Please take the time to read this one carefully and pass it along to anyone you feel could benefit from this information. Thank you.
Eeyore
From the Gloria Center:
By Patrick S. Poole June 4, 2013
Obama meets with members of his national security team to discuss developments in the Boston Marathon bombings investigation, in the Situation Room of the White House on April 19, 2013. Pictured, from left, are: FBI Director Robert Mueller; Lisa Monaco, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism; Attorney General Eric Holder; Deputy National Security Advisor Tony Blinken; and Vice President Joe Biden.
Why has the U.S. government called certain Islamic groups supporters of terror in federal court, and then turned around and called these same organizations “moderates” and embraced them as outreach partners? In a number of cases from the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations, the leaders of these organizations (some of whom are now in federal prison) were under active investigation at the same time they were meeting with senior U.S. leaders at the White House and the Capitol and helping develop U.S. policy. Now these same Islamic organizations and leaders have openly encouraged a purge of counterterrorism training that have effectively blinded law enforcement, homeland security, and intelligence agencies to active terror threats as seen in the inaction of the FBI concerning the Boston bombing suspects and other terror cases. This study poses serious questions as to the efficacy and even security concerns about U.S. government outreach to Islamic groups, which often turn out to be Islamist militants, enemies of Islamic moderation, and even supporters of terrorism.
The aftermath of the April 15, 2013 bombings in Boston, Massachusetts, has focused attention on the failure of the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) to carry out an adequate investigation of the suspected bombers despite warnings from Russian authorities. This failure has partially been attributed to a full scale campaign of political correctness waged inside the bureau and throughout the U.S. government under the Obama administration against any attempt to link jihadi terrorism with anything remotely connected to Islam of any variety (the most radical versions included).[1] This has extended into other segments of the government as well, particularly the Department of Defense.[2]
If anyone has any doubts on where Obama’s loyalty lies all they have to do is read the monograph, he is doing all he can to help the jihad of our enemies, and the scary think is that if we impeach him we get Biden to take his place. Biden is even more unqualified then Obama.
The Yanks need Arnie! They already have a President born overseas so what’s to stop them electing Arnie? Would be the best President they ever had and would end the encroachment of Islam dead in its tracks…
He is open about being born overseas, Obama is not open about it. We are trying to save the constitution not destroy it, and ignoring the natural born clause openly would just destroy the constitution faster then the left is now. Without the Constitution the US won’t be a very nice nation to live in.
Around six years ago I began to question the ambiguities present in the “War on Terror”. Not blaming Islam for its vile deeds has been the order of the day for the political elite since 9/11. It is an ORDER with no exceptions, and was very likely agreed by all Western nations in the year preceding the invasion of Afghanistan. Now this is truly amazing, as complete unanimity on any political and social issue among the ruling elite in ALL Western countries, has never happened before. Never.
So I have to conclude that there is something else at play. That something is that we are waging war on Islam, but for obvious strategic reasons, the West has deny it as vigorously as it can.
One of the problems faced by the America after 9/11 was how to respond in the manner that America is accustomed to. The perpetrators were a motley bunch of 19 Muslims with no state connection or direction, so the normal method was not available. The West had to come up with a longterm strategic plan.
Phase 1 – involved invading and overturning countries using a multiplicity of reasons. This has lasted for round 10 years, and is now coming to an end. The results, depending on your POV is that Iraq, in the heart of the ME, is nor thoroughly destabilized, hundreds killed each day in rival ” eye for eye attacks”, and its future bleak. Afghanistan was invaded merely as a place to destabilization Pakistan. Objective achieved.
Look at what is happening around the Islamic world. To Muslims it must be obvious that a Crusade is going on, but they do not know how to protest against it. If they do, they are contradicted. The elite of the Muslim world cannot protest, as that would shame them that they cant do anything either. So they keep Mum.
Note that criticizing any belief system – Christianity, Hinduism or whatever, does not elicit a response from the police. Only criticism of Islam elicits that. That in itself shows that the authorities do not want criticism of of Islam to become a torrent. Such a situation would jeopardize the whole strategy.
Phase 2
As of now, no one believes the reasons that were given in Phase 1- WMDs, bringing democracy and women’s rights to Muslim countries etc.All these reasons are totally discredited, and shown to be false.
So now we have adopted supporting freedom fighters in the Islamic world. It does not matter that the fighters are al Qaeda or worse, and the targeted country was a friend, such as Egypt. The objective is still the same – to destabilize and ruin the little stability and economy of the Muslim world.
What I see happening in the near future (10 years or so) is that these Muslim Brotherhood countries that we are establishing in Muslim countries, will seek to form a caliphate. The leader of the caliphate has to be Turkey – no other is possible according to Islamic doctrine. This is precisely what we are after as well. However, as Sunnis hate Shias, Arabs hate Turks and Persians, and vice versa all round, even the leadership of the caliphate will be questioned in the usual Islamic manner with bombs and bullets. Wonderful.
If the the caliphate gets going it will give the West a proper enemy – something along the lines of the Warsaw pact, but nowhere near as powerful. NATO has been looking for a proper enemy since the USSR folded up its tent.
The same rules of engagement that were applied to Warsaw pact countries, will be applied to the caliphate – no immigration, even tourist visas. Little or no economic contact.
As the caliphate has little arable land area and no real organization to grow food and feed itself, there will be massive food riots and perpetual turmoil. There already are food riots and bombing galore. Muslims will get a proper dose of sharia, just as Eastern Europe got a proper dose of Marxism. In fact worse, as starvation will be the norm in the caliphate.
Islam rests on the foundations of providing power, loot and sex at the expense of the Infidel. When Muslims find that none of it is available, and they are in fact starving, they will abandon Islam faster then East Europeans abandoned Marxism
Why are we doing this? The West, particularly the Anglo-Saxon part of it, has never been content to wage war on the basis of revenge, even when served cold. Its forces are configured to destroy not just armies but to destroy nations. Its strategic objective is not just to win a military war, but to destroy the ideological basis of the enemy, that is total victory. This is what we did to Germany, Japan and the USSR – Nazism and Marxism are now totally discredited in those countries (unfortunately we did not the same for Marxism).
For a dictator, one of the most frustrating aspects in dealing with democratic nations, particularly the West, is that it is difficult to discern a cohesive and uniform policy. Even in a particular administration, their are several policy centres – the executive, senate, parliament, congress, public opinion, electoral convenience. It is so confusing for a dictator. When combined with duplicity, it gets very confusing.
I’m therefore quite content, and have been since a few years, that our policies are just fine.
DP you are ignoring the massive amounts of evidence that Iran, Iraq and others including Pakistan were giving massive aid and training to al Qaeda, that is state direction while trying for plausible deniable.
As for the WMDs, it is know known that Saddam sent his chemical and probably his bio weapons to Syria before the invasion. Also google 435 metric tons of yellow cake uranium, this African yellow cake was found in Iraq and the occupation government sold it to Canada.
Richard
Of course all Muslims are required to aid in anyway possible, those who are conducting the supreme sacrifice of Jihad and “martyrdom”. However, our aid now to the likes of al Qaeda is something quite different. It not only gives them advanced technology, but more importantly, political cover of the West. This is why the Libyan and Egyptian governments collapsed – because our support was withdrawn.
What is certain though, is that when and if sharia is established throughout the Islamic world, these countries will go back economically and socially. They will thus have no real power; more like being on the verge of starvation. They want sharia, lets give them a full and proper dose sharia that will last decades. And no help from the West anymore. Sharia does not fill empty stomachs of men and women, and unfortunately children. Let them have their fill of sharia though.
As for WMDs no evidence was found. It is conjectured that Saddam shipped them to Syria. As for nukes – nothing. As far as I’m concerned, I have no qualms of deception. It is a necessary part of any war. I see no reason why we should be hamstrung.
Having exhausted the possibilities of WMDs, democracy and womens rights etc to destroy the Islamic world, the new tactic of supporting freedom fighters i.e., “freedom”, is quite a nice one. It involves no significant casualties on our side, but causes chaos in the enemy camp. Look what is happening in Egypt, Libya and Syria – hundreds bombed and shot each day..
Actually there is a lot of evidence about the shipment of chemical weapons to Syria, and the 435 metric tons of yellow cake is a proven fact.
The first question we need to be asking our politicians, starting with our mayor, city/town council, county supervisors/commissioners, state/national House and Senate members representing us: “Is the Muslim Brotherhood in America (MB) (Ikhwan) our friend or foe? Please provide me with links to the source material that provides you with your view(s).”
Next “Is Pres. Obama using the Muslim Brotherhood in America to form a global caliphate or are they using him to do so?” Third, “Does Obama want to become the next UN SecGen in order to form a global caliphate, a Ummah? If not, why did he sign UN Resolution 16/18 that places Shariah/Islamic law above our First Amendment and our right to criticize Shariah?
To understand more about UN Resolution 16/18 and how it places Shariah/Islamic law above our First amendment watch an excellent briefing on YouTube by former DOD/JCS Shariah/Islamic law expert Stephen Coughlin: The Organization of Islamic Cooperation and its Role in Enforcing Islamic Law.
The Democrat Party is helping Obama and the RINO/GOP leadership/followers are also helping him by refusing to hold hearings on the Muslim Brotherhood and their plan to destroy America. I have asked Sen. Burr (RINO-NC), Sen. Hagan (DEMON-NC), Sen. McCaskill (RINO-MO), Sen. Blunt (RINO-MO), Rep. Ellmers (RINO-NC) and Rep. Price (DEMON-NC). They either ignore the question or never respond or they have a chief of staff call me and tell me NO hearings or they give me some stupid response like I got from Rep. “RINO” Renee Ellmers.