Obama Sees Cautious Conservatives Who Wish to Spare Lives as the Enemy, Not Insidious ISIS Infiltrators
“And whoever emigrates for the cause of Allah will find on the earth many locations to settle and wide abundance. And whoever leaves his home as an emigrant for the sake of Allah and His Messenger, and then death overtakes him, his reward has already been established with Allah. And Allah is ever Forgiving and Merciful.” —Koran 4:100
Your Strengths Are Your Weaknesses
The Western world has a tradition of tolerance that has permitted Muslims—who disapprove of our sacrilegious freedom to criticize or question Muhammad in specific, or religion in general—to move to the West and exercise their right not only to criticize the freedom culture of the West, but to wage cultural jihad against it. Many have been swift to point out that this tradition of tolerance is a strength of our society. But the truth is that your strengths are also your weaknesses. We in the West have been so tolerant of freedom-hating, Sharia-loving individuals that we have allowed them, in many Western countries, to increase by immigration to a critical mass of voters who are now politically powerful enough to demand that Western governments rid themselves of cherished freedoms—such as freedom of speech and of the press. The consequence of not enacting an increasingly Sharia-compliant agenda is a loss of votes for the party in power.
Islam has instituted a Grand Jihad against the West which involves turning the cultural values of the West into a weapon to use against the West. For example, although Islam is not a moral religion in the Western sense (since it embraces wife-beating, female-genital-mutilation, pedophilia, slavery, gay-bashing, honor-killing, infidel-beheading, and genocide), Muslims still claim religious-conscience protections for their physical acts of violence and sexual acts of perversion and rape. They infiltrate societal institutions and government bodies, as well, where they support causes that are freedom-killing but Sharia-compliant.
Although Syria has no state-to-state relationship with the United States—which has been trying to overthrow its government—President Obama, John Kerry, and other Democrat leaders insist that the US can quite ably vet the Syrian refugees who want to come to America. Not only would Syria’s enmity with the US get in the way of reliable vetting, but the fact is that Syria is such a war-torn country that no serious vetting process could be undertaken, anyway. Any people who might be contacted as character witnesses for those applying for asylum cannot be found, in most cases.
Remember the St. Louis
On May 13, 1939, the St. Louis, a German transatlantic liner, sailed from Hamburg, Germany, for Havana, Cuba. There were over 900 Jewish passengers on the ship, who, fleeing the Third Reich, had hopes of finding safety in Cuba. Most of these Jews were German citizens, albeit others were Eastern European, and some were officially stateless. After Cuba’s ultimate rejection of the Jews, Captain Gustav Schröder actually tried to find a country that might accept the refugees. The captain tried both the US and Canada, but without luck.
In the US, President Roosevelt could have issued an executive order that would have allowed the Jewish refugees to enter, but he chose not to do so. And these people were not from a group whose traditions promote genocide. Quite the opposite, these were people being stalked by genocidal fascists whose philosophy was actually in line with the anti-Semitic ethnic-cleansing views of Islam. (Nazi leader Albert Speer quoted Hitler: “The Muhammadan religion . . . would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. . . . Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of . . . [a] Mohammedan Empire.”)
So, if endangered Jews were denied entry into America during wartime, why should America admit a potentially genocidal group with jihadist proclivities into America during a time of war against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS)? Or, to put it another way: America did not allow immigrants from Germany to enter while at war with fascists in Germany; so, why should Americans allow immigrants from Syria to enter while at war with Islamo-fascists in Syria?
The first hijra—or migration—was the migration of Muhammad and his followers, in 622, from Mecca to Medina. Islam flourished in its new home to the point, eventually, of fully Islamizing it. Koran 4:100 suggests that one way to plant the seed of Islam in a new place, and eventually take the place over, is through migration to that place, and anyone who does this is blessed by Allah with a place in the afterlife.
The fact remains that 1/8 of migrants entering Europe are children, 1/8 are women, and 3/4 are men of military age! And, if not one single Muslim country is taking in these refugees due to the risk of ISIS infiltration, then why would the US think any differently? Are those Muslim countries uncompassionate or somehow bigoted against Muslims? That is not likely. So, why is it that President Obama would accuse Americans of being those things?
Obama Expresses Anger at Fellow Americans for Trying to Protect Human Life
By not intervening in Syria—when Assad crossed an Obama “red line” that the president chose not to enforce—Obama has fostered the conditions that would create the chaos in Syria that has led to the current immigration crisis into Europe and the potential for there to be one here. And Obama, we have known since 2010, does not have an appropriately high level of concern when it comes to protecting Americans from terrorism, having told Bob Woodward that the US could “absorb another terrorist attack.” (Read more here.)
On Wednesday, November 18, 2015, President Obama said that Republicans, who insist on pausing the immigration of Syrian refugees out of an abundance of caution, were offensive in their efforts to keep America safe. “Apparently they’re scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America,” Obama said. But, according to Breitbart, just hours after Obama’s inappropriate taunting of Republicans about fearing widows, “a female suicide bomber in Paris blew herself up as police closed in.” (Read more here.)
Obama’s Feckless Jihadist Legacy
Obama’s track record, with respect to his public assumptions regarding jihadists, is not altogether wise, having also referred to the ISIS threat as being “contained” only hours ahead of the Paris bombing. (Read more about Obama’s tragically incorrect prognostication here.)
What is undeniable is the fact of Obama’s jihadist legacy. A potential nuclear Iran is part of Obama’s to legacy. So is ISIS, whom Obama chose to ignore initially, calling it a “JV team.” (Find Obama’s dishonest characterization here.) And now, a full-on Islamization of Europe is being abetted by Obama’s past refusal to address Syrian problems early on, when the Red Line he insisted on was crossed by Assad. And now, Obama adds to his legacy the Paris attacks, which have come about largely due to Obama’s disastrous foreign policy. (Obama turned a war victory in Iraq into an opportunity for a terrorist state to develop, when he irresponsibly withdrew the US military to leave a power vacuum for ISIS to fill, thus giving rise to the control and command centers which likely trained those who were behind the Paris attacks.)
What Is Real Racism?
Would Martin Luther King, Jr. have ever been accused of racism for not inviting black-hating white people, many of whom might act out violently, into his home or his church? Let the racists in, or you are a racist? Really? No, I do not think so. And when it came to problem-solving, Dr. King entertained all kinds of suggestions from across the entire spectrum of ideas. He never would have called a fellow American racist or an enemy simply because he shared an idea that Dr. King disagreed with. True racism, King understood, is enshrined in policy, not in speech.
ISIS & Its Fascist Ideology
Although President Obama likes to say that ISIS is not Islamic, this is not true. ISIS’s philosophy is one of forced enslavement to a theocratic state, where there is no freedom of thought or action, since allowing as much would sanction the right to challenge Islam. Their overarching goal is reestablishment of the Caliphate and, ultimately, world domination and the annihilation of all jahiliyya—any culture, art, or tradition that is not guided by Islam. This is why ISIS destroyed the museum at Mosul. ISIS follows the example of Muhammad, who destroyed all of the art and religious icons contained in the Kaaba of Mecca, upon conquering that city from his base of an Islamized Medina. Genocide, in pursuit of this goal of Islamic jihad, and the annihilation of all that is non-Islamic, is classic Islam. And it is not the kind of doctrinaire Islam we need to be welcoming, en masse, into America. Not now, not ever!
Not Too Late for America
It may be too late for the European West to save itself from cultural suicide. But it is not too late for America, so long as common sense prevails, along with the Western will to protect innocent life. The Hippocratic Oath, which has come down to us from the ancient Greeks, instructs our physicians first to do no harm. Our Judeo-Christian tradition demands of us, in the West, to choose life. And there is something definitely wrong with an American president who embraces carelessness in his sympathy for potential terrorists above and beyond Western morality and common-sense reasoning.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com