Michelle Malkin, as usually, nails the problem with Obama’s latest speech in Cairo.
He attempted to obfuscate his explicit anti-American apologism with a mixture of disingenuousness and naiveté totally untethered to reality (including the “7 million Muslims” figure he hyped).
7 Million Muslims are in America? Really? According to the CIA World Factbook it is more like 1,843,272. Why isn’t Obama made to face his lies?
Obama insists on hiding behind the euphemism “violent extremism.” It’s not only the “t-word” — terrorism — that failed to pass from his lips. It’s the j-word — jihad, violent jihad — that Obama will not acknowledge. He clings to the myth that only a “tiny minority” of “extremists” subscribe to the deadly Koran-inspired mission to force infidels to submit. He refuses to acknowledge and confront the violent jihadi virus around the world and on American soil.
Ms. Malkin brings up a poll taken from last year that talks about how people around the world 
really feel about the Sept 11 attack.
President Obama mentioned the “trauma” of the September 11 jihadi attacks in his speech. Here’s another reality check. Flashback, September 12, 2008, The Blame America poll and the Blame America candidate:
A poll released this week of more than 16,000 people in 17 nations revealed that “majorities in only nine countries believe al Qaeda was behind the attacks on New York and Washington that killed about 3,000 people in 2001.” A mere 46% of individuals overall said they believed al Qaeda executed the attacks…….
“Israel was behind the attacks, said 43 percent of people in Egypt, 31 percent in Jordan and 19 percent in the Palestinian Territories,” the survey found. “The U.S. government was blamed by 36 percent of Turks and 27 percent of Palestinians.” The pollsters noted that no prompting was necessary: “These responses were given spontaneously to an open-ended question that did not offer response options.”
Among our great friends south of the border, Mexico boasted “the second-largest number citing the US government as the perpetrator of 9/11 (30%, after Turkey at 36%). Only 33 percent name al Qaeda.” ……
While the global community refuses to unite against al Qaeda as a common enemy to humanity, it has decided on who should be America’s
next president. The BBC-commissioned poll named Barack Obama the world’s favorite candidate by an overwhelming margin of four to one. They see in their fellow “citizen of the world” a kindred spirit:
Someone whose former spiritual mentor shares the European elite’s “chickens coming home to roost” schadenfreude. Someone who has promoted the need for “empathy” toward the head-chopping jihadists. Someone who shares their fetishizing of terrorists as poor victims of imperialism in need more “understanding” and “education.” Someone who cynically hawks “Buy American” campaign stickers while courting the “Blame America” Left at home and abroad.
Obama is their man. Never forget.
It still amazes me that we voted for the man that people who hate us wanted us to vote for. Exactly how does that make sense to anyone?
Loading ...
Well, in ten years the world will understand. Maybe less. While our fellow Catholics gave their lives to prevent a muslim takeover of the world during the crusades, we’re just handing it to them on a silver platter.
I thought if people understood that abortion meant killing a baby, if only we could make them see that the baby was real, alive, they’d stop having abortions. But I found out that they already know it’s a real baby. They just don’t care. They want the right to kill their babies. They’ve given up obfuscating by calling them fetuses. The truth came out and they still want their abortions.
I thought if our youth understood that Obama wanted socialism they would realize that they couldn’t vote for him. Turns out they already knew he wanted socialism. So do they. Go figure.
I thought if people knew how fast the muslim populations of the world were reproducing they would be a little more cautious in their “empathy” speeches. Turns out the world wants to be muslim…or at least muslim run.
I give up. I’ll be dead in thirty years. By then the world will be ruled by the Muslims, homosexuals will be dead, having been stoned to death, we’ll be living in a totalitarian state and everyone will be happy! Well, at least we will finally have outlawed abortion. Killing your neighbor, the infidel, will be legal, but killing the unborn will finally be outlawed…ahhhhhh, the irony.
“While our fellow Catholics gave their lives to prevent a muslim takeover of the world during the crusades, we’re just handing it to them on a silver platter.”
And yet it was the the Muslims that brought us out of the Dark Ages brought upon in part by the Catholic Church. Go figure.
Second of all- you forget, as a whole Americans don’t want any religion dictating our laws, whether it be Christianity or Islam is a moot point. If it’s based on religion, period, there will be wide spread opposition. The media likes being able to report on whatever they want, and Americans love the bill of rights. Islam or no Islam, it’s not going anywhere unless we are taken over by force and the U.S. government falls.
“I thought if people knew how fast the muslim populations of the world were reproducing they would be a little more cautious in their “empathy” speeches.”
Americans are moving past religion as an institution. If you haven’t notice, more and more Americans are treating their religion more as a heritage or culture rather than a way to live life or set rules to follow.
“I give up. I’ll be dead in thirty years. By then the world will be ruled by the Muslims, homosexuals will be dead, having been stoned to death, we’ll be living in a totalitarian state and everyone will be happy! Well, at least we will finally have outlawed abortion. Killing your neighbor, the infidel, will be legal, but killing the unborn will finally be outlawed…ahhhhhh, the irony.”
The world won’t be ruled by Muslims. They may be the dominant religion, but that does not equate to ruling the world. Again, homosexuals will be fine. Unless each country is taken over by military forces that cannot be ousted by the country’s military and/or guerilla forces. Acceptance and tolerance are the two greatest enemies of dictatorial regimes in general, esp ones supposedly based upon a religion. That liberalization leads to more pissed off people when they try to restrict rights, and that leads to more exposure, vocalization, and could lead to outright war our revolution for example originally being entirely based on getting the colonists rights as Englishmen back rather than revolution, though it became that once it was clear there was no other route). History repeats itself, that is certain. And that means even if taken by force, there will be revolutions and oustings of seemingly undefeatable forces or governments.
Dan –
“and Americans love the bill of rights.”
LMAO
You’re joking right? After the multiple articles we have wrote on America turning their backs on the bill of rights? Really? You truly believe this? Amazing.
I just wrote today about the state of Connecticut trying to take away the first amendment and they have a lot of support.
There are multiple organizations that are gaining speed in removing our 2nd amendment rights.
The supreme court recently eradicated part of our 5th amendment rights by allowing the government to use “emanate domain” to take private property away.
The left and Obama have been actively working to take our 10 amendment right away to the applauding of the masses.
You really believe we “love” our Bill of Rights? We are slowly and systematically taking those rights and flushing them down the toilet.
Val-
RE Connecticut-
I think it’s a stretch. If that gets taken to the Supreme Court, I don’t see the state winning. They could try and claim they made a stance on a political issue and take away their tax exempt status, but again a bit of a stretch.
RE- Eminent Domain- That has existed from this country’s founding and is enshrined in the 5th amendment: “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” Compensation + public use = eminent domain. It has to be approved by the legislature, including what the land will be used for, prove its public use, etc, but it is entirely legal and Constitutional. It was inherited from English law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain#United_States
Agh, the 2nd amendment and its intent have long been the subject of debate, so I won’t even touch that one.
The tenth amendment has always largely been in flux, moving back and forth dependent on world events, presidencies, etc. I would argue Bush did no better with the 10th than Obama has done.
The “necessary and proper” clause and the tenth amendment are what cause this flux.
Sorry, realized I probably should have mentioned that.
MK,
The people get the government they deserve.
Dan –
Re Connecticut – It doesn’t matter the outcome, what matters is the attempt. Every attempt that isn’t publicly ridiculed and publicly denounced is a step toward America turning its back on it.
Eminent domain – Look up Kelo V City of New London.
The intent of the 2nd amendment has been repeatedly decided by the Supreme Court. To say otherwise is a cop out. The fact remains that there are multiple organizations that disagree with Supreme court rulings and want a complete ban on private gun ownership. This has been established as being a protected right, yet the organizations grow every year and try to push legislation with increasing support.
As for the tenth amendment – exactly where did Bush try to take the rights of the states away in favor of the federal wants and wishes?
The point is still there – America does not “love” the Bill of Rights seeing as the majority of them want to pick and choose which ones we keep.
“And how can this be? For Obama is the Kwisatz Haderach!”
Actually what he wants to convince the Muslim world is that he is “Al Mahdi”.
And many are being convinced of just that.
Very, very scary thought.
Dan,
Come again?????
“While our fellow Catholics gave their lives to prevent a muslim takeover of the world during the crusades, we’re just handing it to them on a silver platter.”
I would like an explanation of that statement, myself.
The Crusades were a series of military campaigns during the time of Medieval England against the Muslims of the Middle East. In 1076, the Muslims had captured Jerusalem – the most holy of holy places for Christians. Jesus had been born in nearby Bethlehem and Jesus had spent most of his life in Jerusalem. He was crucified on Calvary Hill, also in Jerusalem. There was no more important place on Earth than Jerusalem for a true Christian which is why Christians called Jerusalem the “City of God”.
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/cru1.htm
granted thats a simplified description, but it was from an unbiased source….
Here is a Catholic view…
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04543c.htm
Here, this one is pricesless…
The Crusades were a series of wars initiated by Christians to win back their holy lands from Muslims.
Win Back? Doesn’t that mean that they were TAKEN in the first place?
A guy steals your bike. You steal it back. You go down in history as the guy that stole the bike…yeah, that’s how it happened.
http://www.mrdowling.com/606islam.html
The Crusades were a response to the Muslim invasion (Muslim kingdoms) of Christian nations. Modern Day Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Jordan, ect.. were all Christian or multi-religions nations at one point. Islam swarmed out of the Saudi Arabian peninsula and when it had reached the Byzantine borders is when Constantinople asked for the Pope to send an army.
There was 300-400 years of Islam spreading by the sword before the crusades. Those were crusades by Islam…. They took over areas and did not allow for Christians to pass on their religion to future generations. This still happens in Turkey and other Islamic countries. According to Mohamed you are born Muslim and it is justifiable to kill you to reconvert you to stop you from not believing.
Yes some of the Roman knowledge survived in the Ottoman Empire. That was mostly because the Byzantine Empire was the Western Roman Empire. They called themselves Romans. When Islam overtook Byzantium and Constantinople they acquired (by force) all the knowledge that had existed in the Byzantine Empire.
The Dark ages were caused by the Little Ice Age (colder climate), the fall of the Eastern Roman Empire, and the resulting collapse of authority.
As an interesting note, Mary is mentioned more in the Koran than the Bible. Mohamed was an ecliptic and a pedophile (in modern terms). In my mid-twenties I had an interest in Islam.
So Dan, learn some history from non-liberals. It takes little effort to learn on your own.
Amen Stu…and thank you.
MK,
The crusades are an interesting time period. The period around the Spanish Inquisition is another that is totally skewed because we live in a protestant nation… Oh wait, Obama said it was a muslim nation…
btw – Have you noticed that over the last 30 years the change in view of Columbus? Notice they point out he was Catholic (and Italian) now and not 30 years ago?