Archive for the ‘President’ Category
Last Thursday morning as Colleen Hufford arose and readied for work, her thoughts very likely were on the day ahead, things needing to be done, realizing that tomorrow would be Friday and maybe even thinking up weekend plans with her grandchildren. Little did she know that she was en route to becoming another statistic, a sticking point in the manic affirmations of America’s leaders that her death, like so many before hers, “had nothing to do with Islam.”
But the truth is Ms Hufford’s grisly demise has everything to do with Islam, as does the death of the victims of Nidal Hasan in the Fort Hood rampage, the beheading of British Army drummer, Lee Rigby, in May of last year and countless other victims of this sick death cult we know as Islam.
Let’s not mince words here, the constant attempt at redefining reality by our leaders’ insistence that the Muslim violence we are witnessing on a daily basis has nothing to do with the Muslim religion, is frankly offensive and in the end encourages more and ever grislier acts of terror.
In “problem solving 101” we learned that location and formulation of the problem was the first step in finding a solution. However, covering one’s eyes and pretending there is no problem will not make the problem disappear. In point of fact, it will only make the problem bigger and much harder to solve.
So long as western leaders, like Barack Obama, David Cameron and others continue to insist that these acts of violence are mere “workplace violence” or “isolated instances” they will continue to provide cover to the insidious and duplicitous cancer growing in our midst.
I’m certain there are Muslims that do not agree with the violence, just as there were Germans that disagreed with the Nazis. We saw the results of the quiescence of the Germans who were too timid to speak out against the Nazis. We are beginning to see the results of the silence of so-called “moderate” Muslims.
President Barack Obama has spent more time golfing than he has spent listening to daily intelligence briefings.
The Daily Caller has calculated that he’s spent almost 700 hours in 875 “Presidential Daily Briefings” since 2009.
But he’s also spent roughly 800 hours on almost 200 golf trips since his first inauguration.
Obama’s golf trips typically last four and half hours, including one hour on the road. The longest trip took about six hours, according to regular reports from the media pool that follows the president on trips outside the White House.
In contrast, President George W. Bush largely gave up golfing during the Iraq campaign, from 2003 to 2008.
The daily briefing calculations are based on a new report by the Florida-based Government Accountability Institute, which reported Sept. 30 that Obama has attended 875 Presidential Daily Briefings over the course of his presidency.
Those briefings allow top intelligence officials to share their latest intelligence data on security threats, and also to focus the president’s attention on growing or novel problems.
The formal intelligence briefings usually last 45 minutes, according to the “daily guidance” schedules issued each evening by the White House. That time adds up to about 700 hours, so far.
An internal Secret Service report revealed more than “1,000 security breaches and vulnerabilities,” according to a House investigator who said that a “politically correct” culture is endangering President Obama.
“There are new details that will come out that — you really have to question if security is their number one objective,” Representative Jason Chaffetz (R., Utah), who sits on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that is holding a Tuesday hearing on the Secret Service, tells National Review Online. “They want to be politically correct.”
Chaffetz backs that up by reference to the Secret Service’s statement on the most recent security breach, when a man jumped the White House fence and entered the building before being stopped.
“Although last night the officers showed tremendous restraint and discipline in dealing with this subject, the location of Gonzalez’s arrest is not acceptable,” the Secret Service press release said. (That statement was issued before whistleblowers revealed that the fence-jumper made it all the way to the East Room of the White House, on the second floor.)
“When is that the goal and objective of the Secret Service? ‘Restraint?’ Because he had no apparent weapons?” Chaffetz points out. “In this day and age of ISIS and suicide bombers, we don’t know what he has underneath of his clothing. He could have a dirty bomb or improvised explosive device. You just don’t know. It’s totally unfair for an agent to have to make a split second decision on whether or not to use lethal force. If you can’t get a dog or a person in between the person rushing the White House and the White House itself, you may have to use a more lethal weapon.”
The Obama administration was grilled on Monday for inviting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to a state dinner while he is fasting as part of a Hindu religious observance, a move that has been criticized by some as insensitive.
Obama will host Modi Monday evening at the White House “for a private dinner” that will also be attended by Vice President Joe Biden, the White House announced Monday morning. The event is closed to the press.
However, the administration appears to have forgotten that Modi is in the middle of carrying out a religious fast in observance of the Hindu navratri, in which the faithful abstain from food, according to reports.
The administration’s seeming insensitivity to Modi’s religious observance caused a tense back-and-forth during the State Department’s daily briefing with reporters.
State Department spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki was forced to defend the decision to hold the dinner on the holy day.
“I’m just wondering if anyone thought it was really that much of a good idea to host and dinner and lunch for the visiting president who is the middle of a fast,” asked Associated Press reporter Matt Lee.
“We certainly understand that and recognize it and respect it, his fast. It’s a way of honoring an individual,” Psaki responding.
“Are these people going to be actually eating in front of him?” Lee followed up.
A new Government Accountability Institute (GAI) report reveals that President Barack Obama has attended only 42.1% of his daily intelligence briefings (known officially as the Presidential Daily Brief, or PDB) in the 2,079 days of his presidency through September 29, 2014.
The GAI report also included a breakdown of Obama’s PDB attendance record between terms; he attended 42.4% of his PDBs in his first term and 41.3% in his second.
The GAI’s alarming findings come on the heels of Obama’s 60 Minutes comments on Sunday, wherein the president laid the blame for the Islamic State’s (ISIS) rapid rise squarely at the feet of his Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.
“I think our head of the intelligence community, Jim Clapper, has acknowledged that I think they underestimated what had been taking place in Syria,” said Obama.
According to Daily Beast reporter Eli Lake, members of the Defense establishment were “flabbergasted” by Obama’s attempt to shift blame.
“Either the president doesn’t read the intelligence he’s getting or he’s bullshitting,” a former senior Pentagon official “who worked closely on the threat posed by Sunni jihadists in Syria and Iraq” told the Daily Beast.
On Monday, others in the intelligence community similarly blasted Obama and said he’s shown longstanding disinterest in receiving live, in-person PDBs that allow the Commander-in-Chief the chance for critical followup, feedback, questions, and the challenging of flawed intelligence assumptions.
“It’s pretty well-known that the president hasn’t taken in-person intelligence briefings with any regularity since the early days of 2009,” an Obama national security staffer told the Daily Mail on Monday. “He gets them in writing.”
The Obama security staffer said the president’s PDBs have contained detailed threat warnings about the Islamic State dating back to before the 2012 presidential election.
What are the major threats to free speech today? Perhaps the overarching condition that threatens free speech is the spread of political correctness. This has sharply curtailed candor about all manner of contentious subjects. It is no longer possible, in polite society, to speak frankly about race, about differences between the sexes, or a hundred other topics — so-called “climate change,” for example, or the relationship between Islam and free speech.
George Orwell was right when he observed that the first indispensable step towards freedom is the willingness to call things by their real names. The cause of freedom is not aided when a director of National Intelligence says (and says with a straight face) that the Muslim Brotherhood is “a largely secular organization.” Nor is it aided when the U.S. president, his secretary of State and other underlings lie about what caused the Benghazi massacre.
The triumph of political correctness has encouraged an epidemic allergy to candor. The hope is that the embrace of euphemism will alter not only our language but the reality our language names. And to a large extent, it is working. Unfreedom does not become freedom by calling it free, but the misprision can help spread and reinforce the fog of self-deceit. Terrorism committed by Muslims is not Islamic terrorism but “anti-Islamic activity,” A Muslim Army officer who goes on a shooting rampage at Ft. Hood while shouting “Allahu Akbar” is guilty of “workplace violence” not slaughter undertaken to advance the cause of Islam, etc., etc.
The U.S.Commission on Civil Rights conducted a year-long investigation into the matter shortly after the dismissal. Despite being compelled by statute to cooperate fully with commission investigations, DOJ
refused to answer 18 separate interrogatories,
refused to respond to 22 separate requests for production of documents,
barred two key DOJ attorneys from testifying (both of the attorneys defied DOJ and testified at considerable risk to their careers),
refused to provide witness statements for twelve key witnesses,
invoked specious privileges in order to withhold critical information,
failed to provide a privilege log,
and failed to provide requested e-mails between Civil Rights Division personnel and other DOJ officials regarding the dismissal of the NBPP lawsuit (some of the e-mails later were revealed pursuant to court order in a lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch)
A high-ranking DOJ political appointee gave instructions that the Voting Section was not going to bring cases “against black defendants or for the benefit of white victims.”
A high-ranking DOJ political appointee explicitly told the entire Voting Section “that this administration would not be enforcing Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act.” (The purpose of section 8 of the NVRA is to ensure that persons ineligible to vote are not permitted to vote.)
DOJ refuses to enforce Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act on behalf of white victims.
There exists within DOJ pervasive hostility to the race-neutral enforcement of civil-rights laws.
The commission’s 262-page report to congress contains much more evidence that, under Holder, DOJ did not enforce the nation’s civil-rights laws in a color-blind manner. Something to consider while reading the next obtuse editorial extolling Mr. Holder’s record on civil rights.
“President Obama keeps on insisting that ISIS is not Islamic,” Maher noted, adding with a smirk, “Well, maybe they don’t practice the Muslim faith the same way he does.”
Maher contrasted the way liberals talk about American conservatives with the way they won’t talk about Muslim nations’ deplorable standards for women:
We hear a lot about the Republican ‘War on Women.’ It’s not cool Rush Limbaugh called somebody a slut. Okay. But Saudi women can’t vote, or drive, or hold a job, or leave the house without a man. Overwhelming majorities in every Muslim country say a wife is always obliged to obey her husband. That all seems like a bigger issue than evangelical Christian bakeries refusing to make gay wedding cakes.
He also had stern words for Yale’s atheist organization, which was among the groups that complained when Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a woman who was born in Somalia, raised Muslim and suffered traditional genital mutilation, was brought to campus to share her critical-of-Islam views.
“You’re atheists, you should be attacking religion, not siding with the people who hold women down and violate them, which apparently you will defend in the name of multiculturalism,” Maher seethed.
Maher also issued a general challenge to all liberals who vigorously police the words and actions of Jews, Christians and non-religious people — but who won’t criticize Islam.
“If we’re giving no quarter to intolerance,” Maher asked, “shouldn’t we be starting with the mutilators and the honor killers?”
We’re being had. Again.
For six years, President Obama has endeavored to will the country into accepting two pillars of his alternative national-security reality. First, he claims to have dealt decisively with the terrorist threat, rendering it a disparate series of ragtag jayvees. Second, he asserts that the threat is unrelated to Islam, which is innately peaceful, moderate, and opposed to the wanton “violent extremists” who purport to act in its name.
Now, the president has been compelled to act against a jihad that has neither ended nor been “decimated.” The jihad, in fact, has inevitably intensified under his counterfactual worldview, which holds that empowering Islamic supremacists is the path to security and stability. Yet even as war intensifies in Iraq and Syria — even as jihadists continue advancing, continue killing and capturing hapless opposition forces on the ground despite Obama’s futile air raids — the president won’t let go of the charade.
Hence, Obama gives us the Khorosan Group.
There is a reason that no one had heard of such a group until a nanosecond ago, when the “Khorosan Group” suddenly went from anonymity to the “imminent threat” that became the rationale for an emergency air war there was supposedly no time to ask Congress to authorize.
The “Khorosan Group” is al-Qaeda. It is simply a faction within the global terror network’s Syrian franchise, “Jabhat al-Nusra.”
As these columns have long contended, Obama has not quelled our enemies; he has miniaturized them. The jihad and the sharia supremacism that fuels it form the glue that unites the parts into a whole — a worldwide, ideologically connected movement rooted in Islamic scripture that can project power on the scale of a nation-state and that seeks to conquer the West. The president does not want us to see the threat this way.
On the day Attorney General Eric Holder announced his resignation, President Barack Obama enacted an executive action on Thursday to allow certain DREAMers to serve in the military and be put on an expedited path to citizenship.
Obama vowed to hold off on broad executive amnesty that would also potentially grant temporary work permits to millions of illegal immigrants until after the midterm elections to help Senate Democrats retain the Senate. According to the Military Times, this executive action will expand MAVNI (Military Accessions in the National Interest) “to target foreign nationals with high-demand skills, mostly rare foreign language expertise, or specialized health care training.”
The program, which admits foreigners with specialized medical or language skills, will now be “open to immigrants without a proper visa if they came to the U.S. with their parents before age 16″ and have been approved for Obama’s 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
The MAVNI program “is capped at 1,500 recruits per year,” and Obama’s executive action “may be the first phase of a broader government-wide effort to ease pressure on immigrants and create new paths to citizenship,” according to the Times, because “after entering military service, foreigners are eligible for expedited U.S. citizenship.” The Times noted that “since 2001, more than 92,000 foreign-born service members have become citizens while serving in uniform.”