Military Action Needed to Save Christians under Muslim Domination


John R. Houk

© June 16, 2015

An Iraq government set up by America has no value to its own citizens and certainly no value for continued American support. In fact to keep throwing money into this Iraq government is undoubtedly harming both American National Interests and National Security.

Can we expect President Barack Hussein Obama to retool American diplomatic and military strategy that is a both advantageous to our National Interests and put an end to Islamic execution of a Christian genocide in old Iraq and Syria and the rest of the Muslim dominated world for that matter?

NO!

President BHO’s foreign policy strategy of appeasement at all costs has proven to be as ineffective as the 1938 Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain “Peace in our timeMunich Agreement (Also See HERE, HERE and HERE) was with Adolf Hitler. Roughly seven years after the Munich Agreement the world discovered Hitler was responsible for at least TWELVE MILLION (depending on who you read) civilian deaths of which roughly half were exterminated Jews from Europe.

… Nazis murdered from 15,003,000 to 31,595,000 people, most likely 20,946,000 men, women, handicapped, aged, sick, prisoners of war, forced laborers, camp inmates, critics, homosexuals, Jews, Slavs, Serbs, Germans, Czechs, Italians, Poles, French, Ukrainians, and many others. (DEMOCIDE: NAZI GENOCIDE AND MASS MURDER; 20,946,000 Victims: Nazi Germany 1933 To 1945; By R.J. Rummel; Hawaii.edu; © 1992)

Neville Chamberlain’s Munich Agreement victory speech could be broadcast today in color with U.S. President Obama telling us he will end American aggression to make the world a safer place:

VIDEO: Neville Chamberlain returns from Germany with the Munich Agreement

If you’d listen to Obama, removing American troops and gains from Iraq has brought peace to America. If Obama extricates American troops from Afghanistan I’m certain he’ll claim peace in our time to America. AND sometime around June 30, 2015 Obama might come on your television to tell Americans his Administration has successfully negotiated a non-nuke WMD treaty with Iran further ensuring peace in our time and demonstrating that Islam truly is a religion of peace.

Just like with the good intentions of Neville Chamberlain in 1938 that deluded the British people into jubilant adoration that a second horrific European war was averted, SO ALSO are any promises of international peace or global understanding of a peaceful Islam also a cock-n-bull load of manure.

And another complaint about our current President’s integrity on peaceful foreign relations between the USA and hostile foreign nations. How can a man so enamoured with social justice keep looking away and allowing the genocidal slaughter of Christians in Muslim dominated nations, ESPECIALLY at the hands of ISIS, ISIL or IS – whichever is one’s favorite appellation for murderous rapacious Muslims who operate according to their sacred writings (See Also HERE)?

Christians in America, you need to wake up to the global threat of Islam. At the very least wake up to the brutality perpetuated in the name Allah and Mohammed. Due to the many evils perpetuated by Crusaders who were initially launched under the excuse to take back the Holy Land so Christian pilgrims could travel there in peace, it has become politically incorrect to stipulate the actual reality of the Crusades. That reality is the Crusades were the result of the brutal assaults of Muslims against Christian lands and populations that had been going on since the days of Mohammed AND was perpetuated into a Muslim empire based on subjection of non-Muslims, slavery (labor and sex-slaves), pillaging and cultural Islamization of the local conquered locals.

Modern Muslim perspective on the Crusades:

Of all the religious wars in human history waged by any religion, at any place, and at any time, none have been bloodier, more genocidal, more barbaric, and more protracted than the 200-year “holy wars” by the Western Crusades against the Arabs and Islam. The Western Crusaders horrifically soaked Asia Minor and the Eastern Arab Mediterranean coast with Arab blood (both Muslim and Jewish). The objective of the Crusades was simple, to destroy the Arabs (whether Muslim or Jew) in the Holy Land of Palestine and its environs “…on the ground that they had no right to inhabit their part of the earth, while for a Christian the whole world is his country.” (THE CANNIBALISM AND BLOODBATHS OF THE CRUSADES (1095-1291); By Dr. Abdullah Mohammad Sindi; Radio Islam)

Modern Jewish perspective on the Crusades:

The Crusades turned into campaigns of slaughter, rape, and pillage, and woe to the poor Jews in the way. Indeed, the Crusades mark the first large-scale European mob violence directed against Jews which is going to become, unfortunately, the pattern for the next hundreds of years. The later pogroms are just going to be a repeat of this idea.

A peasant force also joined in. As these peasants started marching through Europe (in advance of the knights and their army), they needed to eat, and eat they did by pillaging the countryside. As they were marching along they got the idea that they might as well get rid of the infidels in their midst ― namely the Jews.

What happened after the Crusaders entered the city?

We have one account from Ibn Al Kalanisi, the Moslem chronicler, describing hair-raising behavior of unnecessary brutality-Thousand of Muslim men, women and children were slaughtered. The poor Jews had all huddled together in a synagogue and this is where the Crusaders found them, set the place on fire, and burned them alive. One of the Crusaders, Raymond of Aguilers joyfully recounted:

With the fall of Jerusalem and its towers one could see marvelous work. Some of the pagans were mercifully beheaded, others pierced by arrows plunged from towers, and yet others, tortured for a long time, were burned to death in searing flames. Piles of heads, hands and feet lay in the houses and streets, and men and knights were sunning to and fro over corpses.

Today we have amazing ruins from the Crusader period all over Israel. Some of the most massive and impressive are in Caesarea, Acco, Tiberias and in Belvoir (near the battle site of Hattin). If you should happen to visit any of these sites, keep in mind while admiring them, what the Crusaders did to the Jews. (History Crash Course #45: The Crusades; By Rabbi Ken Spiro; aish.com; 9/15/01)

Christians killing in the name of Jesus is horrific especially since such actions of brutality are expressly contrary to the Scriptures of the New Testament. The reality is the Christian leaders were quite weary of Muslim aggression that had been going on for about 450 plus years. Indeed, even after the last Crusader remnant city was dispatched in 1272 by Muslims, Muslim imperialism continued against Christians on through the Ottoman Empire (today’s Turkey) which lost its Sultan and Caliph shortly after their defeat in WWI. Friends I am talking about religious Islamic state organized repression against non-Muslims right through the early 20th century.

Here are some decent excerpts of Islamic imperialism and Islamization:

The Muslim wars of imperialist conquest have been launched for almost 1,500 years against hundreds of nations, over millions of square miles (significantly larger than the British Empire at its peak). The lust for Muslim imperialist conquest stretched from southern France to the Philippines, from Austria to Nigeria, and from central Asia to New Guinea. This is the classic definition of imperialism — “the policy and practice of seeking to dominate the economic and political affairs of weaker countries.”

 

 

… The local governors, judges, and other rulers were appointed by the central imperial authorities for far off colonies. Islamic law was introduced as the senior law, whether or not wanted by the local people. Arabic was introduced as the rulers’ language, and the local language frequently disappeared. Two classes of residents were established. The native residents paid a tax that their colonialist rulers did not have to pay.

 

Although the law differed in different places, the following are examples of colonialist laws to which colonized Christians and Jews were made subject to over the years:

 

  • Christians and Jews could not bear arms — Muslims could;

 

  • Christians and Jews could not ride horses — Muslims could;

 

  • Christians and Jews had to get permission to build — Muslims did not;

 

  • Christians and Jews had to pay certain taxes which Muslims did not;

 

  • Christians could not proselytize — Muslims could;

 

  • Christians and Jews had to bow to their Muslim masters when they paid their taxes; and

 

  • Christians and Jews had to live under the law set forth in the Koran, not under either their own religious or secular law.

 

In each case, these laws allowed the local conquered people less freedom than was allowed the conquering colonialist rulers. Even non-Arab Muslim inhabitants of the conquered lands became second class citizens behind the ruling Arabs. This is the classic definition of colonialist — “a group of people who settle in a distant territory from the state having jurisdiction or control over it and who remain under the political jurisdiction of their native land.”

 

… Because the Orthodox were imperialist, colonialist, and bloody, and majored in religious persecution to boot, the Muslim imperialist, colonialist, bloody conquest and subjugation of Palestine, and then Egypt, was made easier. Because of Orthodox weakness and the relative speed of the conquest of Palestine and Israel, I have often seen this Muslim, imperialist, colonialist bloody conquest described by Muslim and PC writers as “peaceful” or “bloodless.” This statement is simply not true.

 

The Muslim imperialist, colonialist, bloody conquest and subjugation of Palestine began with a battle, the August 20, 636, battle of Yarmk (it is believed that 75,000 soldiers took part — hardly bloodless). … Beginning in July 637, the Muslims began a siege of Jerusalem which lasted for five (hardly bloodless) months before Jerusalem fell in February 638. …

 

The Muslim conquest of (Christian) North Africa went relatively easily until the native peoples of North Africa (most importantly the Berbers) were encountered west of Egypt. The North African people fought so strongly against the Muslims that the Muslim imperialist, colonialist, bloody conquest in the west was brought to an almost complete stop between Tripoli and Carthage for more than a quarter century. The Muslims broke through in a series of bloody battles followed by bloody (revenge) massacres of the Muslim’s (largely Christian) opponents. This Muslim imperialist, colonialist, bloody conquest continued through North Africa and through what is now Spain, Portugal, and southern France, until they were stopped at the battle of Poiters (hardly bloodless) in the middle of France.

 

I believe that if I had the time, I could show that the Muslims, in their western imperialist, colonialist, bloody conquests, killed two to three times as many Christians as the Christians killed Muslims in all of the Crusades combined.

 

 

…  I believe that the murderous and pillaging acts of the Crusaders when they entered Jerusalem were barbaric, unchristian, and evil. This is particularly so as those barbaric, unchristian, and evil acts were carried on in the name of a religion of peace, love, and forgiveness. I believe that the vast bulk of thinking Christians agree with me. I cite as evidence the large numbers of Christians who have recently taken long pilgrimages in the footsteps of the Crusaders, repenting for the Crusader’s acts, seeking for forgiveness, and giving penance for the Crusader’s barbaric, unchristian, and evil acts.

 

A question occurs to me here. How many Muslim groups have taken long pilgrimages in the footsteps of the Muslim conquest repenting, seeking for forgiveness, and giving penance for the Muslims imperialist, colonialist, and bloody conquest of Palestine, Egypt, Syria, North Africa, and Spain?

 

 

Consider the Ottoman invasion of Christian Eastern Europe in which the Ottoman Empire invaded the west and conquered and colonized Greece, all of the Balkans, Romania, Bessarabia, and Hungary, and was stopped only at the outskirts of Vienna in 1529. Consider also the Muhgal (sic) conquest of Northern India in the early 1600s.

 

READ ENTIRETY (1,400 Years of Christian/Islamic Struggle: An Analysis; By Richard C. Csaplar, Jr.; CBN.com)

Other full view history of what caused the Crusades:

 

 

 

On a personal level I can find ZERO justification for Crusader Jew-hatred. There never was a Jewish empire that sought global domination to force the world to convert to Judaism for their own good. Although more Left Wing thinking Jews might disagree with this thought: the closest thing to a Jewish empire were the conquests of David which still did not include all the Biblical land promised by God Almighty.

David-Solomon Kingdom

God’s Promised Land

The Biblical history of the Jews shows that Jewish ancestors came into what Christians and Jews call the Holy Land because God knew and decided the indigenous non-Jewish people of that area had become so wicked that the Almighty followed through on His Promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and brought former Egyptian slaves to bring an to end Canaanite and etc. wickedness (See Also HERE) AND to follow through with the Abrahamic inheritance.

At this point I need to reiterate that the greatest threat to Western culture and to the Christian faith is the intolerant agenda spelled out in the Quran, Hadith and Sira of Islam. The Islamic theopolitical ideology commands Muslims to globally spread the submission of Islam in which all non-Muslims must submit to the tenets of Sharia by converting or accepting a second class status of humiliation in which Islam is to be honored or else receive a death sentence.

Even if the majority of Muslims truly believe Islam is peace and does not coerce unbelievers, the Islamic doctrine of abrogation insures the later Quranic surahs (as in time sequence and not Quranic order) and the supporting Hadith and Sira that support the abrogation, means Islam’s ultimate agenda is as I described in the last paragraph. Any Muslim who protests this analysis either does not know Islam as well as he should or is a taqiyyah lying apologist deceiving kafir (unbelieving-infidels) to or in a non-Muslim majority land.

For eco-political reasons Christians and Americans probably count on Europeans military powers or the United Nations to deliver Muslim dominated Christians experiencing genocide. Also I doubt President Barack Hussein Obama will deliver Christians from genocide because it is part of his Socialist-Marxist to Europeanize American culture into a self-destructive multicultural secular humanist anti-Biblical utopian pipedream.

So once again it is up to America to save people from despotism as in WWI, WWII and the Cold War. Saving foreign people from despotism is how America became the greatest economic and military powerhouse the world has seen to date. Will American voters continue to believe the Obama and Leftist delusional deceptions of making a better America via socio-cultural transformation? If WE Americans continue to vote for this delusional spiral our nation will become as big a target as is Europe who are frozen from protecting their own civilization via creeping Socialist-Marxism and Islam.

The Obama transformation will lead to the ultimate cultural conflict of anti-Christian secular humanism. The Leftist elitists will themselves face the purist Islamic revival to fight for survival. It is my opinion the Leftists using the military of Western powers will patiently wait for cultural transformation to eliminate the theopolitical religion of Islam. For the Left being a multiculturalist apologist for Islam is merely a tool knock Biblical Christianity from cultural dominance. For the most part this has already occurred in Europe. Thanks to Obama’s final touches, America’s Biblical Christian cultural thinking may face the same fate as Europe’s.

For you Separation of Church and State error prone fanatics, I am not advocating the Establishment of a particular Christian Denomination (Protestant, Catholic, Eastern Orthodox or various ascribed Monophysite Churches) or any religion for that matter. America’s Western heritage includes Judeo-Christianity as much as it does a Greco-Roman influence. The Christian minorities stranded in Muslim dominated lands are the remnants of the original Christians that were conquered by rapacious Muslims building an exploitive empire.

Many of those dominated minority Christians still exist because they have become accustomed to being submissive to centuries of understanding their place under the thumb of Islamic Sharia Law. In a more secular Islamic nation the penalty for a Christian breaking Sharia Law will be at least some kind of imprisonment. In a more religious Islamic nation (Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan and wait for it – the Islamic State (IS, ISIS or ISIL) the penalty for breaking Sharia Law – particularly if it is considered blasphemyis death.

Currently all Muslim nations are persecuting their Christian minorities, but in ISIS controlled areas Christians face convert or die or if you are a female – sex slavery. Brave Christians under the ISIS thumb are maintaining their Christianity even knowing it means a death sentence. I personally know of at least one instance that a Christian was tortured into converting to Islam but was still beheaded (video on link removed undoubtedly due to brutality, but a photo is still at link) with the pronouncement of cooperating with Bashar Assad.

This is a genocide perpetrated on Christians!

We are Americans. If Obama does not have the guts to put his ideology to the side perhaps it is time to find some wealthy benefactors to train will people to fight like soldiers against ISIS. A Private army of volunteers whose primary payment is the knowledge they are saving Christians from massive brutal deaths on a genocidal scale.

I realize the obstacles to such a private army are huge. Will the impotent Iraq government support a Christian private Army? Will Twelver-Shia Islam fanatical Islam tolerate a private Christian Army next door? Will Assad’s despotic Syrian Shia government tolerate a private Christian Army against ISIS? Will the so-called moderate Sunni-Syrian rebels tolerate a private Christian Army fighting for the life of Syrian and Iraqi Christians against the ISIS genocide? Would the primarily Sunni Kurds support a private Christian Army joining the Kurdish cause of independence will delivering Christians?

I suspect without a miracle from God no Muslims will tolerate a private Christian Army in their vicinity. There may be religious squabbles between Sunni and Shia Muslims in the Syria-Iraq area but they are still united in hatred against Christians for trying to protect their heritage during the Crusader era.

Unfortunately I believe America is the only viable path to STOP THE GENOCIDE OF CHRISTIANS by the contemptible hands of ISIS.

Obama’s current solution has nothing to do with stopping the genocide but to send more military advisors who are not to be involved in military operations to continue the training of the inept Iraqi government army. Yep, BHO believes throwing money into a situation will prolong his entirely unsuccessful foreign policy directives.

The Iraqi military has proven itself to be a craven lot with a craven military officer corps. After ISIS first began exercising its muscles in Iraq the Iraqi army chose to through their weapons down, abandon American given high-tech military equipment, rip off their uniforms and flee like the wind.

Check out how the American trained Iraq version of Special Forces fought for their nation as ISIS approached Ramadi about a month ago:

Kurdish commanders say Islamic State extremists were able to capture Ramadi a week ago because elite U.S.-trained Iraqi soldiers abandoned their posts 48 hours before the jihadis launched their final assault on the western Iraqi city. Their retreat left Iraqi units remaining in Ramadi and defending the strategic city dangerously exposed.

The flight of Iraqi Special Forces in scenes reminiscent of the mass retreat of regular Iraqi soldiers last year from Mosul made it easier for Islamic State to take over Ramadi on May 17, a top frontline Kurdish commander told Rudaw news site, a media outlet close to the leaders of the Kurdistan Regional Government.

According to the commander, an officer in the Iraqi army and not attached to the Kurdish Peshmerga forces, the elite troops pulled out two days before Islamic State fighters launched a series of devastating suicide car bomb attacks to punch their way into the city, the capital of Iraq’s western Anbar province.

“Two days prior to the ISIL attack, we had accurate information that the Special Operations had packed up and abandoned their base…I personally relayed the information through the chain of command and contacted Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi,” he said.

The Iraqi Special Forces were formed in 2005 and the first units were trained in Jordan by U.S. commanders. A branch of the Iraqi army, the Special Forces Command, which is made up of two brigades, reports directly to Iraqi Prime Minister Abadi.

… (Iraqi Special Forces First to Flee Ramadi; By Jamie Dettmer; VOA; 5/24/15 3:26 PM)

And this from the Canada Free Press:

Reports overnight are that Ramadi, a crucial city in the Anbar province and a strategic part of the gateway to Baghdad, has now fallen to ISIS:

“Ramadi has fallen,” Haimour had told AP Sunday. “The city was completely taken. … The military is fleeing.”

Smith said that the U.S. would continue to support Iraqi forces with airstrikes and added, “The loss of Ramadi does not mean the tide of the campaign has turned, and we have long said that there would be ebbs and flows on the battlefield. If lost, that just means the coalition will have to support Iraqi forces to take it back later.”

Sunday’s retreat recalled the collapse of Iraqi security forces last summer in the face of the Islamic State group’s blitz into Iraq that saw it capture a third of the country, where it has declared a caliphate, or Islamic State. It also calls into question the Obama administration’s hopes of relying solely on airstrikes to support the Iraqi forces in expelling the extremists.

… U.S. air power surely helps in given situations, but it goes only so far when ISIS knows full well that the Iraqis will not – under any circumstances – get support from U.S. ground troops.

The videos of ISIS beheading people and burning people alive have not been as much in the news lately, maybe because the media got bored with it and moved on to their cherished race riots. But these practices have certainly not stopped, and the prospect of ISIS controlling most or all of Iraq is just as horrifying now as it was back when Obama was smugly dismissing ISIS as Al Qaeda’s JV team. The strategic and geopolitical consequences of the ISIS rampage across the Middle East impact America’s economy, national security and energy independence. It seems incomprehensible that we would have a president who refuses to do everything possible to protect those interests, but that’s the president you elected America. Twice. Nice job. (Iraqi troops drop weapons and flee as ISIS takes Ramadi; By Dan Calabrese; CFP; 5/18/15)

Will Westerners and/or Obama listen to Syrian Catholic Archbishop Yohanna Mouche who found his Church in Mosul desecrated by ISIS? Archbishop Mouche is asking for military intervention to save his Christian brethren from the ISIS generated Christian genocide. See this WND article below.

JRH 6/16/15

Please Support NCCR

*****************************

Bishop tells West: Defeat ISIS or give Christians asylum
‘I can’t understand what is going on around me. It is a nightmare’

 

By LEO HOHMANN

June 13, 2015

WND

A leading Iraqi prelate has called on the U.S. and its allies to double down on their efforts to defeat ISIS militarily, and, if that is not possible, to rescue Iraq’s 120,000 exiled Christians and grant them asylum in the West.

Marking the first anniversary of the Islamic State’s capture of Mosul, Syrian Catholic Archbishop Yohanna Mouche called on “people who have the responsibility” to come to the rescue of the ousted Christian communities, whose people long to go home, the archbishop said in a phone interview with John Pontifex of Aid to the Church in Need, an international Catholic charity.

Since the fall of Mosul into ISIS’s hands last summer, the city has been emptied of the thousands of Christians who once resided there.

The archbishop told Pontifex that military action is the “best solution” to restore the land and property that has been stolen from Christians in Mosul and other Iraqi cities.

“We ask everyone to put pressure on the people who have the responsibility to free the [towns and villages] as soon as possible so the people can come back and live in peace in their homes and continue their lives there,” he told the Catholic charity.

The archbishop’s comments reflect the frustration felt by many Middle Eastern Christian clergy, not only Catholic but also Orthodox and Protestant, about what they perceive as the West’s reluctance to commit to a full-scale intervention to confront and defeat Islamic extremism in the region. Until recently many Catholic clergy had opposed such a move, but as the situation has grown more desperate, so have their pleas for help.

Many Christians have fled to safe havens in Kurdish-controlled areas and some have taken up arms, fighting alongside Kurdish soldiers.

West should ‘open its doors’ to Christian refugees

Archbishop Mouche said if the West is unable or unwilling to expand its military options against ISIS, then it should open its doors to Christians and other minorities seeking asylum.

“I am calling on the international community: if they cannot protect us, then they must open their doors and help us start a new life elsewhere,” he said.

But “we would prefer to remain in Iraq and be protected here,” he added.

Speaking of his own hardship, the prelate said: “I am like someone who is dreaming or drunk. I can’t understand what is going on around me. It is a nightmare.”

Asked about widespread reports of destruction of religious artifacts and ancient churches in Mosul, he said his contacts with the city had been severed. But he confirmed that “all our heritage is in Mosul, and in Qaraqosh,” on the Nineveh Plain.

He noted the monastery of St. Behnam, which dates back to the fourth century AD. The monastery is believed to have been at least partially destroyed by ISIS, which has also desecrated numerous Christian cemeteries.

“We have no news about our churches and monasteries, because we have no one left in Mosul to report on it,” the archbishop said.

U.N. assigns mostly Muslims for resettlement in West

The United States, which accepts the majority of the world’s refugees and asylum seekers, has taken in 119,210 refugees from Iraq since 2008, but 72,983 or 61 percent of those have been Muslims and only 42,000 or 35 percent have been Christian, according to U.S. State Department data.

As for the other major Middle Eastern source of refugees, Syria, the numbers are even more slanted toward Muslims. Among the nearly 850 Syrian refugees sent to the U.S. for permanent resettlement since the outbreak of the Syrian civil war, 92 percent have been Muslim and less than 6 percent Christian.

Iraq is home to some of the world’s earliest Christians. St. Thomas the apostle evangelized the Assyrians and Chaldeans living in the Nineveh plain of ancient Mesopotamia, part of modern-day northern Iraq, shortly after the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. About 4.7 million Christians lived in Iraq as of 1947, despite the numerous jihads launched against them by the 14th century warlord Tamerlane, who slaughtered 70,000 Christians at Tikrit, by the Ottoman Turks and later by al-Qaida.

Many Christians have fled while others converted to Islam. When the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003 to overthrow Saddam Hussein, about 1.5 million Christians still lived in the country. That number has now dwindled to about 125,000, with most of those remaining living in Baghdad, Basra, and in the Kurdish cities of Kirkuk and Erbil.

Yet, instead of pushing for these Christians to be allowed into the U.S. and other Western countries, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and much of the refugee resettlement industry has lobbied instead for the relocation of Syrian refugees, 90 percent of whom are Muslims.

The U.S. Congress, led by Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, R-Texas, has expressed grave concerns about the security risks of accepting large numbers of Syrian refugees, the ranks of which ISIS has vowed to infiltrate.

As WND reported June 3, between five and 10 of the 1,000 Syrian refugees slated by the U.N. for resettlement in Norway were recently found to have connections to either ISIS or the al-Nusra Front, according to Norway’s Police Security Service.

Also previously reported by WND in February, the FBI’s deputy director of counter-terrorism, Michael Steinbach, testified before the House Homeland Security committee that his agency was unable to screen the Syrian refugees because the U.S. has no access to reliable law enforcement records in the “failed state” of Syria. McCaul said he feared Syria’s Muslim refugees would become a “jihadi pipeline” into the United States.

Christians abandoned by Western governments

Christians pose no security risks, yet they have been largely abandoned in the face of vicious persecution, said Joel Richardson, a Christian author and filmmaker who recently visited Iraq on a missions trip.

“There’s no question we need to open our doors to the Christians of Iraq,” he told WND. “There’s been a lot of anecdotal evidence that within Congress and the various departments and channels that oversee U.S. immigration that for some mysterious reason we’re putting up these roadblocks that prevent these Christians from coming to the U.S. when we’re morally obligated to let them in, particularly in light of the fact that there is zero security risk and most of their plight can be attributed to the foreign policy blunders of the U.S. State Department under Barack Obama that was led by Hillary Clinton.”

The refugee issue will not be going away anytime soon, said Richardson, author of the New York Times-bestseller “The Islamic Antichrist,” and director of the film “End Times Eyewitness.”

“We have to get this issue down and established because the refugee crisis is only going to continue to explode as Libya falls into chaos as a result of (Obama’s) blunders there,” Richardson said. “It’s important to recognize what is the responsibility of the U.S. government but right now the Church needs to recognize that as chaos continues to envelope the earth, the mission field of Christ is opening up and expanding, and we are to be the first responders who will be there for the refugees who are in crisis.”

While the Christian refugees of Iraq pose no security risk, the loudest voices in the refugee resettlement industry, such as former U.K. Foreign Minister David Miliband, who now heads the International Rescue Committee, have lobbied in recent months almost exclusively on behalf of the Syrian refugees. Miliband and others have said the U.S. needs to take in at least 65,000 Syrian refugees by the end of 2016.

This same demand — for the U.S. to accept 65,000 Syrian refugees — has been echoed by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and by the Refugee Council USA. RCUSA is the main lobbying arm of the nine agencies that do the resettlement work under contract for the U.S. government.

That demand was taken up last month by 14 Democratic U.S. Senators, led by Richard Durbin, D-Ill., Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken, D-Minn. and Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., who signed a letter calling on President Obama to “dramatically increase” the number of Syrian refugees allowed into the U.S. That was enough to earn the 14 senators the title of “the Jihad Caucus” by Refugee Resettlement Watch author Ann Corcoran, who has been following the refugee movement since 2007.

_____________________

Military Action Needed to Save Christians under Muslim Domination

John R. Houk

© June 16, 2015

_________________________

Bishop tells West: Defeat ISIS or give Christians asylum

 

© Copyright 1997-2015. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

Iran and Nuclear Terrorism


BHO Iran Nuke Appeasement

Justin Smith highlights what the Mainstream Media has again failed to notify Americans of adequately. Iran is nuclear and is a heartbeat away from arming nuke missiles. The Appeaser-in-Chief does nothing but talk platitudes out the side of his used car salesman mouth.

 

JRH 2/8/15

Please Support NCCR

*************************

Iran and Nuclear Terrorism

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 2/6/2015 5:43 PM

 

Feckless negotiating with Iran over the past decade, especially these past two years, have burned an image of a miserable Chamberlain-style failure in the minds of the American people, as President Obama and Secretary Kerry have allowed the greatest threat in the 21st century to become our reality. For all intents and practical purposes, Iran is now essentially a nuclear armed missile state, and rather than pursue more negotiations, the at risk nations, such as the United States, Britain, Germany, France and much of Europe and Israel, must seriously consider a preemptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, before its weaponry can be perfected and mass produced. And even then, small nukes handed to Iran’s proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, will remain a threat, as long as the Ayatollahs hold their iron grip on Iran.

 

All the political analysts have been speaking in terms of “if” Iran achieves a nuclear weapons program, when all the evidence suggests that Iran already has one. Long held Shahab-4 missiles with a 2500 mile range and the February 2, 2009 orbit of the Safir-2 Omid – “Hope” exhibits that Iran has an intercontinental delivery system. Iran also has received an A.Q. Khan warhead design from North Korea, as well as a Chinese warhead design, and it has a currently undetermined amount of near weapons grade uranium, due to its maintenance of a number of secret facilities.

 

Iran has acknowledged the existence of 19,000 centrifuges, with 9,000 currently operating. These 9,000 centrifuges can produce enough weapons grade plutonium to produce approximately three nuclear missiles in a year. If Iran reduces this number to 7,000 and keeps much of its uranium enriching technology, as John Kerry and others have suggested, experts warn that any reduction in centrifuge efficiency is reversible more quickly than a straight decrease in the number of centrifuges.

 

While Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani claimed in his February 4th speech that Iran “neither covets nor aspires to acquire nuclear weapons”, there remain many within the Ayatollah hierarchy who would refute this. Rouhani’s opposition states fairly correctly that Sipah-e-Sahaba, an intensely anti-Shiite Islamofascist group, has close ties to Pakistan’s military and intelligence establishment, which stokes Iranian fears of a nuclear first strike by Pakistan. They are also concerned that Riyadh has invested heavily in the Pakistan nuclear program and can get a nuclear weapon at will, which plays a large part in Iran’s nuclear quest.

 

And, as an unrepentant sponsor of terrorism for thirty-five years, Tehran has made no secret of its desire to wipe Israel – “Little Satan” and America “Big Satan” – off the face of the earth, while it has systemized terror as a primary mechanism for accomplishing it goals and exporting its worldview and Islamist ideology. In this context, despite any security issues Iran may have with Sunni nations like Saudi Arabia, the United States must not allow Iran to build an arsenal of nuclear weapons, under any circumstances.

 

Over the past year the world has seen Iran use its Quds Force and Revolutionary Guard in Iraq and Hezbollah in Syria. We witnessed Iran trade arms and munitions for black-market oil with the Islamic State. And then, Iran threatened to send millions of jihadists to Gaza to fight in the “struggle” against Israel. The news from Iran is never good.

 

Since Iran already views itself as advancing the Islamic hegemon in the region, just think of the influence Iran will exert throughout the entire Middle East, once it is prepared to fully unveil its real nuclear capabilities. It is already exerting great influence through its finances and military, and in the aftermath of the Iranian backed Shiite Houthis taking control of Sana’a, Yemen, the Arabic media now refers to Beirut, Damascus, Baghdad and Sana’a as “the four capitals of Iran”, which Iranian media calls a “victory for the [Islamic] revolution.”

 

Does anyone believe that the Ayatollahs will not find a way to detonate a nuclear weapon in New York or Chicago, especially with the U.S’s current porous border situation? – Or Tel Aviv?

 

Although Iran has previously launched several satellites on a south to north trajectory, in an attempt to elude U.S. Ballistic Early Warning Radar, Iran will seek “plausible deniability”. As I wrote on November 30, 2013:

 

“Utilizing numerous deceptions, such as tramp steamers off the U.S. and European coasts or physically crossing porous borders, it would not be too difficult for Iran to target 29 critical sites in America and the West, identified numerous times by successive Iranian presidents.” [Bold text added by Editor]

 

 

As Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) spoke with Greta Van Susteren (Fox News) on January 27th, he observed:

“If we continue on the path we are with the Iranians, they’ll wind up with a nuclear capability … and one day have a [nuclear] bomb. He’s about to make the biggest mistake of this presidency.”

 

While Obama has previously stated that a nuclear armed Iran represents a “profound” national security threat to the U.S., his Chamberlain-style appeasement tactics have greatly alarmed opponents of Iran’s nuclear program, especially considering that Olli Heinonen, former IAEA Deputy Director General, warned (Jan. 20, 2014) that Iran could build a nuclear weapon within two to three weeks. They see Iran on the cusp of a rapid nuclear break-out, while Obama gives Iran more time to stockpile more uranium, time that the world can ill-afford to give a rogue regime with so much blood on its hands.

 

With Iran’s Ayatollahs stalling for time and possibly stockpiling an untold number of nuclear warheads (scores?) and Obama and Kerry legitimizing major pieces of Iran’s nuclear program, this U.S. administration and world leaders are failing at a critical juncture of history that demands decisive action, not an unacceptable bad deal that leaves nuclear capabilities in Iran’s hands. Decisive action is needed to stop a defiant Iran, protect U.S. interests and halt a rising Islamic dawn and an era of nuclear terrorism.

 

By Justin O. Smith

___________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

 

© Justin O. Smith

Intro: Obama’s Dangerous Consistency


BHO Quran apology - BHO Constitution Disdain

John R. Houk

© September 22, 2012

 

Caroline Glick has some awesome insight on Obama’s Foreign Policy in relation to Egyptian animus toward the USA.

 

She begins by pointing out the Islamic hatred for American Free Speech. This Egyptian hatred of America is evidenced by Egypt placing arrest warrants against the makers of the Mohammed Movie and anyone associated with promoting the movie.

 

Just as a sidebar: Egypt asking the U.S. government to honor the arrest warrants for something that is protected by the First Amendment should give more importance to the grassroots movement of enacting American Laws for American Courts (ALAC). – End of sidebar

 

Glick points out that Egyptian Clerics – like from the Muslim Brotherhood – are calling for an end of attacks on U.S. Embassies; however call for Muslims to rise up in the USA to murder anyone connected to the Mohammed Movie.

 

Glick points out that the Obama Administration has been consistent in an appeasement foreign policy by using an apologetic strategy of courting friendship with Muslim nations and most notoriously the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt.

 

Glick rounds out her criticism of President Barack Hussein Obama by pointing out his Administration is attempting to take the voters’ eyes off the foreign policy failure by dredging memories of the Neocons of the old Bush Administration yet only and oddly falling into the myth that Neocons are Jewish. Hence, without using anti-Semitic words the Obama Administration is using antisemitism to separate Obama policies as the source of Muslim rage against Americans.

 

This is a good read!

 

JRH 9/22/12

Please Support NCCR

**************************

Obama’s dangerous consistency

 

By Caroline Glick

September 21, 2012, 9:39 AM

CarolineGlick.com

 

On Tuesday, Egypt’s chief prosecutor issued arrest warrants against eight US citizens.

 

Their purported crimes relate either to their reported involvement in the production of the Internet movie critical of Islam that has received so much attention over the past 10 days, or to other alleged anti-Islamic activities.

 

One of the US citizens indicted is a woman who converted from Islam to Christianity.

 

According to the Associated Press, Egypt’s general prosecution issued a statement announcing that the eight US citizens have been indicted on charges of insulting and publicly attacking Islam, spreading false information, and harming Egyptian national unity.

 

The statement stipulated that they could face the death penalty if convicted.

 

The AP write-up of the story quoted Mamdouh Ismail, a Salafi attorney who praised the prosecution’s move. He claimed it would deter others from exercising their right to free expression in regards to Islam. As he put it, the prosecutions will “set a deterrent for them and anyone else who may fall into this.” That is, they will deter others from saying anything critical about Islam.

 

This desire to intimidate free people into silence on Islam is clearly the goal the heads of the Muslim Brotherhood seek to achieve through their protests of the anti-Islamic movie. This was the message of Muslim Brotherhood chief Yussuf Qaradawi. Three days after the anti-American assaults began on the anniversary of the September 11 jihadist attacks on America, Qaradawi gave a sermon on Qatar television, translated by MEMRI.

 

Qaradawi struck a moderate tone. He called on his followers to stop rioting against the US. Rather than attack the US, Qaradawi urged his Muslim audience to insist that the US place prohibitions on the free speech rights of American citizens by outlawing criticism of Islam – just as the Europeans have done in recent years in the face of Islamic terror and intimidation.

 

In his words, “We say to the US: You must take a strong stance and try to confront this extremism like the Europeans do. This [anti-Islamic film] is not art. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech. This is nothing but curses and insults. Does the freedom to curse and insult constitute freedom of speech?”

 

Both the actions of the Egyptian prosecution and Qaradawi’s sermon prove incontrovertibly that the two policies the US has adopted since September 11, 2001, to contend with Muslim hatred for the US have failed. The neoconservative policy of supporting the democratization of Muslim societies adopted by President Barack Obama’s predecessor George W. Bush has failed. And the appeasement policy adopted by Obama has also failed.

 

Bush’s democratization policy claimed that the reason the Muslim world had become a hotbed for anti-Americanism and terror was that the Muslim world was not governed by democratic regimes. Once the peoples of the Muslim world were allowed to be free, and to freely elect their governments, the neoconservatives proclaimed, they would abandon their hatred of America.

 

As a consequence of this belief, when the anti-regime protests against the authoritarian Mubarak regime began in January 2011, the neoconservatives were outspoken supporters of the overthrow of then-president Hosni Mubarak, despite the fact that he had been the US’s key ally in the Arab world for three decades. They supported the political process that brought the Muslim Brotherhood to power. They supported the process despite the fact that Qaradawi is the most influential cleric in Egypt. They supported it despite the fact that just days after Mubarak was ousted from power, Qaradawi arrived at Cairo’s Tahrir Square and before an audience of two million followers, he called for the invasion of Israel and the conquest of Jerusalem.

 

In the event, the Egyptian people voted for Qaradawi’s Muslim Brotherhood and for the Salafi party. The distinction between the two parties is that Qaradawi and the Muslim Brotherhood are willing to resort to both violent and nonviolent ways to dominate the world in the name of Islam. The Salafis abjure nonviolence. So while Qaradawi called for the riots to end in order to convince the Americans to criminalize criticism of Islam, his Salafi counterparts called for the murder of everyone involved in producing the anti-Islamic film.

 

For instance, Salafi cleric Ahmad Fouad Ashoush issued a fatwa on Islamic websites last weekend calling for American and European Muslims to murder those involved with the movie. His religious ruling was translated by the SITE Intelligence Group on Monday.

 

Ashoush wrote, “Those bastards who did this film are belligerent disbelievers. I issue a fatwa and call on the Muslim youth in America and Europe to do this duty, which is to kill the director, the producer and the actors and everyone who helped and promoted the film.

 

“So, hurry, hurry, O Muslim youth in America and Europe, and teach those filthy lowly ones a lesson that all the monkeys and pigs in America and Europe will understand. May Allah guide you and grant you success.”

 

These are the voices of democratic Egypt. The government, which has indicted American citizens on capital charges for exercising their most fundamental right as Americans, is a loyal representative of the sentiments of the Egyptian people who freely elected it. The Salafi preacher is a loyal representative of the segment of the Egyptian people that made the Salafi party the second largest in the Egyptian parliament. Qaradawi’s call for the abolition of freedom of speech in America – as has happened in Europe – and to ban all criticism of Islam is subscribed to by millions and millions of Muslims worldwide who consider him one of the leading Sunni clerics in the world.

 

Free elections in Egypt have empowered the Egyptian people to use the organs of governance to advance their hatred of America. Their hatred has been empowered, and legitimized, not diminished as the neoconservatives had hoped.

 

The behavior of the Egyptian government, Qaradawi and the Salafis also makes clear that Obama’s policy of appeasing the Muslim world has failed completely. Whereas Bush believed the source of Muslim hatred was their political oppression at the hands of their regimes, Obama has blamed their rage and hatred on America’s supposed misdeeds.

 

By changing the way America treats the Muslim world, Obama believes he can end their hatred of America. To this end, he has reached out to the most anti-American forces and regimes in the region and spurned pro-American regimes and political forces.

 

When Obama’s policies are recognized as driven by appeasement, the seeming inconsistency of his war against Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi on the one hand, and his passivity in the face of the anti-regime uprising in Iran in 2009 and the Syrian uprising against the Assad regime today makes sense. Gaddafi was not a threat to the US, so he was unworthy of protection. The mullahs in Iran and Assad are foes of the US. So they deserve protection. Obama has assiduously courted the Muslim Brotherhood from the outset of his presidency.

 

The official and unofficial Egyptian exploitation of the Internet film as a means to intimidate and attack the US into disavowing its core principles is proof that Obama’s theory of the source of Muslim rage is wrong. They do not hate America because of what the US government does. They hate America because of what America is. And it is because of this that since September 11, the rationale for Obama’s foreign policy has disintegrated.

 

Rather than accept this basic truth and defend the American way of life, Obama has doubled down in the only way now available to him. He, his administration, his campaign and his supporters in the media have responded to the collapse of the foundations of his foreign policy by resorting to the sort of actions they accused George W. Bush, his administration and supporters of taking. They have responded with a campaign of political oppression and nativist bigotry directed against their political opponents.

 

Late last Friday night, law enforcement officers descended on the California home of Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the man who made the film that the Muslims of the newly free Arab lands find so offensive. Nakoula was questioned by federal authorities and later released. His arrest was photographed. The image of a dozen officers arresting an unarmed man for making a movie was broadcast worldwide within moments.

 

Beyond persecuting an independent filmmaker, the White House requested that YouTube block access to it. YouTube – owned by Google – has so far rejected the White House’s request.

 

The Obama administration’s abetment of bigoted nativism to silence criticism of its substantively indefensible foreign policy was on prominent display last Sunday. Obama’s campaign endorsed an anti-Semitic screed published by New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd.

 

In her column, titled, “Neocons slither back,” Dowd wrote that Republican Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are mere puppets controlled by “neocon puppet master, Dan Senor.”

 

Neocon is a popular code for Jewish. It was so identified by Dowd’s Times’ colleague David Brooks several years ago.

 

Dowd said that “the neocons captured” Bush after the September 11 attacks and “Now, amid contagious Arab rage sparked on the 11th anniversary of 9/11, they have captured another would-be Republican president and vice president, both jejeune about the world.”

 

One telling aspect of Dowd’s assault on Senor as a neoconservative is that he and his boss in the Bush administration, Paul Bremer, were the nemeses of the neoconservatives at the Pentagon. The only thing Senor has in common with the likes of Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith is that all three men are Jews.

 

Moreover, Dowd drew a distinction between supposed “neocons” like Senor, and non-Jewish US leaders Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney who merely “abetted” the neocons.

 

So Senor doesn’t share the same ideological worldview as Feith and Wolfowitz but he’s a neocon. And Cheney and Rumsfeld do share the same worldview as Feith and Wolfowitz. And they are not neocons.

 

The Times’ public editor Andrew Rosenthal dismissed claims that Dowd’s column was anti- Semitic, arguing it couldn’t be since she never said a word about Jews.

 

The Obama campaign linked to Dowd’s column on its Twitter account with the message, “Why Romney and Ryan’s foreign policy sounds ‘ominously familiar.'” Obama’s campaign’s willingness to direct the public to anti-Semitic screeds against his political opponents is consistent with the administration’s general strategy for defending policies. That strategy involves responding to criticism not with substantive defense of his policies, but with ad hominem attacks against his critics.

 

His failed economic policies’ critics are attacked as “Wall Street fat cats.” His failed foreign policies’ critics are demonized as ominous neocon puppet masters.

 

There is a difference between appeasing parties that have been harmed by your actions and appeasing parties that wish your destruction. In the 1970s the US appeased the Philippines by transferring sovereignty over the Clark Air Force Base to the Philippine government. America was still America and the US and the Philippines became friends.

 

To appease a party that hates your way of life, you must change your way of life. The only way America can appease the Muslim world is for America to cease to be America.

 

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

_________________________

© 2012 Caroline Glick

 

About Caroline Glick

Appeasement’s Deadly Consequences /or/ Obama’s Bloody Hands


BHO Foreign Policy Failure

Justin O. Smith appropriately castigates President Barack Hussein Obama for his appeasement style Foreign Policy.

 

JRH 9/17/12

Please Support NCCR

****************************

Appeasement’s Deadly Consequences /or/ Obama’s Bloody Hands

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 9/15/2012 1:28 PM

 

Our U.S. Embassies are attacked by islamofascists in a planned coordinated assault and our State Department issues an apology for the “hurt feelings” that a movie depicting Islam unfavorably has caused Muslims. From President Obama’s anti-Israel/ pro-Muslim stance and his Qaddafi misadventure to enabling “democratic” frameworks during the Arab Winter and his reluctance to help the rebellion in Iran or now in Syria, Obama is sending  clear signals that the U.S is weak and no longer a force to be considered and respected. Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma attributes the attacks on the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, Egypt and the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya on 9-11-2012 to “President Obama’s failure to lead and his failed foreign policy of appeasement and apology.”

The portents for trouble in these two hot-spots were readily apparent to anyone paying attention, and if State Dept spokeswoman Victoria Nuland really believes that “the security at Benghazi was appropriate for what we knew” then she did not know much and needs to be removed. Fathi Baja, a Libyan politician, described Ambassador Stevens’ four man security team as “sorely inadequate” in a country “still in transition” with extremists everywhere. And common sense alone suggested that islamofascists might see the 9/11 Anniversary as a prime opportunity for more terrorist acts.

While administration officials deny any forewarning had occurred, “The Independent” reported (9-13) that senior diplomatic sources stated that the U.S. State Dept had warnings 48 hours prior to these attacks that American missions would come under attack, but no further plans for increased security developed. Some forewarning evidently reached our Cairo U.S. Embassy, since the staff had long been evacuated prior to the “protester’s” attack and Egyptian security forces were conspicuously absent (the same security forces that swarmed protesters during the Tahrir Square uprising), as these anti-American islamofascists scaled the Embassy walls and replaced the U.S. Flag with the Al Qaeda flag… and then they tore and burned Our American Flag! One must wonder if a similar warning compelled Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens to speed to the Consulate in Benghazi that day, in an effort to save his staff.

How hard it must have been for our Marines to suffer the insult against America and not be able to repel these despicable and contemptible Sons of Allah, because one: they were restrained by bollixed rules of engagement, and two: they had no live ammunition.

With full understanding that chaos and upheaval in these two countries was far from over, why wasn’t better security and more Marines provided for the Cairo U.S. Embassy and why didn’t Ambassador Stevens have any Marines for his protection detail? Why weren’t multiple intelligence briefings, analysis and assessments undertaken by the Joint Chief of Staff and the NSA concerning the risk factors to these facilities in conjunction with the approaching 9/11 Anniversary?

These actions were not taken because America has a feckless President, Barry Soetoro…Barack Hussein Obama, at the helm of leadership in the White House these days; Obama attended only 43% of his intelligence briefings over the past 1200 days of his term, and, on the day before these attacks, Obama was absent from that briefing too. But he can damn sure get in his rounds of golf and scurry off to Las Vegas and Aurora for campaign appearances, before Ambassador Stevens’ body is even cold and in the ground!

Ambassador Chris Stevens was a highly praised career diplomat, who spoke fluent French and Arabic, and he started out with the Peace Corp as a young man; during his Libya posting, he worked with Qaddafi, but he became the main interlocutor to the rebels in Benghazi for the Obama administration.

The fact that some 200-300 armed “militants”/islamofascists with AK-47s and RPG grenade launchers surrounded the Libyan U.S. Consulate, that they were there ready for action, suggests more than a “spontaneous protest.” The “insulting movie” was nothing more than a ploy, and if it hadn’t been this, they would have fabricated another excuse for mobilization. All the evidence now points to a planned assault on the U.S. Consulate and murder of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens by Al Qaeda/ Islamic Maghreb!

Ambassador Stevens had just returned to Libya from Europe and his location was confidential, which now illuminates a security breach between Libya’s National Transition Council and the U.S. State Dept; sensitive documents are now known to be missing too. as the battle was met at the Consulate, some Libyans died fighting the murderous Sons of Allah, while other Libyan “security forces” removed Ambassador Stevens, Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith, Terrence Woods (ex-Navy SEAL) and Glenn Doherty  (ex-Navy SEAL) to a safe house. Shortly upon arriving, this so-called “safe house” came under mortar fire, and then came the final betrayal, as the Libyan “security” handed them over to their murderers. They died horribly but bravely!

“How could this sort of attack occur in a country we helped liberate… in a city (Benghazi) we helped save?” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked this after the reported deaths of these American patriots. It happened because Obama is out of his depth and has thrown in his lot with enemies of the United States. Does anyone really believe that Libya’s National Transition Council isn’t full of Al Qaeda, Islamic Maghreb and Muslim Brothers? It happened because they hate us and the brainwashing and indoctrination through Islam makes many Muslims view killing infidels no more serious than slaughtering a cow, thus the term “kafir”. As a whole the Islamic ummah has a pathological psychology and loves death…especially that of non-believers and Americans!

President Obama’s and Secretary of State Clinton’s Neville Chamberlain brand of diplomacy through appeasement and apologies set the stage for the Cairo and Benghazi attacks and this new rash of Embassy attacks in Yemen, Tunisia, Morocco and Sudan… no matter that a later sterner condemnation of the attacks was released. Nation after nation is falling to this grotesque, debasing ideology of Islam… Our sovereign territory was attacked! Our American Flag was burned! American lives were taken… destroyed! I don’t give a good tinker’s damn if Muslims have hurt feelings when they regularly murder with impunity in the name of their bastard god Allah! Plans at the highest levels must be made for swift, fierce retaliation and retribution in the harshest of terms… with overwhelming and extreme prejudice! Where is Obama’s outrage over these heinous murders? And now, Obama pontificates on cooperating with the islamofascist Libyan government in order to “bring the terrorists to justice”, as he assuages his conscience… But the blood of these four Americans is on his hands…Hillary’s hands! May God Rest Their Souls.

 

By Justin O Smith

_______________________

Edited by John R. Houk