Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label George W. Bush. Show all posts
Showing posts with label George W. Bush. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 18, 2018

Barbara Bush -A Racist And Raised A War Criminal, Hardly! However, In The US Even Idiots Get Their Free Speech, Anywhere But On Campus

Here's why that professor dancing on Barbara Bush's grave shouldn't be fired

Former first lady Barbara Bush died on Tuesday night at the age of 92 — only two days after it was announced she would forgo further medical treatment and receive comfort care.
She leaves behind a memorable legacy in which she spearheaded programs to reduce illiteracy in America, in addition to being actively involved in the campaigns of her husband, former President George H.W. Bush. Yet, some liberals seem keen on dancing on the former first Lady's grave instead.
Take Fresno State professor Randa Jarrar. Following the news of Bush's death, Jarrar called her a "racist," who "raised a war criminal," referring to her son, former President George W. Bush.
Instead of reprimanding Jarrar, Fresno State University President Joseph Castro released a statement that stopped well short of a condemnation.
As of Wednesday morning, Jarrar set her Twitter account to private, saying in her bio, "Currently on leave from Fresno State. this is my private account and represents my opinions."
It's quite appalling that someone would use the death of a beloved figure like Barbara Bush to drag her memory through the mud. Criticizing the former first lady on her politics or the politics and policies of her husband and son while they served as president is one thing, but what Jarrar did treads into the territory of just straight vitriol. And that's problematic.
Don't get me wrong, you should be allowed to criticize public figures whether they're alive or dead. However, if Jarrar was trying to criticize the former first lady, she did a very poor job of expressing it. Calling her a "racist" who intentionally "raised a war criminal" isn't criticism, it's just nasty.
Here's the thing, though: Jarrar shouldn't be fired from Fresno State University over her comments, as objectionable they may seem. She's protected by the First Amendment, and Fresno State is a public university. It would be hypocritical of conservatives to call on her to be fired for making crude comments about the former first lady, especially if they criticize colleges for suppressing the speech of conservatives.
Bottom line: Jarrar represents a quality in people that's not only unflattering, but damn near cancerous. Some people choose to see the glass half full, meanwhile folks like Jarrar always see it as half empty, and there's no way to convince her that the glass is anything but. And while it's clear we shouldn't take to a boycott or protest to demand a professor be fired for speaking their mind, the very least we can do is call them out on it. After all, the answer to problematic speech is more speech to counter it.

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Muslim Leaders Have A Islamic Duty To Conduct Jihad. Sad Part, Western Leaders Don't Understand The Fight We Are In.

  • CNN International, which is widely watched in the Muslim world, has not been fair to the American position in the current clash between Islam and the West and Israel. Western media have a strong presence in the Middle East but refuse to bring much needed enlightenment to the Muslim public, and explain that the West has a legitimate right to self-defense against Islamic jihadist terrorism. As a result, the majority of Muslims in the Middle East, and many in the West, have no clue why America is in Afghanistan and why Syria is a huge security threat to Western nations.
  • After the invasion of Afghanistan, Islamic propaganda told Muslims that the US was intentionally poisoning its humanitarian food supplies in order to hurt the Afghani people. My own cousin, who received a good education in Cairo, called during the Afghan war to ask, "Why is the US poisoning Afghanis?"
  • It is hard for the Western mind to understand why the Muslim leadership and media are frantically trying to keep the public hostile and misinformed as to why the US is in Afghanistan. It is because the truth about violent jihad against the West launched from Afghanistan must be hidden and protected. There is an Islamic law that commands every Muslim head of state to conduct jihad and never abandon that sacred Islamic duty. Sharia dictates that leaders who refuse to conduct and support jihad must be removed from office. Such uncompromising Sharia laws regarding jihad imposed on Muslim heads of states are ignored and not taken seriously by Western leaders and the media.
It was refreshing to hear President Donald J. Trump define without reservation a US mission to fight terrorism and prevent Afghanistan from once again becoming a safe haven for Al-Qaeda, or any other terror groups, when he summarized the US presence in Afghanistan as no longer about nation-building, but rather about "killing terrorists."
Many Americans, however, are still confused regarding our mission in Afghanistan. This is mainly because the media in general did little to keep the public informed of the complexities of the Middle East and to stay focused on why, after 9/11, the US needed to destroy the safe havens of Al-Qaeda and other terror groups.
Reporting on Afghanistan -- not just in the Arab media but also, unfortunately, by many in the US media – often appeared to portray America as the aggressor. That was perhaps a factor in why President George W. Bush overcompensated by including "nation-building" as part of the US mission in Afghanistan. Even though nation-building worked brilliantly in Japan, Germany and South Korea, it unfortunately has failed so far in Muslim nations, which clearly do not want to be "rescued" by infidels.
Concerning Islamic terrorists, Trump is the first US president rightfully to demand from Muslim leaders, in his speech in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, "to drive them out of your places of worship, drive them out of your Holy Land. Drive them out of this earth." It was a historic moment, a wake-up call to both Muslim leaders and average Muslim citizens who have traditionally settled with accepting terrorism in their midst as part of the life that is preached in mosques, praising those who die in jihad as national heroes.
The West, however, cannot rely only on Trump to assume the job of educating the public -- Muslims as well as non-Muslim Americans -- about realities of Islamic terrorism from the point of view of victims of jihad. Confusion in the West regarding Afghanistan and the dynamics of the Muslim world in general is multiplied when even the average Muslim lacks basic understanding of why the US is in Afghanistan.
CNN International, which is widely watched in the Muslim world, has not been fair to the American position in the current clash between Islam and the West and Israel. Western media have a strong presence in the Middle East but refuse to bring much needed enlightenment to the Muslim public, and explain that the West has a legitimate right to self-defense against Islamic jihadist terrorism. As a result, the majority of Muslims in the Middle East, and many in the West, have no clue why America is in Afghanistan and why Syria is a huge security threat to Western nations.
Recently in Australia, a representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir refused to condemn ISIS and went into a tirade blaming the West for the colonial occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. Such views are not restricted to groups such as Hizb ut-Tahrir, but are common among many Muslims.
After the invasion of Afghanistan, Islamic propaganda told Muslims that the US was intentionally poisoning its humanitarian food supplies in order to hurt the Afghani people. My own cousin, who received a good education in Cairo, called during the Afghan war to ask, "Why is the US poisoning Afghanis?"
The Egyptian state-run newspaper Al Ahram, which often reports on the supposed injustice done to Afghanistan at the hands of the US, insinuates economic motives for America's invasion: "It is a war with questionable motives, for the country [Afghanistan] sits on enormous wealth in natural mineral resources."
It is hard for the Western mind to understand why Muslim leadership and media are frantically trying to keep the public hostile and misinformed on why the US is in Afghanistan. It is because, for them, the truth about violent jihad against the West launched from Afghanistan must be hidden and protected.

A U.S. Army soldier shakes the hand of a young Afghan child while on patrol in southern Afghanistan on Feb. 5, 2010. The American soldiers were part of an operation helping the Afghan National Army clear several villages of improvised explosive devices, weapons caches and illegal drugs. (Image source: U.S. Department of Defense)

These are some of the Islamic laws, in the book Reliance of the Traveller, that discuss the obligatory nature of jihad (defined as war against non-Muslims) which every Muslim head of state (Caliph) must obey or else be removed from office:
  1. The Caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians. (o9.8 p602)
  2. The Caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim. (09.9 p603)
  3. If none of those concerned performs jihad and it does not happen at all, then everyone who is aware it as an obligation is guilty of sin. (O9.1 p600)
  4. One of the duties of a governor appointed by a Caliph is to undertake jihad against enemies. O25.9 (8) p 647. [Note there are no duties mentioned to make peace]
  5. If the Caliph becomes a non-Muslim, alters sharia law or imposes reprehensible innovations while in office [such as abandoning jihad obligation] then he loses his authority and its obligatory for Muslims to remove him from office. (O25.3 (a) p640)
  6. Thus, a new Muslim head of state could come to power through seizure of power meaning by force, by an individual who possesses the qualifications of a caliph. (o25.5 (3) p644)
Every Muslim head of state fully understands the repercussions of not abiding by the above, and by many other laws forcing him to conduct jihad and never to accept peace with Islam's enemies, unless absolutely necessary. Leaders who refuse to conduct jihad, and who instead befriend the West, must be removed from office. Such uncompromising Sharia laws regarding jihad imposed on Muslim heads of states are ignored and not taken seriously by Western leaders and media.
Muslim leaders cannot therefore openly stop jihadists unless the terrorists turn against them, which they often do through coups and assassinations. They often make deals with jihadists to go conduct their business elsewhere. Muslim nations with a weak central government, such as Afghanistan, then become targets as safe havens for jihadists -- with the blessing of many Muslim leaders. The West Bank and Gaza are two other locations that have been used for nearly 70 years by Arab nations to perform the most "honorable" goal of Islam: jihad against non-Muslims.
Saudi Arabia and other wealthy Arab states understand that, but never waged a direct war against Israel from their lands because they fear retaliation and the destruction of Islamic holy sites. Instead, they chose to be the major force behind the Arab jihad conducted from Gaza, the West Bank and Afghanistan, for that matter.
After 9/11, Muslim leaders were caught in a bind. They could not openly defend and protect Osama Bin Laden in front of their citizens and the world, but behind the scenes, they housed and hid him from the US.
Muslim leaders, even after 9/11, could not give up their obligatory jihad duty especially in front of their citizens. That was one reason why no Muslim leader apologized to the US for 9/11. Also, no Muslim leader wanted to admit that Afghanistan brought the war with the US upon itself or that the US was right in invading it to take out the never-ending supply of terrorists. If anyone did that, he would be acting against Sharia. If a Muslim leader were to admit that Afghanistan was wrong, then he would also have to admit that jihad is wrong and that the West was right to defend itself. In such an Islamic equation, if anyone were to admit that Afghanistan was wrong, then the world would discover what jihad really means -- and the loser would be Islam.
The only solution, therefore, was to tell the world -- and to keep Muslims believing -- that Afghanistan is the victim of the West and that the US is an aggressor and invading colonial "occupation" force that Muslims must fight.
The Western media need do a better job of reporting the truth regarding the Muslim world in general, including Afghanistan. This does not mean that the media have to become offensive, but it does mean that the media really do need to report truths that Muslims and Muslim apologists may not want to hear.
In this saga, the US and Israel, Europe and other countries in the West, are left with little media support to tell the world the "other" side of the problem: that the public in the West should not be split regarding its legitimate right to defend itself against Islamic jihadist terrorism.
Nonie Darwish, born and raised in Egypt, is the author of "Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values Over Islamic Values."
© 2017 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Thursday, July 20, 2017

This Is The Reason Trump Supporters Continue To Believe In Him

Subject: He Fights


Do not miss a word of this, written yesterday.  He nails it............

July 14, 2017 by Evan Sayet                    

My Leftist friends (as well as many ardent #NeverTrumpers) constantly ask me if I'm not bothered by Donald Trump's lack of decorum. They ask if I don't think his tweets are "beneath the dignity of the office." Here's my answer:
We Right-thinking people have tried dignity. There could not have been a man of more quiet dignity than George W. Bush as he suffered the outrageous lies and politically motivated hatreds that undermined his presidency. We tried statesmanship. Could there be another human being on this earth who so desperately prized "collegiality" as John McCain? We tried propriety – has there been a nicer human being ever than Mitt Romney? And the results were always the same.
This is because, while we were playing by the rules of dignity, collegiality and propriety, the Left has been, for the past 60 years, engaged in a knife fight where the only rules are those of Saul Alinsky and the Chicago mob.
I don't find anything "dignified," "collegial" or "proper" about Barack Obama's lying about what went down on the streets of Ferguson in order to ramp up racial hatreds because racial hatreds serve the Democratic Party. I don't see anything "dignified" in lying about the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi and imprisoning an innocent filmmaker to cover your tracks. I don't see anything "statesman-like" in weaponizing the IRS to be used to destroy your political opponents and any dissent. Yes, Obama was "articulate" and "polished" but in no way was he in the least bit "dignified," "collegial" or "proper."
The Left has been engaged in a war against America since the rise of the Children of the '60s. To them, it has been an all-out war where nothing is held sacred and nothing is seen as beyond the pale. It has been a war they've fought with violence, the threat of violence, demagoguery and lies from day one – the violent take-over of the universities – till today.
The problem is that, through these years, the Left has been the only side fighting this war. While the Left has been taking a knife to anyone who stands in their way, the Right has continued to act with dignity, collegiality and propriety.
With Donald Trump, this all has come to an end. Donald Trump is America's first wartime president in the Culture War.
During wartime, things like "dignity" and "collegiality" simply aren't the most essential qualities one looks for in their warriors. Ulysses Grant was a drunk whose behavior in peacetime might well have seen him drummed out of the Army for conduct unbecoming. Had Abraham Lincoln applied the peacetime rules of propriety and booted Grant, the Democrats might well still be holding their slaves today. Lincoln rightly recognized that, "I cannot spare this man. He fights."
General George Patton was a vulgar-talking, son-of-a-bitch. In peacetime, this might have seen him stripped of rank. But, had Franklin Roosevelt applied the normal rules of decorum, then Hitler and the Socialists would barely be five decades into their thousand-year Reich.

Trump is fighting. And what's particularly delicious is that, like Patton standing over the battlefield as his tanks obliterated Rommel's, he's shouting, "You magnificent bastards, I read your book!" That is just the icing on the cake, but it's wonderful to see that not only is Trump fighting, he's defeating the Left using their own tactics.
That book is Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals – a book so essential to the Liberals' war against America that it is and was the playbook for the entire Obama administration and the subject of Hillary Clinton's senior thesis. It is a book of such pure evil, that, just as the rest of us would dedicate our book to those we most love or those to whom we are most indebted, Alinsky dedicated his book to Lucifer.

Trump's tweets may seem rash and unconsidered but, in reality, he is doing exactly what Alinsky suggested his followers do.

First, instead of going after "the fake media" – and they are so fake that they have literally gotten every single significant story of the past 60 years not just wrong, but diametrically opposed to the truth, from the Tet Offensive to Benghazi, to what really happened on the streets of Ferguson, Missouri – Trump isolated CNN. He made it personal. Then, just as Alinsky suggests, he employs ridicule which Alinsky described as "the most powerful weapon of all."
Everyone gets that it's not just CNN – in fact, in a world where Al Sharpton and Rachel Maddow, Paul Krugman and Nicholas Kristof are people of influence and whose "reporting" is in no way significantly different than CNN's – CNN is just a piker.

Most importantly, Trump's tweets have put CNN in an untenable and unwinnable position. With Trump's ability to go around them, they cannot simply stand pat. They need to respond. This leaves them with only two choices.
They can either "go high" (as Hillary would disingenuously declare of herself and the fake news would disingenuously report as the truth) and begin to honestly and accurately report the news or they can double-down on their usual tactics and hope to defeat Trump with twice their usual hysteria and demagoguery.
The problem for CNN (et al.) with the former is that, if they were to start honestly reporting the news, that would be the end of the Democratic Party they serve. It is nothing but the incessant use of fake news (read: propaganda) that keeps the Left alive.

Imagine, for example, if CNN had honestly and accurately reported then-candidate Barack Obama's close ties to foreign terrorists (Rashid Khalidi), domestic terrorists (William Ayers), the mafia (Tony Rezko) or the true evils of his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright's, church.
Imagine if they had honestly and accurately conveyed the evils of the Obama administration's weaponizing of the IRS to be used against their political opponents or his running of guns to the Mexican cartels or the truth about the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the Obama administration's cover-up.

This makes "going high" a non-starter for CNN. This leaves them no other option but to ratchet up the fake news, conjuring up the next "nothing burger" and devoting 24 hours a day to hysterical rants about how it's "worse than Nixon."
This, obviously, is what CNN has chosen to do. The problem is that, as they become more and more hysterical, they become more and more obvious. Each new effort at even faker news than before and faker "outrage" only makes that much more clear to any objective observer that Trump is and always has been right about the fake news media.

And, by causing their hysteria, Trump has forced them into numerous, highly embarrassing and discrediting mistakes. Thus, in their desperation, they have lowered their standards even further and run with articles so clearly fake that, even with the liberal (lower case "l") libel laws protecting the media, they've had to wholly retract and erase their stories repeatedly.
Their flailing at Trump has even seen them cross the line into criminality, with CNN using their vast corporate fortune to hunt down a private citizen for having made fun of them in an Internet meme. This threat to "dox" – release of personal information to encourage co-ideologists to visit violence upon him and his family -- a political satirist was chilling in that it clearly wasn't meant just for him. If it were, there would have been no reason for CNN to have made their "deal" with him public.

Instead, CNN – playing by "Chicago Rules" – was sending a message to any and all: dissent will not be tolerated.

This heavy-handed and hysterical response to a joke on the Internet has backfired on CNN, giving rise to only more righteous ridicule.

So, to my friends on the Left – and the #NeverTrumpers as well -- do I wish we lived in a time when our president could be "collegial" and "dignified" and "proper"? Of course I do. These aren't those times. This is war. And it's a war that the Left has been fighting without opposition for the past 50 years.

So, say anything you want about this president – I get it, he can be vulgar, he can be crude, he can be undignified at times. I don't care. I can't spare this man. He fights.