Obama: Anti-Anti-Terrorist

[rasbridge]

Obama: Anti-Anti-Terrorist 

by Andrew C. McCarthy June 18, 2016 4:00 AM

 

Sharia supremacists are not only shielded from scrutiny by U.S. intelligence but welcomed into the national-security apparatus.

 

Barack Obama has spent his presidency cultivating Islamists, particularly from the international Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates in the United States. As we saw this week, he chafes at the term “radical Islam” — as do his Islamist advisers. At their insistence, he had instructional materials for training government agents purged of references to Islamic terms that illuminate the nexus between Muslim doctrine and jihadist terror.

 

Obama’s vaunted national-security strategy, “Countering Violent Extremism,” is Orwellian. The term CVE supplants identification of our jihadist enemies with the wooly notion that “violence” can be caused by any form of “extremism” — it has nothing to do with Islam. By transferring security responsibilities from government intelligence agents to Muslim “community leaders” (often, Islamist groups), CVE actually encourages violent extremism.

 

These steps have been reckless. They have made our nation more vulnerable to the kind of jihadist atrocities we saw last weekend in Orlando. So obvious is this that many Obama critics have gone from thinking the unthinkable to saying it aloud: The president of the United States seems to be intentionally betraying our national security; even if not squarely on the side of the terrorists, Obama is such an apologist for their Islamist grievances that he might as well be.

 

I don’t buy this. Oh, I believe Obama is betraying our national security, but I do not think he is doing so intentionally. Instead, he has the good intentions, such as they are, of a left-wing globalist. The president sees security as a matter of international stability, not of a single nation’s safety — not even of that single nation that has entrusted him with its security.

 

To grasp Obama’s conception of security, we must revisit a progressive fantasy oft-lamented in these columns, “moderate Islamists.” This is where the Muslim Brotherhood comes in.

 

Here in the West, “moderate Islamist” is a contradiction in terms. An Islamist is a Muslim who wants to impose sharia (Islam’s repressive law) on a society. In the United States, that would mean replacing our Constitution with a totalitarian, discriminatory system. That is an extremely radical goal, even if the Islamist forswears violence and promises to proceed in Fabian fashion. Therefore, from the perspective of our free society, Islamists are the very antithesis of moderates.

 

For a post-American transnational progressive like Obama, however, the context that matters is not our society. It is the world. He is the first president to see himself more as a citizen of the world who plays a critical role in American affairs than as an American who plays a critical role in international affairs.

 

Viewed globally, the Brotherhood seems — in fact, it is — more moderate than ISIS, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, and other infamous terrorist groups. I say “other” terrorist groups because the Brotherhood surely is one, which is why it should be formally designated as such under U.S. law.

 

As I outlined in The Grand Jihad, the Brotherhood promotes terrorism. Its doctrine prominently includes jihad, and it has a long history of violence that runs to this very day. Indeed, Hamas — a terrorist organization that the Brotherhood masquerades as a “political” “resistance” movement — is the Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch.

 

Nevertheless, four things separate this very sophisticated organization from other jihadists:

 

(1) The Brotherhood pretends to reject violent jihad, especially when dealing with Western audiences.

 

(2) The Brotherhood opportunistically limits its overt support for jihad to situations that the international Left feels comfortable excusing (e.g., violence against “occupation” by Israel, or by American troops fighting Bush’s “unnecessary war of aggression” in Iraq).

 

(3) The Brotherhood purports to condemn terrorist acts that it believes, judging from a cost-benefit analysis, are likelier to harm than to advance the sharia agenda (particularly the Brotherhood’s lucrative fundraising apparatus in the West). A good example is the 9/11 atrocities (but note that even there, the Brotherhood, like the rest of the Left, always adds that American foreign policy is jointly culpable).

 

(4) The Brotherhood aggressively pursues a menu of nonviolent advocacy and sharia proselytism, known in Islamist ideology as dawah. As Brotherhood honcho and major Hamas backer Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi puts it, “We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America, not through the sword but through dawah.”

 

For present purposes, the most salient of these Brotherhood strategies is the fourth. The menu includes international diplomacy, participation in various countries’ political processes, exploitation of civil-rights laws in various countries’ court systems, strong presence on college campuses (administration, faculty, and student societies), vigorous fundraising under the guise of charity, and aggressive influence peddling in the media and popular culture.

 

Significantly, it is this menu of nonviolent pressure points, not violent jihad, that is the Brotherhood’s public face in the West. That is what enables the organization to pose as a comparatively moderate political and ideological movement, not a jihadist organization. That is what allows Brotherhood operatives to pass themselves off as “civil-rights activists” and social-justice warriors, not sharia radicals.

 

This meticulously cultivated moderate pose is the Potemkin foundation on which Obama and other transnational progressives, including a fair number of leading Beltway Republicans, cooperate with the Brotherhood throughout the world.

 

Obama is anxious to work with the Brotherhood on the Left’s theory that dialogue and cooperation always promote international stability — rather than convey that America’s principles are negotiable. Obama embraces the Brotherhood for the same reason that he

negotiates with our enemies in Iran: the illusion that any talk is good talk; that any deal is a boon, regardless of how one-sided. The American wants peace through strength; the post-American globalist prefers peace “processes” and their inevitable peace “prizes.”

 

As a practical matter, Obama cannot negotiate with ISIS or al-Qaeda. He would if he could, but they won’t. They are interested only in conquest, not compromise. By comparison, the Brotherhood does seem moderate — but only by comparison with these barbaric, full-throttle terror networks. Unlike ISIS, the Brotherhood is amenable to suspending the jihad while taking the concessions it can get through diplomacy and political processes — then going right back to jihad promotion when these alternatives have been exhausted.

 

The Brotherhood is well regarded by many Sunni Islamist regimes with which our government hopes to cooperate in containing the regional aggression of Shiite Iran (aggression materially supported by Obama’s obsessions with deals and dialogue). There has even been a recent thaw between the Brotherhood and Saudi Arabia: Relations turned icy when the Saudis backed the ouster of Egypt’s Brotherhood-led government; but with Obama canoodling with Tehran, Riyadh has grown desperate for any allies it can find.

 

On the world stage, the stage they care about, transnational progressives portray the Brotherhood as “moderate Islamists,” partnership with whom is vital if we are to achieve the panacea of global stability.

 

The con job actually gets worse than that. The Brotherhood has figured out that “democracy” in Muslim-majority countries is the quickest route to imposing sharia. So it has taken on the mantle of “democracy” champions. By backing the Brotherhood, Beltway progressives purport to promote a “democratic transformation” of the Muslim Middle East. The fact that it would be a transformation to an anti-democratic, discriminatory, liberty-crushing system is, for progressives, as irrelevant as the fact that Obama’s empowering of the monstrous Tehran regime destroys the democratic aspirations of pro-Western Iranians. The progressive conception of stability — cooperation with rogues — is no friend of freedom.

 

The Brotherhood has devoted three generations to building an infrastructure in the United States — an impressive network of affiliated Islamist organizations. To partner with the Brotherhood internationally therefore requires embracing the Brotherhood domestically. But how can Obama and other transnational progressives pull that off? After all, as we’ve seen, the Brothers may seem like “moderate Islamists” when they’re in the same neighborhood as ISIS; but here on our own soil, an Islamist is plainly a radical.

 

Obama pulls it off by distorting law and history to sanitize the Brotherhood’s American Islamists.

 

Here, we must consider the progressive version of the Cold War. The Left clings to the conviction that the “mere” advocacy of radical ideology is constitutionally protected, even if what’s being advocated is the overthrow of our constitutional system itself. Symmetrically, the Left also holds that (a) anti-Communism was more dangerous than Communism, and (b) the “living” Constitution can be “evolved” whenever necessary to protect aggressive “dissent” by the Left’s constituencies.

 

Put it all together and you have Obama’s two core conceits:

 

First, the Constitution immunizes the Brotherhood’s ideology from government scrutiny. Our agencies must deem anti-American sharia-supremacist advocacy as “constitutionally protected activity,” no matter how virulently anti-American it is; no matter that it supports Hamas (material support for which is actually a felony under American law); and no matter how many Islamists make the seamless transition from Brotherhood indoctrination to membership in other, more notorious terrorist organizations.

 

Second, anti-terrorism is more of a danger to “our values” (i.e., Obama’s values) than is the regrettable but unavoidable fact that squelching anti-terrorism will result in the occasional terrorist attack — which Obama regards as more of a nuisance fit for law-enforcement procedures than a national-security challenge.

 

There you have it: Obama is not really pro-jihadist; he is anti-anti-terrorist. As long as they don’t appear to be blowing up buildings, sharia supremacists are not only shielded from scrutiny; our president welcomes the Brotherhood into our national-security apparatus in order to reverse what progressives see as the dangerous excesses of real counterterrorism.

 

That is how you end up with such lunacy as “Countering Violent Extremism.” That is how the jihad shakes off its post-9/11 shackles on the road to Orlando. So don’t say “radical Islam,” much less obsess over the carnage at the Pulse nightclub. After all, look how stable Obama’s globe has become.

 

— Andrew C. McCarthy is as senior policy fellow at the National Review Institute and a contributing editor of National Review.
 

Source:  http://www.nationalreview.com/article/436783/obama-muslim-brotherhood-terrorism-radical-islam-violent-extremism

[dMog]

this is a totally irresponsible and stupid claim... it actually borders on stupidity if not crossing the line into total stupidity...just because some stupid half-assed  reporter writes a stupid hate article...  does not make it credible   cannot make shit up  and call them true facts to suit a political agenda

[rasbridge]

Ex-Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Morsi Sentenced To Life In Prison

Posted on June 18, 2016

 

An Egyptian court has sentenced former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi to life in prison while simultaneously passing down death sentences for six co-conspirators.

 

Those who followed the 2011 Islamic uprising in Egypt saw the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton support the Muslim Brotherhood and their candidate Mohamed Morsi.

 

President Obama was thrilled with the Morsi election and immediately called him with congratulations.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton flew to Cairo to express the administration sentiments and well wishes personally.

 

Unfortunately it did not take long before Morsi began deconstructing the secular social constructs, disbanding the Egyptian court system, and attempting to institute Sharia Law.

 

Thousands of Coptic Christians were slaughtered after Morsi took control and empowered the Muslim Brotherhood to attack his political enemies.

 

As president, Mohamed Morsi opened the Egyptian jails releasing hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood terrorists, including Mohamed Al Zawahiri the brother to al-Qaeda’s leader in Afghanistan Ayman Al Zawahiri.

 

 

After a year of brutal dictatorship within Egypt, and with thousands of Egyptians killed as a result of the Islamic terrorists within the Muslim Brotherhood, the people of Egypt reached out to the widely respected General Fattah el-Sisi to restore order and bring peace.

 

The Egyptian army responded to the call of the citizenry and removed Morsi from power.

 

 

Six months after the restabalization of Egypt elections were held and el-Sisi won the presidency with over 75% of the vote.  It took President Obama over six weeks before he would call el-Sisi and make contact with the moderate leader.  Sisi remains a widely popular leader (82% support) who was able to bring peace and stability along with a more secular outlook.

 

The Obama administration continues to belittle the efforts of Fattah el-Sisi but lets take a look at what he’s accomplished:

 

Disbanded the Muslim Brotherhood as a political terror entity. (link)  (link)
Arrested those who burned churches and attacked Coptic Christians. (link) (link)
Jailed or banished the extremist forces.  (link)
Supported Israel’s right to exist and defend it’s borders.  (link)  (link)
Defeated Hamas in the border region. (link)  (link)
Destroyed the border terror tunnels used by Hamas  (link) (link)
Pressured Hamas and the PA to negotiate the ceasefire, and forced the PA and Hamas to assemble ONE negotiating group for their interests. (link)  (link)
Fought extremism in the Sinai region, and fought against ISIS infiltration.
Fought the Libyan new al-Qaeda network “Libyan Dawn”.  (link)
Charged and prosecuted the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood, who fled to Qatar.  (link) Followed the MB to Qatar and initiated sanctions against Qatar until they stopped financing and harboring terror.  (link)
Formed a coalition against Qatar including the UAE and Saudi Arabia who withdrew their ambassadors and isolated Qatar in the region.  (link)  (link)
Won reelection with almost 70% of the vote. (link)  (link )   (link)
Holds an 80%+ job approval rating among ALL Egyptians. (link)
Shut down Qatar financed Al Jazerra propaganda machine.  (link)
Supported framework for a new constitution with minority protections.  (link)
Won a victory against Qatar as they finally conceded and stopped safeguarding terrorists. Sending the MB leadership to the new safe harbor of Turkey.  (link)
United the moderate (non violent) Arab coalition, the Gulf Security Council, and constructed a unity principle that supports the safety of Jordan and formed a coalition to defend if needed.  (link)
Faced down and quietly defeated Turkey’s bid for a security council seat in the United Nations.  (link)  (link)
Negotiated a safe passage coalition for Israel and Greece to form an energy based economic trade agreement.
Continues to fight the Islamist extremists inside Libya.  (link)  (link)
Continues to fight ISIS in the Northern Sinai region.  (link)  (link)  (link)
Expanded the border safety zone with Gaza to insure greater control and protection from weapons smuggling. (link)

 

 

The Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic terrorist networks including ISIS, have been attempting to regain power ever since el-Sisi brought peace to Egypt.  Five leaders within The Brotherhood fled Egypt and took refuge in Qatar.  Those terrorist leaders aligned in abstention with the Islamic State or ISIS.

 

Eventually the Qatari government came under pressure from the six Gulf Council states to stop providing safe refuge for the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist leaders.  President Recep Erdogan of Turkey gave them safe harbor, and it is believed they remain in Turkey today while coordinating ISIS political advocacy.

 

Because of the coordinated spying and connected activity to radical jihadists, Egypt was also forced to confront the Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers within Al Jazerra the primary media.  Several Salafist-minded journalists were arrested while engaging in communication and promotion for the Brotherhood against the Egyptian government.  Al Jazerra is also based in Qatar.

 

Cairo is considered the intellectual epicenter of Muslim scholarship and religion.  President Fattah el-Sisi made a historic plea to the leadership within the Muslim community to stop allowing the promotion of radical Islam.  –SEE HERE–

 

President Obama and Hillary Clinton remain widely despised within Egypt as they are seen as the cause of almost a year of brutality, terrorism, and bloodshed brought upon them by the rise of Mohamed Morsi and the advocacy of the Obama administration.

 

The last time Secretary Clinton attempted to visit Egypt her entourage was pelted with tomato’s and she experienced a gauntlet of hatred toward her by the victims of her short-sighted policies.

 

 

Source:  https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/06/18/ex-egyptian-muslim-brotherhood-president-mohamed-morsi-sentenced-to-life-in-prison/

[tonygunns]

I'm not at all surprised of this Obama claim.  If you look at the history of this "so called" President  He has grown up hating America.  His past is right there for everyone to see.  When he talked about change, I don't think the American people knew what he was actually talking about.  Hillary will be just as bad; she has cheated and lied to the people for over 30 years.

 

Can't wait for Wikileaks to release what they have!!

 

Tony

[steven36]

1 hour ago, tonygunns said:

Hillary will be just as bad; she has cheated and lied to the people for over 30 years.

 What someone does or does not do  for there own personal gain  i could care less . The USA is full of Rich people  who got rich by breaking the law. I do know when Bill  was President things were better than they had  been in just about my whole life 

 

All  Regen done was help the rich not have to pay taxes  and the middle class are still is paying for it today  All the Bush family  done was  help out the Rich and start wars .

 

There's Democrats who never do nothing while there in there like Obama and Carter that are dead weight .But there was  Democrats like Bill Clinton who done more good than harm .

 

You don't know what Hillary would do you have no crystal ball . But if you look at history  one thing is for sure  the Economy  never has done good  under  most Republicans   the exception  being Regan but all them are just out to help the rich. So if Trump gets in I just look for things too get worse . .

 

Quote

Over the last six decades or so, history has tended to favor Democratic presidents in terms of economic performance. The country's unemployment rate has been lower at the end of every Democrat's tenure since Kennedy took office in 1961. Ronald Reagan, meanwhile, is the only GOP president since Dwight Eisenhower took office in 1953 who can say the same.

 

Reagan stabilized the deficit and Clinton eliminated it, and then it exploded under Bush [II] and has remained relatively high under Obama. Obama has a better record there than Bush, but that's a distinction between this presidency and those ones.

 

Obama and Bush II carry the not-so-desirable distinction of increasing the federal deficit by more than any other president post-World War II. They've also added the most debt to the country over the same period.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/10/28/which-presidents-have-been-best-for-the-economy

 

 

Everyday you see this Trump Propaganda posted on Nsane..  I'm sick of it it's not real news. its just gossip .

 

[pc71520]

On 19/6/2016 at 8:26 PM, steven36 said:

Everyday, you see this Trump Propaganda posted on Nsane

The Hitlery propaganda is excused, I guess...

[steven36]

16 minutes ago, pc71520 said:

The Hitlery propaganda is excused, I guess...

I dont see one posting Hitlery propaganda you make no sense at all? You never did under you're other name before you were  banned   ether.  

 

I watched Meet the Press  does that count ?  At lest that is real news.  It told how Trump saying this about Obama has made him sink way down the polls . 

[pc71520]

12 minutes ago, steven36 said:

I dont see one posting Hitlery propaganda

Not even yourself, ah?

13 minutes ago, steven36 said:

banned   ether

ether?

[steven36]

4 minutes ago, pc71520 said:

Not even yourself, ah?

ether?

I dont post nothing for along time and got better things to do than  post about  about 2 people i dont care for at all. I dont like ether one.