Showing posts with label war on terror. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war on terror. Show all posts

Monday, June 22, 2015

TSA means thousands standing around

From the files of Michael Shannon at The Whole Shebang (mostly) and Newsmax

You missed out on last summer’s viral social exhibitionism craze and never got around to scheduling an Ice Bucket Challenge, but you have no intention of making that mistake twice.

So you’ve already started planning a Let’s Draw Mohammed contest.

No need for ice this time, but there is the question of what organization will handle screening the attendees?

Should you contact TSA or your local police department?

If you picked TSA there is no need to include me on the guest list.

The acting TSA head, Melvin Carraway, was demoted this week after the Inspector General found his crack crew of coffee drinkers failed to spot weapons and explosives in 95 percent of the unannounced tests conducted by a security team.

For your Draw Mohammed Contest this means TSA will be confiscating pencils while the C–4 wrapped in a turban sails through unmolested.

Find out all the details in the Shannon column at Newsmax.
_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now



Thursday, June 11, 2015

No strategy ~ No clue

From the Warning Signs of Alan Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy


The Wednesday, June 10 Wall Street Journal headline at the top of the page was “Obama Set to Expand Troops in Iraq.” We were 589 days into the two terms Barack Hussein Obama has served in the office of President of the United States and he is as clueless now as he was when he arrived on January 20, 2009.

“President Barack Obama is poised to send hundreds more American advisers to a new base in a strategic Iraqi region to help devise a counterattack against marauding Islamic State militants, U.S. officials said Tuesday, a shift that underscores American concern over recent battlefield losses.” It’s 450 “trainers.”

We have had losses because:
(1) Obama was elected on a promise to end the conflict in Iraq and
(2) reelected by pulling out troops to the point that the remaining Iraqi troops—Shiites in the south—decided it wasn’t worth dying for their leaders. 
Can’t say I blame them, but dying at the hands of ninth century Islamic fanatics is the fate that threatens the entire Middle East, not just Iraq or what’s left of it.

This is how we lost the war in Vietnam. There was a time when Americans utterly destroyed their enemies on the battlefield. In the latter half of the last century, starting in Korea, we forgot how to do that and why that’s how wars are won.

In all candor, like a lot of Americans, I went back and forth about the Mideast conflicts. Looking back, I think George H.W. Bush showed remarkable insight when, after driving Iraq’s Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait, he stopped at the border and came home. George W. had the notion he could somehow introduce democracy to the region. He couldn’t and it will likely never really occur there because Islam is the only law and it has kept the region ignorant, backward, and under the thumb of tyrants for centuries.

The Islamic State troops must be stopped at some point, but Obama is not the President who will do it. Whatever U.S. backed combat occurs will be just enough to present enough television news images to convince the gullible that progress is being made.

Obama arrived in office without any strategy and has spent the last six and a half years “muddling through” as the British say. He and the Democratic Party had only one goal; to win the elections. After that, they wanted to “fundamentally transform” the greatest nation on planet Earth. They have largely made a mess out of everything they touched from ObamaCare to Common Core.

There’s a reason why Obama will send more troops and that’s because every one of our allies has told him that, if the U.S. does not again assert its role of global leadership, they are not going to cooperate with him in a thousand different ways.

Our allies in the Mideast have told him they lack the military strength (and will) to conduct any kind of war with ISIS. The U.S. and much of the rest of the world cannot afford to sit by and let the enormous oil wealth and reserves of the Mideast come under the control of ISIS.

So, once again we read headlines about U.S. troops returning to the Mideast.

What that means is that the 2016 elections are more critical to the future of the nation than all previous ones.

I think Americans, liberals, conservatives and independents alike have had more than enough of President No Strategy. I think there are enough older Americans who remember and take pride in a nation that was unabashedly the world’s leader in the pursuit of peace and democracy. And I think that the thirty percent or so of brain-dead liberals are not sufficient to affect the outcome of a 2016 election devoted to restoring the nation’s economy and leadership.

It can be done. John F. Kennedy was on his way to doing so. Reagan did so. In 590 days from now, we can begin to do so again.

_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now



Friday, June 5, 2015

ISIS planning nuke weapons in the U.S.

From the files of Colonel Allen B. West


The Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL), in the latest edition of its propaganda magazine, indicated that it could purchase a nuclear weapon in Pakistan, take it to Nigeria, and then smuggle it into the U.S. through Mexico by using existing trafficking networks in Latin America.

BREITBART REPORTS:

In an op-ed article published in the ninth edition of ISIS’ Dabiq magazine released in late May, the jihadist group claims it could transport a nuclear device in the same way illicit drugs are smuggled into Europe through West Africa, adding that Boko Haram’s presence in Nigeria could facilitate the transaction.

The Nigeria-based Islamic terrorist group, Boko Haram, pledged allegiance to ISIS in March.

In March, Gen. John Kelly, then-commander of U.S. Southern Command (Southcom), warned that Islamic terrorist groups such as ISIS could exploit the capabilities and knowledge of Latin American smuggling networks to infiltrate the U.S. through Mexico and possibly bring in weapons of mass destruction.

The general, in October 2014, acknowledged that illegal drugs from South America move “through West Africa, up the Maghreb and into Western Europe,” adding that ISIS enemy al Qaeda and its affiliates take “a lot of money to allow it to flow.”

According to the alleged author of the Dabiq op-ed article, kidnapped British photojournalist John Cantlie, ISIS could smuggle a nuke into the U.S. by using the same route and reversing the flow— moving the nuke from West Africa into South America, from where it could be transported into the United States through Mexico.

“Let me throw a hypothetical operation onto the table,” Cantlie wrote in the article entitled “The Perfect Storm.”

“The Islamic State has billions of dollars in the bank, so they call on their wilāyah [province] in Pakistan to purchase a nuclear device through weapons dealers with links to corrupt officials in the region.” He addded . . .

More on ISIS - Dabiq: 



Wednesday, May 13, 2015

Political correctness games with jihadists

“We Have Played A Game Of PC And Not Put The Spotlight On The Jihadi Support Sources” says Colonel Allen West

_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now


Wednesday, February 4, 2015

The other cause of terrorism

The Other Cause of Terrorism from the Warning Signs of Alan Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

Know the Warning Signs from Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

I never fail to be astonished by the amount of corruption there is in the world. It is a very human trait whether it was royalty asserting that they ruled by God’s choice until their subjects rose up against them or modern day despots encountering the same fate.

Available On Line Now
Sarah Chayes has authored “Thieves of State: Why Corruption Threatens Global Security” ($26.95, W.W. Norton) and it is quite timely when you consider that corruption ignited the “Arab Spring”, first in Tunisia when a peddler grew so tired of the police asking for bribes that he set himself afire in protest.

Its dictator’s wife openly displayed the nation’s stolen wealth for which they were driven from power. In Egypt there was a similar response when the public tired of the looting of the state treasury by Mubarak’s son. Revolts from Libya to Syria have been generated by the same cause.

Corruption in the Middle East has a long history, but it is worldwide and, depending on the nation, is either tolerated as part of the way the culture does business or resisted by governments who understand that it undermines their legitimacy. Throw a dart at the map of the world and you are likely to hit a nation where corruption is influencing current events.

As Chayes notes, “Time and again U.S. officials are blindsided by major developments in countries where they work. Too often they are insensible to the perspectives and aspirations of population.”

A classic example is Afghanistan where both the Soviet Union and the U.S. ran into such ingrained corruption that it undermined their objectives, the former to turn it into a satellite and the latter to turn it into a modern, democratic government. Chayes cites Afghanistan as a classic example of why the Taliban emerged as a jihadist movement.

Corruption in the form of bribes, kick-backs, cronyism, is so deeply engrained in Afghanistan that it generated a movement to replace it with sharia law by Islamists.

“If the very Afghan officials by whose sides they planned to combat extremists were generating those extremists themselves—by having men shake down travelers and taking a cut, or leaving bills unpaid, or by providing judiciously selected ‘intelligence’ to engineer a night-raid against a rival trafficking network—it was too big a paradox to take in. NATO officers,” said Chayes, “did not want to know.”

“The corruption networks” in Afghanistan, writes Chayes, “were just too vertically integrated: any move against any official, no matter how lowly, would reverberate all the way up the chain to Karzai.”

In the 1960s and 1970s, Afghanistan had been a constitutional monarchy with a national assembly and local elders affording a check on executive power. “Citizens expected a decent education from their government, health care, even employment in state-owned industries.” That changed when Hamid Karzai took over. At that point government became a criminal enterprise.

The 9/11 attack prompted the U.S. to invade to drive out al Qaeda, but it also led to its staying on to fight the perceived enemies of Afghanistan. They—otherwise known as the Taliban—were being generated in part by the desire to drive out the corrupt Karzai administration.

What we tend to forget about the “Arab Spring” was that “millions of Arabs chose a constructive way to force change. They chose political revolution—a peaceful, civic, inclusive, and responsible form of revolt—directed square at their own leaderships, not at Western countries, not even those seen as regime allies.”

This is not to suggest that Islamism hasn’t degraded from its opposition to widespread corruption into organizations seeking to take control over the nations where it has spread. It has and this is most evidence in the incredibly corrupt nation of Nigeria where since 2009 Boko Haram has developed terrorism to new heights of barbarity—if that is possible.

An oil-rich nation, the billions that it generates have gone missing thanks to the administration of Nigerian president, Goodluck Jonathan. The police in Nigeria are hated as much as Boko Haram and, as we have seen, have not demonstrated any ability to eliminate the terrorist organization.

Why would any police officer or member of the armed forces want to die for a corrupt, kleptocratic administration? This was true back in the days when the U.S. was fighting in Vietnam, true when the Iraqi armed forces fled from those of the Islamic State, and it explains why even the active participation of U.S. forces does not result in victory against the terrorist organizations.

Why then should we be surprised that many throughout the Middle East have turned to Islam to address the problems they encounter from the corruption of their governments? “Lured by militant advocates of a religious ordering of human affairs, they will seek to roll back four hundred years of political history.”

In the West, we regard those regions of the world where corruption is rampant as backward. We can be forgiven for forgetting that our ancestors in England, the Netherlands, and parts of France laid the groundwork for modern democracy by their efforts to curb the corruption of the monarchies that enjoyed the good life at the expense of their subjects.

By the time the Founders came together to create the U.S. Constitution, they had been well-schooled and experienced in what it would require to keep corruption at bay with a government whose powers were limited and divided among executive, legislative, and judicial branches.

We are their beneficiaries, but that does not mean we have defeated corruption. The vast entitlement programs are just one example of the way millions are secured illegally by deception and disbursement. Other forms of corruption are addressed in the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act that forbids the use of bribery by corporations doing business in foreign nations.

The U.S. is not alone, however. Just as occurred in 2008, the too close relationship of the banking community and government led to financial crises in Ireland and Iceland. The public’s rejection of corruption in Ukraine led to its current civil unrest.

The role of corruption in the nations experiencing Islamic terrorism cannot be underestimated. Its role in the conduct of the world’s affairs is huge and a constant threat whose many forms must be understood, addressed, and eliminated to the greatest degree possible.
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Friday, January 23, 2015

Ghadafi would have left peacefully

Admiral: U.S could have ousted Moammar Ghadifi peacefully from Jerome Corsi at WND

Moammar Gadhafi
As the allied bombing of Libya began in 2011, the Obama administration rejected an offer by Moammar Gadhafi to engage in negotiations to abdicate, according to a retired U.S. Navy officer who says he was prepared to broker the deal.

Instead, the U.S. decided to provide weapons to “rebels” consisting of al-Qaida-related local Libyan militia and members of the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood, contends retired Rear Admiral Chuck Kubic.

Kubic began email and telephone contact March 21, 2011, between Tripoli and AFRICOM in Stuttgart, Germany, to broker an offer by Gadhafi to engage in talks with the U.S. under a white flag of truce, according to testimony he provided the Citizens Commission on Benghazi.

As WND reported Monday, the commission – comprised of 17 retired admirals and generals; former intelligence agents; active anti-terrorist experts; media specialists; and former congressmen – has been conducting its own investigation and working behind the scenes for the past year and a half to ensure Congress uncovers the truth of what happened in Benghazi and holds people accountable.

WND reported Tuesday the commission found in an interim report that the Obama White House and the State Department under the management of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “changed sides in the war on terror” in 2011 by implementing a policy of facilitating the delivery of weapons to the al-Qaida-dominated rebel militias in Libya attempting to oust Gadhafi.

As WND previously reported on Tuesday, the Citizens Commission on Benghazi has concluded the State Department then under the direction of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton authorized Christopher Stevens prior to the fall of Qadhafi to enter Libya at Benghazi from a cargo ship, where he implemented an Obama administration policy of facilitating the delivery of weapons to the al-Qaida-controlled rebel militias in Libya attempting to oust Gadhafi from power.

The commission’s April 2014 interim report said the war in Libya continued “and ultimately cost tens of thousands of lives.”

“The U.S. failure to even consider Gadhafi’s request for talks, and its determination to enter and pursue this war in support of al-Qaida-linked rebels, presents the appearance of a policy intent upon empowering Islamic forces with no measurable benefit to U.S. national security,” the report said.
The Citizens Commission on Benghazi involves a group of 17 now retired admirals and generals, former intelligence agents, active anti-terrorist experts, media specialists, and former members of Congress organized

The commission was organized in 2013 by Accuracy in Media Editor Roger Aronoff along with three retired military officers: Navy Admiral James Lyons, Army Major General Paul Vallely and Air Force Lieutenant General Thomas McInerney.
Their interim report said Gadhafi “expressed his willingness to abdicate shortly after the beginning of the 2011 Libyan revolt, but the U.S. ignored his calls for a truce, which led to extensive loss of life (including four Americans), chaos, and detrimental outcomes for U.S. national security objectives across the region.”

In the following days, the report said, Gadhafi “expressed interest in a truce, and possible abdication and exile out of Libya.”

“He even pulled his forces back from several Libyan cities as a sign of good faith.”

The report detailed the precise chain of communications with the U.S. government regarding the possibility Gadhafi would abdicate and obviate the need for the U.S. to join with NATO to back the al-Qaida-affiliated militia seeking to depose the dictator.

More at WND
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Friday, January 16, 2015

Investigation: Did the terrorist get the message?

Maybe the terrorists failed to get the message from the art studios of A.F. (Tony) Branco at Comically Incorrect.com

Get a Daily Dose of Humor and Reality from A.F. (Tony) Branco at Comically Incorrect

Check out some of the websites listed below that publish the A.F. (Tony) Branco Political Cartoon features.
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

I Have Always Been a Pencil

"I have always been a pencil" ~ Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec and edited in the art studios of Dan Youra at Utoons.com

Get Your Daily Dose of Humor and Reality from Dan Youra at Utoons.com

Dan Youra is one of the outstanding conservative cartoonists in the trade today who follows in the footsteps of the great political cartoon masters, whose quotes inspire a new generation of followers.
"Outside of basic intelligence, there is nothing more important to a good political cartoonist than ill will." ~ Jules Feiffer, Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist.
"Too many of today's artists regard editorial cartooning as a trade instead of a profession. They try not to be too offensive. The hell with that. We need more stirrer-uppers." ~ Bill Mauldin.
Youra was one of the first recipients of a Fulbright Scholarship and worked in Latin America. He served as an editor of Current Thought on Peace and War at the United Nations in New York.

"As long as there are politicians who continue to try and fool the voters, there is no chance of ever running out of material to work with because they create it themselves and about themselves," says Dan Youra.

Dan is the small business owner and operator of the Youra Studios located in the State of Washington.

Visit the Youra Studios at Utoons.com
_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

To Hold a Pen is to Be at War

To Hold A Pen Is To Be At War ~ Voltaire from the art studios of Dan Youra at Utoons.com

Get Your Daily Dose of Humor and Reality from Dan Youra at Utoons.com

Dan Youra is one of the outstanding conservative cartoonists in the trade today who follows in the footsteps of the great political cartoon masters, whose quotes inspire a new generation of followers.
"Outside of basic intelligence, there is nothing more important to a good political cartoonist than ill will." ~ Jules Feiffer, Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist.
"Too many of today's artists regard editorial cartooning as a trade instead of a profession. They try not to be too offensive. The hell with that. We need more stirrer-uppers." ~ Bill Mauldin.
Youra was one of the first recipients of a Fulbright Scholarship and worked in Latin America. He served as an editor of Current Thought on Peace and War at the United Nations in New York.

"As long as there are politicians who continue to try and fool the voters, there is no chance of ever running out of material to work with because they create it themselves and about themselves," says Dan Youra.

Dan is the small business owner and operator of the Youra Studios located in the State of Washington.

Visit the Youra Studios at Utoons.com
_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

U.S. almost joins with France against terror

U.S. almost joined the French to reject Radical Islam from the art studios of A.F. (Tony) Branco featured at Net Right Daily

Get Your Daily Dose of Humor and Mostly Reality from A.F. (Tony) Branco

Check out some of the websites listed below that publish the A.F. (Tony) Branco Political Cartoon features.
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Tuesday, January 13, 2015

Justices do not belong at the State of the Union

President Delivering a State of the Union Speech on Capitol Hill

Justices don't belong at the State of the Union pep rally by Jeff Jacoby at the Boston Globe

Next week, President Obama will be on Capitol Hill, appearing before a joint session of Congress for the annual ritual known as the State of the Union address. Amid the hoopla and pageantry — the partisan cheers and ovations, the shout-outs to honorees in the gallery, the approving nods or deprecating scowls from the vice president and House speaker — one dour anomaly will be hard to miss.

Members of the Supreme Court will be sitting poker-faced in the front row, draped in their black robes and refraining from any applause or show of loyalty.

The Constitution directs the president to periodically "give to the Congress information of the State of the Union," and most presidents since Woodrow Wilson have delivered that "information" in a formal speech.

But nothing in the Constitution requires the Supreme Court to be on hand for the performance, and there is no time-honored tradition that explains their presence. It wasn't until the late 1950s that justices began regularly showing up for State of the Union addresses. Nothing has been gained by the change, least of all admiration for the Supreme Court or confidence in its impartiality.

Justices used to have more self-respect than to dance attendance on presidents delivering political exhortations. Scholars Todd Peppers and Micheal Giles, in research published in 2012, show that of the 35 State of the Union addresses given between 1913 and 1964, members of the Supreme Court appear to have attended only seven.

The speech frequently coincided with court hearings, and justices were rarely inclined to reschedule oral arguments to accommodate a presidential oration.

That changed in 1965, when the State of the Union moved to an evening time slot. Lyndon Johnson wanted a larger TV audience, and the justices may have found it hard to resist the allure of a national broadcast.

Apparently they also found it hard to mask their political preferences. Peppers and Giles write that justices openly applauded many of LBJ's legislative pronouncements, in areas ranging from civil rights to budget cuts to US-Soviet trade. Only in the 1970s did the justices seem to realize that they shouldn't be hip-hip-hooraying controversial measures they might later have to rule on. They learned to sit impassively while the carnival went on around them.

"To the extent the State of the Union has degenerated into a political pep rally, I'm not sure why we are there," Chief Justice John Roberts admitted in 2010. "The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court … has to sit there expressionless, I think is very troubling."

It sure was troubling that year, when some of the "hollering" was incited by Obama's pointed criticism of the court itself. With six justices directly before him, the president denounced the recent ruling in Citizens United v. FEC, claiming it had "opened the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations," to sway US elections. ("Not true," Justice Samuel Alito was seen to murmur — a reaction many in the media ludicrously treated as a shocking breach of etiquette.)

Roberts may wonder "why we are there," yet he continues to attend State of the Union speeches. Several of his colleagues, on the other hand, have decided they have better things to do than sit in frozen silence during the partisan ovations and political showmanship.

Clarence Thomas says he stopped going because it became "very uncomfortable for a judge to sit there," adding that "there's a lot that you don't hear on TV — the catcalls, the whooping and hollering and under-the-breath comments."

Antonin Scalia hasn't attended the speech since 1997. "It has turned into a childish spectacle," he remarks. "I don't want to be there to lend dignity to it." Alito, having learned the hard way that there is no percentage in having to "sit there like the proverbial potted plant," hasn't returned since 2010.

The State of the Union address gains nothing from the presence of black-clad jurists except a whiff of gravitas it doesn't merit. The heavens wouldn't fall if all the Supremes simply stopped taking part. In 1986 and 2000, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton delivered addresses that none of the justices attended.

The nation survived — just as it survived the pre-TV era when the Supreme Court wasn't represented at the State of the Union pageant because it was focused on something more pressing.

Its job.
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Obama needs to say ISLAMIC terrorist attack

Say it Mr. President dammit: It was an Islamic terrorist attack from the files of Colonel Allen B. West

Meet Colonel Allen B. West
Yesterday morning I awoke to a nightmare: a brutal savage Islamic terrorist attack in Paris, France. We have now come to the point where tolerance has become a one-way street leading to cultural suicide.

It was the French who came to the aid of a young America and it was the French who gave us the gift of Lady Liberty. Sadly, it was the French who found themselves on the 21st century battlefield as liberty was assaulted — our venerable freedom of speech and the press, as well as expression.

We have allowed the enemy into our home and refuse to acknowledge it. Our own president, Barack Hussein Obama has said “the future shall not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” and “let me be clear, ISIS is not Islamic.”

So once again, we are forced to acquiesce to a vile theocratic-political totalitarian ideology that does not conform to the concept of “coexistence.”

In the case of this latest attack — the assailants were born in France. Somehow, they never embraced the ideal of liberty and freedom. Somehow, they decided to be parasitic invaders who fed off the host until a time when they deemed it was time to attack.

And over time we have allowed the invading parasite to fester in its own communities all to our detriment — under the guise of “multiculturalism.”

The real question is, what shall we do in response?
1. First of all we need to acknowledge this Islamist enemy — our own White House referred to this attack as “violence.” Only after French President Hollande stated it was a terrorist attack, did the White House refer to it as the same.
However, President Obama just cannot bring himself to say Islamist, jihadist, Islamic terrorism — nothing. It is still this Obama administration which classifies the Islamic jihadist attack at Ft. Hood Texas, and the barbaric beheading of an American woman in Moore Oklahoma, both as “workplace violence.”

If we cannot even admit who this enemy is — especially given that they freely admit the fact — then the Islamo-fascists and terrorists are indeed winning. They are censoring us and instilling fear. Why did it take President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry to even say the word?

And we have cultural jihadist apologists who buy into this perverted and warped sense of political correctness and condemn those who call Islamists out. I refuse to, and will not call this “radical” Islam. It is what it is, and that is islam — pure and simple, and without any type of reformation bringing this belief system into the 21st century we will continue to confront the problem. The system of “nakeesh” (abrogation) means the latter and more violent verses of the Koran supersede the previous — meaning these jihadist actions are justified within their doctrine — their playbook.

I applaud the hashtag campaign saying “We are all Charlie” – oh, just like the hashtag campaign to free the girls taken by Boko Haram, remember that one? I’m glad there are signs in Paris stating, “Not Afraid” — but I have had friends already telling me news editors are telling them to not do anything to upset Muslims. Yes, they win.
2. We cannot continue to make our culture and values subservient in some ill-advised “can’t we all just get along” moment. We welcome those from other countries, but Western civilization values have promoted individual freedoms and liberties.
Instead we have those who tell us that we must accommodate them — while there is no reciprocation. I just have to ask, why is it that Mecca is “off limits” to “kafirs?” How is it that in the 21st century we have an entire city that is ruled verboten to those not belonging to a certain belief? Who can embrace a belief system and ideology that shoots a young girl in the head just because she wants an education — and where are all those feminist voices – but that is a topic for another day.

How can it be that we are allowing Sharia law practices into our culture, which is something totally antithetical to our fundamental core beliefs? Again, we bow down before the false god of multiculturalism, which has now become a cancerous premise and has enabled values which conflict with the basics of freedom to be made superior. We are accepting subjugation and subservience.

Yes, Western civilization is superior, and there’s nothing for which we should be ashamed. We must begin to win the information and propaganda war and stop redefining evil just to make ourselves feel better — actually wishing away the problem because we prefer to dismiss its existence.
3. We must begin to reconsider who is allowed into our countries. We don’t have to roll out the welcome mat to everyone — especially those from areas which are breeding grounds for Islamic terrorist activity. We must begin to cordon off Islamo-fascism. We also must take a stand against those within our countries who embrace and support this jihadism and not provide an umbrella of protection. Proselytization that advances concepts contrary to that of a Constitutional Republic is not free speech, it is sedition.
I was criticized by stating that imams, clerics, and mullahs residing in this country who are found to be preaching jihad should be removed from this country. Why did I say that? Because they are fomenting the type of action that occurred in Paris. Even Egyptian President al-Sisi called out the imams — but then again, the cultural jihadist apologists would rather attack me or others instead of those who would slay them, as happened in Paris.

The Muslim community must come to realize it has a responsibility and the collective patience of Western civilization grows thinner with each of these incidents — at least from those who love freedom and liberty and refuse to surrender.

We must accept the reality of this enemy and make a decision sooner rather than later to vanquish it. And yes, that means developing a strategy for victory.

I’m just waiting for those who will say, “this is what can happen and perhaps it was deserved.” Do the Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Copts deserve what they are getting? Are we now accepting crucifixions of Christians and the massacre of children at a school in Pakistan?

It is time we shrink the global footprint of Islamic jihadism.

It is time we unite and make the stand to say no more. It is time we say we reserve the right to criticize and editorialize against those we wish. We cannot cower in fear because of a cartoon caricature of a 7th century figure. We cannot allow anyone to define the limits and constraints on our freedoms and liberties. If so, then we pass onto our subsequent generations something that shines a lot less bright than the gift which we were given.

Islamic blasphemy laws? Give me a break.

There is a moment in time relating to this Paris Islamic terror attack which we must seize upon — before the news cycle moves on to something else. We are going to have to decide whether our liberties are worth the fight.

And in closing — a study of Islamic history of conquest will show this is no perversion of the faith, just a following.
_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Wednesday, January 7, 2015

Obama sends in his Gitmo reinforcements

Obama gives the enemy a better foothold with his Gitmo releases from the political art studios of A.F. (Tony) Branco and featured at Comically Incorrect.com

Get Your Daily Dose of Humor from Pulitzer Nominee A.F. (Tony) Branco

Check out some of the websites listed below that publish the A.F. (Tony) Branco Political Cartoon features.
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

Islam kills again

Islam Kills Again from the Warning Signs by Alan Caruba at Facts-not-Fantasy

We Forget Too Soon What the President Said About the Religion of Peace

The news from Paris about the killing of twelve journalists highlights Islam's war on the West that represents a fundamental truth about this cult of Mohammad.

Most are familiar with the Islamic schism between the majority Sunnis and the minority Shiites. It dates back to the very earliest days of Islam when the two groups disagreed over who should be the successor to Mohammad.

There is a new schism in Islam these days and it is between a moderate interpretation of Islam and fundamentalism. We have all seen what fundamentalism produces.

The past year had dramatic and tragic slaughters by the Islamic State (ISIS) in the Syrian-Iraqi area they control, the murder of more than 140 school children in Pakistan by the Taliban, and the kidnapping of 276 girls by Boko Haram in Nigeria. These acts represent a strict interpretation of Shia law based on the Koran.

That is why an address by Egyptian President, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, on New Year’s Day to clerics at Al-Azhar and the Awqaf Ministry is particularly significant. As reported by Raymond Ibrahim of the Middle East Forum, Sisi “a vocal supporter for a renewed vision of Islam, made what must be his most forceful and impassioned plea to date.”

His speech was a warning that “the corpus of (Islamic) texts and ideas that we have made sacred over the years” are “antagonizing the entire world.”
Referring to the 1.6 billion Muslims, Sisi said it is not possible that they “should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants—that is 7 billion—so that they themselves may live.” Islam, said Sisi “is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost—and it is being lost by our own hands.”
I cannot recall any other Islamic leader saying anything this bold and this true. Directly addressing the clerics, Sisi said “It’s inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire umma (Islamic world) to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world.” That is, of course, exactly what has been occurring.

Sisi called for “a religious revolution”, what Christians would call a reformation. “You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world is waiting for your next move…”

Based on negotiations led by the U.S., the world is waiting to see what Iran, the home of the Islamic Revolution—the name given to the ayatollah’s movement that overthrew the Shah in 1979—will do in the face of demands that it cease its quest to produce its own nuclear weapons.

You don’t have to be a U.S. diplomat to know the answer to that. As Behnam Ben Taleblu of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies recently wrote, for decades the Iranian leadership has referred to “American Islam”, a term that describes what Iran “perceives to be a depoliticized perversion of the true faith, devoid of the revolutionary sentiment that guides the Islamic Republic.” Calling it “American” demonstrates their contempt for everything American.

The Iranians even apply the term to Muslim nations “deemed pliant before the will of superpowers like the United States.” In their view, they are the champions of “the pure Islam of Mohammad.” The Iranians are Shiites. As such, they are a minority sect within Islam, though a large one by any standard.

Those U.S. diplomats negotiating to get Iran to agree to cease pursuing the ability to construct their own nuclear weapons should read the memoirs of Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister and lead nuclear negotiator. As Taleblu notes, Zarif has a PhD from an American university, but he still wrote “We have a fundamental problem with the West and especially with America. This is because we are claimants of a mission, which has a global dimension.”

That mission is to impose Islam—their fundamental brand of it—on the entire world. That would get easier if they can threaten the world with nuclear weapons. Iran has been the leading sponsor of Islamic terror since its revolution in 1979.

The gap between Egyptian President Sisi’s concerns about the state of Islam today and the intention of fundamentalists like Zarif are a capsule version of what is occurring among Muslims throughout the world.

Islam is not inclined toward any form of modernity and most certainly not toward any form of personal freedom so the world has to remain watchful and, at this point, far less inclined to give its terrorists a pass with the claim they do not represent Islam.
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

 

Religion of Peace strikes again

The Religion of Peace at Work Again from Judson Phillips, Founder of the Tea Party Nation

Bullet Hole Captured by Photo at French News Office

This morning, America awoke to the news of a horrifying attack in Paris.

Twelve people were killed in the attack. By the standards of Islamic terrorism, that’s not a lot of people. ISIS does that every few minutes.

This terror attack should scare the hell out of everyone in the West, not because of the death toll, which is bad enough. The target should worry everyone.

From the Washington Times:
At least 12 were killed in a terrorist attack at a Paris newspaper known for taking satirical shots at the prophet Mohammed early Wednesday morning.

Among the killed were 10 newspaper staffers and two police officers, Fox News reported.

France President Francois Hollande is terming the attack — carried out by two men wearing masks and carting Kalashnikovs and a rocket launcher — an act of terror, Fox News reported.

Mr. Francois also said intelligence had thwarted and halted a number of terrorist plots in recent weeks, The Guardian reported.

His statement: “[France has experienced] an exceptional act of barbarism committed against a newspaper,” The Guardian said. He added that Paris was in “shock” and vowed to “fight these threats” and “punish the attackers.”

The city has gone on high alert, The Guardian reported.

Gunmen attacked the Paris offices of the Charlie Hebdo newspaper — the same publication that was firebombed years ago after printing a cartoon that poked fun at the Muslim prophet, Mohammed.

Benoit Bringer, a witness to Wednesday’s attack, told a media outlet in France: “Two black-hooded men entered the building with Kalashnikovs. A few minutes later, we heard lots of shots.”

National Review Online, meanwhile, reported tweets from witnesses, with one writing: “Several men in black cajoles were heard to shout ‘the Prophet has been avenged.’ “
Like all tyrannies, Islam cannot stand any dissent. This attack was more than just an attack on a publication that had run satirical images of Mohammad. It was also a warning to the free press in France and Europe. If you publish something the Islamists don’t like, this is what will happen.

Some publications have wondered how France, European leaders and even Barack Obama will react.

Who cares?

How about how so-called Islamic leaders will react? So far not a single one has denounced the attack or the killing of the cartoonists. None has stood to defend their right of free expression.

This was more than just a terrorist attack. This was an attack on one of the core values of western civilization. The death of twelve people his terrible. What may be worse is the fact that the west has no leader willing to stand up to this terrorism.
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

 

Allahu Akbar and 12 French journalists dead

At least a dozen die in attack on Paris newspaper office from the AP and MSN News

Police official says 12 dead in French shooting

Masked gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar!" stormed the Paris offices of a satirical newspaper Wednesday, killing 12 people before escaping. It was France's deadliest terror attack in at least two decades . . .

Paris prosecutor's spokeswoman Agnes Thibault-Lecuivre confirmed that 12 people were killed in the attack. Video images on the website of public broadcaster France Televisions showed two gunmen in black at a crossroads who appeared to fire down one of the streets.

A cry of "Allahu akbar!" — Arabic for "God is great"— could be heard among the gunshots.

The extremist Islamic State group has threatened to attack France and minutes before the attack Charlie Hebdo had tweeted a satirical cartoon of that extremist group's leader giving New Year's wishes.

The cartoon entitled "Still No Attacks in France" had a caricature of an extremist fighter saying "Just wait — we have until the end of January to present our New Year's wishes."

Charlie Hebdo has been repeatedly threatened for its caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad and other controversial sketches. Its offices were firebombed in 2011 after a spoof issue featuring a caricature of the prophet on its cover.

Click here for videos and detailed story
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

 

Tuesday, January 6, 2015

No short-term solution to stop an ISIS state

Obama Envoy John Allen: No 'Short-Term Solutions' for Stopping Islamic State - Interview, Spiegel Online

IS fighters parade in Mosul, Iraq in June
In an interview conducted By Matthias Gebauer and Holger Stark, US General John Allen, Washington's special envoy for countering the Islamic State, discusses why he believes the recent military campaign has reversed the terrorist group's momentum but warns the battle to stop its ideology could take years.

General John Allen, 61, has served as special presidential envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter the Islamic State (IS) under US President Barack Obama since September. He previously served for three years as the deputy commander of the US forces in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In an interview with SPIEGEL, Allen uses the Arabic term "Daesh" when referring to IS in order to prevent having to say the word "state".

SPIEGEL: It took more than a decade to halfway stabilize Afghanistan. The situation in Syria seems even worse. When will you be able to say "mission accomplished"?

Allen: I wouldn't put a timeline on it, frankly. This is a difficult moment. The components of instability that we face with Daesh are found widely in the region. It's not just about Daesh, Iraq or Syria. There are broad-based undercurrents of difficulty -- social difficulties, economic difficulties, governance challenges -- that created opportunities for extremism to emerge and the radicalization of populations. So, while we are all interested in dealing with Daesh as the immediate threat, more broadly we're interested in the underlying factors that create these problems. A useful conversation to have is: How can we take action together to eliminate some of these social, ethnic, religious and economic problems that have combined in so many places? There are no short-term solutions. It's going to require concerted action by the community of nations. It's going to require ownership of the problem in the region.

SPIEGEL: President Obama has stated he wants to "ultimately destroy and dismantle" IS. Was it a mistake to set such a maximalist goal that is almost impossible to reach?

Read the Conclusion
______________________________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now

 

Thursday, January 1, 2015

Are you ready for the Obama pen?

Are you ready for the Obama pen? from the political art studios of Dan Youra at Utoons.com

Get a Daily Dose of Humor at Utoons.com

Dan Youra is one of the outstanding conservative cartoonists in the trade today who follows in the footsteps of the great political cartoon masters, whose quotes inspire a new generation of followers.
"Outside of basic intelligence, there is nothing more important to a good political cartoonist than ill will." ~ Jules Feiffer, Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist.
"Too many of today's artists regard editorial cartooning as a trade instead of a profession. They try not to be too offensive. The hell with that. We need more stirrer-uppers." ~ Bill Mauldin.
Youra was one of the first recipients of a Fulbright Scholarship and worked in Latin America. He served as an editor of Current Thought on Peace and War at the United Nations in New York.

"As long as there are politicians who continue to try and fool the voters, there is no chance of ever running out of material to work with because they create it themselves and about themselves," says Dan Youra.

Dan is the small business owner and operator of the Youra Studios located in the State of Washington.

Visit the Youra Studios at Utoons.com
_____________________________

Become a Truth Serum Partner Now