Tag Archives: Islamic terrorism

In Allah’s Name

Islamic terrorists shout “Allahu Akbar” as they slaughter and kill innocents, and apologists for these jihadists claim it has nothing to do with Islam.

Allah's Name

“Allahu Akbar,” translated “God is the greatest,” is better rendered “Allah is the greatest.” It is, of course, Allah to whom the phrase refers.

Jihadists crying out, “Allahu Akbar,” are proclaiming the supremacy of Allah, not of some generic or non-Islamic god. Allah, and Allah alone, is the recipient of their fealty and worship.

But apologists for jihadists are pleased to translate “Allahu” as God and not Allah. Why? It serves at least two purposes. First, it obscures the identification of the worshiped (Allah) and the worshipers (Muslims). This enables apologists and sympathizers to perpetuate their myth of Islam as a religion of peace.

Second, it suggests a moral equivalence between Islam and other religions, each with its own god or gods. Therefore, apologists for Islam can immediately pivot to attacking non-Muslims and besmirching other religions, principally Christianity.

That fact that religion-based terrorism is almost exclusively committed by Muslims in the name of Allah can, therefore, be disguised and denied. By translating “Allahu” as God and not Allah, all religions can be denied. This is particularly appealing to secularists and atheists.

Apologists for jihad refuse to acknowledge even the existence of Islamic terrorism and they contend that jihad is peaceful, contrary to history (more than a millennia), reality (global violent jihad is daily in the news), and the self-identity of the jihadists themselves (who proudly proclaim to be doing Allah’s will).

Violent jihad has always been a part of Islam, prescribed by its holy texts. Its adherents, those who accept the original interpretation of those texts, truly believe they are doing Allah’s (not God’s) will.

When terrorists behead, blow-up, and butcher innocents, we should take them at their word as they give credit to Allah. Words mean things. Twisting words to mean something else does not change reality.

Author Ann Coulter recently addressed the Orwellian nature of this redefinition and misrepresentation of words. In a Facebook posting, she noted:

Orlando

Jihad-deniers treat all of those expressions as equally benign. One is not. One can be a harbinger of death and destruction. (Usual caveat: Not all Muslims are terrorists and many Muslims oppose jihadism.)

“Allahu Akbar” has an historical significance in being used during various periods of Islamic conquest. It has a contemporary significance in being used, daily, by jihadists as they commit acts of terrorism. That singular expression tells the story. Jihadists commit these acts because of their Islamic faith and their devotion to the commands of Allah.

What are those commands? Here are a few (graphic from Internet):

13343131_10209284912421011_5487301502195725937_n

Denying the obvious only enables these cruel zealots to continue their war on civilization in pursuit of their version of Paradise, a worldwide caliphate.

All those who love liberty and deplore the barbarism of these jihadists should demand the truth from our government, our media, and all those who are in a position of influence and power.

To defeat the enemy, we must defeat their ideology. To defeat their ideology, we must recognize it, refute it, and destroy it. Denying their intentions and motivations enables their actions to continue undeterred.

Indeed, our silence – the jettisoning of reality down the memory hole – and our refusal to fight for victory emboldens our enemies. They are eager to destroy us even as the Left pretends that they are our friends.

Update: Andrew McCarthy explains how the Orlando massacre (and other Islamist attacks) could have been prevented. Here’s but one paragraph:

“It should have been possible to see Omar Mateen coming. He was a first-generation American citizen, born in this country to immigrant parents from Afghanistan and raised in a troubled household – one in which the father is a visible and ardent supporter of the Taliban, the fundamentalist jihadist group that ruled Afghanistan in the 1990s, harbored al-Qaeda as it plotted and executed the 9/11 attacks, and to this day wages war against American troops as it fights to retake the country.”

Advertisements

Left Fixated on Mythical, White, Right-Wing Extremists!

The Left has gone bonkers again, this time over the Oregon rancher standoff.

Mythical

As reported by Infowars (emphasis added):

“Numerous voices are calling for a literal bloodbath in Oregon – and the exercise of unilateral government power to kill the individuals involved, including supporters. It is an armed and highly-charged, but so far peaceful situation that is, nonetheless, rooted firmly in civil disobedience and principle. But that hasn’t stopped opponents from calling for them to be treated like domestic terrorists.”

The Left is incoherently outraged, making spurious racial charges and demonizing whites, conservatives, law enforcement, and the media over alleged racial and political bias in favor of whites and conservatives. (What world do they live in?)

In the Age of Islamic Terrorists, the Left continues to be obsessed with alleged white, right-wing extremists! Why this obsession? Two reasons. One – they are white.[1] Two – they are conservative. But are they extremists? In the mind of the Left, yes. To more rational human beings, no.

Salon Leads the Charge!

Headline: “No happy ending in Oregon: We can’t reward white, right-wing extremists every time they pull a gun and threaten violence”

How is not wantonly killing protesters engaged in legitimate, peaceful, civil disobedience rewarding them? They have a right to protest! (First Amendment: “the right to peaceably assemble.”)

How often do “white, right-wing extremists” “pull a gun and threaten violence?”

The writers at Salon apparently think it is very often.

But, are these justice-seeking ranchers really extremists? And, are they threatening violence? No and no. They are engaged in a peaceful protest, an act of civil disobedience which, if conducted by liberals, would be treated as a noble act of social justice.

Salon’s lead paragraph claimed that the ranchers “are protesting perceived overreach from the federal government.”

Except, of course, the federal overreach is far more than perceived. It is very, very real. The convicted ranchers have already served time for trumped-up charges.

Salon graciously declined to call them “terrorists,” preferring the term “separatists,” because of “the group’s refusal to acknowledge the federal government”

Except, of course, the so-called “separatists” want neither separation nor an emasculated federal government. They want a federal government which operates within the framework of the Constitution.

Salon then compared these white “separatists” “with black protesters and Occupy Wall Street.” Salon claimed that the encampments of “peaceful, unarmed [Occupy Wall Street] protesters” “were brutally dismantled by law enforcement. Police didn’t hesitate to use tear gas, rubber bullets and batons to clear them out.”

Except, of course, Occupy Wall Street activists were far from peaceful and it often took weeks for the government to respond. Indeed, OWS encampments occupied entire parks in the nation’s capital, and other U.S. cities, for months!

Salon also claimed, “Nor was there any hesitation to call in the National Guard on Black Lives Matter protesters in Baltimore. So far, the Malheur occupiers are meeting no such resistance.”

Except, of course, the Baltimore “protesters” were violent rioters and looters committing mayhem while Baltimore authorities actually dillydallied in seeking assistance, choosing instead to give them “space to destroy.” The rioters wanted to purge the city.[2] In contrast, the so-called “separatists” have harmed and threatened no one.

Having made a false equivalence while distorting the facts, Salon then pitched its message:

“This discrepancy is important. Peaceful, left-wing protesters are fair game for state violence. But when armed anti-government zealots seize federal property and promise to defend themselves, law enforcement takes time for tact, maybe even negotiation.”

Salon fabricated so-called “state violence” against allegedly “Peaceful, left-wing protesters.” The actual violence of Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter is uncontestable. Moreover, their violent rhetoric encourages more violence as they call for the assassination of their foes and the burning of cities. Their nihilistic sense of “justice” is the killing of those they hate.

In contrast, the “separatists,” as Salon calls them, are defending themselves from government overreach.

Salon concluded, “more important, we cannot reward white, right-wing extremists every time they pull a gun and threaten violence. And if there is bloodshed, there is real danger it will spread like the Hammonds’ own fire.”

If only Salon had the courage to challenge left-wing movements which really are violent! And what do we make of Leftists who want these “separatists” to be killed? Are Leftists really peaceful and supportive of the rule of law? Or are they selective in the law’s application?

Protester, Separatist, or Terrorist?

At least Salon did not call the ranchers “terrorists!” Others on the Left were not so sanguine.

As pointed out by Tammy Bruce, “No one’s at risk. There’s no one in the vicinity. They happen to have their firearms. That’s their lifestyle.” In contrast, “the 2011 takeover of Wisconsin’s capitol building by union activists resulted in millions of dollars in damages, yet no one considered referring to them as terrorists.” (Did you see the video at the time? Anarchy and wanton destruction!)

Alan Colmes, on the other hand, focused on race and ethnicity, claiming, “If you had Muslims here it would be called domestic terrorism,” apparently believing the white “separatists” should be called “terrorists.” In fact, Islamic terrorism is the terrorism threat endangering Americans today.[3]

The Left continues to be obsessed with the race of individuals,[4] rather than the nature of their actions. If whites or conservatives do it, it must be bad; if minorities or liberals do it, it must be good.

Justified Civil Disobedience

David French made some salient observations. Having analyzed the original court case, French observed, “What emerges is a picture of a federal agency that will use any means necessary, including abusing federal anti-terrorism statutes, to increase government landholdings.” It’s all about a land-grab by the government.

According to the ranchers, in the 1990s, “the government then began a campaign of harassment designed to force the family to sell its land, beginning with barricaded roads and arbitrarily revoked grazing permits and culminating in an absurd anti-terrorism prosecution based largely on two ‘arsons’ that began on private land but spread to the Refuge.”

French added, “There’s a clear argument that the government engaged in an overzealous, vindictive prosecution here. … To the outside observer, it appears the government has attempted to crush private homeowners and destroy their livelihood in a quest for even more land.”

Unlike Leftist protests this decade (think Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, various college campus protests), these ranchers are occupying “a vacant federal building in the middle of nowhere, and there is no reported threat to innocent bystanders.”

Yet, some on the Left want the federal government to crack down on the ranchers with “shoot to kill” orders because they are white conservatives who do not fit the liberal narrative for social justice activists.

French concluded: “Yet now they’re off to prison once again – not because they had to go or because they harmed any other person but because the federal government has pursued them like a pack of wolves. They are victims of an all-too-common injustice. Ranchers and other landowners across the country find themselves chafing under the thumb of an indifferent and even oppressive federal government. Now is the time for peaceful protest. If it gets the public to pay attention, it won’t have been in vain.”

Are these ranchers “right-wing extremists” and “terrorists” as the Left would have you believe? Or are they simply American citizens seeking justice from a tyrannical government through peaceful civil disobedience?

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Guilty of Being White” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-17.

[2]               See “Baltimore ‘Purged’” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-8S.

[3]               See “Willful Blindness to Reality” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-c9.

[4]               See “Identity Politics Is the Problem” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-1l.

Islamists Fear Cartoons

America is under assault of Islamic jihadists and those who want to replace the Constitution with sharia law – and nobody cares!

Cartoons

The New York Times reported:

“Two gunmen were killed after they opened fire Sunday evening outside an event hosted by an anti-Islam group in Garland, Tex., featuring cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, local officials said.”

Wrong! They were not gunmen, they were Islamic terrorists!

Wrong! It was not an “anti-Islam group,” it was a pro-free speech event.

The Left responded to this terrorist attack by attacking the victims of the attack, by asserting that the cartoonists were provoking the terrorists. (Would they make any such suggestion to a rape victim?)

The Left is, again, on the wrong side. They attack the cartoonists and not the terrorists!

Even a Fox News anchor blamed the event sponsors instead of the terrorists and suggested we should submit to sharia law.

The Left never protects the speech of conservatives or Christians, but they will defend to our death jihadists who kill in the name of Allah![1]

Instead of fighting against the Islamists, they choose appeasement,[2] as if a jobs program will bring peace.[3]

Funny, huh? We need more cartoons exposing the truth about Islam.

Islamists literally seek world domination. Freedom of speech in anathema to them. That is why they so quickly pounce upon those speaking the truth about Islam. Coercion to control expression, thought, and actions.

Geert Wilders, Pamela Geller, and all those involved in this conference are heroic for standing up against such a vicious evil.[4] We must all rise up and support them.[5]

Survival requires unity against this shared existential threat.

The winning cartoon is featured in the graphic above. May we all have the courage of that cartoonist!

Endnotes:

[1]               See “CVE: How to Submit to Jihad” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-7x.

[2]               See “Let’s Talk ISIS Into Peace” at http://t.co/x5bJ44gBxY.

[3]               See “Root of Evil: Let’s Put ISIS on Welfare” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-7s.

[4]               See “We Are All Parisians!” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-71.

[5]               See “CPAC: Roman Genn – Solidarity for Liberty” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-8f.

CVE: How to Submit to Jihad

Obama’s Countering Violent Extremism Summit is a blueprint for America’s subjugation to Islamic jihadists.

CVESummit

The summit’s very name is a denial of the existential threat posed by Islamic radicals, a global threat to civilization itself. The agenda dismissed the nature of the terrorist threat engulfing the world, misdiagnosed the source and root causes of that threat, and offered pabulum as a cure.

10978624_432700326906599_614278454421327414_n

Lies Propagated by the Obama Administration

  • The enemy is not Islamic.

Obama claims, “No religion is responsible for terrorism – people are responsible for violence and terrorism. … [ISIS] are not religious leaders, they are terrorists.”

Obama insists, beyond reason, “We are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam.” (Who made Obama an expert on Islam?)

10959463_978489232211206_2418756950450771123_n

11015933_440598849423996_4975674928875539348_n

  • Poverty is the root cause of terrorism.

State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf offered a brand new strategy to defeat ISIS: a jobs program. Harf claimed, “We need … to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups, whether it’s lack of opportunity for jobs.”

If poverty was the root cause of genocidal violence, the world population would have been decimated during the Great Depression. Moreover, the religiously-based targeting of victims and the terrorists’ very declarations while committing these atrocities disproves Harf’s (and Obama’s) thesis.

Osama bin Laden was the son of a billionaire. The 9/11 hijackers were also upper class. Ideology (a Muslim theocracy in the form of a worldwide caliphate) spurs them on.

11001783_937928479561523_5382494432711075549_n

11014631_10204022337422745_1300470224201605080_n

11006386_462936253858799_3782544428711246821_n

11006399_432737603569538_3309895307512681858_n

Author and talk show host Dana Loesch mocked Harf with her own “Jihadi job fair.”

  • We must beware Christian terrorists.

Again, Marie Harf: “We have over 60 countries from around the world who are facing a number of different kinds of extremist threats. … If you at the Lord Resistance Army and Kony – Joseph Kony – I don’t remember people talking about that as much anymore, but that’s a Christian militant group. So there are a lot of different extremist threats we face and a lot of tools to go after each one of them.”

Except, as National Review points out, “Kony [is] a practitioner of Ancholi mystical traditions with 88 wives, a flair for Biblical apocalypticism, and, if we take him at his word, 13 spirits (one of them Chinese) dwelling within him.” So much for Harf’s best example of “Christian militant” terrorism.

Vice President Biden also targeted Christians.

cve-twitter

Isn’t it astonishing how eagerly the Left hurls hatred and vitriol toward conservatives and Christians, yet placates actual terrorists of the beheading-kind?

  • Every religion poses a threat.

This is the natural tendency of the secular mind, with its moral equivalency and fear of faith.

At the National Prayer Breakfast, Obama asserted, “…lest we get on our high horse…(we need recognize that Christians too hijacked religion) for their own murderous ends…this is not unique to one group or one religion.  There is a tendency in us, a sinful tendency that can pervert and distort our faith.”

10981818_455841344567791_7361204167721845896_n

10988482_339191562951025_2383553460063691136_n

  • We must address Islamic grievances.

Obama asserts that terrorists terrorize due to poverty and a sense “that injustice and corruption leave them with no chance of improving their lives.” His solution: “Efforts to counter violent extremism will only succeed if citizens can address legitimate grievances through the democratic process and express themselves through strong civil societies.”

11002699_809464039141194_6504362425234025652_o 

DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson argues, “We in the administration and the government should give voice to the plight of Muslims living in this country and the discrimination that they face. And so I personally have committed to speak out about the situation that very often people in the Muslim community in this country face.”

Funny, I though his job was to keep America safe!

Do you remember when Obama tasked NASA with its number one mission: “reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering.”

Feelings. Nothing more than feelings.

This is right out of the playbook for so-called White Privilege conferences, sensitivity training, and campus speech codes. Micro-aggressions matter more than beheading. Psychological gobbledygook.

10978530_10204401966143821_8948709941607148507_n

  •  The world is safer now under Obama’s watch.

Obama continues to de-emphasize the unprecedented violence and savagery we witness every day, in keeping with his continual assertions that the world is a better place under his watch. Rather, his policies have created a very dangerous world.

static1.squarespace.com

May 2014: [Obama] “In fact, by most measures, America has rarely been stronger relative to the rest of the world.”

June 2014: [Obama] “… if you had to choose any moment to be born in human history, not knowing what your position was going to be, who you were going to be, you’d choose this time. The world is less violent than it has ever been. It is healthier than it has ever been. It is more tolerant than it has ever been. It is better fed then it’s ever been. It is more educated than it’s ever been.”

July 2014: [White House spokesman Josh Earnest] “I think that there have been a number of situations in which you’ve seen this administration intervene in a meaningful way, that has substantially furthered American interests and substantially improved the, uh, you know, the – the tranquility of the global community.”

August 2014: [Obama] “If you watch the nightly news, it feels like the world is falling apart. I promise you, things are much less dangerous now than they were 20 years ago, 25 years ago, or 30 years ago. This is not something that is comparable to the challenges we faced during the Cold War.”

Identifying The Enemy

The Obama administration consistently and continuously misidentifies the enemy.

10924812_10153115779944459_6107585723074241645_n

1653455_10204409003360240_4572488650762822078_n

Author and columnist Charles Krauthammer bluntly expressed what is becoming increasingly obvious to everyone: “[The Obama administration is] pathological in its inability to state what is going on.”[1] Author and columnist George Will descries this White House’s “semantic somersaults.”[2]

10987416_808402259247372_1162429063950887241_o

Krauthammer called ISIS “is a genocidal movement.”[3] Others have echoed his analysis. Gen. Jack Keane described the metastasizing nature of the terrorist threat which is currently gobbling up huge swaths of the planet: “Al-Qaeda has grown four-fold in five years. ISIS, which began when we pulled out politically and militarily from Iraq, grew from an organization of less than 3,0000 to an organization of more than 30,000 in three years.”[4]

  • The enemy is Islamic jihadists.
  • They are genocidal zealots.
  • They rape women, behead children, and burn people alive.

savages

  • They faithfully interpret the Koran.

10931105_861872793856703_4555758650753563367_n

  •  They are evil.

The Worldview of Participants

  • Some participants were affiliated with terrorist groups.
  • In large measure, they held an anti-Western, anti-American worldview.
  • In large measure, they held a Socialist worldview.
  • The thrust of the summit was pacifistic in nature.

Path to Victory

Obama’s Countering Violent Extremism Summit offered no substantive solutions because it refuses to acknowledge the problem and rejects the very solutions needed to achieve victory.

Victory? How can America be victorious without even acknowledging we are at war? Obama’s strategy of appeasement is worse than useless, it is dangerous.

Obama and his State Department pursue diplomacy at all costs, believing they will prevail through force of persuasion. For evil regimes, one needs persuasion of force.

Winston Churchill understood at the outset of the Nazi movement that appeasement never works. Ronald Reagan’s doctrine of “peace through strength” won the Cold War.

Instead of projecting power, for over six years Obama has been projecting weakness, emboldening our enemies to pursue their evil intentions.

Screenshot-2015-02-19-at-7.46.11-AM

Endnotes:

[1]               Charles Krauthammer, Special Report, FNC, 2/16/15.

[2]               George Will, Special Report, FNC, 2/17/15.

[3]               Charles Krauthammer, Special Report, FNC, 2/16/15.

[4]               Gen. Jack Keane, Fox News Sunday, FNC, 2/1/15.

We Are All Parisians!

Last Sunday, most of the world (absent the Obama administration) stood in solidarity against Islamic jihad.

Headline: “Today Paris is the capital of the world.”

Father James Schall observed, “This is the French 9/11.

Millions tweeted “I am Charlie” and hashtagged #jesuischarlie.

Parisians

It remains to be seen whether this Paris rally, with dozens of world leaders and millions of marchers, represents a watershed moment in our generation and a pivotal change in the West’s political and cultural zeitgeist.

Already this week, some Western leaders have backtracked on Islamic terrorism. Surprisingly, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has chosen to side with Islam. (First, it was the Nazis, now, the Jihadists?)

I Am Not Charlie Hebdo

While it is surely good to unify over a good cause (and defeating evil is always good), phony grandstanding and political opportunism can thwart that cause. Are these leaders and those marchers truly committed to vanquish evil? Or was it merely a “moment” to experience?

Just how courageous are legions of celebrities and anonymous Tweeters in spontaneously supporting this surge of condemnation against evil? Will their solidarity continue in the face of real danger?

Maggie Gallagher offered perceptive observations regarding who the real heroes are. She wrote:

“I am not Charlie Hebdo because that is not the right name. That is not a person, it is a magazine, and darn it, the heroes in this case have other names, especially Stephane Charbonnier, the editor in chief, who testified, ‘It perhaps sounds a bit pompous, but I’d rather die standing than live on my knees.’”

“No Stephane Charbonnier, it doesn’t sound at all pompous. Not today.”

“I am not Charlie Hebdo, in other words, because Stephane Charbonnier and his colleagues were heroes and I am not.”

“What have I done to deserve that title, to make that claim?”

“Tweeting ‘I am Charlie!’ does nothing to change the fact that I live in utter safety; Stephane Charbonnier and his colleagues did not die because they wrote ‘I am Charlie Hebdo,’ but because like the others on the al-Qaeda hit list, he and they dared to criticize the Prophet Mohammed.”

Let us apprehend Gallagher’s words and realize that now is a time, not for hollow words, but for bold action. We need to be engaged in combat – in one way or another – or today’s heroes will be tomorrow’s forgotten martyrs and victory will be ceded to an evil enemy.

Will we stand up, criticize and combat Islamic jihadism or will we, like the Obama administration, refuse to even name the evil which is charging through the gates of hell to unleash Armageddon upon the world?

We Are All Parisians

We live indeed in an ever-shrinking world with a burgeoning Islamic caliphate. No-go zones, cities, territories, and nations are held by Islamic jihadists who seek the imminent fulfillment of their Islamic utopia: a global caliphate.

Paris has joined the growing ranks of victims of Islamic jihad.

France, like many other western European nations, has contended with a large influx of Muslim immigrants who self-segregate in isolated enclaves, often establishing no-go zones and enforcing sharia law. Jihadism thrives in these environments. This is the end to which multiculturalism has led the City of Lights.

This is the path America and many other nations are on. We are all in the same boat.

America is becoming France.

Let’s stand in solidarity with the people of Paris and oppose Islamic jihad.

Benghazi-Paris Nexus

The nexus between terrorist attacks in Benghazi and Paris is stark. Both expose the flawed ideology, non-existent strategy, anti-Western sentiments, and self-absorbed leadership of the Obama administration.

Obama and his comrades have denied that these terrorist attacks were committed by Islamic terrorists. In the case of Benghazi, Obama created a false narrative of an amateur YouTube video inciting a demonstration which led to the attack. (Many of his comrades are now rushing to blame cartoons – and not Islam – for the motivating force behind the Paris attack.)

Benghazi-Paris

Both Benghazi and Paris disprove Obama’s narrative that al-Qaeda (and, by implication, every terrorist organization) is decimated and that the war on terror is over. He further claims that America is stronger than ever and the world has never been more tranquil.

Clearly, the war on terror is not over. Obama cannot create peace by fiat.

Nevertheless, Obama continues to promote his false narrative, which he intends to be his foreign policy legacy: the hero who ended two wars, unilaterally ended the war on terror, and brought peace to the world. (He is a Noble Peace Prize winner, after all.)

Hence his decision to boycott the historic anti-Islamic terrorism rally in Paris last weekend. To attend would have been to validate the purpose of that rally. To attend would have been an admission that Islamic jihadism is the enemy. To attend would have corroborated that his much-vaunted victory over terrorism was a sham.

Now, the Obama administration is engaged in a diplomatic cover-up for its foolish boycott. The snub seen around the world.

What that gaffe of biblical proportions reveals is the very same mindset which permeated the Situation Room during the Benghazi attack and which drove the false YouTube narrative during the presidential campaign.

A mindset which is focused more on ideology than reality. Which is willing to go to any extreme to promote its fanciful vision of the world. Which will allow brave men to die in Benghazi – providing no help whatsoever – to advance a narrative of peace and safety. Which will allow the world to converge in solidarity against the Islamist threat – providing no symbolic support whatsoever – to again advance that same narrative.

Leadership was absent during and after the Benghazi attack, just as it was absent when Paris became the capital of the world. Obama prefers to attend fundraisers, play golf, or watch football than do what a leader does: lead.

Benghazi and Paris are also emblematic of Obama’s pacifism. He does not have the cojones to fight. Benghazi proves that. Obama would not even defend marines under attack. And Obama would not even pretend to be interested in the war on terror. Remember, his false narrative – and his legacy – depend upon that war being over. Peace in our times.

This president and his administration are in denial. Their strategy of appeasement is an abysmal failure. And the world is going up in flames.

Obama Snubs Paris, Disses War on Terror

President Obama snubbed Paris – and the world – by refusing to participate in a truly historic gathering of world leaders who met in Paris to show solidarity against Islamic terrorism.

Paris01

Wow!

The world united against terrorism!

And the President watches a football game while history is in the making!

A headline highlighting this truly global event proclaimed, “Paris Is the Capital of the World Today.” But Obama missed the memo.

Obama refuses to even admit that we are at war with terrorists of any kind, let alone to identify their source and motivation. Indeed, Obama defends the perpetrators of evil around the world. Failing to identify and name the enemy, Obama fails to offer a strategy. Indeed, we see this administration giving lip service to the defense of the nation while failing to act.

Obama would rather appease and negotiate with terrorists than fight them. Obama and his Kumbaya comrades think we can live in peace with people who want to destroy us. He, and they, prefer to empathize with and accommodate the enemy.

At the same time, Obama is vociferously opposed to Israel. What he should be doing, instead, is learning from the Israelis how to fight terrorists! Instead, Obama makes war on global warming.

Millions of people participated in this astonishing global rally, representing a sea change in world opinion, but Obama fears giving his imprimatur to the movement. He does not want to validate what he opposes.

Obama certainly does not oppose Islamic terrorism. At another time, in a different war, Obama would be called a fifth columnist.