“There is a rank due to the United States, among nations, which will be withheld, if not absolutely lost, by the reputation of weakness. If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known that we are at all times ready for war.” — George Washington, Fifth Annual Message, 1793.
Infamously ill-tempered Fox News co-host and former Democrat strategist Bob Beckel suggested last Monday that the U.S. stop accepting foreign Muslim students until the ones already here have been thoroughly vetted.
“The hatred for the United States runs deep,” he said during a broader discussion on the Boston Bombings.
“I think we really have to consider, given the fact that so many people hate us,” he added, “that we’re going to have to cut off Muslim students coming to this country for some period of time so that we can absorb what we’ve got, and look at what we’ve got, and decide whether some of the people here should be sent back home or to prison.”
Unsurprisingly, the liberal pundit’s moratorium recommendation stirred up controversy on both sides of the aisle. Fox News’ Megyn Kelley, for example, challenged him to defend his position.
“It wouldn’t have stopped the Boston Marathon bombing, but there is a lot of investigation that needs to be done and take a break and get that done and take a two-year hiatus” from awarding visas to students from Muslim countries, he explained.
“How do we get there?” Kelly asked.
She pointed out that among 75,000 Muslim student visas in the U.S., only five have been linked to terrorist activities.
“The numbers are not in favor of saying let’s penalizing,” she said.
“Of the 74,995, how many of those have been looked at very carefully?” Beckel said. “We have a lot of students here who may themselves harbor feelings about resentments. They come from countries where they brainwashed against the United States from the beginning.”
But even after being challenged by Kelley, Beckel refused to back down, reaffirming his position later in a tweet and during a Tuesday broadcast of Fox News’ “The Five.”
“Despite the early morning calls from my liberal friends who hung up on me,” Beckel said, he chose not to “pull back” on his suggestion.
“If the FBI could not deal with this fellow in Boston with all they had on him,” Beckel said, “it seems to me that we ought to give time for them to clear up their problems with the current Muslim population here and then let students come back in.”
If Bob Beckel had spent any time on our college campuses, like the University of California at Irvine, he might have taken and even stronger stand against granting student visas to Muslim students. There have been numerous incidents at UCI where Jewish speakers have been shouted down by the Muslin student groups while the campus administration stands idly by.
Who is our enemy? President Barack Obama is convinced it is Americans that simply want to exercise their Constitutional right to bear arms. At the same time, the President refuses to condemn Muslims both foreign and domestic — religious fanatics, like the Boston bombers, who are part of a global jihad and have declared America the “Great Satan.”
For all his education, with all of the intelligence services at his fingertips and with nearly 12 years of attacks on American soil, our President remains willfully blind of what must be done to protect America when it comes to Islam and immigration. Instead, his focus is on guns. This was on display when the President railed the Senate for rejecting his gun-control legislation.
“I see this as just round one,” said the President, surrounded by relatives of the Newtown, Conn., victims as well as former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot in Tucson, Ariz.
Obama said Senators are fearful that “the gun lobby would spend a lot of money,” accusing them of opposing the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms.
Shortly after the capture of the surviving Boston Marathon bomber, Obama went on television to tell Americans not to be quick to judge any one group of people. Translation: Don’t blame Muslims.
This week's bombing of civilians at the Boston Marathon in which three people, including an 8-year-old child, perished upon being torn to bits and 250 were wounded, some most grievously, followed the template set by the other Islamist incidents on Obama's watch. The media stumbles over itself trying not to see why we were attacked while glorifying terrorists, showing them in the most innocent-looking youthful pictures they can find, interviewing irrelevant credulous neighbors and school chums and blaming innocents (us) for the acts of terror. The federal government in large part, starting with the White House, is no better. HSA Secretary Napolitano urges us, "see something, say something" but the major media and all the president's men (and women) seem to operate under a different order, "See, hear, and speak nothing of the Islamist evil that threatens us."
Well, as it happens, I've seen quite a lot of things over the last few years that I'd like to say something about -- enough things to break a heart and to kill a country.
And after the Boston Massacre committed by two immigrant Jihadis, I'm going to say them.
I've seen the president of the United States bow down before the Saudi king, whose country sent fifteen hijackers to topple our towers.
I've seen Obama's minions arrest and jail an obscure California film-maker for creating a YouTube video that criticizes Mohammed. Incredibly, I then witnessed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton attempt to blame the hapless guy for inciting the Benghazi slaughter
I've seen Obama's UN ambassador hustle to pass UN Resolution 16/18, an "anti-blasphemy law" pushed by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to make criticizing Islam an international crime. So if comment on Shari’ah fanatics by critiquing their child marriages, honor killings, homosexual hangings, and genocidal plots to wipe out Israel, you're the one who's going to jail.
Then there’s Janet Napolitano, Obama's Homeland Security Secretary, refuse to use the term "terrorism" and insist on calling jihad-inspired carnage "man-caused disasters." As she helpfully explained to a German interviewer, she selected this term to "move away from the politics of fear" and, presumably, towards the politics of insanity.
How about Obama's Department of Defense, which prosecutes our War on Man-Caused Disasters, order a complete purge of "anti-Islamic content" from all military training materials. Do me a favor: If you see a U.S. soldier, could you explain to him what "jihad" means.
Just this month, it is reported that a U.S. Army training instructor teach his military students that "Evangelical Christianity" is the leading movement of dangerous "Religious Extremism," along with "Catholicism" and "Islamophobia." Funny how that works. I didn't notice the entire city of Boston cowering inside their homes to stay safe from Islamophobes, did you.
Then there’s the FBI conducting an interview with Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev in 2011 and come up blank. Maybe if Obama's FBI hadn't just purged its counterterrorism training manual of words like Muslim, Islam, jihad, Al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and Sharia, they might have found a clue.
Three weeks ago, I saw the U.S. Army formally refuse to award Purple Hearts to the 13 soldiers killed and 32 wounded in the shooting rampage of Major Nidal Hassan at Fort Hood. Although Hassan was in extensive communication with Al Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki before screaming "Allahu Akbar" and opening fire, the military claims Hassan merely committed "workplace violence."
I suppose Hassan's slaughter of the pregnant 21-year-old soldier Francheska Velez was just "sexual harassment." Fort Hood hero Sgt. Kimberly Munley now says that Obama "betrayed" her and the other victims.
How about the Army refusing a Purple Heart to Private Andy Long, who was killed in 2009 outside an Army recruiting office in Little Rock, Arkansas. His murderer was an all-American boy who converted to Islam at Tennessee State University and traveled to a terrorist training camp in Yemen, before returning home to commit jihad. Does his conversion give credence to Bob Beckel’s suggestion? It certainly does as this is happening on campuses all across the land as butter-minded youth are molded by progressive academics and Muslim student groups like the Muslim Students Association and Students for Justice in Palestine.
Obama threatened to veto the entire 2013 Defense Authorization Act, because it awarded a Purple Heart to Private Long, whom the military claims is merely a victim of street crime. Obama’s three monkeys of Islam are see no jihad, hear no jihad, speak no jihad.
Of course, nobody in the mainstream media seemed to notice, but I watched Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris driven underground in fear of her life after proposing "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day" on Facebook. Unlike the late Margaret Thatcher, who provided government protection for author Salman Rushdie when his life was threatened by Jihadis, Obama has given Molly Norris exactly nothing — not even one word of support.
Americans are being disarmed of our right to free speech, our most potent weapon in this brutal war. Obama and his media allies are locking up the language through political correctness to even discuss the nature of our enemy, and leaving us stripped of the basic knowledge we need to resist submitting to Islam.
If you've never read Sultan Knish's blog, you ought to. He's one of the brightest stars of the internet and his comments this week on the media treatment of terrorists could not be more acid nor accurate. In his latest posts he states:
“The media's coverage is weighed down by its old fetish of murder as celebrity. The media covers murderers and celebrities in the same way. It writes exhaustively about them, but rarely meaningfully. The murderer, like the celebrity, is famous for being famous. And fame clips context and suppresses meaning. It becomes its own reference. A thing is famous for being known. It is known for being famous. It enters the common language as a reference. A metaphor.
In the case of the Tsarnaevs, the surface coverage, the endless rounds of interviews with friends and relatives, with anyone who ever met them or retweeted them, is mandatory because it avoids the more difficult question of why they killed.
…
Prisons are full of 300 pound men who beat their 90 pound wives to death in self-defense and spree killers who felt bullied and misunderstood and defended themselves with killing sprees. The kind of evil we see in movies, the serial killer who gleefully whisper about demonic pacts and the joy of killing, are a rarity. Even human monsters are human. They explain things in terms of their egos. They are always defending themselves against some form of oppression and looking for someone to sympathize with their outrage.
Muslim terrorists are no different.
…
Islam, as one of the great world religions, has a long history of needing to be defended against small boys, blind female poets and elderly cartoonists. Sometimes Muslims have to defend Islam against each other, the way they are now doing in Syria. Other times defending Islam requires demolishing its archeological sites, the way that the Saudis are doing. Either way defending Islam is difficult work.”
Sultan Knish (Daniel Greenfield) deftly explains that there is a private Islam, which guides the daily life of its practitioners, and a "public Islam" which would force us all to follow the same proscriptions. That Islam, the public Islam, "must be defended by bombs", he argues. Both the media and the administration refuse to acknowledge that distinction.
“Why did Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev detonate bombs at the Boston Marathon? They were engaged in an old disagreement over political systems. Terrorists of the left set off bombs to force a political revolution. Their Islamist fellow-travelers are doing the same thing. Dig away enough of the trappings of the celebrity murderer and you come to the ideas buried underneath all the rubble.
…
[The media] wants us to speak of foreign policy as an isolated American act and of random violence as arising from thin air. It does not want us to understand the nature of the struggle. It does not want us to know why we die. It is determined to keep from us the reason why Muslims kill.”
It may be that the media dissembles concerning the impetus for these murderous acts because it knows no better. Certainly they give evidence every day of their thin knowledge of the world outside their pressroom cloisters. But one cannot help but feel that from 9/11 on the media has treated Americans as if WE were the murderous thugs who must not learn of the Islamist nature of the slaughterers lest we grab our pikes and scimitars and start off to mosques to behead the innocent. Tom Brokaw told us so last week.
Brendon O'Neill at the Telegraph captured the essence of the media’s wrong-headed reports of so called hate crimes against Muslims since 9/11:
“Clearly, some observers fear ordinary Americans more than they do terrorists; they fret more over how dangerously unintelligent and hateful Yanks will respond to bombings than they do over the bombings themselves. But where is this Islamophobic mob? Where are these marauding Muslim-haters undergoing a post-Boston freak-out? They are a figment of liberal observers' imaginations. In the years since 9/11, the American public has been admirably tolerant towards Muslim communities. According to federal crime stats collected by the FBI, in 2009 there were 107 anti-Muslim hate crimes; in a country of 300 million people that is a very low number. In 2010, a year of great terrorism panic following the attempt by Pakistani-American Faisal Shahzad to detonate a car bomb in Times Square in NYC, there were 160 anti-Muslim hate crimes. In 2011, there were 157. To see how imaginary the Islamophobic mob is, consider a state like Texas, fashionably mocked as a backward Hicksville full of Fox News-watching morons: there are 420,000 Muslims in Texas, yet in 2011 there were only six anti-Muslim hate crimes there. It simply isn't true that mad racist Yanks are biting at the bit to attack Muslims.
There were similarly wrongheaded fears of an outburst of mass Islamophobic hysteria in the wake of the 7/7 bombings in London, too. Policemen were posted outside mosques. NHS trusts encouraged doctors and nurses to keep their eyes peeled for anyone who expressed anti-Muslim hate. Trade union officials warned of a "backlash" against Muslims. But the backlash never came. Brits did not rise up in spite and fury against Muslims. Crown Prosecution Service crime figures for 2005-2006, covering the aftermath of the 7/7 attacks, showed that only 43 religiously aggravated crimes were prosecuted in that period, and that Muslims were the victims in 18 of those crimes. Eighteen prosecutions for anti-Muslim crimes -- all those crimes are unfortunate, of course they are; but this was far from an "Islamophobic backlash". As the then Director of Public Prosecutions, Ken Macdonald, said: "The fears of a [post-7/7] rise in offences appear to be unfounded." Time and again, Left-leaning campaigners and observers respond to terror attacks in the West by panicking about the possibly racist response of Joe Public -- and time and again, their fears prove ill-founded and Joe Public proves himself a more decent, tolerant person than they give him credit for. What this reveals is that liberal concern over Islamophobia, liberal fretting about anti-Muslim bigotry, is ironically driven by a bigotry of its own, by an deeply prejudiced view of everyday people as hateful and stupid. The anti-Islamophobia lobby poses as the implacable opponent of bigotry, yet it spreads a bigoted view of ordinary white folk as so volatile, so brimming with fury, that they are one terrorist bombing away from transforming into an anti-Muslim pogrom. Yes, some prejudiced things have been said about Muslims post-Boston; but far more prejudiced things are being said or implied about ordinary Americans.”
This contempt for the innocent victims of Islamic terrorism permeates the International set of anti-democratic American and Israeli haters. Princeton Professor Richard Falk who sits on the preposterously named and constituted UN Human Rights Commission is an exemplar of this caste of blinkered mandarins. He publicly blamed the bombing on U.S. foreign policy and its support of Israel. Just as he has earlier suggested our government had a hand in 9/11.
As the New York Post's Michael Goodwin observed, Falk's fault finding error is shared with the president:
“Yet Falk is not the only one with warped views. His praise for President Obama's apologies to Muslims should give the president reason to pause, but the White House is too busy making sure it passes the test of the Boston bombing trial.
Not so much the test of whether Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is guilty, about which there seems little doubt. Rather, the trial is a test of American values, according to all the president's men.
Obama himself still refuses to cite Islam as a motive for the bombing, despite the copious evidence investigators and the media have produced. He rushes to judgment only when it suits his worldview.
…
The dynamic is bizarre. Americans are attacked and, in return, are warned by their president to behave. Obama used that formula to defend the proposed mosque at Ground Zero, saying it was important that "we stay focused on who we are as a people and what our values are all about."
Apparently, the president sees the Constitution as a suicide pact.”
There is more than a small hint that other federal agencies were involved in getting a Saudi injured at the scene of the blast and tagged a "person of interest" off a watch list and perhaps even spiriting him out of the country.
A Saudi national originally identified as a "person of interest" in the Boston Marathon bombing was set to be deported under section 212, 3B — "Security and related grounds" — "Terrorist activities" after the bombing on April 15
The Blaze received word that the government may not deport the Saudi national — identified as Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi — as the story gained traction on April 18.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano refused to answer questions on the subject by Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) on Capitol Hill on April 18, saying the inquiry was "so full of misstatements and misapprehension that it's just not worthy of an answer."
An ICE official said April 18 that a different Saudi national is in custody, but that he is "in no way" connected to the bombings.
Key congressmen of the Committee on Homeland Security request a classified briefing with Napolitano on April 22
New info provided to The Blaze reveals Alharbi's file was altered on the evening of April 17 to disassociate him from the initial charges
Sources said on April 22 that the Saudi's student visa specifically allows him
The Blaze sources reveal April 22 that Alharbi was put on a terror watch list after the bombing, and Napolitano confirms he was on a "watch list" April 23.
By week's end, Beck's story, now confirmed after an early denial by Secretary Napolitano, grew even more shocking:
- “At the time the event file was created for Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi, it indicated he was "armed and dangerous"
- Alharbi was admitted into the country under a "special advisory option," which is usually reserved for visiting politicians, VIPs, or journalists. The event file cover page indicates he was granted his status without full vetting.
- One of the first excuses given by law enforcement when confronted about Alharbi's pending deportation was an expired visa. But according to the event file, his visa is good until 11-NOV-2016.
- The event file indicates he entered the U.S. on 08/28/12 in Boston, MA but says he is a student at the University of Findlay, in Findlay, Ohio. He has an apartment in Boston, and doesn't seem to have been a full-time student in Ohio.
- When a file is created in the system the author(s) are notified via email when it is accessed, and given the email address of the person accessing, so there is a record within the government data system of who deleted them. It was amended to remove the deportation reference, then someone later went in and tried to destroy both the original event file and amended versions. Copies had already been made.
- The original event file was reviewed and approved by two high level agents — Chief Watch Commander Maimbourg and Watch Commander Mayfield.”
Sure looks like a cover-up. Since there are pictures of Michelle Obama visiting Alharbi in his hospital room, since the Administration has been lying about him repeatedly and altering official records, and since there's as yet no answer as to how and why he was admitted under a "special advisory opinion" and since we do not yet know if he's still here or was spirited out of the country, we have good reason to be suspicious.
In his best-seller The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11, Pulitzer Prize winner Lawrence Wright traced Islamic hatred of Westerners back to one man, an Egyptian dissident named Sayyid Qutb.
Qutb was an Egyptian author, educator and Islamist theorist who immigrated to the United States in 1948. (He later returned to Egypt.) He has been called “the man who inspired [Osama] bin Laden,” and it is not hard to see why he earned that reputation after you read his philosophy on infidels.
Wright wrote:
“He also brought home a new and abiding anger about race. “The white man in Europe or America is our number-one enemy,” he declared. “The white man crushes us underfoot while we teach our children about his civilization…”
It may be that only two in 10,000 Muslims have bad intentions against the United States; but as the Boston-bombing brothers from Chechnya proved last week, that is two too many. I think we should take Bob Beckel’s advice and place at least a two-year moratorium on the issuance of any visas for students from Muslim countries.
No comments:
Post a Comment