Does Obama Support ISIS?

Not Destroying ISIS

Posted By Nonie Darwish On October 14, 2014 Daily Mailer, FrontPage

Western media, President Obama, all Muslim countries, and myriad groups and individuals have been telling us that ISIS does not represent Islam. Muslims, especially in the West, insist that their beloved faith has nothing to do with the terrorists who are embarrassing the good and peaceful Muslims and who are giving Islam a bad name and dishonoring the real Islam.

It is a fact that Arab/Islamic culture highly values honor and pride and has little tolerance for those who dishonor Islam and Islamic “family values.” Because honor is so vital in Islamic culture, a whole section in Islamic law is dedicated to forgiving and not prosecuting certain murders when they are linked to honor, such as the killing of adulterers and apostates. Sharia has harsh punishment for those who dishonor Islam or deviate from its values and commandments.

Because of Muslim sensitivity to dishonor one would think that the majority of moderate Muslims, especially after 9/11, would mobilize their armies, police and legal resources to arrest, punish, imprison or execute those who kill, behead and terrorize in the name of the religion of peace.

Muslim legal systems in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan and Yemen, do not hesitate to whip, amputate, stone and behead those who violate Islamic sexual taboos, but never behead, amputate or whip jihadists who terrorize in the name of Islam.

Almost all Muslim governments claim to be moderate, but none have apologized for 9/11. They have no interest in rounding up terror groups except those who point their guns at Muslim governments. Why is that? Why is it that many Muslim governments allow the financial support and accommodation of terror groups as long as terrorists do their business elsewhere? Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Gulf countries financed the radical resistance against Bashar Assad for one reason: he is not Sunni. And now when the radical resistance turned into ISIS, these same nations are asking the US to do something.

There are approximately 1.5 billion Muslims divided among 49 majority Muslim nations around the world and all claim to be peace-loving and “moderate.” Many of these Islamic nations have some of the largest and well-equipped armies in the Middle East and Africa. Pakistan possesses nuclear weapons. Egypt’s military has approximately 468,500 active personnel, in addition 1 million reservists. Turkey has 662,719 active personnel. Saudi Arabia’s military is estimated to have 150,000 active personnel and Pakistan has 550,000 active troops, 500,000 reserves.

Yet the huge armies of the above four Muslim nations are watching the ISIS slaughter and refuse to end it. Has anyone asked why? Where are the 1.5 billion moderate Muslims to save the reputation of Islam and fellow Muslims? Is there even a moderate Muslim army that will not hesitate to kill ISIS beheading their way from city to city? Will Muslim armies fight the alleged bad Muslims?

The answer is simple and I hope the West is ready for the truth. If Muslim governments go to war against ISIS, there is a good possibility that their armies will not kill ISIS but might actually join them against Arab governments. This is why: The ultimate holy goal of Islam, both “moderate” and “radical,” is to reestablish the Islamic Khalifate and control the world.

That is the goal of jihad. Historically all Islamic States were established by the sword, terror and violence. Even Mohammed himself established his first Islamic political entity in Arabia through the sword, violence and terror. Mohammed himself said in a hadith “I have been victorious through terror.” His followers took the sword, terror and beheading throughout Arabia to bring Arabs back to Islam after the death of Mohammed. Historically, Islam never created and maintained a Khalifate without the sword and the cruel punishments of Sharia. So the fact that ISIS is violent does not disqualify it in the eyes of Sharia from doing holy jihad in the name of Allah.

Thus, Muslim heads of state are caught in a quagmire. Sharia dictates that every Muslim head of state must do jihad as an obligation otherwise he is an apostate and must be removed from office — the old fashioned Islamic way like what happened to Saddam Hussein and Moammar Gaddafi. Sharia also gives the right to Muslims to wage jihad war against non-Muslim nations, but gives non-Muslim nations no right to reject Islamic jihad and fight back.

That is why Muslim leaders never want to wage serious war against the likes of Al Quaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram, Hamas, Hizbullah, etc. Muslim leaders do not want to be perceived as acting against Sharia by destroying the first budding Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

Thus we see Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Gulf nations and Egypt, who are perfectly capable of destroying ISIS, refuse to move against ISIS and allow the slaughter of fellow Muslims, Christians and Kurds, rather than violate Sharia. All these Muslim governments are begging the US and Western nations to do their dirty work for them, as usual. America is the great Satan, so what more can America lose between friends?

President Obama today refuses to put troops on the ground in Syria and Iraq to destroy ISIS. I hope his refusal is because it is in the best interest of the United States and not because he too, like Arab leaders, does not want to destroy the first budding Islamic State In Iraq and the Levant.

A German's View of Islam

Our political correctness is going to have devastating consequences if we don't wake up!
________________________________

A German's View of Islam

A German's View on Islam - worth reading. This is an excellent explanation of today's worldwide Muslim terrorist situation. The references to recent history are accurate and clear. The article is not long, easy to understand, and well worth a read. The author of the article is Dr. Emanuel Tanya, a well-known and well-respected psychiatrist. A man whose family was of the German aristocracy prior to World War II and who owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism.

'Very few people were true Nazis,' he said, 'but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come.'

'My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.'

'We are told again and again by 'experts' and 'talking heads' that Islam is a religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff meant to make us feel better, and meant
to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.'

'The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers.'

'The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the 'silent majority,' is cowed and extraneous. Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China 's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.'

'The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet. And who can forget Rwanda , which collapsed into butchery? Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were 'peace loving'?

'History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points: peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.

Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany , they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.'

'Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.'

'Now Islamic prayers have been introduced in Toronto and other public schools in Ontario , and, yes, in Ottawa , too, while the Lord's Prayer was removed (due to being so offensive?). The Islamic way may be peaceful for the time being in our country until the fanatics move in.'

'In Australia , and indeed in many countries around the world, many of the most commonly consumed food items have the halal emblem on them. Just look at the back of some of the most popular chocolate bars, and at other food items in your local supermarket. Food on aircraft have the halal emblem just to appease the privileged minority who are now rapidly expanding within the nation's shores.'

'In the U.K, the Muslim communities refuse to integrate and there are now dozens of "no-go" zones within major cities across the country that the police force dare not intrude upon. Sharia law prevails there, because the Muslim community in those areas refuse to acknowledge British law.'

'As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts - the fanatics who threaten our way of life.'

Lastly, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes this email without sending it on, is contributing to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand.

Extend yourself a bit and send this on. Let us hope that thousands world-wide read this, think about it, and send it on before it's too late, and we are silenced because we were silent!

We Need Zero Tolerance For Pro-ISIS Preachers

Global Jihad

Investors Business Daily (editorial)

London has rounded up and jailed pro-Islamic State preachers. So why are we letting radical clerics remain in the pulpits of our mosques? The First Amendment doesn't protect incitement or insurrection.

American Muslim leaders have insisted that they condemn the barbaric actions of the Islamic State. However, the Washington Post reveals that the American Islamic State jihadist who blew himself up in a truck bomb in Syria may have been radicalized by a Muslim cleric in Fort Pierce, Fla.

Before joining the Islamic jihad in Syria, the social life of the American suicide bomber, Moner Mohammad Abusalha, orbited around the mosque's imam and his family, according to the Post.

Meanwhile, a whistleblower member of the mosque attended by the IS-sympathizing beheader in Oklahoma City told Fox News that the leaders there taught members to wage jihad against non-Muslims using decapitation as a killing method.

The former mosque member, identified only as "Noor," said clerics at the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City have tried to disguise their violent agenda.

"To the public," he said, "the mosque will not promote terrorism or any kind of radical acts, but when they're among friends and congregants only, they will promote the true teachings of Islam, which include the offer to non-Muslims — the choice, rather, that you must convert, live under Islamic rule, or be fought against — jihad, for the sake of Allah."

Noor, who left the mosque because of its extremist teachings, said he was told by leaders there that suicide bombings are a legitimate tactic in jihad and that "when you meet the unbelievers you should smite at their necks." The quote also appeared on beheading suspect Alton Nolen's Facebook page.

He added that former imam Suhaib Webb — now the prayer leader of the Islamic Society of Boston, where IS media wing chief Ahmad Abousamra, as well as the Boston marathon bombers, worshipped — taught him about the standing Islamic order to put all non-Muslims under the sword.

He further revealed that members of the mosque took him to shoot weapons at targets resembling President Bush.

The mosque, which also once hosted 20th hijacker Zacarias Moussaoui, denies the charges, insisting Webb preached "Islam's message of peace" while noting its current imam Imad Enchassi has received local community awards.

The Obama administration buys it. It sent a representative to the mosque to offer words of praise to congregants.

London, in contrast, arrested several of its radical Muslim clerics, including Islamic State supporter Anjem Choudary, in recent anti-terror raids. It's declared zero tolerance for jihad inciters and recruiters.

There's a fine line between free speech and inciting violence, and many of our own Islamic preachers have crossed it. Yet this administration not only leaves them in their pulpits, but gives them official blessings.

The War in Iraq Revisited

War On Terror

Investors Business Daily (editorial)

The Islamic State somehow now possesses the weapons of mass destruction that Saddam Hussein never had. If the U.S. had finished the job in Iraq, neither IS nor its WMD would exist.

The New York Times boasts admittedly great reportorial skill, but the Old Gray Lady has a lot of trouble connecting the dots of what she uncovers.

A massive eight-part front-page extravaganza on Iraqi chemical weapons on Tuesday reported that during the Iraq War, U.S. forces found "roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs," sickening numerous soldiers, who were then ordered not to talk.

But in a story dripping in supposed irony, the Times never puts two and two together: If stumbling upon Saddam Hussein's buried WMD made our troops ill, what could he have done had he been allowed to recover what he buried? After all, 5,000 Kurds and thousands of Iranian troops were gassed by Saddam in the mid-1980s during the Iran-Iraq War.

The Times also never notices a particularly weighty gorilla in the room: At the Persian Gulf War's conclusion back in 1991, United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 required Iraq to "unconditionally accept the destruction, removal or rendering harmless" of all its chemical and biological weaponry.

In 1997, of course, Saddam began closing down WMD inspections by the U.N. Special Commission on Iraq, accusing it of being a U.S. spy agency.

The so-called "rush to war" with Iraq after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that critics of Bush's invasion talk about, charging it was all based on misinformation, actually took place over some 12 years, during which the civilized world patiently stood by amidst 17 U.N. resolutions against Saddam, all of which were based on widely accepted fact and Saddam's documented mischief.

It wasn't George W. Bush or neocon icon Paul Wolfowitz who described the "kind of threat Iraq poses now" as being "a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists." President Bill Clinton did — in 1998.

Nor did Bush say, "Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program," and, "if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." That was then-Sen. Hillary Clinton in 2002.

Bush didn't say in 1998: "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology ... and he has made a mockery of the weapons-inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi did.

No wonder more than 50 countries supported the U.S. liberation of Iraq in 2003, dwarfing the international coalition that went to war to reverse Saddam's invasion of Kuwait more than a decade earlier.

When the U.N. Security Council unanimously passed Res. 1441, "a final opportunity" for Saddam to disarm in November 2002, all it wanted to lift sanctions and avoid war was overflights and unannounced inspections. Saddam refused, knowing WMD would be found.

Now that the chemical weapons that weren't really there are in the hands of the Islamic State monster that has emerged after Obama's premature military withdrawal from Iraq, how many of the Democrats quoted above wish their president had not dismantled the victory Bush left for him?

In the Obama Administration, Incompetence Is Unbounded!

Incompetence Running Wild
INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Accountability: Turns out the Secret Service — which has one job to do — let a knife-wielding intruder all the way into the East Room of the White House. Can't anyone in government do anything right these days?

Time was when the Secret Service seemed an exemplar of professionalism and dedication, an agency with a focused mission and largely immune from the bureaucratic bumbling inherent to big government. In recent years, it's seemed more like Animal House.

The intruder blew past one guard and was stopped only by an off-duty officer.

And this was one of hundreds of apparent security breaches. Even before the latest fiasco, there've been plenty of other examples of dereliction.

One agent was found passed out in a Netherlands hotel hallway this March after a booze-filled night.

Several others were charged with bringing prostitutes to a hotel in Colombia. And let's not forget that the Secret Service failed to notice several bullets had hit the White House until days after a shooter fired them.

It would be bad enough if the Secret Service were the only agency under Obama suffering from what looks like the Peter Principle on steroids.

Veterans have died waiting for the Veterans Affairs system to treat them, despite a rising budget and vows by the president to make the VA run better.

The IRS leadership was ignorant of or complicit with the agency's politically motivated targeting of conservative groups, compounding that with changing stories and ridiculous claims of crashed hard drives and lost emails.

HHS officials spent $2 billion on HealthCare.gov — supposedly Obama's top legislative priority — which failed spectacularly at launch. It still suffers security weaknesses and remains unfinished. A Government Accountability Office audit found rampant management failures and lack of accountability to blame.

The Justice Department sold guns to drug cartels in Mexico, one of which killed a border agent.

The State Department's failure to secure its consulate in Benghazi led to four deaths.

The Border Patrol is incapable of patrolling the border.

Obama seems routinely ill-informed by his staff.

Given that Obama never owns up to his mistakes and the staffers under him are never held to account for theirs, is it any wonder everyone seems — even by government standards — so lackadaisical?

It doesn't help that he keeps appointing nincompoops to key positions. From Kathleen Sebelius to Eric Shinseki to Steven Chu to John Kerry to Chuck Hagel — it's hard to think of any Cabinet official who's up to the job.

In his first inaugural address, Obama promised that "those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account." Maybe he'll get around to that after his 200th round of golf.