Posts
Who won the Democratic debate Saturday? Easy--the winner was . . . ISIS.
All three candidates went through excruciating calisthenics to avoid using the word "radical Islam," on the heels of a radical Islamic attack in Paris, France.
I'm not surprised Hillary Clinton wasn't honest about it--hell, she's the type of liar who can tell the families of four dead Americans from the radical Islamic attack in Benghazi that the cause was a video a handful of people in the world got to see.
But for Bernie Sanders to tap dance around those words is almost sad. Sanders obviously didn't want to talk about Islamic terrorism and said that he didn't think the term "is what's important." (It sounded more like he used the word "impawtant" but I looked it up and it doesn't exist.)
As a Jew, Sanders is a member of Islam's most hated group of human beings. Jews are so hated by Muslims throughout the world, that Muslims don't consider them to be human, Nobel Prizes aside. Jews are referred to as 'apes,' by the religion of peace.
They aren't fond of Christians either, referring to us as 'pigs.' But look who's calling the kettle 'black.'
When the panel was asked if they agree with Sen. Marco Rubio who said that "We are at war with radical Islam," the wife of former President Bill Clinton said that calling it such would be "painting with too broad a brush," and also said the term was "not particularly helpful."
"I don't think we're at war with Islam. I don't think we're at war with all Muslims. I think we're at war with jihadists," the Scandal Queen said, as if jihadists and Muslims were of different religions and had nothing to do with each other.
Guess which party Muslims are going to be voting for. And guess how many "radical Islamic extremists" are going to be entering the country as refugees. The winner of this guessing contest wins an AK-47 and a year's supply of ammo.
On the other hand, Hillary did concede that we are at war with "violent extremists" who use religion for "power" and "oppression." That must have been hard for her to say, what with her closest aide, Huma Abedin, tied to the Muslim Brotherhood and Sisterhood by her own family.
Actually, Hill, Islam itself calls for power and oppression over ''unbelievers", but you would have known that if you had read the Koran, the Islamic version of Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals," a book you so love, a book dedicated to Lucifer. Even President Obama has quoted anarchist Alinsky to Israeli students.
Former Maryland Gov. O'Malley, like Hillary and Bernie, took the low road to avoid offending terrorists and non-violent Muslims. "I believe calling it what it is . . . radical jihadis. Let's not fall into the trap of thinking that all our Muslim-American neighbors in this country are somehow our enemies here. They are our first line of defense . . . We need our Muslim-American neighbors to stand up and to be part of this," said the man who backed down after saying that "all lives matter."
It looks like our "first line of defense" is being very quiet about the latest Paris attack, just like they were with the Charlie Hebdo attack back in January. If Muslim-Americans are our first line of defense, they need to speak up, speak out, and tell us who in their community sees us as the enemy.
But they don't.
O'Malley and his ideas are as useless as they were when he was the mayor of the failed city of Baltimore.
So far, French President Francois Hollande has shown strength--he called the Paris attack "an act of war" with ISIS. Now the ball is in his court, so to speak; we shall see what he does to back up his rhetoric.
Hopefully, Hollande will not take Hillary's advice of "showing "respect even for one's enemy," and to try to "empathize with their perspective and point of view." These are the words of an idiot who has no business being commander in chief of our nation. She tried to walk it back by saying "It is important to try to understand your adversary in order to figure out how they are thinking, what they will be doing, how they will react."
When you drop napalm on the bastards that immolated the caged Jordanian pilot, who gives a damn what they are thinking? We know how they will react--they will scream a lot and then they will stop screaming very quickly.
That's how you fight a war--shock and awe--the strategy comes from knowing their ideology and calling it for what it is so that you can predict their next move and know where to find them.
Mosques might be a good place to look, but liberal idiots like Bill DeBlasio don't want to infiltrate them where they plan because like all PC leftists, they don't want to offend them.
Tweet
All three candidates went through excruciating calisthenics to avoid using the word "radical Islam," on the heels of a radical Islamic attack in Paris, France.
I'm not surprised Hillary Clinton wasn't honest about it--hell, she's the type of liar who can tell the families of four dead Americans from the radical Islamic attack in Benghazi that the cause was a video a handful of people in the world got to see.
But for Bernie Sanders to tap dance around those words is almost sad. Sanders obviously didn't want to talk about Islamic terrorism and said that he didn't think the term "is what's important." (It sounded more like he used the word "impawtant" but I looked it up and it doesn't exist.)
As a Jew, Sanders is a member of Islam's most hated group of human beings. Jews are so hated by Muslims throughout the world, that Muslims don't consider them to be human, Nobel Prizes aside. Jews are referred to as 'apes,' by the religion of peace.
They aren't fond of Christians either, referring to us as 'pigs.' But look who's calling the kettle 'black.'
When the panel was asked if they agree with Sen. Marco Rubio who said that "We are at war with radical Islam," the wife of former President Bill Clinton said that calling it such would be "painting with too broad a brush," and also said the term was "not particularly helpful."
"I don't think we're at war with Islam. I don't think we're at war with all Muslims. I think we're at war with jihadists," the Scandal Queen said, as if jihadists and Muslims were of different religions and had nothing to do with each other.
Guess which party Muslims are going to be voting for. And guess how many "radical Islamic extremists" are going to be entering the country as refugees. The winner of this guessing contest wins an AK-47 and a year's supply of ammo.
On the other hand, Hillary did concede that we are at war with "violent extremists" who use religion for "power" and "oppression." That must have been hard for her to say, what with her closest aide, Huma Abedin, tied to the Muslim Brotherhood and Sisterhood by her own family.
Actually, Hill, Islam itself calls for power and oppression over ''unbelievers", but you would have known that if you had read the Koran, the Islamic version of Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals," a book you so love, a book dedicated to Lucifer. Even President Obama has quoted anarchist Alinsky to Israeli students.
Former Maryland Gov. O'Malley, like Hillary and Bernie, took the low road to avoid offending terrorists and non-violent Muslims. "I believe calling it what it is . . . radical jihadis. Let's not fall into the trap of thinking that all our Muslim-American neighbors in this country are somehow our enemies here. They are our first line of defense . . . We need our Muslim-American neighbors to stand up and to be part of this," said the man who backed down after saying that "all lives matter."
It looks like our "first line of defense" is being very quiet about the latest Paris attack, just like they were with the Charlie Hebdo attack back in January. If Muslim-Americans are our first line of defense, they need to speak up, speak out, and tell us who in their community sees us as the enemy.
But they don't.
O'Malley and his ideas are as useless as they were when he was the mayor of the failed city of Baltimore.
So far, French President Francois Hollande has shown strength--he called the Paris attack "an act of war" with ISIS. Now the ball is in his court, so to speak; we shall see what he does to back up his rhetoric.
Hopefully, Hollande will not take Hillary's advice of "showing "respect even for one's enemy," and to try to "empathize with their perspective and point of view." These are the words of an idiot who has no business being commander in chief of our nation. She tried to walk it back by saying "It is important to try to understand your adversary in order to figure out how they are thinking, what they will be doing, how they will react."
When you drop napalm on the bastards that immolated the caged Jordanian pilot, who gives a damn what they are thinking? We know how they will react--they will scream a lot and then they will stop screaming very quickly.That's how you fight a war--shock and awe--the strategy comes from knowing their ideology and calling it for what it is so that you can predict their next move and know where to find them.
Mosques might be a good place to look, but liberal idiots like Bill DeBlasio don't want to infiltrate them where they plan because like all PC leftists, they don't want to offend them.
Tweet
No comments:
Post a Comment