The most ass-kickin' writer to come along
in a decade!’


-The NY Times

Glad to see you're getting it right.!’

-Karl Rove

 

Obama's Support of Jihad

December 16, 2015

Commentators have proposed numerous reasons for Barack Obama's recalcitrance in the area of fighting Islamic terrorism. They range from Obama's narcissism and his inability to admit his foreign policy is a failure to his clinging to a leftist ideology that makes him committed to negotiating for peace even as he reduces our ability to fight the ongoing war.

We've heard absurdities like "Guantanamo is a reason for the success of Islamist recruitment" and "we must allow 'refugees' from the Middle East and North Africa - many sporting fake passports -into the United States because they've been forced from their homes by war."

Despite the fact that few of Obama's policy justifications have even a shred of legitimacy, none of them is the fundamental reason that Obama has failed to do what is necessary to destroy an enemy which is at war against the United States.

In fact, it is very likely that Barack Obama's undermining of American democracy through his refusal to seal our borders or to engage in a military response that could eliminate ISIS's power in a relatively short time is due to a fact that few are willing to put into words:

Our president appears to be on the side of Islamist radicals. He is not willing to do anything meaningful to stop the advance of terrorists whose aim is to impose the religion of Obama's childhood on the world.

Donald Trump was excoriated by those who were formerly identified as "useful idiots" by the communists they supported at the middle of the last century but who have now become "useless idiots." The reason for the criticism? Trump recommended that we stop admitting Muslims into the United States until we can gain control of the vetting process.

The U.S. screening process that is supposed to prevent terrorists from getting into the U.S. is not even close to being effective. Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, the couple that committed mass murder in San Bernardino, had been radicalized for several years, yet no one seemed to know or care. Farook visited Saudi Arabia and met with jihadists and his soon-to-be wife, who herself had been radicalized for some time before they met. Farook had been gathering weapons and ammunition in his apartment and assembling pipe bombs in his garage for years before he and his wife committed the mass murder.

Malik came to the United States on a fiancèe visa. The problem is that, thanks largely to Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson's unwillingness to hurt the feelings of Middle Eastern immigrants, DHS officials do not scrutinize the social media posts of immigrants coming here on a fiancèe visa. If there had been anything remotely resembling minimal vetting of immigrants, we would have discovered that Tashfeen Malik had been posting radical views through social media, even indicating that she wanted to join the jihadis and commit mass murder.

Beyond that, though, the only type of screening that would be even minimally effective is to examine data that the governments of countries from which the immigrants are coming have collected. In countries such as Syria, there is no electronic data available. We have no reliable public records regarding whether the immigrants from these areas have any terrorist leanings whatsoever.

In testimony before Congress, FBI head James Comey explained it this way:

"The challenge we're all talking about is that, we can only query against that (data) which we have collected, and so if someone has never made a ripple in the pond in Syria in a way that would get their identity or their interest reflected in our database, we can query our database until the cows come home but there would be nothing show up because we have no record on it."

At present, the screening of Middle Eastern immigrants is based on this absurdity: The key question asked of Muslim immigrants as they are entering the country is, "Do you seek to engage in terrorist activities while you are in the United States?"

Our immigration officials are not kidding around! (Italics and sarcasm mine.)

The only thing we can take away from this arguably criminal policy that has resulted in the murders of Americans by terrorists is that we're too stupid and corrupt to put the protection of our own people ahead of committing microagressions against potential terrorists.

Until we demonstrate that we're able to do that, we really can't let dangerous Muslim terrorists just waltz into the U.S. unexamined, as so many already have.

One sure way to hasten the process of being able to vet immigrants from the Middle East involves national security policy. We must loosen the rules of engagement Obama has imposed on our military in order to allow collateral damage in the effort to destroy our Islamist enemy. The truth is, ISIS takes advantage of the fact that while they are committing atrocities against the innocent civilians of all religious persuasions, the U.S. insists on withholding bombing attacks in case a civilian might be injured or killed.

If Syrian and Iraqi citizens were killed because of attacks on ISIS fighters, it is much more likely that Muslims would understand that ISIS does not stand up for them but rather uses them as human shields to protect against attack.

Obama's one-sided protection of Islamist terrorists and his support of the terrorist manifesto that is the Quran go even further than protecting Muslims against themselves at the expense of American citizens. More than two dozen Christian refugees from Iraq who gained entry into the U.S. by crossing the Mexican border have been held at a Detention Center in San Diego for months. Twenty-two of them have been ordered to leave the United States on the grounds that they made false statements; five of them are waiting decisions on their asylum applications.

When a Christian makes a false statement, it's grounds for deportation. When a Muslim makes a false statement, Obama will stop at nothing to protect his or her freedom of speech.

We have to understand that Barack Obama's actions are clearly supportive of Islamic jihad and they're very likely based on his unspoken commitment to remake our country into The Islamic States of America.


 

Home | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | Commentary | Books | Contact

© 2003-2013 Greg Lewis | All Rights Reserved