insurgency, the Muslim Brotherhood is unfortunately being embraced in the West and the US. Senator John McCain, for instance, seems to have become smitten with the Muslim Brotherhood after meeting with them for a few hours in Egypt. But no one has embraced the Muslim Brotherhood quite like the Obama administration. The Obama administration has established close ties to Muslim Brotherhood organizations in the US and met with them at length and frequently. All indications are that the Muslim Brotherhood plays a prominent role in the Obama administration. Organizations like CAIR (the Council on American Islamic Relations) and ISNA (the Islamic Society of North America) were named unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorism financing conviction in US history. (Attorney General Holder declined to prosecute these organizations when he came to office, despite intentions by others in the Justice Department to do so.) In the Holy Land Foundation trial, in documented evidence that was stipulated to by the defense, both CAIR and ISNA were identified as Muslim Brotherhood organizations.

And yes, a high-level member of the Clinton staff at the State Department, Huma Abedin, comes from a prominent Muslim Brotherhood family. Her father, her brother and her mother all have prominent positions in the Muslim Brotherhood apparatus. If during the Cold War such a person came from a family with extensive ties to the Communist Party of Romania or East Germany, there would have been ample reason to conduct a security investigation. But in today’s politically correct surreal world of Washington DC “go along to get along” culture, it seems that no questions can be raised. This is the same culture that looked the other way while a known Jihadist, Major Nidal Hassan, hid right out in the open in the US Army spouting Islamic Jihad doctrine, culminating in the terrible terrorist attack at Fort Hood.

Well, the Center for Security Policy DID raise questions. The Center produced a 10-part video course on the Muslim Brotherhood in America that every American should watch: http://www.muslimbrotherhoodinamerica.com. Among others members of Congress, Michelle Bachmann has written a letter to inspectors general of key Washington departments inquiring as to Muslim Brotherhood influence in Washington’s halls of power. For her trouble, the likes of Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Anderson Cooper and a host of Leftist media from the Huffington Post to the Los Angeles Times and MSNBC have attacked Rep. Bachmann.

They have all done so in a total vacuum of knowledge about the Muslim Brotherhood, the Holy Land Foundation trial and American fronts like CAIR and ISNA.

The Center has published a rebuttal to this shrill, emotional criticism: http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p19041.xml

This all stems from a complete failure of our leadership to put America on a war footing in the wake of 9/11. Our leaders have failed to identify the enemy. They have failed to try to understand the enemy threat doctrine. In fact they have denied that an enemy threat doctrine even exists. As a result of this culture, an imperialist, nefarious organization with long-standing ties to terrorism and with goals identical to those of Al Qaeda itself, namely the Muslim Brotherhood, is treated as a friend, rather than as a foe. If you even suggest that the Muslim Brotherhood might be an enemy of America, Hillary Clinton, John McCain and Anderson Cooper will attack you as if you are a wild-eyed bomb-thrower. We are indeed through the looking glass.

America’s Bureaucratized Counterterror Apparatus At Work

America is hamstrung in its efforts to defend itself from Jihadist terrorists by a remarkable denial in law enforcement, homeland security, intelligence and military circles as to the nature of our enemy and the threat we face.

This stems partly from political correctness and ignorant assumptions about our enemy and his doctrine.

But it also is the result of effective influence operations run by the Muslim Brotherhood to control how we ourselves describe our enemies and speak about our enemies. This has reached the point at which the Obama administration has openly embraced the Muslim Brotherhood overseas in nations like Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and, evidently, Syria.

Muslim Brotherhood front groups, like Hamas-tied CAIR, ISNA and the Muslim Students Association, all of which were named unindicted co-conspirators in the largest terrorism financing conviction in US history, and have been shielded from prosecution by Eric Holder, have tremendous influence in the Obama administration, to the point that we now know that, despite the fact that the FBI felt compelled to cut off all relations with CAIR, for example, Obama White House officials have met with CAIR hundreds of times over the past 3 years.

So, while the DHS pats down little old ladies and toddlers in airports, they are in TOTAL denial as to the war we are in.

Individuals like John Brennan, Eric Holder and Paul Stockton, who can only be described as bureaucratic train wrecks, control our policies and prevent America from ever being effective in coming to terms with the threat from violent Jihad, which is based in the doctrine known as Shariah.

I urge you to view the short videos below. I do not like terms like, “violent Islamic extremism” or “radical Islam,” but they are a far sight better than the terms our bureaucratized counterterrorism apparatus uses to describe the threat.

The fact of the matter is that America and the West is confronted with a global Islamic insurgency. Like all insurgencies, this one is mostly political, not military, though it does have a military/violent component. This is born out in the fact that large, global Islamic organizations that claim to be peaceful, such as Hizb ut Tahrir, the Muslim Brotherhood and Tabligi Jamaat have the same goals as terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, HAMAS, Lashkar e Taiba, the Taliban, Al Shabaab, Boko Haram, Abu Sayyaf, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and Jemaah Islamiyah.

These goals and this insurgency are anchored in Islamic doctrine, known as Shariah. This does not mean that all Muslims are terrorists or Jihadists, but there is no denying that the doctrine exists and has existed for many years. The fact is, most Muslims do not adhere to this doctrine some are unaware that it even exists. But unfortunately that cannot be said to delegitimize the Shariah doctrine that brings us violent Jihad and a global Islamic insurgency designed to bring about supremacy of Islam worldwide.

Thanks to our own ignorance and the influence operations of the political wing of the global Islamic insurgency (especially the Muslim Brotherhood in America), we have become willfully blind to the threat. We need no further evidence than the disgraceful  bureaucrats in the three videos below:

Combative, willful denial of the threat we face

Ron Paul: Blame America First for Jihad

Ron Paul is at it again.

But let’s not get to worked up about the crazy old loon. After all, he’ll be 76 in August. That will make him 77 by the time the next president is inaugurated. That’s nearly the age President Reagan was when he left office after two terms.

Ron Paul isn’t in this race to win. He’s one of those perpetual candidates for president who just adores the attention.

In his latest appearance on Fox News, Paul manages to stick to his McGovern-like “Blame America First” script with the tired old assumption that Jihad is being waged against us just because we are in Saudi Arabia, or Iraq, or Afghanistan, or especially because we are an ally of Israel. Paul appears to be a disciple of Michael Schuerer, who has been spouting that line since BEFORE he left the CIA.

Anyway, the good folks at Gateway Pundit posted Paul’s appearance. My comments follow the link:

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/04/crazy-ron-paul-still-blames-the-us-for-islamic-extremism-video/

Here are my thoughts:

It is interesting that Ron Paul bases his entire philosophy on the global Islamic insurgency on the opinions of Michael Sheuer. Michael Sheuer epitomizes all that is wrong with America’s bureaucratized counterterrorism apparatus. First of all, he broke longstanding CIA regulations at the encouragement of his politicized superiors to write a book while in active service. This alone makes him a scumbag in my book. Thousands of honorable CIA operators could have done the same, but none did. There is a reason. It’s called honor. Second, Sheuer had a uniquely disturbing career in the CIA. A career analyst with no field experience, he was somehow allowed to become a case officer and eventually found himself in charge of the CIA unit tasked with killing or capturing Bin Laden. He failed miserably. Moreover, if you actually read his work, it is readily apparent that Sheuer has at best a superficial level of knowledge of Islamic threat doctrine. He is appallingly ignorant for someone who was in the position he was in. This has resulted in his belief that we are only being attacked because of things we have done and especially for our support for Israel.

I ask my friends:

Is Jemmaah Islamiya attempting to establish an Islamic state in Indonesia because the US supports Israel?

Are the Chechyan jihadists waging Jihad against Russia because the US supports Israel?

Is Abu Sayyef attempting to establish an Islamic state on Mindanao because the US supports Israel?

Are Jihadists attempting to establish an Islamic state in southern Thailand because the US supports Israel?

Have Nigerian Jihadists attacked innocent Christians repeatedly because the US supports Israel?

Is Al Shabaad conducting terrorist attacks in Kenya and Somalia on innocent civilians because the US supports Israel?

Are Jihadists attempting to create an Islamic state in India’s Kashmir because the US supports Israel?

Have Jihadists killed thousands in attacks on innocent civilians in Morocco, Algeria, Argentina, Brazil, the UK, Spain, Jordan and Bangladesh because the US supports Israel?

Are young Jihadis rioting in France because the US supports Israel?

Why is all this happening? Could it be that there is something more to this global violence than the simple “blame America first” concept that Ron Paul supposes?

Why hasn’t he bothered to learn about the enemy threat doctrine?

ISLAMIC SUPREMACISM AND CONQUEST

The soon-to-be constructed Ground Zero mosque has generated a lot of controversy. There seems to be a general level of confusion as to what this is all about.

There shouldn’t be.

The Ground Zero mosque is about Islamic supremecism and conquest. It’s really quite that simple–and this is not a new phenomenon, as evidenced by these videos posted on YouTube by an individual going by the alias “mujahadeen911.”








America’s Wrongheaded Approach to Jihad

In the wake of the miraculously failed Christmas day Jihadi attack over the skies of Detroit, we are starting to see our governmental mechanisms crank into gear to institute policies to prevent terrorists from attacking us successfully.

Never mind that it was that very governmental bureaucracy which enabled the Jihadists to penetrate secure areas with explosives and come close to killing 270 people on Christmas day. It was our incompetent governmental bureaucracies which granted a known Jihadi a visa to enter the United States. It was our governmental bureaucracies which let him get on an airliner without a passport. It was our governmental bureaucracies which failed to recognize classic warning signs: ticket paid for in cash, no checked luggage.

Nevertheless, Janet Napolitano, who is evidently conflicted between whether the security system worked like clockwork or failed miserably, has had her department of Homeland Security see to it that no one stands up for the last hour of any flight (an order which has evidently already been rescinded) and Transportation Security personnel are redoubling efforts to tighten access to airliners.

Meanwhile, President Obama managed to tear himself from the links to declare the terrorist an “isolated extremist,” perhaps the worst mischaracterization made by a sitting president since Richard Nixon declared himself “not a crook.” Obama then promised a dragnet to find those responsible. What complete and utter hogwash.

This security and law enforcement approach used against those who are at war with us will never work.

We can button up airliners tighter than a drum and do body cavity searches of passengers and you know what will happen?

The Jihadists will drive a truck loaded with TNT through the front door of the terminal at a major airport the day before Thanksgiving and kill hundreds.

Or they’ll target subways and trains like they did in Madrid, London and Paris.

Or they’ll target shopping malls or schools.

Until we realize that this is a war and not a law enforcement problem and that these terrorists have a common thread, whether they are lone wolves or part of cells, it will keep getting worse.

The problem is Islam. Not Muslims, but Islam as practiced by a core of Muslims who largely control the Islamic world. Their goal is to implement sharia law. Their goal is not for you and me to convert to Islam, but to impose sharia on us. That is what they are fighting for and sharia is their doctrine as well. We ignore this at our peril. The reason for everything they do can be looked up in books that they wrote. Not just the Noble Quran, but books like “Reliance of the Traveler” and “Milestones” and “The Quranic Concept of War.” If you really want to understand where the enemy is coming from, buy these books on Amazon and read them.

http://www.amazon.com/Reliance-Traveller-Classic-Islamic-Al-Salik/dp/0915957728/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1262102462&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Milestones-Sayyid-Qutb/dp/0934905142/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1262102522&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/The-Quranic-Concept-of-War/dp/8170020204/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1262102577&sr=1-1

Then download Stephen Coughlin’s thesis from the Center for Security Policy web site. It’s free and it should be the handbook for fighting the war of ideas.

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p16600.xml?genre_id=3

There is a global Jihadist insurgency and insurgencies are 80% political/ideological not military. We can win the military side. But we aren’t even fighting the other 80%. And that’s what manufactures guys like this Nigerian, who was, like most Jihadist terrorists, wealthy and educated, even privileged. (This is NOT about poverty; don’t let anyone tell you that.)

The Jihadis are indoctrinated for years in mosques and madrassas. They don’t go “radical” by accident. It is a system. Go to the MEMRI web site and take a look at state-run television in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the Palestinian territories and even Egypt. You will be shocked at what you see and hear, especially on the programs targeted at children. Jihadis are not born. They are created. Furthermore, they aren’t created because the USA supports Israel or because the USA overthrew Saddam Hussein in Iraq or the Taliban in Afghanistan. Their agenda is much wider, longer and deeper than that.

The Jihadists did not slaughter hundreds of school children in Beslan, Russia because the USA supports Israel or because US troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Jihadists killed 241 US servicemen in Beirut in 1983, blew up the World Trade Center in 1993, blew up a USAF barracks in 1995, blasted our embassies in east Africa in 1998, attacked the USS Cole in 2000 and flew airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11th 2001 before a single American soldier or Marine set foot in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The Jihadists didn’t kill 200 Australian tourists in Bali, Indonesia because the US supports Israel. They didn’t slaughter dozens in Mumbai, India because the US is in Iraq. They aren’t killing people in southern Thailand because the US is in Afghanistan. And the Islamic insurgency in the Philippines predates all of this.

There must be something else at work.

It’s called Jihad.

You can expect some type of Jihadist incident involving Americans to be in the news every week from now on. Some incidents will be violent Jihad like Fort Hood and Flight 253. Others will be civilizational or “stealth” jihad, such as refusing to allow bomb-sniffing dogs near Muslims based on some notion of religious “freedom.” This is the environment that fighting a politically correct war for 8 years has created. Get used to it.

Let me give you an example of what we’re up against. The best example is Saudi Arabia. Some in the US refer to the Sauds as “allies” in the “war on terrorism.” But if the Sauds are really at war with Al Qaeda and the Jihadists, then why don’t we hear about lots of attempts on the lives of Saudi princes (and there are thousands of Saudi princes)? They are not hard to find. Go to a casino or disco in London or Monte Carlo and you can find them and often without tight security. Since Al Qaeda was founded in 1989, the number of Saudi royals killed by their terrorism stands at 0. In that time, there was only a single documented attempt by an Al Qaeda terrorist on a Saudi prince, who just happened to be the minister of the Interior, in charge of a large portion of security forces.

In Saudi Arabia when you are caught shoplifting, under their Sharia law, you have a good chance of getting your hand chopped off as punishment. A woman gets 100 lashes for the crime of adultery. The Sauds behead people for more serious crimes.

Yet, when a Saudi is caught on the battlefield as a member of Al Qaeda by US forces in Iraq or Afghanistan and is turned over to the Sauds, what happens to them?

They are sent to rehab. In rehab they are issued crayons and paint for art therapy. (I am not joking.) After rehab, they are released.

Why do you suppose this is?

I’ll tell you why. Because they haven’t committed a crime as far as the Sauds are concerned. Shoplifting gets your hand chopped off, Jihad doesn’t even get you a slap on the wrist.

Does anyone still believe that the Sauds are our allies?

The Jihadists get funded, they get trained and they get granted safe haven. This happens a number of ways and from a number of sources and we need to go after them. Use our strengths to go after the ideological and financial and training sources. Until we do, expect this to get worse and worse. Taking our shoes off before getting on the airplane isn’t going to help one damn bit.

Baloney from Obama on North Korea–and Covering for Iran

In the video below, President Obama is asked if his policies toward North Korea and Iran are accomplishing anything, other than buying those two nations time to expand their nuclear programs.

This was a surprisingly excellent question from the media–and one that could only have been asked overseas. There is simply no way in hell that any member of the lapdog White House press corps, which may as well be a branch of the administration staff, would have sacked up to ask this question.

Predictably, Obama, sans teleprompter, stuttered and stammered his way clumsily through a non-answer. Watch as French President Nicolas Sarkozy, whose administration led negotiations with Iran for some time and was critical of Obama’s naivete’ regarding Iran, is clearly uncomfortable sitting next to Obama as our president pratfalls his way through his attempt at an answer:

There is much that is troubling about Obama’s answer, besides his obvious inability to articulate on the subject.

He appears to be taking shots at the Bush administration by stating repeatedly that North Korea will no longer be rewarded for bad behavior.

But the fact is, his policy toward North Korea is EXACTLY a continuance of the Bush policy: We’ve got Russia and China on our side…

Russia and China are NOT on our side here. China in particular has a long history of supplying arms to North Korea. Without Russia and China, in fact, North Korea’s nuclear program would be a group of physicists in a lab conducting experiments and nothing more.

It is especially ironic that Obama is attempting to distance himself from the Bush policies given that he himself personally selected the architect of the Bush policy toward North Korea, Christopher R. Hill, to be ambassador to Iraq, where, even more ominously, he will no doubt have to interact with the neighboring Iranians. Obama picked him over the desires of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who wanted retired Marine General Anthony Zinni for the Iraq ambassadorship. This is an indication of just how impressed Obama is with Hill.

We can only shudder to think what Hill might give away to appease the Iranians. He had North Korea taken off the terrorist-sponsoring list, above the objections of US ally Japan, because of their perceived “cooperation” on their nuclear program, only to watch with his thumb up his you-know-where as they went back on those agreements after the fact. If there is one man in the United States of America who we do NOT want dealing with the Iranians, it is Christopher R. Hill.

Note in the video that Obama completely ignores the issue of Iran. He does not even attempt to answer that part of the question and basically covers up the Iranians’ actions:

1. Like North Korea, Iran has also conducted ballistic missile tests.

2. Iran has announced that they are now spinning 7200 centrifuges–in violation of international treaties and UN Security Council resolutions.

3. Iran has refused to cooperate with IAEA inspectors–again, in violation of international treaties and UN Security Council resolutions.

4. Iran continues to supply heavy weapons to the Taliban, which the Taliban use to kill US GIs in Afghanistan

Obama mentions none of this.

 

Why?

Chas Freeman: Saudi shill and liar

Chas Freeman, Barack Obama’s choice to head the National Intelligence Council has no business being anywhere near classified information, much less heading an intelligence body. 

He has close ties to the Iran lobby. He has enriched himself as a board member of Red China’s China National Offshore Oil Company and he has fed hungrily at the Saudi feeding trough.

alwaleed

 

And, as Martin Kramer reveals, Freeman is also a liar…

http://sandbox.blog-city.com/chas_freeman_911_september_11.htm

LATE ADDITIONS:

Powerline blog has an excellent article on Freeman entitled “Saudi/Manchurian candidate unfit for office”

We’d add that Freeman is also very fond of the Iranians, but it’s still a darn good article:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/03/023008.php

And Ed Morrisey at HotAir does an excellent job of deconstructing Freeman’s transparently pro-Saudi and anti-American views about September 11th…

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/03/07/chas-freeman-911-our-fault-and-the-israelis/

 

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,831 other followers

%d bloggers like this: