While the systematic socialist takeover (voluntary or not) was taking place within the business community back in what used to be the United States, BHO/JFK/LBJ/FDR was in Turkey where he was “mending fences” with the Muslims. This “mending” will be about as sturdy and reliable as the typical flimsy fascist fabricated “Habitat for Humanity” hovel lovingly assembled by the lachrymose left.. No matter, as soon as the next disgruntled cab driver or “foreign exchange student” “coincidentally” wanders by wearing a backpack full of “books” and/or a ticking turban, all of this “mending” will be for naught..
In a bold statement seemingly meant to embolden the “radical fringe”, Obama said that “the United States is not and will never be at war with Islam”. The liberals enjoy extending the olive branch of appeasement to those who view their voluntary concessions as cowardice. “Never” is such an all-encompassing word that when it is used in the same sentence as “war” by the left, it negates the usual “verbal malleability” that they are known for.
Obama called for “a greater partnership” with the Islamic world and for a “greater bond between Americans and Muslims” based upon “mutual interests”. There is already a “great bond” between “some of the practitioners of the religion of peace” and “some Americans”. The liberals have as their guiding principles the same “interests” as the Islamic “extremists”. (Is it possible to use “liberals” and “principles” in the same sentence?) The Middle Eastern “extremists” use morons, box cutters and the Koran, the Western “extremists” are using Geithner, Frank and the Manifesto. Both have the same “goal”, they are just going about it in “radically” different ways..
As always, when groveling before the rabid rug rashed reactionaries, it has become mandatory for the “politician” to make the canned comical excuse for terrorism. Al Qaida are “extremists who do not represent the vast majority of Muslims”. Let’s assume just for a moment that that is true.. Just for a moment..
Flash back to the “horrors” of Abu Ghraib and to the Newsweek fabricated fiction of “flushed Korans”. Did these “actions” represent ” the vast majority of Americans”? In the sardonic eyes of the “impartial media”, a nude pyramid was the equivalent of the Muslim terrorist’s attack upon the Twin Towers. Lynndie England and Charles Graner were the equivalent of Mohammed Atta and “Ol’ Spinach Chin” himself, Bin Laden and through the repetitious “reporting” done by the “impartial” media, EVERYONE from the Republican President on down was “responsible”. When it appeared that this angle didn’t have the desired effect, they simply made things up..
The “travesty” of “flushed Korans” then swept the world. This media make-believe “occurred” at Guantanamo Bay, another of the liberals targets in THEIR “War on Terror”. This was nothing more than western liberal/Middle Eastern Muslim terrorist accelerant as both groups have the same objectives, one of which was and is to end the War on Terror in any way possible. The duplicitous media was more than happy to aid in the “cause”.
During either of these trumped up “incidents”, when did a “moderate” Muslim come forward to claim that these “extremists did not represent the vast majority of Americans”? When did a prominent western liberal step up and make a similar exclamation? For those who would like to accrue bonus points, name the world’s leading “moderate” Muslims.. OK, I’ll settle for one.. Next, name the leading liberal patriots.. Again, I’ll settle for one..
The constant and comical “reminders” that this “problem” comes from a “fringe element” within the world of Islam begs a question. If the “vast majority” of Muslims disagree with the “ethics” of the Muslim terrorists, (terrorists who use and worship from the same text as they do, terrorists who use the text as the justification for their “actions”) then why aren’t the “vast majority” gathering, marching and exclaiming their disdain for those who sully their world wide reputations? The bottom line is that the silence of the alleged “vast majority” is either complicit cowardice or mute Muslim duplicity. Neither is a desirable description for those who are so allegedly concerned about their “reputations”.
The juvenile genuflecting continued on, “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over many centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country..”
Here the Muslims are being exposed to the liberal proclivity towards the “proof isn’t necessary/ I said it therefore it is” school of stupidity that we suffer through in what was once the United States. Can anyone please explain the last contribution to the world of science that has come out of the sixth century cesspool that is the Middle East? Medicine? Physics? I need someone to try to convince me otherwise because within the past few centuries, the work of the most prominent of Muslims has been to “shape the world” by flattening it, especially in “my own country.”
“We seek a broad engagement based upon mutual interests and mutual respect.” The “broads” of the Middle East don’t get any of this alleged “respect”. The wonderful world of Sahria law, soon to be completely imposed by the Obama caliphate here in what was once America, just recently passed a law “legalizing rape in marriage” and decreeing that women can only seek work, an education or a doctor’s appointment only with the permission of their husband.”
That silence that you hear is the western liberal feminists who are too busy with the pressing matters of changing the broad jump into the long jump and transforming manhole covers into “person hole covers”.. All of the factual abuses of Middle Eastern women which are endorsed and encouraged by their so called Muslim governments are nowhere near as important as the imaginary “snivel rights” violations that weren’t done to Muslim terrorist prisoners at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib.. The liberal/feminist double standard is alive and well for all to see.
There was still more empty talk of “a greater partnership, including the fight against terrorism”. If that were truly the case, why has Obama been silent relative to the one truly effective force in the War on Terrorism in the region, former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf?
In an area of the world that is marinated in Muslim terrorism, Musharraf stood alone as a leader determined to effectively aid the West in the War on Terror. He was so affective to that end, that at least five attempts were made on his life between 2000 and 2007. Talk is truly cheap and anytime that Obama speaks, especially about the War on Terror, “cheap” becomes the overwhelmingly prevailing conclusion that everyone invariably comes to.
Obama obviously wishes to continue the War of/on Words as opposed to the War on Terror. He may believe that he is “mending fences” with the Muslims, but a number of us would prefer that at least a few more fences be built.