Obama Flashback: “I will never question the patriotism of others in this campaign.”
But that was back in 2008.
The Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism advisor to the White House John Brennan wrote today that those who criticize Team Obama’s dangerous and naive national security decisions are only serving Al-Qaeda.
USA Today reported, via HotAir:
Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda. Terrorists are not 100-feet tall. Nor do they deserve the abject fear they seek to instill. They will, however, be dismantled and destroyed, by our military, our intelligence services and our law enforcement community. And the notion that America’s counterterrorism professionals and America’s system of justice are unable to handle these murderous miscreants is absurd.
Man, these cut-and-runners are goofy. You point out how weak they are on national security and suddenly you’re serving Al-Qaeda?
That doesn’t even make sense.
Byron York has more at The Washington Examiner.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:09 am | #1
If the goal of the terrorists is to reduce America to a third-world, impotent, has-been international power then it is this administration that is more in league with that goal than the critics merely pointing out that fact.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:12 am | #2
Before January 20, 2008: Criticism and protest were the highest forms of patriotism!
After January 20, 2008: Criticism and protest are treasonous and help our enemies!!!
What a difference an Obama makes!!
February 9th, 2010 | 11:12 am | #3
Errr…make that “January 20, 2009″.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:14 am | #4
Gotta check the “sell-by” date on any of zero’s statements. I’m sure his policies have a MTBP(mean time between failure) rate of <1 year.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:15 am | #5
Argh! Should be MTBF!!!
February 9th, 2010 | 11:20 am | #6
Remember when the moonbats went nuts because Ari Fleisher simply said that we should be careful what we say, which is good advice for any situation?
February 9th, 2010 | 11:21 am | #7
“I will never question the patriotism of others in this campaign.”
Well, the campaign is over.
The war is lost, isn’t it? Harry Reid said it was.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:23 am | #8
Obama’s “patriotism” is born of despots and dictators, Marxists and political machines. Twenty years in the pews at UCoC, listening to a Jeremiah spew gloom and doom, built a hatred of this country and its white citizens in Obama. Patriotism for Obama is just another pose he has had trouble faking: demeaning the wearing of a the flag pin, his crotch grabbing during the National Anthem rather than a hand-over-heart, blowing off visiting the wounded because no cameras were allowed, his middle-of-the-night photo-op with the flag-draped casket of a true patriot…. Obama is not a patriot and he is un-American. God give Obama what Obama wants to give me, hard.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:23 am | #9
but but but… “dissent is patriotic”
February 9th, 2010 | 11:24 am | #10
That’s just Big Brother Newspeak.
Truth: the Obama regime is al qaeda’s strongest and most effective ally.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:26 am | #11
USA Today refuses to “cheerlead” for Brennan, White House
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/02/09/usa-today-refuses-to-cheerlead-for-brennan/
February 9th, 2010 | 11:28 am | #12
Me and several college buddies could have done better than this gang with no training and while polishing off a case of beer and making jokes. Because, at least, we are on the correct side! Jail is too good for this bunch.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:28 am | #13
Brennan gave a terrorist, specifically Richard Burns the Panty bomber ,the presumption of innocence, a lawyer, free health care for his burns and 3 hots and a cot.
He will get a criminal trial, not a military tribunal.
Brennan is dumb as a box of hammers
February 9th, 2010 | 11:29 am | #14
What’s going to happen on February 11, 2010 Brennan? Iran is boasting that they are going to do something that will shock the entire Western World. What is it, big shot?
February 9th, 2010 | 11:36 am | #15
Hackety-hack-hack-hack.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:36 am | #16
gus: somewhere there is a box of hammers that is hugely angry.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:43 am | #17
They really can’t help but project every one of their flaws on to us can they?
Meanwhile, back here on earth…
February 9th, 2010 | 11:46 am | #18
The only ones who are helping al-Qaeda are Obamao, the Corruptocrats, their MSM propaganda wing and their drool cupped Orc and Troll followers. They and the Islamofascists have been allies for decades.
I do find it funny that Obamao and the Corruptocrats are getting so desperate to stay in power that they start spouting shinola like this, though.
OT but pertinent…
Feds admit wrongly tracking Wis. abortion groups
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/08/AR2010020803123.html
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security conducted a threat assessment of local pro- and anti-abortion rights activists before an expected rally last year, even though they did not pose a threat to national security.
The DHS destroyed or deleted its copies of the assessment after an internal review found it violated intelligence-gathering guidelines by collecting and sharing information about “protest groups which posed no threat to homeland security,” according to a department memo written last year.
The report was only shared with police in Middleton and with the director of the Wisconsin Statewide Information Center, an intelligence-gathering hub, according to the memo, which was signed by general counsel Ivan Fong and inspector general Richard Skinner.
It concluded the report was unlikely to “have any impact on civil liberties or civil rights” given its limited dissemination. But anti-abortion groups and the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin on Monday both criticized the federal government’s collection of information on law-abiding protesters.
The Obamao regime can spend precious intelligence and law enforcement resources on tracking people who do not support their agenda but can not connect the skid marks on the Knickerbomber.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:46 am | #19
The Obama Administration had previously made statements that to ensure there was no harsh treatment that all interviews of “high value targets” would be done by the FBI, instead of the CIA.
So, even if Brennan had told GOP leaders that the FBI was interviewing Abdulmutallab, there was no reason for the GOP leaders to infer that this “high value target” had been or would be mirandized.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:53 am | #20
Straws, anyone?
Geez.
Maybe they’re projecting.
February 9th, 2010 | 11:54 am | #21
Feds admit wrongly tracking Wis. abortion groups.
By RYAN J. FOLEY
The Associated Press
Monday, February 8, 2010; 6:34 PM
MADISON, Wis. — The U.S. Department of Homeland Security conducted a threat assessment of local pro- and anti-abortion rights activists before an expected rally last year, even though they did not pose a threat to national security.
Our goals need to be, to donate, remove these people, regain control of Congress and proceed with hearings, and criminal charges against these people. They are blatant criminals. Pelosi included, for using government planes to transport her family. These people need prosecuted, and put in Federal Prison.
February 9th, 2010 | 12:02 pm | #22
Hola mi amigas y amigos …… Just practicing for the coming Amnesty.
Here’s pretty much what I put as commentary on another forum…………
People keep saying the administration is incompetent, naive, etc.
I disagree.
Everything this administration does is deliberate and becoming more and more obvious by the hour each and every day to be so.
Thing is, before the election, some of us were saying that if elected, he and his people were going to do just what they’re doing and probably more. We were called crazy, Islamophobes, etc.
Now, it’s becoming apparent to some of the left-side Israelis and even some of ‘my people’ here who supported him blindly solely because of the “D”.
— — — — —
I’ll take it one step further.
If Israel moves to stop Iran, I have zero doubt in my mind that this administration will move on Israel and not just by cutting off all aid, recalling Ambassadors and Consuls. Remember that Harold Koh and Samantha Power are the chief cooks and bottle washers for The Midle East for The Dept. of State.
Cheers !
Kenny Solomon
Typical bitter Jewish God-clinging gun owner and barking-mad insane NASCAR fan.
Git-r-done Jamie Mac !
DC Works For Us
http://www.dcworksforus.com
February 9th, 2010 | 12:12 pm | #23
++
“The Arabs Have Stopped Applauding Obama”
['He talks too much," a Saudi academic in Jeddah, who had once been smitten with Barack Obama, recently observed to me of America's 44th president. He has wearied of Mr. Obama and now does not bother with the Obama oratory.
He is hardly alone, this academic. In the endless chatter of this region, and in the commentaries offered by the press, the theme is one of disappointment. In the Arab-Islamic world, Barack Obama has come down to earth.
He has not made the world anew, history did not bend to his will, the Indians and Pakistanis have been told that the matter of Kashmir is theirs to resolve, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the same intractable clash of two irreconcilable nationalisms, and the theocrats in Iran have not "unclenched their fist," nor have they abandoned their nuclear quest.]
to be continued..
==
February 9th, 2010 | 12:13 pm | #24
++
re: #23
Weakening Islamism is Vital to Improve US Image in the Muslim world
[In addition, after President Obama came to office in 2009, the number of home-grown Islamist terror plots inside the US has risen dramatically compared to the previous years. The Year of 2009 represents the highest level of domestic home-grown Islamic radicalism in the US since 2001.
We must question why President Obama's approach with the Muslim world has not succeeded yet in at least having a more positive effect in improving the US image in several Muslim countries or in decreasing the rate of home-grown Islamic radicalism on the home front. One of the main reasons for this lack of success is that US strategic communications with the Muslim world was largely based on the assumption that the problem of Islamic Radicalism and hatred to America is primarily because of the US foreign policy with the Muslim world and thus changing this policy will change the latter. This can only work if the main problem was in the US approach; however, if the main problem was in the Muslim world, such an approach cannot succeed as it will be like trying to change the keys to open a room while the problem is in the rusty lock! In the latter situation, changing the lock - or in other words changing the Muslim world itself - is crucial to solving the problem.
Improving the image of the US in the Muslim world before the proliferation of the phenomenon of Islamism was a very different task compared to trying to improve its image after the phenomenon has proliferated. While traditional approaches of diplomatic, economic and social engagement had the possibility of working with the earlier situation, non-traditional ways to weaken Islamism are now needed for today's situation.
Islamism, or the broad collection of movements to impose intolerant forms of Islamic teachings and practices, has made many in the Muslim world unable to be satisfied with any political system that does not implement Sharia law in some form or fashion. Any Un-Islamic system is seen as an enemy to Islam that must be opposed through violent or even non-violent means. Dr. Al-Zawaherri (second in command of Al-Queda) was clear is his offer for the US to convert to Islam in order to stop terrorism against it.]
to be continued..
==
February 9th, 2010 | 12:16 pm | #25
++
re: #24
On the Job Training
[It is sad that President Obama and his team are still going through on-the-job training a year into their administration. Despite the fact that Janet Napolitano, our homeland-security secretary, bizarrely tried to nix the use of the term terrorism and despite the fact that his own White House dubiously dubbed this global conflict "an overseas contingency operation," the president has finally learned to use the most obvious term - terror- this week. Mr. President, if you are listening, here are a few more thoughts from a concerned Muslim.
You cannot just stay hunkered down at your "beachhead" in Hawaii after another virulent byproduct of global political Islam attacked on our homeland. While no one was really hurt, you don't exactly look like you are taking the issue seriously when your photo of the day captures a romp on the beach. It was not a coincidence that this was attempted on Christmas day, yet you ignore the religious struggles in this conflict. It is time that our commander-in-chief and the leader of the free world come to terms with the reality that this is the greatest conflict of the century and a battle of ideas between western liberal secular democracies and political Islam.
While you and your colleagues are stymied by the question of whether to even use the term "terror," the ideology of al-Qaeda (violent political Islam) is spreading exponentially. Your systematic failure to advance American security against ideologies that threaten us may turn catastrophic. In fact the Christmas bomber said so himself, telling an investigator that "there are more just like me who will strike soon." By all means, Mr. President, fix the holes in our security that we know are there - but terrorists who are suicidal religious zealots and very creative will sadly very likely strike again soon. This year certainly proves that.
Our nation is clearly becoming more and more anxious and concerned over the rash of radicalized Muslims. Is it not time for you to acknowledge that terror is a simply a symptom of a more profound deeper underlying disease? That disease is political Islam.
Hopefully you will realize that we can only defeat an enemy we can name, describe, and understand. As Thomas Friedman and others have recently reminded us, the only answer to jihadists, Salafists, and Islamists is a narrative from within America, and most important from within Islam, that counters the global supremacism of political Islam. Until you say exactly that, we will continue to flail in this conflict.
I hope after Nidal Hasan, after the American jihadis in Pakistan, and now after the Christmas bomber radicalized in London, that you see our need for clear leadership against political Islam and its ubiquitous permeating militant manifestations. We need a leader who recognizes that this conflict is most significantly within Muslim communities as we Muslims struggle with the conflict between theocracy and democracy, sharia and liberty, Islamism and freedom, and salafism and modernity. The longer you squander your leadership and stay silent on this, the more vulnerable we will be.]
to be continued..
==
February 9th, 2010 | 12:17 pm | #26
++
re: #25
A Cold-Blooded Foreign Policy
[The joke is on the enthralled crowds in Cairo, Ankara, Berlin and Oslo. The new American president they had fallen for had no genuine calling or attachments abroad. In their enthusiasm for Mr. Obama, and their eagerness to proclaim themselves at one with the postracial meaning of his election, they had missed his aloofness from the genuine struggles in the foreign world.
It was easy, that delirium with Mr. Obama: It made no moral demands on those eager to partake of it. It was also false, in many lands.
[..]
What a difference three or four years make. The despots have waited out that burst of American power and optimism. No despot fears Mr. Obama, and no blogger in Cairo or Damascus or Tehran, no demonstrator in those cruel Iranian streets, expects Mr. Obama to ride to the rescue. To be sure, it was in the past understood that we can’t bear all burdens abroad, or come to the defense of everyone braving tyranny. But there was always that American assertion that when things are in the balance we would always be on freedom’s side.
We hadn’t ridden to the rescue of Rwanda and Burundi in the 1990s, but we had saved the Bosnians and the Kosovars. We didn’t have the power to undo the colossus of Chinese tyranny when the tanks rolled into Tiananmen Square, but the brave dissidents knew that we were on their side, that we were appalled by the cruelty of official power.
It is different today, there is a cold-bloodedness to American foreign policy. “Ideology is so yesterday,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton proclaimed not long ago, giving voice to the new sentiment.
History and its furies have their logic, and they have not bent to Mr. Obama’s will. He had declared a unilateral end to the “war on terror,” but the jihadists and their mentors are yet to call their war to a halt. From Yemen to Fort Hood and Detroit, the terror continues.
But to go by the utterances of the Obama administration and its devotees, one would have thought that our enemies were Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, not the preachers and masterminds of terror. The president and his lieutenants spent more time denigrating “rendition” and the Patriot Act than they did tracking down the terror trail and the latest front it had opened at the southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen. Our own leaders spoke poorly of our prerogatives and ways, and they were heard the world over.
Under Mr. Obama, we have pulled back from the foreign world. We’re smaller for accepting that false choice between burdens at home and burdens abroad, and the world beyond our shores is more hazardous
and cynical for our retrenchment and our self-flagellation.]
also just finished posting something about this here, post #47..
==
February 9th, 2010 | 12:18 pm | #27
[...] GOP in Alabama Gateway Pundit: Pamela Geller Destroys Ron Reagan Jr. on Joy Behar Show (Video) Obama Top Advisor & Political Hack Says National Security Critics Are Serving Al-Qaeda The Andrew Breitbart Tea Party Speech: A Declaration of War on the Democrat-Media Complex (Video) [...]
February 9th, 2010 | 12:19 pm | #28
Obama wants to negotiate with terrorists, pay the Taliban jizya, bestow citizen’s rights on the Christmas Day bomber, and now his hack Brennan has the audacity to call his detractors terrorist enablers:
“Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda.”
Sorry, the well-deserved criticism hurts Obama, who is not up to the job of protecting this nation. We are sounding the alarm, and that hurts al-Qaeda. Obama’s numerous shortcomings, 100% record for bad decisions, and nosedive ratings must be getting to him.
February 9th, 2010 | 12:22 pm | #29
These liberals are a bunch of hypocrites. For 8 years the libs did everything they could to support al queda, cheering them on with every american soldier death, becoming the political wing of al queda in the USA, doing everything they could to give aid and comfort to alqueda and hoping america would lose the war, just so they could hurt President George W. Bush and get another house seat. The behavior of the liberals was disgusting. I guess its not patriotic anymore to criticize the president during a time of war. But I guess we are making progress. Nine years after 9/11 and the libs have finally acknowledged that we are at war. obama is the worst president in american history.
February 9th, 2010 | 12:23 pm | #30
++
re: #26 decided to re-post #47 in here..
flashback to 8/09:
It’s not over until it’s over
[According to John Brennan, head of the White House's homeland security office, the war on terrorism is over. From now on, the administration will never use terms like "jihadists" and "global war" because doing so, as Mr. Brennan said, "risks giving these murderers the religious legitimacy they desperately seek but in no way deserve." He insisted that the U.S. is at "war with al Qaeda" ("U.S. no longer at war with 'terrorism' ," Page 1, Friday).
Could we be more blind? Acts of terror are rooted in the aspirations of Islamists to create an Islamic state and impose their version of Shariah law.]
flashforward to 2/10:
Bush Was Right, Says Obama
[This weekend, Americans were treated to something new: Barack
Obama defending his war policies by suggesting they merely continue
his predecessor's practices. The defense is illuminating, not least for its implicit recognition that George W. Bush has more credibility on fighting terrorists than does the sitting president.
[..]
Leave aside, for just a moment, the substance. Far more arresting is that Mr. Obama now defends himself by invoking a man he has spent the past year blaming for al Qaeda’s growth. You know—all those Niebuhrian speeches about how America had gone “off course,” “shown arrogance and been dismissive,” and “made decisions based on fear rather than foresight,” thus handing al Qaeda a valuable recruiting tool.
[..]
Like Mr. Obama, Mr. Brennan was singing a different tune this weekend. On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” a testy Mr. Brennan defended the decision that allowed Christmas bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to lawyer up by invoking—you guessed it—the Bush administration. Mr. Brennan claimed the process for reading Abdulmutallab his Miranda rights was “the same process that we have used for every other terrorist who has been captured on our soil.” The FBI, he asserted, was simply following guidelines put in place by Bush Attorney General Michael Mukasey.
Mr. Mukasey begs to differ. “First, the guidelines Mr. Brennan refers to involve intelligence gathering,” he told me. “They do not deal with whether someone in custody is to be treated as a criminal defendant or as an intelligence asset.”
“Second, as for gathering intelligence, it begs the whole question about whether he [Abdulmutallab] should have been designated a criminal suspect. And there is nothing—zero, zilch, nada—in those guidelines that makes that choice. It is a decision that ought to be made at the highest level, and the heads of our security agencies have testified that it was made without consulting them.”
Ditto for the “190 folks” Mr. Obama invoked in his interview with Ms. Couric. The figure comes from a report by Human Rights First (they actually claim 195), which ransacked the federal files to find any cases even remotely connected with terrorism. Most charges, the report concedes, involve not acts of terrorism but charges of material support. These 190 men and women may be guilty of bad things, but to suggest they are comparable with KSM is highly misleading.]
a bit more @ links..
ok, the link-up doesn’t work, so what you have to do is google Bush Was Right, Says Obama and click on William McGurn: Bush Was Right, Says Obama – WSJ.com link to view entire page..
==
February 9th, 2010 | 12:37 pm | #31
TOTUS is on my tv screen at this moment, lying his f***ing a** off…again…as usual. I have grown to truly HATE that man. Not dislike. Not disagree with. Hate.
February 9th, 2010 | 12:39 pm | #32
++
EARTH TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
just a sample..
Obama Administration Stacking the Deck with Islamists
[Abdul-Malik also makes no bones about discussing how the election of President Obama is a step forward in the project of Islamization and the long term goal of Islamist domination which falls right in lock-step with that of the Muslim Brotherhood as revealed in their manifesto.
[..]
Notice Abdul Malik’s reference to “Muslim nation”. Notice his reference to “regime change.” Notice the magic number of ‘50% Muslim’ where Abdul Malik’s Muslim political party (aka Muslim Brotherhood) can then control the electorate and enact their interpretation of “shar’ia’ law” as a majority in their mobocracy. This was just a peek into Abdul Malik’s beliefs. He is no small fish in the American Islamist community. He is a protégé of Siraj Wahhaj, the well known Islamist and unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 WTC bombing. He is President of the Coordinating Council of Muslim Organizations (CCMO) and the outreach director for Dar-Al Hijra mosque in Northern Virginia. The CCMO represents more than 50 Muslim organizations and mosques in the D.C. area. This same group, true to Islamist separatist ideology recently signed a statement from the “grand pooba of Islamist organizations in the United States” (the American Muslim Task Force) suspending their relationship with the FBI. Hardly the action of a “mainstream Muslim group.”
[..]
“…even under the pressures that you and I know about, the deen of Islam is growing because people see even within all of this struggle it is better to be a Muslim under these conditions than to be a kaffir under any conditions… before Allah closes our eyes for the last time you will see Islam move from being the second largest religion in America-that’s where we are now- to being the first religion in America.”
[..]
Williams further told the Tribune that, “it was mostly under the radar…we thought it would put President Obama in a precarious position. We didn’t know how closely he wanted to appear to be working with the Muslim American community.” This group of Islamists is, here, openly telling reporters that they are advocating for placement in positions of influence “under the radar.” They do this with the appearance and false assumption that somehow all Muslims in the U.S. would be overjoyed by their activities and ideology. The report by Abdul-Ullah went on to also link other global Islamist ideologies for outreach to their resume book initiative including outreach to the Syrian and Iranian governments and Islamist complaints about the FBI’s counterterrorism efforts inside a few mosques.
Abdul Malik Mujahid of the Muslim Democrats also pointed to the example of Zalmay Khalilzad who was appointed as Ambassador to Iraq and then to the U.N. under the Bush administration as an example of someone they emulate. I have a sneaking suspicion Mr. Khalilzad would never have even entertained allowing his resume to be placed in a booklet which offers no other unifying ideas except being Muslim and advocates of political Islam.]
much more @ link & here..
The Islamic Infiltration, Part 1: Inside Our
Government, Armed With Our Secrets
The Islamic Infiltration, Part 2: From Influence to Insurrection
==
February 9th, 2010 | 12:43 pm | #33
dfbaskwill
February 9th, 2010 | 11:28 am | #12
Because you love this country, you and your buddies couldn’t have possibly done as poor a job as Obamao’s regime has. And watching your beer swilling, college buddies admin. would have been entertaining, too, I’m sure. Hell, run against Obamao in 2012; I’ll vote for you.
February 9th, 2010 | 12:43 pm | #34
You lie.
February 9th, 2010 | 12:44 pm | #35
gus
February 9th, 2010 | 11:28 am | #13
You shouldn’t insult hammers like that. Or boxes. Unlike Brennan, they’re both useful.
February 9th, 2010 | 12:54 pm | #36
President 44 is simply not up to the job of being Commander-in-chief.Mr.Brennans latest tirade is proof of obamas’appointment failure list.
February 9th, 2010 | 12:58 pm | #37
James
February 9th, 2010 | 12:22 pm | #29
Yes. Further, on the news ticker this morning was something about Obamao’s regime telling USA News that national security shouldn’t be politicized. Bulls**t. Firstly, as you pointed out, the left politicized national security from 9/11 to the end of Bush’s presidency. And they still do whenever the topic is is Bush and Cheney. Secondly, the primary purpose of the Federal govt is national security. Therefore, there is no reason for national politics, the Federal govt and/or national politics/politicians if not for national security. From the beginning, and especially in the last 100 years, most Federal legislation has been counter to the Constitution. National security should never be put on the back burner or taken to the back rooms in WA DC, for without it, we don’t need WA DC.
February 9th, 2010 | 12:58 pm | #38
++
a few more sample’s..
Obama’s UN Resolution to Stifle Free Speech on Islam
[On October 1, 2009, the Obama administration in conjunction with the Egyptian government, introduced an anti-free speech measure to the United Nation’s Human Rights Council (HRC). It was adopted the
next day without a vote.]
Obama Quietly Backing Muslim Brotherhood
[China Confidential has learned that the Obama administration is quietly backing the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, in an attempt to curry favor with the banned Islamist opposition group.
In response to the Brotherhood’s emergence from elections in 2005 as Egypt’s main opposition group, the government of President Hosni Mubarak has wisely banned religion-based political parties. The government has introduced legislation preventing Muslim Brothers
from standing in elections as independent candidates.
The government has also sought to cripple the
movement by arresting hundreds of its members.]
sarc on/
whatever i once was, i am no longer a Muslim
whatever we once were, we are no linger a Christian nation
/sarc off
Obama is an IslaMarxist by any other name..
==
February 9th, 2010 | 1:02 pm | #39
bg #32
It’s good to see this information is getting out to citizens from sources other than blogs such as AtlasShrugs.com and BareNakedIslam.com, sources that are more widely read by a broader audience, such as FamilySecurityMatters.com. As one who’s been seeking education and information on the dangers of Islam and Islamization for much longer than I have, I’m sure you agree.
February 9th, 2010 | 1:05 pm | #40
++
It’s time to root out political Islam
[The crux of our mission is that the ideology of political Islam (Islamism) is the root cause of extremism that threatens Americans' security as well as the faith of American Muslims. Most major American-Muslim organizations hatched from the Muslim Brotherhood are advocates of political Islam and will always refuse to acknowledge the need to separate mosque and state.
The recent Christmas Day airliner attack, the earlier December arrests of American Muslims in Pakistan, and the Fort Hood massacre moved that debate into a new phase. The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and the Muslim American Society (MAS) have begun to acknowledge for the first time that Muslim communities are facing a "radicalization" problem.
These organizations recently announced they are pursuing "anti-radicalization" programs. This is certainly an important change in their rhetoric, but sadly, window-dressing.
These Islamist groups have simply recognized that their post-9/11 apologetic messaging is not resonating with the general public. To solve the problem, they co-opted the rhetoric of curbing radicalization. But absent real, honest reform against political Islam, their rhetoric is vacuous.
The question that begs to be asked of any Muslim group touting these programs is: What will be the structure and substance of your campaign, and will you confront, renounce and reform the ideology of political Islam?
CAIR and MPAC have typically renounced the use of terror and violence, but they have never taken a position against the ideology of political Islam. They have also been constant antagonists to efforts by law enforcement to understand and mitigate the real stages of radicalization of Muslims in America. Just recently these groups called for government to naively "decouple religion from terror."
If the root cause of Muslim radicalization is Islamism, what good is any counterterrorism effort that decouples religion from terror? How can law enforcement effectively counter terrorism in our country without recognizing the slippery slope of political Islam and its separatist narrative is the core ideology that drives the mindset of the extremists as they radicalize?
Pragmatically, and I say this with tough love for my co-religionists, many American Muslims need a 12-step program to recognize the driving separatism of political Islam.
So many American Muslims have gone down that slippery slope of
political Islam to radicalization that the connection cannot be denied.]
more here..
February 9th, 2010 | 1:09 pm | #41
Please post links to articles instead of pasting the entire thing.
February 9th, 2010 | 1:18 pm | #42
++
AuntieMadder @ 1:02 pm #38
re: [I’m sure you agree.]
Amen..
Boiling The Infidel Frog
correction : not that it matters
now, but it’s post #45, not #47..
==
February 9th, 2010 | 1:24 pm | #43
++
U.S. torn over whether some Muslims pose threat or offer insight
[Also in 2007, an expert on Islamist ideology working on contract for
the Pentagon repeatedly warned that the U.S. risked undermining its anti-extremist efforts by working with ISNA and similar organizations. "Despite a track record of self-serving denials with regard to extremism, ISNA continues to function as an important component of the Saudi/Muslim Brotherhood global network," analyst Stephen Coughlin wrote.
He named Safi as one example of the "numerous" connections between ISNA and the International Institute of Islamic Thought, the Virginia group raided in 2002, and he alleged that the institute was also a Muslim Brotherhood entity.
Coughlin's warnings created controversy in the Defense Department, and the analyst now works at a Washington think tank. He did not respond to requests for an interview.
High-level contacts with ISNA have continued under President Barack Obama. ISNA president Ingrid Mattson spoke at his inaugural prayer service in January. Valerie Jarrett, a senior Obama adviser, was a featured speaker in July at the group's national convention in Washington, which thousands attended.
"We share common values," Jarrett told the audience, and "we also share common dreams – for security, progress and opportunity."
One convention panelist was Warith-Deen Umar, a former prison chaplain with a history of extremist rhetoric. He advocated "more jihad," blamed Jews for the Holocaust and said Israelis "have control of the world."]
TruthTeller @ 1:09 pm #41
sorry, will try..
==
February 9th, 2010 | 2:08 pm | #44
Al-Qaeda Leaders Charge Obama Critics with “Serving the Goals of Infidel Beasts by Distracting Them from Their March to Slaughter” http://optoons.blogspot.com/2010/02/al-qaeda-leaders-charge-obama-critics.html
February 9th, 2010 | 2:51 pm | #45
[...] This is also the same day that a top White House official wrote that Obama critics are serving Al-Qaeda. Comments [...]
February 9th, 2010 | 3:49 pm | #46
Miss me yet?
February 9th, 2010 | 4:18 pm | #47
We need more good Muslims. As of now, I haven’t seen a good Muslim.
February 9th, 2010 | 4:58 pm | #48
John Brennan might know that cricitism may lead to improvements, no?
Wait. No, he doesn’t know that. It doesn’t fit into his image of the Great Chairman Obamao.
And he became Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism advisor to the White House how? What are his qualifications?
Let’s see…
“* B.A., Political Science, Fordham University, including a year abroad studying Arabic and Middle Eastern studies at American University in Cairo.
* M.A., government, with a concentration in Middle Eastern Studies, University of Texas at Austin.”
So he was with the CIA, but going by his bio he is a seatwarmer, a deskjockey. No operative experience.
I love it with theorists talk about practical implications.
February 9th, 2010 | 5:35 pm | #49
++
MPAC Pursues Islamist Ideology in Guise of Civil Rights Defender
[Lofty goals indeed, but at odds with what the record -- drawn from the organization's ties and membership, its statements and publications -- shows to be its real agenda.
The disconnect can be seen, for example, in considering the history of Edina Lekovic, responsible in her role as MPAC's spokeswoman for preparing the statements that show the group's reasonableness and good intentions.
But this is the same Edina Lekovic who was an editor of Al-Talib, a Muslim student magazine, while studying at the University of California at Los Angeles in the late 1990s. She is listed as managing editor in the July 1999 issue -- one that features Ayatollah Khomeini and Osama bin Laden on its cover, with a headline' "The Spirit of Jihad," and describes bin Laden as a "freedom fighter and philanthropist."
By the time this paean to bin Laden ran, Al Qaida had issued a declaration of war against the United States and a fatwa declaring it to be "an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it" to kill Americans and their allies. And it had carried out the bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
Nonetheless, Al-Talib proposed, "When we hear someone refer to the great Mujahid Osama bin Laden as a 'terrorist,' we should defend our brother and refer to him as a freedom fighter; someone who has forsaken wealth and power to fight in Allah's cause and speaks out against oppressors."]
SOMEBODY, ANYBODY WITH ANY CLOUT PLEASE,
WAKE THE POWERS THAT BE THE HELL UP!!
and you can by-pass Obama, as setting the foundations for integrating Sharia Law into the US & over-riding the Constitution are on his list of to-do’s..
==
February 9th, 2010 | 8:46 pm | #50
John Brennan,key stone cops.
February 9th, 2010 | 8:47 pm | #51
So if you got a call that the FBI was interrogating a “high-interest” person, would you assume they were Mirandized ?
February 9th, 2010 | 9:11 pm | #52
In the same article as this post cites, Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism John Brennan writes, “Senior counterterrorism officials from the White House, the intelligence community and the military were all actively discussing this case before he was Mirandized and supported the decision to charge him in criminal court.”
So the lie continues and even grows! We previously had reports that National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Michael Leiter, chief of the National Counterterrorism Center, were not consulted before the decision was made and had no knowledge of Abdulmutallab being read Miranda rights. Now we have an additional assertion that top Republicans were in the loop on this.
Somebody is still lying. And the press is letting them get away with it by not asking the right questions. We are betrayed again by our press failing to perform their trusted duty, while never failing to advance the liberal agenda.
February 9th, 2010 | 10:13 pm | #53
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by slkbrooke: Obama Top Advisor & Says National Security Critics Are Serving Al-Qaeda http://bit.ly/a9kghe #tcot…
February 9th, 2010 | 11:01 pm | #54
++
Robert @ 9:11 pm #52
re: [Now we have an additional assertion
that top Republicans were in the loop on this.]
Byron York has more at The Washington Examiner.
[ On the other hand, at least Brennan does not blame Republicans for
the decision to Mirandize Abdulmutallab. In my new story today, GOP winning war over Miranda rights for terrorists, I discuss Brennan's talk-show accusation that top Republican officials knew about, and did not object to, the decision to grant Miranda rights to Abdulmutallab. GOP sources on Capitol Hill told me they suspected that Brennan "test-drove that one himself" -- that is, he put out the argument without getting pre-approval from the White House. "I think if they really thought they had a gotcha, they would have rolled it out weeks ago," I was told. "But there really wasn't anything to roll out." In the story, I wrote that "GOP lawmakers don't expect to hear that charge again."]
one not only has to listen very carefully to discern Obama’s “just
words”, but how the Press/MSM et al relate/s them to & for the
publics consumption as well..
==
February 9th, 2010 | 11:11 pm | #55
So, let me get this straight.. Brennan is saying, sit down and shut up while he and other guardians of our national security (haaaa) sit before a Congressional panel giving details on Umar Abdulmutallab’s talking again while those that would see us dead are listening in? Hey, Brennan.. take your own advice.. sit down and shut up!
February 10th, 2010 | 2:59 am | #56
Who are the 300 terrorists held in U.S. prisons?
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
February 5, 2010
“The Bush administration used the criminal justice system to convict more than 300 individuals on terrorism-related charges,” writes Attorney General Eric Holder in a new letter to Republican critics in Congress. The letter is part of the Obama administration’s aggressive defense of its decision to grant full American constitutional rights to al Qaeda soldier Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the accused Christmas Day bomber. That defense boils down to one sentence: Bush did it, too.
Republicans on Capitol Hill object. They argue that one of the reasons some terrorists were handled in the criminal justice system is that it took George W. Bush and Congress years to establish a military tribunal system that satisfied constitutional requirements — a process that was lengthened by legal challenges filed by some of the same lawyers who now work in Holder’s Justice Department.
You can argue about that forever. But there’s one serious factual debate going on about Holder’s letter, and that concerns those “300 individuals.” Just who are they?
It turns out some lawmakers have been trying for months to get an answer. They’re not saying the claim is false — they just want to see what it’s based on. But so far they haven’t been able to find out.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Who-are-the-300-terrorists-held-in-U_S_-prisons_-83588677.html#ixzz0f7c7WW7c
February 10th, 2010 | 1:42 pm | #57
++
300 of them or not, they probably weren’t “AQ enemy combatants”..
==
February 12th, 2010 | 1:20 pm | #58
[...] for GOP in Alabama Gateway Pundit: Pamela Geller Destroys Ron Reagan Jr. on Joy Behar Show (Video), Obama Top Advisor & Political Hack Says National Security Critics Are Serving Al-Qaeda, The Andrew Breitbart Tea Party Speech: A Declaration of War on the Democrat-Media Complex (Video), [...]
February 12th, 2010 | 11:03 pm | #59
[...] And There Goes The Promise About Never Questioning Opponents’ Patriotism February 13, 2010 Posted by taoist in Obama. Tags: Democrats, Lies, Patriotism, Slander trackback Right out the window. [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact