AP Accuses GOP Of Badgering Obama

May 17, 2013 2 Comments

The AP appears to be back on board the Obama train as they ran an article today accusing Republicans of “badgering” the President. That was just the headline. It appears those dastardly enemy Republicans aren’t satisfied with the Benghazi emails. They want more information about the White House talking points and they want more information about the situation generally. How dare they badger the President for such information! Never mind that the first emails released leave a gap of 67 hours between the attack and first email. Don’t pay attention to the fact that meetings took place in the White House in which notes exist. Benghazi is now about a badgered President.

What we still don’t know is why the administration blamed the video in the first place. In the many talking points drafts the video doesn’t appear until the very end. In the released emails, the video doesn’t appear until the very end. So why did Susan Rice and the entire Obama administration claim the video caused the attack? Who decided that was fact? Who decided to put it into the talking points? We still have no idea because the White House thinks a handful of emails ought to satisfy the badgering hordes.

What we still don’t know, what still hasn’t been asked by the Republicans is why Ambassador Chris Stevens was in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012. What was he doing there? What official business was he conducting. We still have no idea why the ambassador was in Benghazi or what he was doing or planning to do. Why didn’t he have enough security? Obama blames budget cuts but the fact is sequestration was six months off last September and played no role in the lack of security in Benghazi. Yes, questioning the security puts Hillary Clinton’s reputation at risk. So what? Four Americans died within her State Department. She’s responsible for security expenditures, the public has a right to know if she screwed up by not providing enough security.

This isn’t about Hillary Clinton, it isn’t even about Obama. It’s about figuring out what happened in Benghazi and pinpointing ways to prevent such an attack in the future. There are potential crimes that took place here, from what we know Obama and Hillary should not be the target of such a criminal investigation. However, there are chain of command issues that a special prosecutor needs to look at. The fact that the administration so adamantly opposes a special prosecutor suggests, fairly or unfairly, that they have something to hide. It suggests there’s more here than meets the eye.

Obviously incompetence isn’t a criminal offense. But it can and should result in Congressional investigations. Democrats would have been well within their rights during Bush’s last two years to conduct investigations about the Federal government response to Hurricane Katrina. Likewise, Congressional investigations are required for Benghazi and the other Obama scandals. It isn’t a matter of badgering a President, it’s a matter of holding him and his administration accountable. Congress is charged with such under the Constitution and we should expect nothing less from our elected representatives. Perhaps as the Republican House continues investigating they might ask why Ambassador Stevens was in Benghazi and what he was planning on doing there.

Filed under corruption Tagged with , , , , , ,

Obama’s Speech To Israeli Leftists Mirrors Cairo Speech

March 22, 2013 Leave a comment

President Obama has been gallivanting around Israel the past few days. His visit is interesting in that it parallels a visit to Egypt in 2009. In his Cairo visit, Obama held a speech at a university filled with hand picked radicals including the Muslim Brotherhood. Rather than speak to the Knesset, Obama chose to speak to another group of hand picked university radicals. In Cairo he included the Muslim Brotherhood, in Israel he spoke to a room where only half stood and cheered when Obama said Israel had a right to statehood. One wonders what Obama’s end game is here in Israel. In Egypt he empowered the Arab Spring radicals. Who is he empowering now?

Obama’s flowery rhetoric for the press can easily be ignored. He suggested the difference between the Palestinians and Israelis is no different than the Canadians and Americans. Last I checked, Canada wasn’t launching rockets on the daily into the United States. It’s easy to dismiss this sort of nonsense argument, as it is easy to dismiss Obama’s positive rhetoric about Israel. Are we to believe he’s done a 180 on Israel in the last few months?

What is interesting about this trip is who he’s speaking to. Like in Egypt he wants to speak to the “leaders of tomorrow” at a hand picked university speech. He even referenced his Cairo speech, telling the crowd of radicals he spoke to people “just like you.” No doubt, they are as they were all hand selected radical leftists. He also said the following:

And let me say this as a politician — I can promise you this, political leaders will never take risks if the people do not push them to take some risks.  You must create the change that you want to see.  Ordinary people can accomplish extraordinary things.

In this line he’s essentially telling a group of radical leftists to push their government to “take some risks.” He said largely the same thing to the Cairo university, which included leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood. They took his words to heart and started a revolution. Don’t think Obama doesn’t know exactly what he’s doing here. He’s signaling to the radical left in Israel and the Palestinians that the United States will do nothing to help Israel if there is a leftist revolution.

Like in Egypt, the Israeli leftists and Palestinians were watching and listening closely to what Obama said in this speech. He’s made it clear that he wants them to push Israel, he’s made it clear the US won’t help the current state of Israel. What these radicals do with this news is anyone’s guess. One would think this was a call for a Palestinian uprising supported by radical Israeli leftists. Israel is perhaps in a better position to defend itself than Egypt was, so who knows which side will come out victorious. World opinion of Israel has turned sharply against the state in the last decade, so perhaps the Palestinians can count on world support. (remember just a decade ago it was “anti-Semitic” to oppose Israel or anything Jewish? Now the media openly attacks the state. Why?)

Hopefully Obama’s speech won’t amount to anything. But in a year when Israel is in turmoil, we can look back to this speech as the start of whatever is taking place. Obama may be over playing his hand in Israel, but look for the Palestinians to start something big at some point. They’ll look to the US for support and odds are they’ll get it indirectly from this administration. They’ll get it directly from our media who will pretend like it’s some sort of spontaneous uprising when in reality it will be a planned event. An event, that has ties directly to the President. We need to be paying attention here, Israel will be the next major world crisis.

Filed under foreign policy Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Israel On The Brink Of War

November 15, 2012 2 Comments

While everyone in the US is paying attention to the salacious details of the David Petraeus fornication scandal, there are other things going on in the world. (in fairness, there are other things going on with Petraeus as well) Israel has launched a handful of bombs on Syria and perhaps more importantly has launched several bombs on Gaza killing a top Hamas commander. The Gaza attack is being described by Israel as a major offensive. Israel has already hit 20 underground rocket sites in Gaza. The Israeli army has declared they are prepared for a major ground offensive in Gaza should it be necessary.

Rather unsurprisingly Hamas has fired several rockets into Israeli border towns. Hamas is of course associated with Iran, which in response to the attacks on Gaza are conducting massive drills in preparation for war with Israel. Egypt, formerly an ally of Israel under Mubarak, is supporting Hamas and threatening to get involved. Obama’s response has largely been silent, though he allegedly called Israel and Egypt trying to talk them off the ledge. None of these events are particularly surprising. They’re a direct result of Obama’s foreign policy which has done little more than placate radical Islam at the expense of our ally Israel.

Obama refuses to get tough with Iran then we’re supposed to be shocked when Hamas fires rockets into Israel at will. Obama has consistently looked the other way as Iran has armed Hamas. In Egypt, Obama actively supported the overthrow of Mubarak knowing full well the anti-Israel Muslim Brotherhood would take control of the country. The Muslim Brotherhood is on record wanting to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. Did Obama think he’s amazing oratory would be able to convince the Brotherhood not to do that? Obama continues to fund the Egyptian Army to the tune of over $1 billion annually. We’re essentially funding the army that will attack our ally in Israel. (message to the GOP House: Cut foreign aid funding for Egypt)

Obama’s apology tour in 2009 did exactly what it intended to do. It demonstrated American weakness in the middle east. It told radical Islamic groups that the United States would be largely unwilling to get involved in disputes involving Israel. It set the stage for Arab Spring in which radical Islamic groups overthrew relatively pro-American regimes and replaced them with vehemently anti-Israel regimes who do little more than pay lip service to the United States. Now we’re on the brink of war in the middle east, a war which can hardly be called unforeseeable. Iran has been threatening war for years with Hamas as its puppet. Egypt has longed for war ever since the Muslim Brotherhood took over. Obama’s foreign policy has been a success, if we define success as weakening America and achieving Obama’s personal goals.

Obama is going to go through the motions of trying to avoid a war. Odds are he will not get US troops involved in any meaningful way. He doesn’t want to support Israel and he doesn’t have support at home to join the Brotherhood and Iran. He’ll pay lip service to Israel while doing very little in their defense. The result of that is that the war, if one should occur, will be particularly nasty and bloody. Without the backing of its major ally, don’t be surprised if Israel uses its nuclear weapons if it feels like its backed up against a wall. While everyone here in the US is focused on Petraeus’ adultery, we’re not focused on a potential war in the middle east to say nothing of the Benghazi cover up. It’s time for us to start paying attention.

Filed under foreign policy Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Obama Gives Muslims License To Attack

September 26, 2012 9 Comments

Yesterday Obama took time out of his busy schedule of chit chatting with the gals on The View to give a speech to the UN. His speech was at best very odd. He gave a general defense of freedom of religion and speech. But then he declared “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam”. One wonders if the future belongs to those who slander Jesus Christ. Oh wait, our government pays for “art” that slanders and defames Christ on a regular basis. I guess the future belongs to Christ haters in Obama’s world. But cross the child molester Mohammed and, well, the future just doesn’t belong to you.

Obama of course makes that statement because he can’t stop himself from apologizing for that ridiculous anti-Mohammed video. Obama continues to pretend that all of the problems we face in Libya are because of that video. Never mind that last week his administration admitted that the attacks in Libya were terrorist attacks. We would also have to ignore the fact that Libya’s President said the video had nothing to do with the attacks. This is pretty consistent with their claim that they warned the US three days before the attacks. When people riot, they usually don’t take three days to plan it. So who does Obama think he’s fooling over at the UN?

In fact, you wonder if Obama believes there is a future for those of us who oppose Islam. To listen to the radical Muslims in the Muslim Brotherhood, who incidentally control Egypt, any opposition or disagreement with Islam is considered slander and blasphemy. So in declaring that there is no future for those who slander Islam, the message Obama is sending to the middle east is that Islam is the future so get out of the way. Is that really the message we want our President conveying to the middle east?

We have an appeasement problem in the White House. We have a President who has basically given the middle east free reign to attack those who “slander” Islam or Mohamed. After all the future doesn’t belong to such people according to Obama. It either doesn’t occur to Obama or he doesn’t care that Muslims will take such a statement as approval of killing non-Muslims and attacking countries like Israel. After all, the future doesn’t belong to such nations as Israel.

You might say that reasonable people won’t interpret Obama’s statement like this. Since when have Muslims in the middle east been reasonable? When talking to the UN, Obama isn’t talking to a group of fairly reasonable auto workers in Ohio. He’s talking to the world and like it or not their interpretation of his words is just as important as the words themselves. By bending over backwards to attack a video that has nothing to do with the middle east protests, which Obama knows has nothing to do with them, Obama has unwittingly given Muslims free reign to go on the rampage against all who slander Islam. How could our President not consider that in the mind of a Muslim any disagreement or criticism is considered blasphemy and therefore slander is beyond comprehension.

Unfortunately no one in the US particularly cares about Obama’s UN speech. The media will largely ignore anything objectionable, they certainly won’t analyze it in any significant way. The conservative media will jump up and down but they’re preaching to the choir. Romney won’t do anything with the speech. He might put out another lame ad that barely attacks the President. Romney’s campaign has done a terrific job of making their candidate look weak though lame ads, so it might be wise to not even bother on this issue. Obama is on his way to victory and no one will care that for the next four years Islam has been given free reign to attack those with “no future.”

Filed under 2012 election Tagged with , , , , , ,

Why We Need Energy Independence

September 14, 2012 2 Comments

The madness in the Middle East continues. It has spread to Tunisia, Sudan and Lebanon. Reports today suggest the intensity of the riots is picking up in Cairo. In London a mob is protesting outside of the US Embassy. Jay Carney suggested that the protests weren’t aimed at the United States. You almost wonder what planet he’s on, except he’s only saying what the administration told him to say. Which of course means it’s the position of the United States that these riots aren’t aimed at us. Who exactly does Obama think they’re aimed at? Of course to admit that these attacks are aimed at the US is to admit that Obama was wrong when he suggested in 2009 that Muslim hostility will ease when he gets into office.

The media is running around suggesting we limit free speech. God forbid people have free speech, they might offend Muslims. Offending Christians is of course acceptable speech. Whether it’s the National Endowment for the Arts funding “art” such as “piss Jesus” (a jar of urine with a crucifix) or Obama forcing Christians to fund contraception, offense of Christians is acceptable. But Muslims, we can’t say anything bad about them. The administration is even pressuring You Tube to take down the supposedly offending video. It’s amazing how quickly the left is willing to give up what is American, make no mistake there’s nothing more American than free speech.

With all of the chaos in the middle east, what is the most important national security issue we face. The answer isn’t being fat as Michelle Obama suggested recently. The answer is energy independence. Romney really needs to make this point loud and clear. He’s already supported energy independence during this campaign, he needs to link the chaos in the middle east to our need for energy independence. Yes, Egypt isn’t the biggest supplier of oil in the world. Libya provides about 2-3% of the world’s oil, most of it going to Europe. But if we look at the middle east, there are riots and/or trouble all over the place. The sooner we become energy independent, ie not dependent on the middle east for oil, the more secure our nation will be.

Because we are dependent on foreign oil, we’re stuck being involved in an intricate way in the middle east. It’s becoming abundantly clear that this isn’t a good idea. We’ve tried to make this work and clearly it isn’t working out very well. We’ve suffered the 9-11 terrorist attacks, we’ve fought two wars, Obama supported the Arab Spring which has resulted in widespread riots and the deaths of four Americans, including an Ambassador. To say nothing of the first Gulf war and the endless trouble we’ve had with Iran. At what point do we say that oil isn’t worth all of this?

Yet we can’t ween our dependence on oil from the middle east because the Democrats won’t allow us to. While they’re chasing expensive green energy, which is largely a fantasy, they’ve opposed oil exploration in the United States. We’re still not drilling Anwar in Alaska because the Democrats won’t authorize it. Obama has actively tried to prevent new offshore drilling, going as far as to defy a court order. Under Obama oil permits on Federal lands are down substantially. First on board with shale oil and gas extraction, the left is suddenly against it now that natural gas prices are down substantially. Meanwhile Obama continues to oppose the Keystone XL Pipeline which would bring us oil from friendly Canada.

Romney needs to be making this argument. We need energy independence now. If the United States cannot get the overwhelming majority of the oil we use from within our borders or from friendly nations such as Canada, then we’re going to have to continue to be involved in the decidedly unfriendly middle east. Obama opposes every measure that will reduce our dependence on middle east oil. Romney supports energy independence. We need to be making this argument and we need to make it forcefully. Especially so while our Embassy’s are on fire and our Kentucky Fried Chicken outlets are smoldering. Romney has a real opening here but he’s not taking advantage of it.

Filed under 2012 election Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Media Blackout: State Dept. Knew 48 Hours Before Riots

September 14, 2012 4 Comments

Mitt Romney said that we need American leadership internationally. He’s of course absolutely right. Unfortunately we aren’t getting that from President Obama right now. The President is to busy fundraising and campaigning on top 40 radio stations to really come out hard against the rioters tearing apart our Embassy’s and killing our ambassadors. So far we haven’t seen any concrete plan or response from Obama. He hasn’t spoken to the nation whether in prime time or during the day. What is our response going to be in Egypt and Libya? We have no idea. But we do know that the media and Obama didn’t like Romney’s response to all of this. Obama’s idea of leadership is to do nothing and attack his opponent.

More details are coming out about the riots. In the UK it’s being reported that our State Department was given credible information about these riots a full 48 hours before they happened. Keep in mind the Embassy in Libya had no Marine or other military protection and in Egypt the Marines had no bullets. This information screams two things to me. First, the notion that these Muslims were rioting over some silly anti-Islam film made in the US is nonsense. These were planned. Second, why isn’t the media in the US reporting any of this? Could it be that to report this sort of information might hurt Obama’s chances for re-election?

Let’s face it, the American press isn’t reporting that the State Department knew about these coordinated riots 48 hours before they happened for the same reason they’re attacking Mitt Romney for daring to comment. They’re in the bag for Barack Obama and will do anything to protect him and attack his opponents. What’s amazing about this is that the media doesn’t seem to get that we can all get online and read stories about this coming out of foreign news rooms. Nevertheless, their desire to hide this story is disturbing. Hopefully they’ll be pressured to start reporting this news because it is vitally important. Especially so in light of the fact that Obama routinely skips his national security intelligence meetings and missed all of them during the week prior to these riots. It sure does paint a picture of incompetence doesn’t it?

Romney has a real opportunity here. What he needs to do is lay out what his plan would be for the middle east if he were President. He should call for an immediate suspension of all foreign aid to countries with rioters threatening our Embassy’s. Make it clear that under a Romney administration unless Egypt (or name your country) can protect our Embassy they will get no money. We will not tolerate this sort of nonsense and if it continues we’ll cut off diplomatic relations. Most of these countries want no part of cutting off American money, they don’t want to cut off diplomatic relations. This plan of action is entirely reasonable and will go over well with Americans, most of whom don’t particularly like foreign aid. It will also show people that Romney isn’t a return of George W. Bush.

We need to resign ourselves to the fact that we have a very weak President who believes in appeasement and weak American power. His reaction to this week’s event make that loud and clear. His policy concerning Arab Spring have failed. Worse, we have a media that is completely in the bag for Obama to the point that they aren’t reporting news, particularly his missteps. Meanwhile they’re attacking Mitt Romney for daring to voice a viewpoint. If Mitt Romney wants a shot to win this election he needs to make a clear and forceful statement about these riots. He remains a long shot to beat Obama so making a strong statement isn’t a huge risk. If the President won’t make a strong statement, then maybe his opponent should.

Filed under 2012 election, foreign policy Tagged with , , , , , ,

Obama’s Cold Embassy Response Leads Press To Attack Romney

September 13, 2012 2 Comments

The President’s response to the Embassy attacks in the middle east can best be described as odd. He delivered a cold, distant message on the matter yesterday. He appeared annoyed that he had to even make a comment. He showed no outrage over the death of a US ambassador. He didn’t look like he was very much concerned at all about what was going on. Obama went ahead with his normal schedule yesterday, appearing at a campaign event in Nevada where he didn’t even mention the ambassador by name. These are major attacks on the United States and the President seems disinterested and preoccupied.

Meanwhile the press is trying to bury Obama’s cold, distant response by focusing on supposed gaffes made by Mitt Romney. The AP published an article that reads more like opinion than news. They suggested that Romney’s statement yesterday that the Embassy apologized and that it’s never to early to defend American values is somehow not factual and therefore a gaffe. Obama commented on it himself yesterday. As usual the fact checkers are showing their left-wing bias. Worse, they’re inserting this into a news article that really is nothing more than opinion. Especially so when even the administration acknowledges that the Embassy statement was horrible.

Romney’s statement was pretty clear. The Embassy attack on American free speech was an apology for the movie put out by Sam Bacile and Pastor Terry Jones. At the time the Embassy issued its statement there were already protesters in Cairo. Romney is right, it’s never to early to defend American values. In this case the value is free speech. That the protesters in Cairo hasn’t yet breached the Embassy isn’t even relevant to Romney’s statement. The AP and Obama know that but they have to cover for Obama’s Carteresque handling of this situation. Romney needs to make another statement on these protests today. He needs to attack Obama’s weakness and his distant reaction. He needs to tell the country that under a Romney administration, murdering an ambassador will not be tolerated. He needs to call for an immediate suspension of all aid to Libya and Egypt.

According to ABC’s Jake Tapper the Pentagon called Pastor Terry Jones to try to strong arm him into no longer funding the anti-Islam film the protesters are allegedly so outraged about. Let’s be up front, Terry Jones is a bit of a nut and no doubt his silly movie is unnecessarily offensive to Muslims. But free speech actually has to matter in this country. We cannot have government officials calling American citizens, much less pastors, trying to get them to shut up. These are thug tactics because the unspoken message is that if Jones doesn’t stifle himself the government will. This is exactly what Mitt Romney’s point is, it’s never to early to defend the American value of freedom of speech.

We’re living in a very strange time in American history. We have a President who is cold and distant in his response to major Embassy attacks. Obama appears disinterested, he doesn’t seem outraged at all. Meanwhile the press doesn’t attack Obama’s handling of these attacks or his preparation or the intel surrounding them. Instead, they attack his Republican opponent by intentionally misinterpreting his statement. Meanwhile the government is calling a pastor up demanding he no longer fund a movie. No one in the press cares about that, in fact many of them blame the movie rather than the rioters and murderers in the middle east.

Obama and company operate under the belief that they should never let a good crisis go to waste. One wonders how they will use this crisis to further their cause. They’re already attacking free speech, as though a movie made by an irrelevant pastor in Florida is cause for murder and mayhem throughout the middle east. What else are they up to?  Or do they even know what they’re doing right now. It almost seems like Obama has no strategy, no plan. Other than his re-election of course.

UPDATE: What do you suppose the biggest threat to national security is? Islamic terrorists come to mind, perhaps a major financial meltdown. Neither of these according to Michelle Obama. Being fat is the biggest threat to national security. Talk about out of touch, not to mention rude because of course she’s implying that we Americans are a bunch of fat slobs. At this point the biggest threat to national security may be Mrs. O’s husband.

Filed under 2012 election, foreign policy Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Coordinated Attacks On All Fronts

September 12, 2012 Leave a comment

The fall out from yesterday’s coordinated attacks in Libya and Egypt continues. It appears that Obama didn’t attend any of his national security intel briefings in the last week. The administration has alleged that Obama reads his briefings but if he’s reading them then he isn’t asking any questions nor is he providing direction to his underlings. Today Obama spoke at the State Department and told the folks there that he values foreign service because he once lived abroad. What stunning leadership. Obama has managed to turn foreign service into a statement about himself. Otherwise, Obama doesn’t seem to have much to say about any of this as he jets off to Vegas. Meanwhile protests are breaking out in Kuwait, Sudan and Morocco.

All of these events are coordinated, just like the Arab Spring. They supposedly are spontaneous protests against a film that is critical of Mohammed. The film maker is Sam Bacile. I had earlier said that it was created by Egyptians, it was apparently translated into Arabic by Egyptians. Like the US Embassy in Cairo which apologized to protesters for free speech, University of Pennsylvania professor Anthea Butler doesn’t think much of Bacile’s free speech. She wants Bacile jailed because of the attacks on our embassy’s. We’ve gotten to the point where Ivy League professors want people exercising free speech jailed because barbarians went on a rampage half a world away. Meanwhile MSNBC debates whether Pastor Terry Jones should be jailed for voicing opposition to Islam. What have we come to?

Mitt Romney got in on the act, criticizing the Embassy response to the attack. The left is going bananas over Romney’s statement, which was made before Obama backtracked on his Embassy’s statement. Apparently Romney has “rushed” to comment while the Embassy is given a pass. How absurd. Romney can and should comment on this because he has an alternative foreign policy vision for the nation. While Obama refuses to meet with Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, Romney says he wouldn’t turn down a meeting. It’s pretty clear that Romney has a different vision of relations in the middle east than Obama does, there is no reason why Romney shouldn’t highlight them. Especially as Obama’s foreign policy unravels before us.

We have a serious problem in this country. We refuse to acknowledge the danger that is Islam. We pretend it’s a religion of peace even while they drag one of our dead ambassador’s through the streets. We pretend like only radicals are dangerous while Muslims protest violently in front of seven of our embassy’s. We make excuses for 9-11 and the attacks on the London Underground. We give them a pass when they violently protest Danish cartoons. Then we actually sit around and debate whether people who publicly oppose Islam should go to jail. Even if we acknowledge that Terry Jones is over the top in his rhetoric or that Sam Bacile’s movie unnecessarily mocks Mohammed, does that mean the government should shut these people down and prohibit their speech?

If this is what it comes down to in America we have lost and the terrorists have won. We have a President who thinks nothing of forcing Christian churches to fund contraception despite their moral opposition which MSNBC cheerleads but they want to jail pastor’s who publicly oppose Islam. We have a President who supported the very people who are responsible for all of these protests in the middle east. Obama’s policies set all of this up. It is Obama who supported the destabilization that has occurred in the middle east thanks to the Arab spring. But it’s Mitt Romney who had best shut his mouth about it. What madness. We need to wake up to what’s going on here because we’re looking at a significant threat to free speech and a significant threat to our security all created by the radical left and Obama.

UPDATE: While Islamic socialists are coordinating attacks on US Embassy’s and liberals are coordinating attacks on American free speech the left-wing press is coordinating questions for Romney, trying to trap him and prevent him from making the points he wants to make.

UPDATE 2: Egypt has reportedly asked its Embassy in Washington (which hasn’t been burned to the ground or attacked) to take all available legal measures against Sam Bacile’s film. Let me make this easy for Egypt: There are no legal measures you may take in the United States against this film. The first amendment protects our right to speak freely, even if it offends you and even if it offends the offensive “prophet” Mohammed. There is nothing you can do to shut down Bacile’s free speech in the US. If our government should ever ban Bacile’s film in any way then all freedom is lost. If we cannot criticize Islam, sharia law will be in effect and freedom will be gone forever. Thankfully our country hasn’t gone down the road of banning speech, at least not yet. So Egypt, take your speech codes back to Cairo.

Filed under foreign policy Tagged with , , , , , ,

Obama’s Foreign Policy Failure On Display in Egypt, Libya

September 12, 2012 6 Comments

The US Ambassador to Libya is dead. Our embassy in Egypt yesterday was attacked by Muslims. Both of these nations were stable when Obama took office. Then he decided to support the Islamic socialists in the Muslim Brotherhood. The so-called Arab spring took place and now both of those countries are in chaos. It should come as no surprise that the Muslim hordes have turned on the Americans who supported them. This is all entirely predictable. Thanks to Obama’s absurd foreign policy we have a dead ambassador and two destroyed embassy’s. How’s that Arab spring working out?

Apparently the Islamic socialists are all worked up about an amateur film which is disparaging of Mohammed. The film was made by Egyptian expats, so of course the US is responsible. The US Embassy in Cairo had the following to say about yesterday’s attack:

The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.

In other words, the United States apparently rejects the idea of free speech so long as that speech ‘hurts’ those of religious faith. In other words, our government opposes films or other speech produced against Mohammed. We’ll pretend that the same government didn’t have a problem funding “art” which amounts to little more than a crucifix in a jar of urine or other forms of “art” which attacks the Christian faith. No, it’s only Mohammed that cannot be spoken against, lest our Cairo Embassy be outraged. The administration is trying to walk back from the Embassy statement but the damage is already done. The Embassy represents the United States in Egypt, they made the statement, once it’s made it represents our country.

The madness doesn’t stop there. Obama refuses to meet with Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu. Apparently the President’s schedule is just too full to meet with the PM of our only ally in the middle east. While our Embassy in Egypt burns and our ambassador’s are dying, Obama will have a moment for an appearance on David Letterman’s silly show. Now that’s some leadership eh? Obama has allowed things to devolve to the point where he’s openly feuding with Israel while his pals in the Muslim Brotherhood are burning down our Embassy’s and killing our ambassador’s. One wonders if we have any allies in the middle east thanks to Obama.

Obama has aided and abetted the destabilization of North Africa and the middle east. He supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which overthrew a stable pro-US government. He supported the overthrow of Gaddafi in Libya, who was marginally pro-US and in the very least stable. Elsewhere he’s been inconsistent, sometimes supporting Arab revolution and other times not supporting it, even when the Muslim Brotherhood is involved. In Iran, he refused to support real democracy demonstrators. In Syria he’s been all over the place. Obama doesn’t have a core foreign policy outlook other than he hates everything the US has ever done in the middle east. Unfortunately that isn’t a very good basis for consistent foreign policy.

Obama’s lack of consistent policy and his lack of a serious core objective is now rearing its ugly face. He’s openly feuding with our only long term ally in the region. The two countries he openly supported in revolution have turned on the United States, destroyed our embassy’s and killed one ambassador. The rest of the region isn’t any better, Obama has no idea what to do in Syria, Afghanistan is an absolute mess and Iran continues to threaten to nuke Israel. But of course, Obama can’t be bothered to meet with the Israeli PM to discuss the matter. Meanwhile the voice of our government in Egypt condemns free speech and supports the Muslims attacking them. Which of course means that Obama has no control over his embassy’s.

Obama’s first term hasn’t just been an economic disaster for the country, it’s been a foreign policy disaster as well. We’re seeing that today. Obviously the economy is going to be the number one issue this November, no one will pretend that this election will be a repeat of 2004. But it is important to note what a disaster Obama has been for this country internationally. It isn’t just his 2009 apology tour, it’s his active policy that is hurting us. We now have two destroyed embassy’s and a dead ambassador all thanks to Obama’s support for Islamic socialists in the Muslim Brotherhood. Do we want four more years of this?

UPDATE: The corpse of American ambassador Christopher Stevens is being paraded around by the Muslim mobs. What an absolutely disgrace.

Filed under foreign policy Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Evil Muslim Brotherhood Controls Egypt, Soros & Obama Rejoice

June 25, 2012 3 Comments

The Muslim Brotherhood has elected Mohammed Morsi as President of Egypt. You’ll recall that the Muslim Brotherhood would like to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth and was nevertheless supported by the Obama administration during the Arab Spring revolution last year. Just last month Morsi was introduced at a rally by cleric Safwat Higazi who declared that Jerusalem will be Egypt’s new capitol. There’s little doubt that Morsi agrees, the entire Muslim Brotherhood is hellbent on war with Israel. A war in the middle east would be a disaster for the United States, it would create chaos which would ultimately harm us.

Various George Soros funded organizations (Code Pink for example) have supported the Muslim Brotherhood’s revolution. It’s always interesting to see American leftist groups, particularly feminist groups, support the Caliphate efforts in the middle east. One Egyptian beat his pregnant wife to death for not voting the right way, Code Pink doesn’t seem to have anything to say about that. In any event, the goals of Soros and the Muslim Brotherhood are similar. They hate capitalism, they hate Israel and they seek to create chaos and overthrow the existing power structure. As such they’re temporary allies despite the fact that they have fundamental disagreements.

What we are seeing in Egypt is democracy in action. It should remind us why democracy is evil, it’s little more than mob rule. Our founders created a republic. The power is with the people but our ability to create mob rule is significantly diminished. A republic protects individual rights, democracy on the other hand tramples all over them. The left loves to talk about democracy, in their minds if they can get one vote over 50% they can run roughshod over individual rights and implement socialism or in the case of the Muslim Brotherhood their goal is to create an Islamic Egypt and a caliphate. Individual rights mean nothing to these people.

The leftists in Wisconsin spent a year talking about democracy, they spent a year linking their effort to oust Scott Walker to the Arab Spring. These two very different groups have one thing in common which is a desire to control people via democracy. They hate individualism and individual rights. In the upcoming months we’ll see countless examples of Morsi and the Brotherhood denying individual rights all for the “good” of Islam. Of course American leftists like George Soros won’t have anything to say about it. But the Brotherhood murders people, remember that is what democracy looks like.

What’s incredible is that our President supports all of this nonsense. Obama isn’t a Muslim, he’s a leftist. Unfortunately American leftists are very much supportive of the fascist Muslim Brotherhood and the chaos they’re bringing to the middle east. Like with Hitler and Mussolini in the 20′s and 30′s, radical American leftists view what’s happening in the middle east as a dry run for what they want to bring here to the United States. Like with the fascist movement in Europe (which was socialist and generally lauded by American leftists until Hitler attacked the Soviet Union) the middle east won’t provide a dry run. But what it will do is bring major chaos to the world, perhaps war in Israel.

We should oppose the Muslim Brotherhood’s takeover of Egypt. Not because we imagine that modern Israel is more than just another country and not because Israel is an ally. We should oppose the takeover because it brings instability to the middle east, which becomes a threat to us militarily and economically. It brings us closer to a middle east, Muslim caliphate. Don’t forget, the Brotherhood isn’t just in Egypt they’re to be found throughout the Islamic world. Islam is a religion of blood and conquest, a caliphate would be incredibly dangerous for the United States and western life. But don’t expect the current occupant of the White House to care about that. He’s an American self loather who would rather our nation become weak. With the Brotherhood in control in Egypt, America is weaker because we now have less influence in the middle east.

Filed under foreign policy Tagged with , , , , , , ,

← Older posts

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 141 other followers