We must not decide our vote based on who is the most polite candidate, or who won’t hurt anyone’s feelings.
As Written By Allen B. West:
It was an interesting last week if you were paying attention to the liberal progressive angst when it comes to two words: Islamic terror. During a CNN town hall event, Barack Obama was asked by a Gold Star Mother as to why he has an issue with saying those two words.
Here is the exchange:
“The truth of the issue is that this is an issue that has been sort of manufactured,” said Obama. “Because there is no doubt … where we see terrorist organizations like al-Qaida or ISIL [the Islamic Strate], they have perverted and distorted and tried to claim the mantle of Islam for an excuse for basically barbarism and death. These are people who kill children, kill Muslims, take sex slaves.”
Obama went on to say that using the term might make Muslims “feel as if they’re under attack.”
And of course y’all know very well about St. Louis University seeking to censor me from saying those two words.
But, what remains perplexing to me is why do we have some “manufactured” burden on ourselves to be concerned about the feelings and emotions of others?
If the enemy declares they’re doing these barbaric acts in the name of Islam – as a matter of fact, they often refer to and read from the Koran — why is it our responsibility to obfuscate, deny, or lie about the nexus of the intent of the enemy?
After all, it’s called the “Islamic State,” not the Methodist, Presbyterian or Lutheran State.
Shouldn’t Muslims have the responsibility to decry the actions of these supposed outliers, and frequently and forcefully condemn them? Instead the first reaction is always to blame us for even mentioning it.
Later in Obama’s comment, he used the typical liberal progressive socialist statement of moral equivalency with Christians. I find it interesting that the left is always Johnny-on-the-spot to label Christians as a hate organization — after all, not baking a cake or taking photos for or a same-sex marriage is right up there with beheadings. What a completely absurd statement that we cannot refer to the enemy as it refers to itself because it will hurt the feelings and upset others.
Well, then they need to fix this crap and seek out a means to reform their “religion.”
At St. Louis University last week, I read the March 26, 1786 letter written by Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, two future American presidents, back to John Jay, our first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The letter was a report of their meeting with the Ambassador of Tripoli, also referred to as the Dey of Algiers, here is the justification as to why our American shipping was being attacked, and Americans enslaved:
“We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the Grounds of their pretentions to make war upon Nations who had done them no Injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation. The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet,1 that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.
At that time we had a choice as a nation: continue to borrow money from Holland and pay ransom to the Islamic terrorists, or as Jefferson decided, take the enemy for its word. He sent the US Navy and Marine Corps to defeat the Barbary Pirates. Apparently Mr. Obama follows the path of Neville Chamberlain, about whom Sir Winston Churchill stated, “you had a choice between dishonor and war, you chose dishonor and we shall have war.”
Why is it today, that our foreign policy and national security strategy is based on not offending others, when so many are being slaughtered?
Here’s just the latest example. As CNS News reported on September 12th, “A Yazidi mother and one of her sons who survived the Islamic State’s attack on Sinjar and surrounding villages in northern Iraq in August 2014, said that ISIS “shot and killed” many people, kidnapped young girls for sex, filmed the abuse and texted it to the girls’ families, and even “beheaded children with axes.”
The mother also disclosed that her husband “felt so helpless” that he committed suicide and that two of her sons, in shock and anguish, “painted their faces” with their dead father’s blood.
The sad thing is that President Obama has been too busy tripping over his tongue about what to call the enemy and who not to offend. We have many who certainly wish to punish the Obama acclaimed “jayvee” team. One thing is for certain, Obama’s obfuscation, denial and outright lies about this enemy have brought dishonor upon our nation — and he has certainly guaranteed we shall have war.
It’s a funny thing — how is it that we have 6,000 troops in Iraq, yet back in 2009, Obama told us we couldn’t because of a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA). Did something change we didn’t know about? Nah, but for certain, the liberal progressive media is too busy worrying about Donald Trump’s taxes to care.
To the Yazidi mother, ISIS will be punished, but it will come after Obama departs the White House, and isn’t replaced by Hillary Clinton. From Americans who want to defeat this scourge, please accept our apology for your pain and suffering.
We must not decide our vote based on who is the most polite candidate, or who won’t hurt anyone’s feelings. We must choose a ….
Full Story Here: