Media Criticism, Political Commentary, War Commentary

Obama’s War On Western Civilization

50 Comments

Continues:

To lay the blame for what happened Wednesday in San Bernardino on Barack Obama might seem excessive. But if not on him, who? From the day he took office, the president has been engaged in a game of outright denial that Islam has anything to do with what is wrong in the world.

In fact, if he ever points a finger, it’s usually at Western imperialism or Christianity or Republicans or Benjamin Netanyahu (to name a few of his favorite enemies).

But never at the I-word.

To paraphrase H.L. Mencken, “When somebody says it’s not about Islam, it’s about Islam.”

Syed Farook did not go to Saudi Arabia to study Zen Buddhism.

America, and its trailing entities in Europe, has a problem now of gargantuan proportions. Barack Obama was and is precisely the wrong man, possibly the worst conceivable man, to be president of the United States at this point in history. No one more invidious could be invented.

Still amazing that he got elected once, let alone twice.

50 thoughts on “Obama’s War On Western Civilization”

  1. I lay blame on those who voted for him for the second term. All of the people who voted for him have blood on their hands.

    You were warned over and over again this would happen and you ignored the warnings and voted for him.

    Those of you who voted for Obama:

    If you want to lay blame on someone, look in the mirror.

    1. It’s pretty tough to correct a system if the feedback loop is malfunctioning. It is necessary in a free society for the press to remain effectively or at least statistically neutral. That hasn’t been the case for some time now. The media in this country is effectively controlled by 6 corporations. The internet was feted to restore the balance, but as it turns out it mainly acts as a resonance chamber for the most emotional issues.

      What’s annoying to me is that Republicans et al whine about media and academic “bias” every day, yet I’ve seen virtually no plans to attack the issue. We know something is wrong with the country but have done virtually nothing about fixing it. So it’s not a big surprise that the first carny huxster to come along and provide some “real talk” is kicking the butts of the professional “conservatives”.

    1. That Daily News cover is about the vilest thing I’ve ever seen in the media, and I’m not even religious.

      1. The Left never misses an opportunity to demonize and even dehumanize white/Christian/conservative/Republican/Tea Party/gun owners, or any combination of the above. They slander us and accuse us of every manner of evil and bad intent. Whenever a mass murder occurs, the media immediately begins to speculate that it was the work of “right wingers”, even before the bodies are cold.

      2. They want to make us a permanent minority in this country, by importing the whole damn Third World.

      3. They want to disarm us.

      It isn’t hard to figure out the Left’s desired endgame.

      1. They want to make us a permanent minority in this country, by importing the whole damn Third World.

        Who is “us” in this sentence?

        2. Jim, does the fact that one of the attackers passed Obama’s anti terror vetting to get a visa make you think twice about importing hundreds of thousands of people who don’t even want to be Americans?

    2. That began after Paris. A lot of leftist atheists were pissed people were saying they were praying for Paris because religion is the problem and by religion they meant Christians. Someone thought that would be a good line of attack to hang onto.

      Not sure why after incidents of Muslim terror that all religions are blamed but not Islam.

      Christians are crucified and sold into sex slavery by ISIS and when people responded to the attack the other day by sending positive vibes or well wishing in the form of thoughts and prayers, our friends to the left thought it was a great time to mock religious people, meaning Christians, that belong to one of the main groups targeted for extinction by ISIS.

      It is a bit like mocking Jews while the holocaust is taking place. The left and ISIS are united in their hated. Who thinks after an Islamic terrorist attack its a great idea to side with ISIS and rhetorically attack the same people?

  3. All of you lefty twits who fought profiling or voted for candidates who were against profiling…you have blood on your hands (see the interview with a neighbor who was scared to report).

    All of you lefty twits who push for gun free zones or vote for candidates who push for gun free zones, YOU have blood on your hands.

    All of you lefty twits who want to restrict access to firearms by law abiding citizens not only do you have blood on your hands…you are misogynists as well.

    Police officials across the country are telling people who have permits to carry – to start carrying. When seconds count the police are minutes away and they acknowledge that.

    1. Gregg, I agree with most of what you say, but I’m also one of the ones pushing for a gun-free zone. It’s just that I’m only advocating a gun-free zone for one specific location; the white house.

      There are many reasons to make Obama’s white house a gun-free zone. He’d be leading by example, and also putting an end to his hypocrisy on the issue. Further, given the utter incompetence of the Secret Service that its plethora of recent scandals illustrate, it’s pretty clear those people have no business carrying guns.

      1. Take down the fence, too. We’re always being told that a fence at the border won’t work, because people can tunnel under or climb over it.

  4. >What’s annoying to me is that Republicans et al whine about media and academic “bias” every day, yet I’ve seen virtually no plans to attack the issue.<

    other than doing things that are totalitarian, the only way to circumvent this level of corruption individually is to tell the truth. see: havel's "the power of the powerless"

    1. You know you have a point there…Havel had to contend with a Commie Press not unlike our MSM where they print only the party line and not the truth.

      Yet he won anyway.

      Wonder how he did that.

  5. Maybe it’s time to be a bit more specific than ‘Islam’. The extremists are Salafists or Wahhabists.
    The folks at Nahdlatul Ulama are pretty chill.

  6. I personally think that Obama is by far the worst President in the history of the US and he has led us to this point.

    I do not EVER blame anyone other than the perpetrators of the crime for committing a heinous act, period.

    The people who choose to commit a crime are solely responsible for their actions.

    Yes, it feels great to blame someone else, but that’s what progressives do. Conservatives believe you are responsible for your own actions.

    1. @ Tom W;

      I disagree in this case, because the perps had enablers. Their enablers were Democrats (and a few Republicans) who allowed large scale immigration from the middle east, thus giving Islam a major foothold here. Obama has furthered this flow via his immigration enforcement slowdowns.

      The Democrats and their fellow travelers agitated against profiling, so much so that a witness to suspicious activity at the terrorist house didn’t report it, because they didn’t want to be accused of profiling. It’s the left that’s killed off rational profiling, and in this case, that meant a tip that could have stopped this was never made.

      Of course the terrorists are the ones to blame, but that shouldn’t stop us from also blaming those who made the terror attack possible. They’re accomplices.

      1. Their enablers were Democrats (and a few Republicans) who allowed large scale immigration from the middle east, thus giving Islam a major foothold here.

        What is wrong with Islam having a “major foothold” here?

        FWIW, about 1% of the U.S. population follows Islam. About a third of American Muslims are African American. Muslim immigrants come to the U.S. from Europe, Africa, South Asia and East Asia in addition to the Middle East.

        1. It was .9% in 2010, by 2014 it has increased to 2.11%. France’s population is nearing 10%, and apparently with that percentage it is reasonable to John Kerry that some might get shot for blasphemy of the prophet.

        2. Why don’t you move to an area to find out? It’s easy to preach when you’re in white bread New Hampshire.

        4. Jim, which of the following would you prefer:

          American Muslims make up 5% of the population, and 50 Americans die each year from Islam-inspired terrorism.

          American Muslims make up 10% of the population, and 150 Americans die each year from Islam-inspired terrorism.

        6. Jim asked;
          “What is wrong with Islam having a “major foothold” here?”

          Because a significant percentage of Muslims hold beliefs that are antithetical to civilized values – especially including the values, such as acceptance of gays and women’s equality, that the left usually preaches (unless Muslims are involved). The hypocrisy is manifest; left often decries the entire Christian religious right for the views held by most members of the religious right (views that are, in reality, far more moderate than those held by most Muslims.) Yet on Muslims, the left is silent at best. Why is that, Jim?

          A good analogy for Islam is colon polyps. Only a small percentage of colon polyps actually become malignant, but that doesn’t mean you want more colon polyps.

        7. The real question Jim is why do you want to import more Muslims? What is the rationale for intentionally going out of your way to bring more Muslims into the USA?

          I suspect it is because Democrats view people who are overtly hostile to Jews, Christians, and Americans in general plays into the Democrat strategy of pitting racial, ethnic, and religious groups against each other.

          1. “The real question Jim is why do you want to import more Muslims? What is the rationale for intentionally going out of your way to bring more Muslims into the USA?

            “I suspect it is because Democrats view people who are overtly hostile to Jews, Christians, and Americans in general plays into the Democrat strategy of pitting racial, ethnic, and religious groups against each other.”

            And hastening the USA further down the Road to Serfdom. Oh, wait a minute: I just figured out what Baghdad Jim wants.

        8. What is wrong with Islam having a “major foothold” here?

          I don’t normally respond to you because I think it’s a waste of time, but I will explain what is wrong with it.

          When Muslims are a tiny minority in a population, they tend to be peaceful and keep to themselves. They say, “We just want to be left alone to practice our religion in peace.”

          As their numbers grow, they begin making demands on the majority population. They will use the infidels’ sense of tolerance against them. They will demand that Muslim cabdrivers not be required to pick up fares with alcohol or seeing-eye dogs, that Muslim checkout clerks in grocery stores not be required to handle pork products, or that Muslim-style footbaths be installed in public restrooms. Any resistance to their demands is met with accusations of bigotry or Islamophobia.

          When their numbers climb above 5% or so, they begin to get violent. It starts small, with scattered incidents that slowly become more organized and frequent. Above 10%, conditions really begin to deteriorate. They become openly threatening and aggressive towards kaffirs in public. Muslim political leaders get elected to more and more government offices, and begin to influence public policy. They start putting loudspeakers on mosques, forcing everyone to hear that caterwauling five times a day, every day, for the rest of their lives. There is no escape.

          As their numbers climb higher, violent incidents become endemic. They begin to attack churches and synagogues filled with worshippers. Non-Muslims start to flee the violence, causing the Muslim percentage of the population to grow even faster.

          Above 50%, it’s “Convert, pay the jizya, or die, infidel.”

          This pattern has repeated time and time again in countries that have been conquered by Islam. It is as predictable as the sunrise.

      2. @Arizona CJ

        I agree with you 100% that they had enablers and there was an atmosphere which helped them to do their crime. I wasn’t trying to make it sound like this only happened in a vacuum (thanks for your post to help me clarify).

        I was only trying to say that at the end of the day, the perpetrators of heinous crimes are the ones to blame. Others who aided or enabled should be sought out and punished, but final blame are the people who pulled the triggers.

    2. I think Obama’s policies have contributed to the problem of ISIS and Islamic Terror in general but also that he isn’t at fault for this specific incident.

      We are at war with people who hate all of us, Republicans and Democrats. Farook, or whatever his name was, described his political beliefs as very liberal. He worked at a government agency in California so it stands to reason his victims were also liberal. They probably had very similar gripes about the USA and yet he killed them anyway.

      Democrats don’t realize that while they share many of the same beliefs as Islamic Terrorists and are constantly acting as apologists for them, that Democrats are hated just as much as Republicans. I can’t quite figure out Democrats support for anti-American sentiment in the Muslim world except as a reactionary response to Republicans, an enemy of my enemy is my friend sort of thing.

        1. Thanks, I didn’t know that.

          Other than that, my point still stands. Democrats who sympathize with Islamic terrorists are just as likely to be killed by them as the rest of us.

    3. Generally I agree Tom, and certainly with respect to holding people responsible. Progressives far to often try to smear good people by blaming them for the actions of others. Even during this recent attack, there was an assumed conservative angle to the attack because of the attack on a government party, and there was an immediate jump to gun control for law abiding citizens. Then the facts came out. And it doesn’t appear this shooting had to do with climate change.

      I do think at some point, we should recognize the weapons used against us and not simply disarm ourselves as progressives would have us do. I mean this not only in protecting our rights to guns, but also our freedom of speech. Last week, progressives were pointing to a lunatic rapists that should have been in jail as an example of rapid Christianity with a gun attacking peaceful women’s clinic. This week, they assumed the same against a diversified government holiday party. I think it is time to point at these fantasies are not stopping the problem. That continuing to blame Republicans, as was done during the attack, does not stop the attack. It is time to hold up a mirror, if nothing else.

      By the way, did anyone hear any complaints about the officers use of military tactical gear when engaging with the shooters? I’m actually one for limiting such gear, and I thought it was a bit excessive for the situation and poorly deployed. However, I also realize it can be used responsibly, so I don’t have that hard of an opinion. But considering the progressive push to complain about cop shootings; nobody was complaining when the cops killed two people in a black SUV for just driving down the road. And you can bet that when there is another cop shooting in a deep blue city, those 2 deaths will be added into the tally of people killed by cops and guns.

  7. Turns out the perp used a dating site. I wonder if that’s how connections and communications are made. For example, according to the LA Times, the dating site ad said:

    ““Enjoy working on vintage and modern cars, read religious books, enjoy eating out sometimes travel and just hang out in back yard doing target practice with younger sister and friends,” the profile read.”

    Target practice in the back yard? In California? Really?

    There are numerous keywords there: religious books, sometimes travel, target practice.

    BTW, as far as the gun control weenies are concerned – it’s illegal in California to have the type of long gun the perp had and used.

    Boy that law sure stopped him old didn’t it?

      1. Yes. It’s been reported that this is because:

        “The DPMS A-15 and Smith & Wesson M&P15 both come in “California legal” versions, which means they have “bullet buttons” that require the insertion of a loose round (or some other tool) to detach the magazine. With that feature, the magazine is not considered “detachable,” which is part of the state’s “assault weapon” definition.”

        So the first article I read was incorrect.

          1. Did you see this?

            I think this news does hurt Barbara Boxers point, but overall, it is an insignificant issue to those who want to curtail our civil liberties. They’ll just point out the legally purchased guns are easily modified to be illegal and tracking that ahead of time is near impossible. They’ll also ignore realities, such as a trained person with their own single fire or semi-automatic would have a better shot at defending themselves even against a person firing full auto. And that France has even stricter gun laws, and the ISIS terrorists there have brought in fully automatic weapons several times.

      2. And of course making pipe bombs is totally illegal.

        That stopped them right in their tracks didn’t it?

  8. Sept. 14, 2012, email from Ben Rhodes, ….

    That email, with the subject line: “RE: PREP Call with Susan: Saturday at 4:00 p.m. ET,” was sent to other key White House staffers such as then-Communications Director David Plouffe and Press Secretary Jay Carney the day before now-National Security Adviser Susan Rice made her whirlwind tour on five Sunday news show appearances to specifically and emphatically blame an Internet video for the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, in which U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other nationals were killed.

    One of the goals listed in the emails was the need for Rice “to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure or policy.” She was also to “reinforce the President and Administration’s strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges.” Her job was not to tell the truth, but to put lipstick on the Obama administration’s Benghazi pig.

    a Sept. 12, 2012, email from Payton Knopf, a former deputy spokesman at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, in which Knopf informs Rice that senior officials had already dubbed the Benghazi attack “complex” and planned in advance. Yet Rice would still insist on her TV tour that the Benghazi terrorist attacks were “spontaneous.”

    In early April, former deputy CIA director Michael Morell, who was heavily involved in editing the now infamous talking points, told lawmakers it was Rice, on the Sunday shows, who linked the video to the Benghazi attack and that the video was not part of the CIA analysis.

    And as for the incredibly stupid notion that Rice got her talking points from the CIA:

    The Rhodes email was not part of the 100 pages of emails released by the administration last May, and we can see why. As we noted at the time, that email package showed a successive pattern of edits with White House involvement designed to remove any hint of terrorist involvement to fit the administration’s campaign narrative that the war on terror was over and won.

    Those emails show that Rhodes and National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor were alerted that the intelligence community was drafting talking points that as late as 3:04 p.m. on Friday, Sept. 14, still included references to extremists tied to al-Qaida and an “attack.”

    The terms “al-Qaida” and “attack” were stripped out by 4:42 p.m., and shortly afterward Vietor thanked colleagues for revisions and said they would be vetted “here,” as in the White House. He then forwarded “edits” from John Brennan, the current CIA chief who then was a White House counterterrorism adviser.

    In a White House meeting on Saturday morning, Sept. 15, the CIA, at the direction of the State Department and White House, drafted the final version of the talking points from which all references to al-Qaida and security warnings in Benghazi before the attack were deleted.

    AT THE DIRECTION OF THE WHITE HOUSE.

    I capitalize these words for the hard of thinking…..

  9. Loretta Lynch commenting on the San Bernardino shootings: “these issues have come together really like never before in law enforcement thought and in our nation’s history and it gives us a wonderful opportunity and a wonderful moment to really make significant change.”

    For 35 people, the moment wasn’t as wonderful as it was for Mx. Lynch. And her comments didn’t even make the top ten list.

  10. In the latest news, the Federal Bureau of Investigation decided that in 48 hours, they had gotten enough information from the Farook family home. The family then let the media in, which found all sorts of information the FBI left behind, because that wasn’t the wonderful opportunity Lynch was looking to find. Now the family has hired a lawyer that might just surpass Jim’s ability to lie.

    1. That was just insane. The press were ransacking files boxes, passports, credit cards, everything. Its is as if the FBI had no intention of looking for accomplices that are still in the USA.

    3. To me, the most telling thing is what wasn’t seen there; no sign that fingerprints have been taken. Also seen; shredded paper in a wastebasket. (They can’t possibly know what’s on it if it’s still there)

      If these observations turn out to be true, we need to look into motive. There has to be one, because the FBI simply is not capable of the level of incompetence needed to act in this way unless ordered to do so.

  11. I wonder how long it will be before the “This has nothing to do with Islam… ISIS has nothing to do with Islam!” drivel is applied to San Bernadino terrorist attack?

    It’s much akin to saying the IRA (Irish Republican Army) had nothing whatsoever to do with Ireland or the Irish. Obviously, most Irish had nothing to do with the IRA, but to say the IRA had nothing to do with Ireland or the Irish would take a very special kind of moron. (Special, in a special-ed sense). Yet, who amongst us doubts that Obama will say just that, yet again?

  12. Left invents new statistic. Rather than use the FBI state of mass murder, we now have “mass shootings”, which counts all the cases in which 4 people were killed or injured. Now NPR is going around talking about 351 of them so far this year, because the FBI statistic is less than 41, and in that 41, 10% of the dead were at the hands of ISIS supporters. Actually, the new metric also does one more trick. Where the FBI doesn’t count just 4 murders, but 4 victims not including the shooters; the “mass shooting” statistic counts the killers, because of course, that is where progressives have the most sympathy. Of that 351, 280 of them don’t have a named assailant. At least we know who killed Kathryn Steinle.

Comments are closed.