Started this in the Cuba thread, but it deserves its own separate hearing:
In a speech in Argentina, Obama is pushed by the press to react to the terror bombings in Brussels.
First, he insists on calling the terror group ISIL. This seems a small thing, but is, in fact, a clear and direct message to the terrorists.
ISIS stands for the "Islamic State in Iraq and Syria," a terror group controlling a large swath of both Iraq and Syria in which the terrorists claim to have established a "caliphate," a state in which Islamic sharia law is imposed upon all living in the area, anyone who fails to adhere to strict Muslim guidelines has his head removed.
ISIL, Obama's preference, stands for the "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant." According to glaphyridae.com, "[t]he Levant in its geographical sense comprises the following political entities: the west part of Syria, Lebanon, west part of Jordan, Palestine (West Bank and Gaza Strip), Israel and Sinai (Egypt)." All of these states embrace Islam, with one very notable exception: Israel, our only "blood brother" ally in the region that all Islamic terrorists want gone, violently and forever.
Even as he persists in calling it ISIL, when asked about the terror attacks his outrage is confined to "They are killing Muslims. Innocent Muslims who worship Allah in a different manner. They are warping their minds... " That's his concern. The Muslims.
Now he's crediting the "great, successful, integrated, patriotic Muslim communities" for preventing terror attacks in America. Any approach that would "single them out for discrimination" would be wrong. How looking at Muslims as purveyors of terror would be acting like Cuba. How we don't need surveillance on them. How they are our children's friends. How they are our colleagues in the workplace.
Yes. Yes they are.
How we elected a Muslim, terrorist sympathizer as president TWICE boggles my mind.
I'm flabbergasted. Beyond words.
4 Replies
1747 Views