Iowa Congressional Candidate Calls for Redefining Islam as 'Militant Cultural Imperialism Seeking World Domination'
Iowa Congressional Candidate Calls for Redefining Islam as 'Militant Cultural Imperialism Seeking World Domination'
Muslim Imperialists are predictably enraged.
The coronavirus is bad enough, but the real pandemic these days is of cowardice. Nonetheless, even in these days of wokeness, political correctness, and “hate speech,” there are a few public figures with courage. One of them is Rick Phillips (pictured above), a Republican Congressional candidate from Iowa, who has dared to grasp the third rail of American public life and state that Islam is not actually the cuddly religion of peace that every enlightened American assumes it to be at this point.
The Des Moines Register reported Monday that Phillips’ “platform calls for redefining Islam as ‘militant cultural imperialism seeking world domination,’” and that he “drew fire Monday for saying he doesn’t believe Islam is protected under the First Amendment.”
Phillips stated on Quad Cities TV station WHBF that the Founding Fathers had only Christianity in mind when they wrote the First Amendment. “They were not talking about anti-Christian beliefs,” he explained. “Now, if a person doesn’t want to believe in Christ, that’s their business. But to say that this First Amendment right includes all religions in the world, I think, is erroneous.”
The usual reaction ensued, Robert McCaw of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), demanded that both the Iowa Republican Party and the national Republican Party “repudiate these Islamophobic, unconstitutional views.” McCaw thundered: “The Constitution must protect Americans of all faiths. The kind of hatred and anti-American views promoted by Mr. Phillips places in danger both constitutional protections of religious freedoms and the safety of ordinary American Muslims.”
Responding like the good invertebrate that most Republican Party leaders are, Iowa party spokesman Aaron Britt said that Phillips’ statements “are not reflective of the views of the Republican Party of Iowa.”
Lost in all this predictable intimidation on the one hand and equally predictable pusillanimity on the other was the question of whether or not Phillips was right. Surely everyone can agree, or should agree, that the First Amendment is not and was never intended to be a license to commit all manner of crimes if such activity is mandated by one’s religion. No one, Muslim or non-Muslim, should be considered anything but innocent until proven guilty, but sooner or later the United States and all non-Muslim countries is going to have to have a public conversation about how much to tolerate a belief system that is itself radically intolerant, authoritarian, supremacist, and violent.
Can Muslims in the U.S. repudiate those aspects of Islam? Should they? This discussion needs to take place, but right now it is covered over by claims of “Islamophobia.” In the same way, lost in the shuffle also was the question of whether or not Islam really is “militant cultural imperialism seeking world domination.”
Inconveniently for Robert McCaw and his ilk, there are certainly some Muslims who think it is. I could quote violent passages of the Qur’an, but those might be waved away with the dismissive and erroneous claim that the Bible contains similar exhortations to violence. Let’s focus instead on what Islamic authorities say. One might get the impression that Islam is not a religion of peace from the authoritative sources in Sunni Islam, the schools of Sunni jurisprudence (madhahib):
Shafi’i school: A Shafi’i manual of Islamic law that was certified in 1991 by the clerics at Al-Azhar University, one of the leading authorities in the Islamic world, as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy, stipulates about jihad that “the caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians…until they become Muslim or pay the non-Muslim poll tax.” It adds a comment by Sheikh Nuh Ali Salman, a Jordanian expert on Islamic jurisprudence: the caliph wages this war only “provided that he has first invited [Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians] to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya)…while remaining in their ancestral religions.” (‘Umdat al-Salik, o9.8).
Of course, there is no caliph today, unless one believes the claims of the Islamic State, and hence the oft-repeated claim that ISIS et al are waging jihad illegitimately, as no state authority has authorized their jihad. But they explain their actions in terms of defensive jihad, which needs no state authority to call it, and becomes “obligatory for everyone” (‘Umdat al-Salik, o9.3) if a Muslim land is attacked. The end of the defensive jihad, however, is not peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims as equals: ‘Umdat al-Salik specifies that the warfare against non-Muslims must continue until “the final descent of Jesus.” After that, “nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus’ descent” (o9.8).
Hanafi school: A Hanafi manual of Islamic law repeats the same injunctions. It insists that people must be called to embrace Islam before being fought, “because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call the infidels to the faith.” It emphasizes that jihad must not be waged for economic gain, but solely for religious reasons: from the call to Islam “the people will hence perceive that they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call, in order to save themselves from the troubles of war.”
However, “if the infidels, upon receiving the call, neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax [jizya], it is then incumbent on the Muslims to call upon God for assistance, and to make war upon them, because God is the assistant of those who serve Him, and the destroyer of His enemies, the infidels, and it is necessary to implore His aid upon every occasion; the Prophet, moreover, commands us so to do.” (Al-Hidayah, II.140)
Maliki school: Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), a pioneering historian and philosopher, was also a Maliki legal theorist. In his renowned Muqaddimah, the first work of historical theory, he notes that “in the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.” In Islam, the person in charge of religious affairs is concerned with “power politics,” because Islam is “under obligation to gain power over other nations.”
Hanbali school: The great medieval theorist of what is commonly known today as radical or fundamentalist Islam, Ibn Taymiyya (Taqi al-Din Ahmad Ibn Taymiyya, 1263-1328), was a Hanbali jurist. He directed that “since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God’s entirely and God’s word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought.”
This is also taught by modern-day scholars of Islam. Majid Khadduri was an Iraqi scholar of Islamic law of international renown. In his book War and Peace in the Law of Islam, which was published in 1955 and remains one of the most lucid and illuminating works on the subject, Khadduri says this about jihad:
The state which is regarded as the instrument for universalizing a certain religion must perforce be an ever expanding state. The Islamic state, whose principal function was to put God’s law into practice, sought to establish Islam as the dominant reigning ideology over the entire world….The jihad was therefore employed as an instrument for both the universalization of religion and the establishment of an imperial world state. (P. 51)
Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee, Assistant Professor on the Faculty of Shari’ah and Law of the International Islamic University in Islamabad. In his 1994 book The Methodology of Ijtihad, he quotes the twelfth century Maliki jurist Ibn Rushd: “Muslim jurists agreed that the purpose of fighting with the People of the Book…is one of two things: it is either their conversion to Islam or the payment of jizyah.” Nyazee concludes: “This leaves no doubt that the primary goal of the Muslim community, in the eyes of its jurists, is to spread the word of Allah through jihad, and the option of poll-tax [jizya] is to be exercised only after subjugation” of non-Muslims.
All this makes it clear that there is abundant reason to believe that Islam is indeed a manifestation of militant cultural imperialism seeking world domination. It would be illuminating if Robert McCaw produced some quotations from Muslim authorities they consider “authentic,” and explained why the authorities I’ve quoted above and others like them are inauthentic. But he won’t. And while in reality there is no single Muslim authority who can proclaim what is “authentic” Islam, and thus it would be prudent not to make sweeping statements about what “authentic Islam” actually is, clearly there are many Muslims who believe that authentic Islam is inherently violent and not a Religion of Peace. Are they all hateful “Islamophobes”?
Robert McCaw and Hamas-linked CAIR would prefer we not know that such Islamic scholars and authorities exist. But that is not going to make them go away. Rick Phillips has raised important questions. We owe it to ourselves, and to our nation’s future, not to allow them to be swept under the rug. But they will be.
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of 19 books, including the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His latest book is The Palestinian Delusion: The Catastrophic History of the Middle East Peace Process. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.
Iranian
Militia Leader Leading Iraq U.S. Embassy Raid Listed as Obama White House Guest
“Of course, one of
OBAMA’S AGENDA:
BUILD A MUSLIM-STILE DICTATORSHIP
The Case for
Impeaching Barack Obama
Pollak:
Everything Joe Biden Said About Donald Trump’s Foreign Policy Actually
Describes Barack Obama’s
Everything
former vice president Joe Biden said about President Donald Trump’s foreign
policy speech on Thursday actually applies to the policy that Biden carried out
together with former President Barack Obama — and not Trump.
OBAMA POSED WITH FARRAKHAN, ACCUSES REPUBLICANS OF "RACIAL NATIONALISM"
https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/271281/obama-posed-farrakhan-accuses-republicans-racial-daniel-greenfield
“Of course,
one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry”
is because race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein
Obama was president for eight long years." MATTHEW VADUM
Iranian
Militia Leader Leading Iraq U.S. Embassy Raid Listed as Obama White House Guest
Official White House Photo by Pete Souza
31 Dec 20196,569
6:55
Iranian militia leader Hadi al-Amiri, one of several identified
as leading an attack on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad on Tuesday, reportedly
visited the White House in 2011 during the presidency of Barack Obama.
On
Tuesday, a mob in Baghdad attacked the U.S. embassy in
retaliation against last weekend’s U.S. airstrikes against the Iran-backed
Shiite militia Kataib Hezbollah (KH), responsible for killing an American
civilian contractor. KH is one of a number of pro-Iran militias that make up
the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF/PMU), which legally became a wing of the
Iraqi military after fighting the Sunni Islamic State terrorist group.
President Donald Trump has
since accused Iran of having “orchestrated” the embassy attack and stated that
the government would be “held fully responsible.”
Breitbart News reporter John
Hayward described the attack on the embassy, writing:
The
mob grew into thousands of people, led by openly identified KH supporters, some
of them wearing uniforms and waving militia flags. The attack began after a funeral service
for the 25 KH fighters killed by the U.S. airstrikes. Demonstrators marched
through the streets of Baghdad carrying photos of the slain KH members and
Iraq’s top Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, who condemned the
American airstrikes.
KH vowed to seek revenge for the
airstrikes on Monday. Both KH and the Iranian military unit that supports it,
the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), have been designated as terrorist
organizations by the U.S. government. The government of Saudi Arabia also
described KH as one of several “terrorist militias supported by the Iranian
establishment” in remarks on Tuesday condemning
the assault on the U.S. embassy.
The attackers were able to
smash open a gate and push into the embassy compound, lighting fires, smashing
cameras, and painting messages such as “Closed in the name of resistance” on
the walls. Gunshots were reportedly heard near the embassy, while tear gas and
stun grenades were deployed by its defenders.
A
uniformed militia fighter on the scene in Baghdad told Kurdish news service Rudaw that
attacks were also planned against the U.S. consulates in Erbil and Basra, with
the goal of destroying the consulates and killing everyone inside.
The Washington Post reported Tuesday that among
those agitating protesters in Baghdad on Tuesday was Hadi al-Amiri, a former
transportation minister with close ties to Iran who leads the Badr Corps,
another PMF militia.
In
2011, both Fox
News and
the Washington
Times noted that then-Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki
brought his transportation minister, al-Amiri, to a meeting at the White House.
The Times noted
that the White House did not confirm his attendance, but the official was on
Iraq’s listed members of its delegation.
The al-Amiri accompanying
al-Maliki, besides also being transportation minister, was identified at the
time as a commander of the Badr organization, further indicating it was the
same person. At the time, the outlets expressed concern that al-Amiri had
ties to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which
the FBI has stated played a role in a 1996 terrorist attack that
killed 19 U.S. servicemen. President Donald Trump designated the IRGC a foreign
terrorist organization, the first time an official arm of a foreign state
received the designation.
Fox
News’ Ed Henry questioned White House Press Secretary Jay Carney following the
visit about the attendance of al-Amiri at the White House. Carney refused to
answer and stating that he would need to investigate the issue. The full transcript from RealClearPolitics
reads:
Ed Henry, FOX News: When
Prime Minister Maliki was here this week there have been reports that a former
commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which U.S. officials say played a
role in a 1996 terrorist attack that killed 19 U.S. servicemen.
He was here at the White
House with Prime Minister Maliki because he’s a transportation minister, yeah,
transportation minister —
Jay Carney, WH: Who’s [sic]
report is that?
Henry: I believe the
Washington Times has reported it. I think others have as well, but I think this
is a Washington Times —
Carney: I have to take that
question then, I’m not aware of it.
Henry: Can you just answer it
later though, whether he was here and whether a background check had been done?
Carney: I’ll check on it for
you.
Henry: Okay, thanks.
In
2016, Obama secured a deal with Iran which included a payment of $1.7 billion
in cash. Breitbart News reporter John Hayward reported in September of 2016:
On Tuesday, the Obama
administration finally admitted something its critics had long suspected: The
entire $1.7 billion tribute paid to Iran was tendered in cash — not just the
initial $400 million infamously shipped to the Iranians in a cargo plane — at
the same moment four American hostages were released.
“Treasury
Department spokeswoman Dawn Selak said in a statement the cash payments were
necessary because of the ‘effectiveness of U.S. and international sanctions,’
which isolated Iran from the international finance system,” said ABC News, relating what
might be one of history’s strangest humblebrags. The sanctions Obama threw
away were working so well that he had to satisfy Iran’s demands with cold, hard
cash!
By
the way, those sanctions were not entirely related to Iran’s pursuit of nuclear
weapons. As former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy pointed out at National
Review last month, they date back to Iran’s seizure of hostages at the
U.S. Embassy in Tehran, its support for “Hezbollah’s killing sprees,” and, most
pertinently, Bill Clinton’s 1995 invocation of “federal laws that deal with
national emergencies caused by foreign aggression,” by which he meant Iran’s
support for international terrorism.
Former white house staffer
during the Obama administration, Ben Rhodes, blamed President Trump’s policies
for the Tuesday attack on the U.S. embassy.
Trump sanctions on
Iran have done nothing to change Iranian behavior except make it worse. This is
what happens when your foreign policy is based on Obama envy, domestic
politics, Saudi interests, and magical right wing thinking. https://twitter.com/amichaistein1/status/1211731826890412033 …
#BREAKING: US official tells me: New Iran-related sanctions will
be announced "In the next 24 hours"
Many have hit back at Rhodes
for the accusations, including former CIA ops officer Bryan Dean Wright.
As you attack
Trump’s foreign policy, Iranian militia members are — at this very moment —
attacking American soldiers using the $1.7B cash you and Team Obama sent to Tehran.
What a time to be self righteous. https://twitter.com/brhodes/status/1211991305208905729 …
What a time to be self righteous. https://twitter.com/brhodes/status/1211991305208905729 …
No
further information has been given about al-Amiri’s presence at the U.S.
embassy raid on Tuesday. Read more about the attack on the U.S. embassy in
Baghdad at Breitbart News here.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of
free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan or email him at lnolan@breitbart.com
“Of course, one of
OBAMA’S AGENDA:
BUILD A MUSLIM-STILE DICTATORSHIP
The Case for
Impeaching Barack Obama
Listen to the Article!
Yes, you read the title of this
missive correctly.
As a career military officer, we
never believed that you win on defense. During the constant, incessant, and
insidious attacks on President Trump, I believe there should be a full-fledged
attack to evidence the abject, utter hypocrisy of the progressive socialist
left. If I were on any news program and was asked about the “impeachment
inquiry” of President Trump, I would pivot and discuss the case for impeaching
Barack Obama…and why the progressive socialist left defended his indefensible
actions.
If in this current frenzy by the
left and their media accomplices about Ukraine, the issue is about national
security, I can counter that.
Early in 2009, Barack Obama
traveled to Cairo, Egypt to deliver an address to the Muslim world. I have no
issue with his wanting to have an outreach. But we should all agree that
Obama’s requesting members of the Muslim Brotherhood to be in attendance, front
and center, was ill advised. All one need to do is understand the history of
the Muslim Brotherhood, the grandfather of modern-day Islamic jihadism.
This is the terrorist
organization responsible for the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar
Sadat. Anyone can read the Muslim Brotherhood’s website and realize what their
goals and objectives are, and they are not consistent with those of the United
States. Yet, Barack Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood candidate for
President, Mohammed Morsi, as he undermined the office of Hosni Mubarak. Sure,
Mubarak was not the best, but he was not supportive of Islamic jihadism.
When Morsi won the election,
quite questionably, it was Barack Obama who congratulated him and offered US
support, to include military aid…to a Muslim Brotherhood backed president. The
people of Egypt were indignant, and in the end, revolted against Morsi and
overthrew him for a new President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. Barack Obama condemned
Egypt and its so-called coup, threatening to cut off any US aid…which he was
willing to supply to a Muslim Brotherhood backed government.
Second point, Barack Obama
claimed that there was a major crisis in Libya and ended up outsourcing our
military support and aid to Islamic jihadist organizations against President
Muammar al-Gaddafi. There was evidence that Gaddafi was willing to negotiate
his removal and departure from Libya, but instead, Obama supplied weapons, intelligence,
and air support to Islamic terrorists who did overthrow, and execute, Gaddafi.
Since when did the United States provide military aid to Islamic terrorists?
In the aftermath, the Obama
administration attempted a weapons buy back program from these same jihadists.
And that led to the debacle we came to know as Benghazi. Amazingly enough a US
Ambassador, Chris Stevens, was brutally murdered and paraded in the streets,
along with Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods, and Glen Doherty during an Islamic terrorist
attack. But where was our support to those brave men who fought off the
attacks? Why was it that Barack Obama lied about this very sad day in US
history, and was never held accountable and responsible? This was not about
some anti-Islam video, which was the Obama talking point. And sadly, those four
Americans who lost their lives, Barack Obama did not even send a US military
aircraft to retrieve their remains.
Third point in the case for
impeaching Barack Hussein Obama, the off-mike comment by Obama to Russian
President Dmitry Medvedev. Yes, remember when Obama whispered, “tell Vladmir
that after my reelection I will have more flexibility”. It was 2012 and no one
dared ask of President Obama, that is from the left, what was meant by
flexibility? Here was a sitting US President making overt guarantees to Russia.
Funny thing, when Obama was in office Russia was not this enemy, dark specter,
matter of fact, the Obama administration offered a “reset button” to Russia.
Recall in the final presidential debate between Obama and Mitt Romney how Obama
chastised and ridiculed Romney on his assertion that Russia was our number one
geopolitical threat? Obama said to Romney that the 80s was calling for their
foreign policy back, now the progressive socialist left runs around screaming
Russia, Russia, Russia ad nauseum.
When Russia was overrunning
Ukraine, and Ukraine asked the Obama administration for support, Obama sent
socks and MREs. President Trump has sent A-10s and increased military support
to include increased military to military training and cooperation in the
Baltic States and Poland. And somehow, we are being told by Nancy Pelosi that
we must impeach President Trump for threatening national security and our
foreign policy?
Lastly, Iran is the number one
state sponsor of Islamic terrorism. Why then did Barack Obama sent pallets of
laundered cash in a blacked out unmarked plane to Iran? And no, it had nothing
to do with past weapons deals, those deals, agreements, had been made with the
Iranian Republic when the Shah of Iran was the leader. When the Shah was
deposed by the Ayatollah Khomeini, that agreement was null and void. Several US
Presidents, Republican and Democrat, had not sent cash to Iran, until Obama.
That was, and is, a violation of US Code, Statute, in aiding and abetting the
enemy, which Iran used the funds to advance its terrorist support, especially
to its proxy army, Hezbollah.
As well, why was it that Obama
did not bring the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the Iranian nuclear
agreement, before the US Senate as a treaty for ratification? Instead he made
it a unilateral executive decision, which is in violation of our US
Constitution. There was nothing said about impeaching Obama, but I am saying it
now.
I am tired of Republicans playing
right into the traps, games, of the progressive socialist left, instead of
putting them on defense. I would love to have someone, anyone, ask of Nancy
Pelosi, Adam Schiff, Jerrold Nadler, and Rashida Tlaib, who wants to use US
Marshals to remove Trump administration officials from office, to answer these
points I have presented.
The progressive socialist left is
mad that they lost the 2016 presidential election. They realize that, as Rep.
Al Green said, they will probably not be able to defeat President Trump at the ballot
box, unless they use tricks like ballot harvesting. So, what it their only
recourse, the Banana Republic, kangaroo court tactics of using impeachment as a
political weapon...this is nothing more than an unsophisticated coup.
The case for impeaching Barack
Obama was easy, yet the left and their propagandized media dismissed it. Let’s
stop allowing the progressive socialist left to dominate the narrative, it is
time to put them on defense.
(Allen West is a retired
Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Army. Mr. West is a Senior Fellow at
the Media Research Center, supporting its mission to expose and neutralize
liberal media bias. Mr. West also writes daily commentary on his personal
website theoldschoolpatriot.com)
Pollak:
Everything Joe Biden Said About Donald Trump’s Foreign Policy Actually
Describes Barack Obama’s
Johannes Eisele / AFP Getty
12 Jul 20193
3:48
Everything
former vice president Joe Biden said about President Donald Trump’s foreign
policy speech on Thursday actually applies to the policy that Biden carried out
together with former President Barack Obama — and not Trump.
In his speech, at City University of New York, Biden called
Trump an “extreme” threat to the country’s national security. No one has yet
taken Biden to task for describing the sitting commander-in-chief in such
alarmist terms.
But that wasn’t even the most bizarre aspect of Biden’s speech.
He said the main problem in Trump’s foreign policy was … Charlottesville,
Virginia. Biden went on to recite a version of the debunked “very fine people”
hoax, claiming that Trump had drawn a “moral equivalence between those who
promoted hate and those who opposed it.” That, he said, was a threat to
America’s mission of standing for democratic values in the world.
But in fact, Trump
specifically condemned the neo-Nazis
in Charlottesville on multiple occasions. The entire premise of Biden’s speech
was a lie.
Biden went on to claim that Trump’s foreign policy rejects
democratic values and favors the rise of authoritarianism worldwide. He cited
Trump’s warmth to Russian president Vladimir Putin and North Korean dictator
Kim Jong-un. And he claimed that Trump has undermined America’s alliances with
democracies in favor of flattery from dictators.
Apparently Biden forgot that Obama literally bowed to the Saudi
king; that he abandoned the pro-democracy protests during the Green Revolution
in Iran; that he pushed for a “reset” with Russia and abandoned our Czech and
Polish allies on missile defense; that he promised Putin he would be even more
“flexible” after he won re-election; that he tried to normalize relations with
the Cuban dictatorship without securing any democratic reforms there; that he
gave the store away to the communist dictatorship in China; and that he
abandoned Israel, a betrayal in which Biden himself played a direct and
shameful role, condemning Israel for building apartments in a Jewish neighborhood
of Jerusalem.
Trump praises dictators as a negotiating tactic; Obama praised
them because he, too, thought America was a problem.
One of the few times the Obama administration embraced
democratic change was during the Arab Spring, when “democracy” meant the rise
of the Muslim Brotherhood — which had no interest in freedom, only in power.
In 2008, the Obama campaign cast Biden as a foreign policy guru,
though he had been wrong on almost every foreign policy issue in his career. On
Thursday, he mostly ignored his own record.
Astonishingly, Biden claimed credit
for Trump’s success in crushing the so-called “Islamic State,” saying he worked
with Obama “to craft the military and diplomatic campaign that ultimately
defeated ISIS.” In fact, Biden was complicit in the rise of ISIS. He was
Obama’s point man on Iraq when the U.S. suddenly pulled out of the country,
leaving a vacuum that ISIS filled. He did not object when Obama called the
terror group “junior varsity.”
Biden offered nothing new in terms
of solutions to current foreign policy challenges. He claimed that the Iran
nuclear deal had been a success — on the very day Iran was reportedto have been
cheating all along. He said the U.S. should re-enter the deal once Iran did,
offering no idea how to ensure that it did so. On North Korea, Biden promised
he would “empower our negotiators,” whatever that means.
He said that he would get “tough”
with China, which Trump is already doing (and which Biden previously suggested he
would not do).
And on immigration, he ridiculed the very idea
of borders — literally: “I respect no borders.”
And this is the best Democrats have on
foreign policy.
Joel B.
Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social
Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard. He is a
winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the
co-author of How
Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from
Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
OBAMA POSED WITH FARRAKHAN, ACCUSES REPUBLICANS OF "RACIAL NATIONALISM"
https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/271281/obama-posed-farrakhan-accuses-republicans-racial-daniel-greenfield
September 9,
2018
See if you can spot the
Republican racial nationalism in these pictures.
In his Trump-bashing
speech, Barack Hussein Obama accused Republicans of an "appeal to racial
nationalism that’s barely veiled". I don't see a whole lot of veils up
there.
ANTI-SEMITE LOUIS
FARRAKHAN SPOTTED IN THE FRONT ROW AT ARETHA FRANKLIN’S FUNERAL
Amber Athey | Media and Breaking
News Editor
Louis Farrakhan, the anti-Semitic
leader of the Nation of Islam, managed to snag a front-row seat at Aretha
Franklin’s funeral on Friday.
A live broadcast of the Queen of
Soul’s funeral shows Farrakhan seated in the same row with Rev. Al Sharpton,
Rev. Jesse Jackson and President Bill Clinton.
On
stage in front at Aretha Franklin’s funeral are Min. Louis Farrakhan, Rev. Al
Sharpton, Rev. Jesse Jackson, and former president Bill Clinton https://www.freep.com/story/entertainment/music/aretha-franklin/2018/08/31/aretha-franklin-funeral-live-stream/1151529002/ … #ArethaHomegoing
·
·
Farrakhan is a black nationalist
who has called for an end to white men and repeatedly gone on angry rants
against Jewish people. (RELATED: Seven Louis
Farrakhan Quotes On Jews, Gays, And White People)
“Some of you think that I’m just
somebody who’s got something out for the Jewish people. You’re stupid. Do you
think I would waste my time if I did not think it was important for you to know
Satan? My job is to pull the cover off of Satan so that he will never deceive
you and the people of the world again,” Farrakhan said in 2011.
In 2015, he asserted, “White
people deserve to die, and they know, so they think it’s us coming to do
it.” (RELATED: Louis Farrakhan Issues A
Sunday Call For An End To White Men)
BARACK Hussein OBAMA: THE CLOSET MUSLIM
PSYCHOPATH WHO HATED AMERICA!
"But the Obamas are the center of the most delusional cult of
personality that the media has yet spawned. And so we get bizarre
pieces like these."
The mullahs rolled in cash as a result of rolling
Obama and his gullible team over the deal, knowing that Obama was desperate for
some sort of legacy. MONICA SHOWALTER
MUSLIM DICTATORS, INCLUDING THE 9-11 INVADING SAUDIS,
FUNDED THE PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARIES OF BUSH, CLINTON and OBAMA!
ISLAMIST BARACK OBAMA
“Of
course, one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry” is because
race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein Obama was
president for eight long years." MATTHEW VADUM
"But the Obamas are the center of the most delusional
cult of personality that the media has yet spawned. And so we get bizarre
pieces like these." MONICA SHOWALTER
"Along with Obama, Pelosi and
Schumer are responsible for incalculable damage done to this country over the
eight years of that administration." PATRICIA McCARTHY
THE OBOMBS AND HARVARD
OBAMA AND HIS SAUDIS
PAYMASTERS… Did he serve them well?
Malia,
Michelle, Barack and the College Admissions Scandal https://globalistbarackobama.blogspot.com/2019/03/malia-michelle-barack-and-college.html
*
Michelle was the next to attend Harvard, in her case Harvard Law
School. “Told by counselors that her SAT scores and her grades weren’t good
enough for an Ivy League school,” writes Christopher Andersen in Barack and
Michelle, “Michelle applied to Princeton and Harvard anyway.”
GOOGLE WHAT THE OBOMB DID FOR HIS SAUDIS
PAYMASTERS
Barack Obama’s back door, however, was unique to him. Before
prosecutors send some of the dimmer Hollywood stars to the slammer for their
dimness, they might want to ask just how much influence a Saudi billionaire
peddled to get Obama into Harvard.
No comments:
Post a Comment