OFFENSIVE JIHADISTS

The Dear Leader Obama continues to demonstrate his disconnect with freedom - loving Americans. On the day 13 people were slaughtered at Fort Hood, Obama was scheduled to give a speech at something called the Tribal Nations Conference. A president that recognized the implications of the attack and its affect on the American people would have cancelled his silly publicity opportunity and addressed the entire nation. Not Obama. He went out and joked around with the audience and gave a “shout out” to some guy. After nearly three minutes of this inanity he finally got around to the first terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9-11.

But then, Obama considers the Fort Hood attack just a “man caused disaster” and nothing to get all worked up about. The next day he admonished the American people not to “jump to conclusions” over the motives of the shooter. His condescending warning was a little late for me. The moment I heard of the attack, I thought it was probably a Muslim. When my suspicion was confirmed, I “jumped to the conclusion” that it was an act of Islamic terrorism. Not much of a jump really. It was more like a little hop along the path of reason and logic.

Common sense is incompatible with liberalism as demonstrated by the Main Stream Media reports following the attack. Taking Obama’s lead, the liberal media engaged in all sorts of convoluted speculation in an effort to cloud a perfectly clear picture of Islamic terrorism. One of the many ridiculous N.Y. Times articles had the headline: PRELIMINARY INQUIRY FINDS NO LINK TO TERROR PLOT. Who did the inquiry? Inspector Clouseau? Syndicated columnist and committed lefty Leonard Pitts opined with an article entitled: ACKNOWLEDGE MUSLIM HEROES. An Islamic terrorist murders 13 people and the first thing Pitts does is urge us to remember Muslim heroes! What? This has nothing to do with loyal Americans who happen to be Muslim. No reasonable person is suggesting that all Muslims are terrorists. What Pitts and his liberal colleagues refuse to acknowledge, however, is that ALL Jihadists are Muslim! Pitts states:

“At this writing, we know next to nothing of why he did it.

Maybe he was a stone-cold psychopath like Eric Harris who, with Dylan Klebold, shot up Columbine High in 1999.

Maybe he was deranged and delusional like Seung-Hui Cho, who killed 32 people and himself at Virginia Tech in 2007.

Maybe he was driven by a grudge against the federal government like Timothy McVeigh, who blew up a federal building in 1995.

Maybe he was a terrorist.”

Gee, Leonard, you think? Liberals can be such predictable idiots. Millions of Muslims have declared a holy war against the United States and when they strike us Pavlov’s lefties immediately cite Columbine and Timothy McVeigh in an effort to equate Islamic terrorism with domestic crime. Pitts laments, “So it is for Muslims, now, sacrifices and service unremembered and unremarked.” Give me a break! We bend over backwards to accommodate and coddle Muslims and those of Middle Eastern descent. Muslims that happen to not be murderous jihadists are depicted uniformly as great Americans. As if our country would be immeasurably worse off without them.

Liberals are constantly lecturing us about stereotyping. They tell us that Muslims are just like Christians and these religions all have their crazies. As Bob Schieffer, host of Face the Nation, explained about the Fort Hood attack: “It’s looking more and more like he was just, sort of, a religious nut. And you know Islam doesn’t have a majority – or the Christian religion has it’s full, you know, full helping of nuts too.” I’m not sure what “nuts” Bob is referring too here. One of the liberal favorites is when someone attacks an abortion clinic or kills an abortionist. Well Bob, call me nuts but I make a distinction between the random murder of innocents and the killing of a baby killer. Abortionists are not innocent people! That does not mean I condone these killings. In fact, “mainstream” Christian denominations are always quick to condemn these types of attacks. Compare this with that “vast majority” of “peace loving” Muslims who never say a damn thing when some jihadist goes on a killing spree. To try and equate the isolated and rare actions of some supposed Christians to an organized and persistent jihad against the United States and “infidels” everywhere is ridiculous and dangerous. Instead of trying to put veterans, gun owners and pro-lifers on his terrorist watch list, I think Obama should maybe take a closer look at these curiously silent Muslims.

With liberals in control of the government, Mainstream Media, academia and Hollywood, it’s not too surprising that political correctness permeates society in general. That’s bad enough. But when it bleeds into our military structure we’ve got real problems. The more we learn about what the Army and FBI knew about Major Nidal Hasan, the scarier it gets. Yet nothing was done! Afraid of being charged with racism and discrimination, the Army and FBI let a “soldier of allah” continue on as an officer in the U.S. Army. It gets worse. Even after knowing what we now know, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey said, “As great a tragedy as this was, it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty as well.” Unbelievable! Our soldiers deserve so much better. Diversity as a goal is a liberal concept and it has no place in our armed forces. The goal of our military can only be greatness. Diversity, as an ancillary condition of achieving this goal, is fine. Any other kind deserves to be a casualty of this war.

PEACE FOR OUR TIME?

So that august body of socialists over in Norway has awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Hussein Obama. How nice! In presenting the award, the committee cited Obama’s “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples “ and “attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.”

Let’s see. Iran and North Korea are launching test missiles every other day and Iran continues unabated with their nuclear weapons program. The Dear Leader has ditched the Bush-era proposal for an anti-missile shield in Europe because it upset the Russians and he needs their help with Iran. He left our allies twisting in the wind and in return got some oblique statement from the Russkies about possible sanctions against Iran. Then, just last month, the Russian Foreign Minister stated “Threats, sanctions and threats of pressure in the current situation, we are convinced, would be counterproductive.” Wow. What a shocker! China seems unimpressed with our Nobel Laureate and continues to do nothing while North Korea runs amok and they remain opposed to sanctions against Iran. Yes, everybody seems to be getting along splendidly!

This latest joke is nothing new for the Nobel Committee. With their ideological litmus test and penchant for wishful thinking, they have been on a steady path to clownish irrelevance. Consider this collection of charlatans, commies and miscreants, Nobel Laureates all:

2007 – AL GORE

The “Goracle” shared the prize with something called the “Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” (our tax dollars at work). The Committee awarded them the Peace Prize “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.” What any of this nonsense has to do with peace is beyond a logical person’s understanding. I think they just felt a need to award him for not being George Bush.



2002 – JIMMY CARTER

Jimmy won “for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development.” This sounds like more Norwegian speak for “he’s not George Bush.” Economic development? When Jimmy left office in 1980, after four disastrous years, the unemployment rate was seven percent, the inflation rate was 13.5 percent and interest rates were at 21 percent. Oh, those were heady times!

Maybe it was the way he handled the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. Jimmy’s bold response to this “international conflict” was to send Moscow a sternly worded letter and then he manned up by boycotting the 1980 summer Olympics. Wow! After spending ten years getting their asses kicked by the U.S. backed mujahideen, the Soviet’s pulled out of Afghanistan in 1989.

Then there was his “peaceful solution” to the Iranian hostage crises. Actually, the American people solved this one for Jimmy. Americans had the good sense to elect Ronald Reagan in 1980. After 444 days of whining and pleading by Carter, the hostages were released on the day Reagan took office.



1994 – YASSER ARAFAT, et al

The committee gave Arafat, the head of the Palistine Liberation Organization, and leaders from Israel the peace prize “For their efforts to create peace in the Middle East.”

Some of you younger readers might not know this but the Middle East was not always the land of peace and harmony that it is today. Israel was constantly being attacked by suicide bombers, mortars, rockets and bombs. The preferred targets were usually innocent women and children. The man that funded and planned many of these attacks was Yasser Arafat, a lifelong terrorist. He signed a worthless agreement with Israel and never stopped murdering innocent civilians but he did get his “peace prize.”

1990 – MIKHAIL GORBACHEV

Those nutty Norwegians gave Gorbachev the award “for his leading role in the peace process which today characterizes important parts of the international community.” So it was the commies that ended the cold war and brought peace to the “international community”? I don’t think so. Let’s review some facts.

In a 1983 speech to the National Association of Evangelicals, President Ronald Reagan said:

“In your discussion of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride, the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.”

Reagan rejected the liberal concept of moral equivalency and believed America had not only the responsibility and moral authority to confront and defeat Soviet tyranny, but also the singular ability to do so. The only thing lefty politicians and the Main Stream Media took from his speech was that he called the Soviet Union an “Evil Empire.” They were quite distraught and there was much hand wringing and whining. They thought Reagan was unstable and dangerous and now he was calling commies evil! Well, from the time of the Russian revolution to 1987, 70 years, it is estimated that 50 to 60 million people were killed in the Soviet Union through starvation, forced labor camps and outright murder of political dissidents. I think evil empire is an accurate description. Reagan decided that the United States, with the wealth generated by a capitalistic economy and the superior technology facilitated by free markets and private property rights could bury the Soviet Union. And he was right. Even the Soviet Union understood what American liberals would not or could not contemplate. Speaking to the Politburo in October 1986, just days before he was to meet with Reagan in Reykjavik, Iceland, Gorbachev told his fellow commies:

“We will be pulled into an arms race that is beyond our capabilities, and we will lose it because we are at the limits of our capabilities. …If the new round [of an arms race] begins, the pressures on our economy will be unbelievable.”

So Reagan’s doctrine of “peace thru strength” worked. The leader of an oppressive, tyrannical regime realized he could not beat us so he quit. And the idiot Norwegians made a defeated bully a Nobel Laureate.

1973 – LE DUC THO

In a mild upset, Le Duc Tho, chief negotiator for North Vietnam, shared the award with Secretary of State Henry Kissinger for reaching a cease fire agreement in the Vietnam War. Hollywood lefties and media elites were hopeful that Jane Fonda would win the award for her “heroic” trip to North Vietnam in 1972. “Hanoi” Jane spent two weeks cavorting with the enemy, posing for pictures and accusing our armed forces of being baby killers. Jane was ultimately vindicated in 1995 when Bui Tin, a member of the North Vietnamese Army General Staff said that Ms. Fonda and the American antiwar movement “was essential to our strategy.” Traitorous Bitch.

So, U.S. forces left Vietnam and the commie Le Duc Tho got his Nobel Prize. Of course, this paved the way for Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge to turn Cambodia into the killing fields where they slaughtered nearly two million people in four years. No matter. The imperialistic, war-mongering Americans were out of Southeast Asia.

Barack Hussein Obama received his prize not for anything he has done, obviously, but because of who he is. The Nobel Committee was so giddy that America finally had a president that subscribes to their guiding principle – NOTHING IS WORTH FIGHTING FOR – that they couldn’t wait to give him a prize. This principle is antithetical to the belief of American Patriots. As Patrick Henry said:

“Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

That a bunch of Norwegian socialists would find the views of an American Patriot to be extreme and misguided means nothing to me. But an American President? God help us!