Obama Official: Return Of Islamic Caliphate “Inevitable”.

He is seen as the harbinger for the coming Islamic Mahdi.  From Egypt, to Yemen, to Libya, to Iraq – Obama lends his hand to establishing a global Islamic Caliphate.

While Conservative Christians reel with the onslaught of daily attacks on our liberties while Obama rules by executive decree, there was an offhand comment made by an Obama DHS appointee that has gone nearly unnoticed by the alternative media.  In a week we were told that amnesty for Mexican insurgents and illegals is ‘inevitable’ – so also we are told that an Islamic Caliphate is ‘inevitable’, at the same exact time that Iraq is falling to Al Qaeda Jihadists.

Welcome to ‘fundamental transformation’.

Back in 2009.  I wrote a warning essay about how the Islamic world was viewing Obama after his Cairo speech and reading the signals he clearly sent to them.

AntiChrist Obama? Islamic World Lauds Obama as the Mahdi

Since then, Obama orchestrated the fall of secular dictatorships in the Middle East and was arming Jihadists such as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Al Qaeda in Syria.  In short, Obama has directly enabled the rise of a STRONGER, MORE POWERFUL Al Qaeda entity that is conquering Iraq as I type.

Obama’s role as an Islamic messiah to the Jihadi terrorists of the world is now growing in acceptance and tenor.  Americans are befuddled – they ascribe Obama’s’ foreign policy to incompetence, yet all they have to do is look at THE FRUITS:  Arming Al Qaeda ISIS rebels in Syria via the Benghazi consulate; releasing hardened Jihadists from detainment after they were captured; trading ONE American deserting traitor for FIVE Taliban Jihadist Generals; working to criminalizing speech detrimental to Islam, etc., etc.

Obama has done all he can to aid, comfort and empower Jihadist Islam groups throughout the world.

Americans have by and large decided to ignore these fruits, cognitive dissonance to an extreme – refusing to acknowledge  the fact that Obama is a Trojan horse for our enemies and is working towards our destruction while the evidence is right in front of our faces.

Now, because Obama is the defacto dictator,  he has dropped many pretenses and masks about his intents and plans.   Which is how and why one of his advisors is stating that the return of the Islamic Caliphate is now ‘inevitable’.  Thanks in large part to Obama himself.

Obama-appointed DHS adviser calls return of Caliphate ‘inevitable’

As ISIS rolls through Iraq vowing to re-establish the global Caliphate, an appointee of President Obama is telling us that the return of the Caliphate is “Inevitable.” John Rossomando reports for the Investigative Project on Terrorism:

A member of President Obama’s Homeland Security Advisory Council known for controversial Twitter posts that seem to support the Muslim Brotherhood wrote Friday that it is “inevitable that ‘Caliphate’ returns.”

Mohamed Elibiary has been controversial since he was firstappointed to the taskforce in 2010. He was closely associatedwith Shukri abu Baker, former executive director of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development – one of five people convicted for illegal Hamas support in 2008. Elibiary argued that there was a “lack of evidence” in the HLF case and suggested that it was a political prosecution.

He previously praised the late Muslim Brotherhood ideologueSayyid Qutb, whose ideas have undergirded the modern jihadist movement – especially his call for violent jihad and for the purification of Islam from the forces of unbelief – on Twitter.

Qutb believed that if the Caliphate – abolished in 1924 – ever were to be re-established, that a vanguard would need to replace the regime of one country with an Islamic state

Baghdad, the object of the current ISIS offensive, was, Rossomondo reminds us, the capital of the Assabid Caliphate from 762 until 1258. In the Muslim world, memories of the Caliphate are highly potent.

Now, here’s a great connect-the-dots essay that chronicles all of Obama’s actions with what is actually taking shape by Obama’s design.

These Events Reveal How Obama Is Creating An Islamic Caliphate

It is not hard to understand why our Dear Leader wanted Dinesh D’Souza in jail and came at him with the full force of the Justice Department.  A so-called routine review of his campaign donations unearthed an irregularity, and Mr. D’Souza was prosecuted to the full extent of the law.  Who has their campaign contributions routinely reviewed anyway? Perhaps if he had been an illegal immigrant, or a Democratic operative like Jon Corzine, his crimes would have been overlooked.  But he was neither and is now convicted. However, in President Obama’s eyes, Mr. D’Souza’s real crime was not illegally funneling money to Republican politicians–it was exposing the President’s dark agenda.  For you see that in D’Souza’s movie, 2016: Obama’s America, he exposed for the world to see that Obama wanted to create a Muslim Jihadist caliphate across North Africa and the Middle East.  For this, D’Souza had to be prosecuted.

Many on the Left laughed at D’Souza’s claims.  Even many on the Right thought he was a little “out there.”  But as I have written on these pages many times, the results speak for themselves, no matter what you believe about President Obama.  If you are intellectually honest, I don’t believe you can look at the evidence and come to any other conclusion but that D’Souza was right.

So let’s take a look at the evidence.  First, let’s start with the so-called Arab Spring.  Here, you had a chain reaction of events where dictatorial leaders across the Muslim world were violently thrown out of positions of control.  However, if you examine these events with a critical eye, what you see is that strongmen had held in check Sunni Muslim jihadists with a boot on their neck for decades.  When this restraint was removed, the Muslim Brotherhood and other similar groups came to power.  In Egypt, for example, after Mubarak’s ouster, there began a march towards Sharia Law.  Why do you think the U.S. government was so angry when the Egyptian military threw the Brotherhood’s Mohamed Morsi out of office, put him in jail, and outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood across the country?  Is there any other explanation except that Obama wanted the Brotherhood in control?

In Libya, the strongman Gaddafi was removed from power and killed in a movement backed by NATO forces in 2011.  In the ensuing power vacuum, Islamic jihadist extremist elements are filling the void.  In fact, once again, the military has launched operations against these Al Qaeda-backed forces to remove them from the country. Why do you think we really don’t know what happened in Benghazi?  Why do you think this administration is going to such lengths to cover up how four American’s died?  In Hillary’s words, “What difference does it make?”  I think if the truth ever comes out, we will find that America was supporting jihadists in the country to allow them to rise to power, in spite of their terrorist links.  Obama cannot let this get out.

In Iran, we have well-documented evidence that the Obama administration has been hellbent on allowing Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.  Yes, they are a Sharia state, which historically have been at odds with the Sunni majority in the Muslim world.  However, I believe that if the Islamic community sees the opportunity to create a pan-Asian Islamic caliphate, as they obviously do, they will put aside their differences.  What will be the consequences to Israel and the United States when Iran has the bomb?  Obama’s animosity to the security concerns of the Jewish State are well documented.

In Syria, Obama was begging for a reason not to attack the Assad regime after they used chemical weapons against their own citizens, deciding to desperately accept a Russian-backed deal that would force Assad to destroy his chemical stockpiles.  Well, that was a year ago; and Assad has used chemical weapons fourteen times since against the opposition.

In Iraq, we have seen the Islamic State in Iraq (ISIS) defeat and occupy the northern cities on its march to Baghdad.  Why do you think the Obama administration was so intent to remove American forces from the region?  “See you in New York,” was a recent comment from a terrorist commander in-country as they beheaded thousands of Iraqis that worked with the Americans to defeat the jihadists under President Bush.  Sunni fighters now control an area from Syria to the border of Iran, creating a terrorist state in the Middle East that will be much more dangerous than Afghanistan ever was.  And now, we see the American presence being removed from that country as well.

In Turkey, Obama initially established a warm relationship with Islamist Prime Minister Ergodan until reports of his supporting Al Qaeda elements crossing Turkish territory back and forth from Europe to Syria forced Obama to publicly cool the relationship.  Read that again.  Obama supported a Turkish leader who allowed terrorists to travel from Syria to Europe through Turkish territory.  Turkey is a member of NATO.  Shocking.

As I have written before on these pages, the Obama administration’s agenda is not the buttressing of American power and ideals in the Middle East.  It is about creating an environment where Muslim countries can install religious governments to create a Islamic caliphate across the Middle East and South Asia.  The evidence of results on the ground as we look at it today is just too obvious.  Enjoy the show, folks; you’re watching history. The Ottoman Empire is being reborn under our noses and is supported by our own government.  I fear for our children’s future.

The REAL Motive for Hillary/Obama Blaming Youtube Video For Benghazi

Anti-Islam Youtube Video created by a patsy agent of Obama’s Justice Department, intended as a pretext to criminalize anything critical of Islam in the United States.

“Anti-Islam Rhetoric ‘Must Be Rejected’ By All Who Respect Our Common Humanity” – Barrack Obama, September 25, 2012

I blogged yesterday on the story about the Muslim agent pretending to be a Coptic Christian used by Obama’s Justice Department to create a Youtube Video insulting Islam.  In going back and reviewing statements both Obama and Hillary made in the wake of the Benghazi attack by an Al Qaeda offshoot that killed 4 Americans – I found an out-of-place insistent statement made by both of them; that the U.S. Government was NOT responsible for the video.

Why make and repeat that insistence out front without anyone making an insinuation??  No one accused them of doing so – yet both of them vociferously stated it.  WHY?

Well, I contend that Obama’s regime WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THE VIDEO.  A stooge patsy Muslim, coerced into working for Obama’s Justice Department, portrayed himself as a Coptic Christian and made the video probably at the Behest of Obama – FOR THE PURPOSE OF CRIMINALIZING ANYTHING CRITICAL OF ISLAM.

Infamous ‘Muhammad-video’ filmmaker actually a Muslim agent for Obama admin

Snip:

It also turns out that the official terms of Nakoula’s parole in 2009 was bogus, and that the administration used his parole as leverage to help him with their agenda: To create a climate for non-Muslim governments to enact laws that make criticism of Islam a criminal offense.

Sound far fetched? Well then I guess you haven’t heard about the ‘Istanbul Process’ meetings Hillary went to in Turkey as Secretary of State that were designed to help facilitate the creation of a “climate for non-Muslim governments to enact laws that make criticism of Islam a criminal offense.”

But before Nakoula could get the video finished, Benghazi happened and the administration quickly blamed it on that video.

Here’s info about this ‘Instanbul Process’ Hillary sought to implement:

The United Nations, at the behest of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and with the support of the U.S. government, succeeded in passing Resolution 16/18, which requires Western democracies to enact legislation preventing the “defamation of religions”.

The summit meeting on July 15, 2011 between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu in Istanbul launched what became known “Istanbul Process”. Mrs. Clinton committed the United States to a partnership with the Islamic world for the purpose of implementing the legislative results required by the agreement.

Shortly after the 9-11 attack in Benghazi, the Obama regime hosted a confab to address criminalizing speech and content critical of Islam:

State Dept. Official to Attend OIC Meeting Today on Banning ‘Defamation of Islam’

The headquarters of the General Secretariat of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation will host a symposium on “Defamation Acts against Islam: conflict dimensions and perspectives of co-existence between Islam and the West” on Monday 19/11/2012.

Word of this meeting got out as facts about Benghazi were emerging and the OIC scrubbed it’s website.

OIC Scrubs Website, Screenshot Added, Cover-Up Begins

The OIC has made no secret of its intentions to use the UN and international law to criminalize what they consider to be “defamation of Islam.”  But now, no more mention of Anne Casper attending today’s OIC session on banning “defamation of Islam.” Let the cover-up begin!

Are you shocked the Obama regime would attempt to create a situation to implement aspects of Sharia Law by restricting speech that is critical of Islam in the USA?   Consider this: Obama himself told the world that free speech should not apply to commentary that can be construed as ‘anti-Islamic’ by Muslims.  He did this IN FRONT of the UN in 2012 and essentially reiterated what the Instanbul Process demanded by the OIC:

So what you have here in this picture all the puzzle pieces make, is that Obama and his regime are CREATING pretexts via inciting violence to abolish the American Constitution and your Rights.  He did this with Operation Fast & Furious running guns to Mexican drug cartels in order to infringe on the Second Amendment.  Now we are learning he attempted it again – by creating a Youtube video insulting of Islam as a pretext for violence so as to implement the Instanbul Process.  Obama did this while he was running guns to Al Qaeda in Syria and ultimately intended to use it as an excuse to infringe and regulate the First Amendment that his regime blamed for Benghazi.

 

 

 

 

Obama Gives Rise To A Beast

The Arab Spring blossoms into the Summer of Jihadist Islam heralding the Winter of Doom for the West as Obama empowers Radical Islam to global supremacy.

“A Tall black man will assume the reigns of government in the West. He will command the strongest army in the earth, and he will carry a clear sign from the Third Imam, whose name was “Hessei Ibn Ali“. –  Shi’a End-Time Prophecy, Iman Ali Ibn Abi-Talib

As the Islamist prophecy goes, this ‘tall black man’ is a forerunner of the Mahdi/12th Imam, the Islamic Savior who will conquer the earth for Islam; a counterfeit of John The Baptist as the forerunner of Christ.  The clear sign’ this man will deliver to the Umma, is that he presides over the destruction of the infidel nations from within, and then delivers the West into the hands of the Caliphate to crush and annihilate.

Islam sees Obama’s policies as another sign of the West’s decline and the triumph of Islam, and the events of the last few weeks no doubt has given confidence to Jihadist Islam that Obama is their sign as he gives rise to what will become a global beast.

The Washington Times is running two editorials that each address a frightening litany of actions and policies by the Obama regime that are shaping an Arab and Persian Middle East that will one day soon, become a bane to our very existence.

Jeffrey Kuhner addresses the domino fall of Arab nations to radical Islamists

President Obama is empowering radical Islam across the Arab world. He is presiding over both the American decline and the rapid advance of our mortal jihadist enemies….Muslim fundamentalists have used street protests against corrupt, autocratic regimes as a Trojan horse to expand Islamic militancy.

while the Arab Spring falls into an Islamist Winter .

There is no strategic upside in any of this change for the United States. The new post-authoritarian Islamist governments will have no particular affinity for America or its values. Regional partners, particularly Saudi Arabia, are alarmed that the Obama administration was so willing to throw longtime allies like Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak under the bus.

Why?  Simple, the Marxist Left will embrace every enemy of America in order to advance it’s own agenda: our destruction.  As Kuhner concludes in this observation:

Like emperors in the final days of Rome, our leaders can pretend that the barbarians pose no imminent threat. Everyone knows, however, that Mr. Obama is simply managing America’s decline. His warm embrace of the Arab Spring as a pro-democracy movement simply camouflages the sad reality of our time: The Islamists are rising, threatening freedom wherever they tread.

It’s not incompetence that many assume Obama is demonstrating, rather is is cold, calculated and deliberate destruction of America and the West, presided over by a tall black man that Radical Islam sees as the sign, that their time to take over the world, is at hand.

There will be no Patton or Uncle Sam to save the world from the forces of darkness this time.  A Beast rises on the world, and Obama is helping to pull it into our gates.

King of the North and King of the South Are What Ignite WWIII

I have heard many prophetic prognostications in my time as a Christian in relation to whom the Beast of Revelation is, what the Mark of the Beast is, and where World War 3 will start.

Some folks insist that a United Europe, led by a resurgent Germany and empowered by the Vatican will become the flashpoint for the end of the world at Jerusalem.

Some insist it will be Russia or China that starts the next world war when they take the Middle East.

But my pal John Galt Fla has an understanding that comes closer to what I see right now on the world scene as the machinations of the Prophetic Kings of the South (Arab Spring) and North (The Turkish/Iranian/Iraqi Renaissance) – who drag the world into another global conflict.  And it’s not Rome or a revived Holy Roman Empire behind it – but the push for an Islamic Caliphate that lights the fuse that hits the powder keg of global war.  John is right – the next world war doesn’t begin in Libya – it may very well start in Babylon.

What Scripture reveals in Daniel 11: 36- 39 reveals the arrogance of this King of the North, while verses 40-44 – tell of the King of the South pushing against this king – whereupon Egypt and Libya (members of the King of the South) are soon made into his slaves.  So the war doesn’t begin in Libya according to the scriptural prophecies.  Libya becomes occupied and enslaved along with much of Africa and the Arab states.

World War III will Begin in Babylon, not Libya

By John Galt

On the August 2, 2011 edition of the Glenn Beck radio program, he began a postulation that World War Three would begin in Libya and the distractions created by that might be sufficient to change the balance of power in the world.  The theory might sound justifiable considering the situation on the ground there but the facts do not bear out any logical reason for a major world conflict to start in that country. The conflict is basically of a tribal nature fought by a  disorganized group of rebels composed of enemies of the Qaddafi family and tribe and the oppression inflicted on the citizens of that tiny nation for decades. The lack of true international interests in the civil war there plus the lack of strategic importance to the powers in the Persian Gulf region make the small conflict in Libya a poor candidate for a war which engulfs the entire world however.

Unfortunately for the United States, Israel, Europe, Russia, and China, there is a region of the world where conflict has been active for decades and the largest world powers do have a strategic and tactical interest. The conflict has been hot in the nation of Iraq for decades now, be it in the form of Gulf War I or the low intensity guerrilla conflicts between the various ethnic and religious groups supported by the region’s powers. The problem that is now revealing itself to the mainstream is one that has been simmering for decades and thanks to the coming withdrawal of the U.S. forces there, will become extremely hot in very short order.

The map displayed above provides the religious background for the start of the conflict but the intervention of the world powers and their interests in Iraq stretch far beyond the borders of this colonialist created artificial nation. Despite the disposing of the Saddam Hussein regime in the last effort, the ethnic and religious conflicts have never been resolved and were only tamed by the brutality of his regime. Under the U.S. occupation the establishment of stability, law and order was a given despite our political correct approach and horrid rules of engagement. Despite the incessant attacks on our soldiers which continues up to the posting of this day, our insane version of “Vietnamization” of the Iraqi people yielded little success as the attempts failed to consider the centuries old religious conflicts consuming that region.

Fast forward to the current situation and consider the implications of a potential withdrawal of U.S. forces from the region:

– Iranian support will move from covert to overt support of Shia tribal and political leaders in the East and South of the nation.

– Kurdish political realities will create open conflict for control of the Kirkuk oil producing region.

– Sunni weakness exposed by the exit of the international peacekeepers and influences will force the Saudi hand and direct intervention to protect their border regions and religious allies in Iraq and probably Jordan.

– Turkey will no longer have a reason to show restraint in its dealings with the Kurdish rebels and opens the door for their military to not only eradicate the problem but occupy the oil rich region which has been a historic desire since they lost the territory after World War I.

– China and Russia have historic ties to many of the players in the region and would take an active role in supporting the apparent winners of any conflict between the region’s powers to monopolize the oil resources and drive the Western powers from Asia and the Middle East for decades to come.

This opens the potential for a major conflict to erupt in the historic region of Babylon, where the world’s major religions are all within several hours flying time and the use of proxies to attack allies and enemies alike will be the standard operating procedure. The Iraqis have a somewhat large group of possible sleepers inside the United States as Sadam then radical Islamist groups in Iraq worked tirelessly after the two major wars to send protagonists across our southern border and create secret terrorist cells. Add in the threats from Libyans, Pakistani, Iranian, Saudi Wahhabi sleepers, etc. and the formula is in place inside our own nation to experience the war on our soil, not just witness the carnage overseas.

The larger problem facing citizens of Western countries is that a war might well be needed and viewed as tolerable in that region as the economic deterioration accelerates in the months and years ahead. A conflict with an acceptable loss rate and minor damage within the home nations would promote economic growth and enable further imposition of strict police state rules to ensure a totally controlled series of nation states under almost dictatorial centralized control would evolve. In a period of major warfare where terrorists inflict casualties on civilians the natural evolution is a tightening of freedoms and dedication of economic resources to the conflict overseas. This formula would simply accelerate many of the plans and desires of the technocrats and globalist elites who reject the ideals of pluralism, populism, and Constitutional Republics as an archaic form of governance.

An issue may arise in such a miscalculation, however, as attacks on any particular group at the behest of another, such as attacks on Iran or Turkey in defense of Saudi Arabia, could well inflame the remainder of the world’s Muslims and broaden the war in scope and size to a point where controls and isolation to one region would indeed bring about the undesired impact on nations which did not wish to participate and expand such a conflict. This mistake, similar to those which caused the first two world wars to expand far beyond the original preconceived concept the world powers of those eras envisioned, is due to be repeated again as the horrors of war for the majority of civilized countries is now several generations removed. We can only pray that the societies come to their senses and avoid such a conflict in the Middle East but the House of Saud, Iran, and Turkey are preparing for such an event spreading from Syria to Pakistan and Algiers to Afghanistan.

Let us hope common sense returns and the American government divests its interests in the region to insure our nation’s ability to survive as a Constitutional Republic intact, yet based on recent events it would appear that this will not be the case. Our nation is ruled by fools now who fail to understand the complexities of the region, its past, or the implications of a wider conflict which would create global conflict of a scale unseen in world history.

Obama Works to Stall Iraq Troop Withdrawal So He Can Be Seen As The One Who Brought Troops Home

In another honest age and time, this would be known as Treason.

But not today, when the world is upside down and Marxists are on the verge of a complete takeover.

Barrack The Hussein Obama, the Annointed One of the Marxist Left actively worked behind the scenes in Iraq to undermine U.S. Policy there, even before elected to the office of President, in order to set the stage for exiting U.S. forces from Iraq during HIS Presidential Administration in 2009-2010.

Amir Teheri reports that while campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, The annointed messiah, Sen. Barack Obama  tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

Obama tried to deny and rebut this news story spending more than five hours on Monday attempting to figure out the best refutation of the explosive New York Post report.

However Obama campaign sources admitted that the report was true.  

There were at least three other people in the room with Obama and Zebari to confirm the conversation, and there was concern that there were enough aggressive reporters based in Baghdad with the sources to confirm the conversation that to deny the comments would create a bigger problem.
Instead, Obama’s national security spokeswoman Wendy Morigi told reporters that Obama told the Iraqis that they should not rush through what she termed a “Strategic Framework Agreement” governing the future of U.S. forces until after President Bush left office. In other words, the Iraqis should not negotiate an American troop withdrawal.

According to a Senate staffer working for Sen. Joseph Biden, Biden himself got involved in the shaping of the statement. “The whole reason he’s on the ticket is the foreign policy insight,” explained the staffer.

Obama told NBC News at the time: “The foreign minister agreed that the next administration should not be bound by an agreement that’s currently made… and my concern is that if the Bush administration negotiates, as it currently has, and given that we’re entering into the heat of political season, that we’re probably better off not trying to complete a hard-and-fast agreement before the next administration takes office…“

So beyond all the lying spin and cleverly crafted obscurity that Obama is famous for throwing out to cloud his changing positions, this one is plain: Obama tried to DEMAND of Iraqi government officials that Iraq not agree to any troop withdrawals of American forces until HIS Administration takes office.

That way, Obama can take the credit for “getting us out of Iraq”.

How can a sitting Senator go to Iraq, talk with Iraqi officials to undermine or make policy to stall decisions the President and the military commanders made when he is not the Executive yet, if at all?

Is Obama wishing for our country’s foreign policy to fail in Iraq, or is he working actively to cause it to fail? the following element of U.S. Code Title 18 might be of interest:

U.S. Code Title 18 

§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

At one time, there would have been a trial for this treason.

But not today.

Today, Democrat Elities routinely commit treason, including visiting our enemies and denouncing America from foreign soil.  Pelosi did so from Syria, Obama does so from Iraq and Berlin.

 

Update: More reports on this breaking story
Fox News: “Obama Tried to Delay Withdrawal Agreement of U.S. Troops”

Dear Mr. Obama: Freedom Is Not A Mistake, and Worth The Price

While this has been turned into a campaign ad for John McCain BY the person himself – the underlying message is to counter Barrack The Hussein Obama’s charge that the war on terror was a “mistake’, and therefore this message is powerful, and right on the money.

This man is someone The Annointed One will never appreciate, comprehend or understand.

But the rest of America does, and another reason why Obama is unfit for Commander In Chief.

The Clash of Civilizations

I remember hearing back in the early 1990’s a discussion about Mr. Huntington’s essay in regards to the Gulf War in Kuwait and Iraq. I recall someone making the statement that even as far back as the early 1980’s, that some were warning about the rise of militant Islam, and that if left unchecked – could rise to hurt the West. Of course in the middle of the Cold War and movies like the Day After, our national experience with radical Islam from Khomeni a few years earlier was already lost in our memories as we watched Reagan tackle the Evil Empire of the Soviets. We of course lost 263 marines when Hezbollah blew up our barracks when we were serving the peacekeeping mission in Lebanon in 1983. That massacre quickly faded from our consciences as we retreated our military forces from the region.

Jihadist Islam grew under our noses, quietly. We largely ignored the Palestinian intifada and assumed all Arab/Muslim problems were Israel’s – and we went along with our notions of fairness, even supporting the Muslim’s in Kosovo in ridding them of their hated ethnic cleanser; Milosevich.

We didn’t hear from Jihadist Islam loudly until Al Qaeda hit our embassies in Africa. The seething rage and hatred being stoked by radicals preaching end-time fulfillments of Islam’s domination of the world went ignored by us, and even then – we did nothing about them, unless bombing an asprin factory in the Sudan counts as punishment.

That of course led the the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen, killing 17 Sailors. But like Beirut before in the 1980’s – we did absolutely nothing. Not even the perfunctory finger wave and empty rhetoric that “justice” would be served.

The lack of attention and retribution was seen by all Jihadists and most of Islam as The Sign – the signal that our weakness was complete and that the time to strike the Great Satan and take him down like Gulliver was at hand.

The rest, is now recent history.

Huntington’s thesis from the early 1990’s is virtually prophetic now. When one considers how militant Islam is being forcefully herded into accepting calls among sects for unity – even when listening to Ahmadinejad of Iran discuss the role the entire Muslim Umma will play in establishing a global Caliphate – I have to ponder aloud if the scriptures about the Beast images of Daniel and Revelation pointing to an empire made of iron and clay – mixed, is not speaking of an Islamic confederacy – where perhaps former secular Turkey itself becomes the lynch-pin for unifying Islam against the West. A speculation at best, and it makes as much sense to me as any other possibilities that underpin Christian prophecy circles.

We do live in interesting times, and it is even more interesting to note those who saw where we are now, decades ago.

The Clash

It would have been unlike Samuel P. Huntington to say “I told you so” after 9/11. He is too austere and serious a man, with a legendary career as arguably the most influential and original political scientist of the last half century — always swimming against the current of prevailing opinion.

In the 1990s, first in an article in the magazine Foreign Affairs, then in a book published in 1996 under the title “The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order,” he had come forth with a thesis that ran counter to the zeitgeist of the era and its euphoria about globalization and a “borderless” world. After the cold war, he wrote, there would be a “clash of civilizations.” Soil and blood and cultural loyalties would claim, and define, the world of states.

Huntington’s cartography was drawn with a sharp pencil. It was “The West and the Rest”: the West standing alone, and eight civilizations dividing the rest — Latin American, African, Islamic, Sinic, Hindu, Orthodox, Buddhist and Japanese. And in this post-cold-war world, Islamic civilization would re-emerge as a nemesis to the West. Huntington put the matter in stark terms: “The relations between Islam and Christianity, both Orthodox and Western, have often been stormy. Each has been the other’s Other. The 20th-century conflict between liberal democracy and Marxist-Leninism is only a fleeting and superficial historical phenomenon compared to the continuing and deeply conflictual relation between Islam and Christianity.”

Those 19 young Arabs who struck America on 9/11 were to give Huntington more of history’s compliance than he could ever have imagined. He had written of a “youth bulge” unsettling Muslim societies, and young Arabs and Muslims were now the shock-troops of a new radicalism. Their rise had overwhelmed the order in their homelands and had spilled into non-Muslim societies along the borders between Muslims and other peoples. Islam had grown assertive and belligerent; the ideologies of Westernization that had dominated the histories of Turkey, Iran and the Arab world, as well as South Asia, had faded; “indigenization” had become the order of the day in societies whose nationalisms once sought to emulate the ways of the West.

…It is not pretty at the frontiers between societies with dwindling populations — Western Europe being one example, Russia another — and those with young people making claims on the world. Huntington saw this gathering storm. Those young people of the densely populated North African states who have been risking all for a journey across the Strait of Gibraltar walk right out of his pages.

…Huntington had written that the Turks — rejecting Mecca, and rejected by Brussels — would head toward Tashkent, choosing a pan-Turkic world. My faith was invested in the official Westernizing creed of Kemalism that Mustafa Kemal Ataturk had bequeathed his country. “What, however, if Turkey redefined itself?” Huntington asked. “At some point, Turkey could be ready to give up its frustrating and humiliating role as a beggar pleading for membership in the West and to resume its much more impressive and elevated historical role as the principal Islamic interlocutor and antagonist of the West.”

Nearly 15 years on, Huntington’s thesis about a civilizational clash seems more compelling to me than the critique I provided at that time. In recent years, for example, the edifice of Kemalism has come under assault, and Turkey has now elected an Islamist to the presidency in open defiance of the military-bureaucratic elite. There has come that “redefinition” that Huntington prophesied. To be sure, the verdict may not be quite as straightforward as he foresaw. The Islamists have prevailed, but their desired destination, or so they tell us, is still Brussels: in that European shelter, the Islamists shrewdly hope they can find protection against the power of the military.

…More ominously perhaps, there ran through Huntington’s pages an anxiety about the will and the coherence of the West — openly stated at times, made by allusions throughout. The ramparts of the West are not carefully monitored and defended, Huntington feared. Islam will remain Islam, he worried, but it is “dubious” whether the West will remain true to itself and its mission. Clearly, commerce has not delivered us out of history’s passions, the World Wide Web has not cast aside blood and kin and faith. It is no fault of Samuel Huntington’s that we have not heeded his darker, and possibly truer, vision.

More at LINK

Murtha Says America “Cannot Win Militarily”

This guy is a Subversive Traitor.

John Murtha, DEMOCRAT – hoping and praying for American defeat and humiliation in Iraq and Afghanistan is the best freind Osama Bin Laden and the Jihadists could ever hope for in Congress.

The good news and progress coming out of Iraq is simply dismissed by the man who decrees Marines in Haditha were “guilty” of mass murder despite their exhoneration in court. He makes no apologies for smearing, castigating and demeaning our troops and their mission, all for the push to gain political victory for himself and his party.

It’s time to call the dishonorable congresscritter what he is – A FAT TREASONOUS CREEP!

Our military has performed maginficently and wins engagements hands down.

Like his insistance that our Marines were mass murderers, he will continue to insist that America cannot win – and therefore – must lose.

And in his fat rotgut head – that means we have to run away like the yellow coward he himself is. It’s sad he wants to project that cowardice on our military for his own political gain.

Murtha: ‘We can’t win militarily’
By S.A. Miller
November 20, 2007

House Democrats’ point man in the war-funding showdown with the White House today dismissed U.S. military gains in Iraq and vowed to tighten the purse strings until President Bush accepts a pullout plan.

“Look at all the people that have been displaced, all the [lost] oil production, unemployment, all those type of things,” said Rep. John P. Murtha, chairman of Appropriations defense subcommittee. “We can’t win militarily.”

The Pennsylvania Democrat conceded violence was down dramatically and some normalcy restored on Iraq’s streets, but he said U.S. victory remains unattainable as long as Baghdad fails to pass national reconciliation laws.

“To change the political law, it doesn’t seem to me you need the military stability,” Mr. Murtha told reporters on Capitol Hill.

The dim view of U.S. military progress in Iraq and a resolve to force a pullout have been echoed by the two top Democrats on Capitol Hill — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California.

The funding standoff will force the Pentagon to make budget cuts at bases in the U.S. to cover the costs of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, including sending furlough notices to as many as 100,000 civilian employees, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said.