No Guts, No Freedom

Obama's strategy to train Iraqi forces and provide them with weapons is as brilliant as his plan to fund companies like Solyndra and provide them with taxpayer money. Both are out of business.

According to Defense Secretary Ash Carter, Iraqi forces were not outgunned or out manned in Ramadi, they simply displayed "no will to fight." So my guess is that Obama will throw more taxpayer dollars at the problem, as if that will change anything.

Carter spoke on CNN's "State of the Union" about last week's battle stating that the Iraqi forces far outnumbered the ISIS scumcrumpets. "What apparently happened is the Iraqi forces just showed no will to fight. They were not outnumbered. In fact, they vastly outnumbered the opposing force. That says to me," Carter said, "and I think to most of us, that we have an issue with the will of the Iraqis to fight ISIL and defend themselves."

What it says to me is that Obama never seems to make the right decisions.

Hakim al-Zamili, head of Iraq's parliamentary defense and security committee, responded to Carter's claims stating the U.S. military commanders failed to support the Iraqis and are pointing fingers of blame on them. According to al-Zamili, Carter's claims are "unrealistic and baseless," and U.S. military is simply trying to "throw the blame on somebody else."

Personally, I blame the mothers and fathers of the Iraqi fighters who have failed to provide their offspring with a sense of patriotism and civic duty.

I also blame the lack of testicular fortitude of the "fighters" themselves--the Brownies have more courage than those dudes.

Ramadi is less than a quarter of a tank of gas from Baghdad, about 70 miles, and is a strategic win for ISIS in more ways than one. It's a recruiting tool for young and impressionable psychopaths and controls much of the western part of Iraq.

Ramadi has fueled questions about Obama's approach in Iraq: retraining the Iraqi so-called army while rebuilding it, and pushing Baghdad to make nice to Iraq's Sunnis and bombing the Islamic State targets without using American forces.

"No denying it is a setback," White House spokesman Eric Schultz said. (Eric is not related to Ed Schultz, but if he were, he would have said Obama is doing a great job and the GOP can go to hell.)

While Carter defended his paycheck by saying the airstrikes are an effective strategy against ISIL, he admitted that they cannot be a replacement for Iraqi forces willing to defend their country. 

Carter also said that there are no military plans to send U.S. troops into the fight as target spotters, which means that the Obama administration is okay with having the appearance of fighting ISIL by blowing up empty buildings and riderless camels but he obviously doesn't see the Islamic State as a threat.

Perhaps he sees them as a future ally once Israel is out of the picture.

The Islamic State inherited about 6 tanks, 6 artillery pieces, dozens of armored personnel carriers and about 100 Humvees. IS considers this booty just like their prophet did--they were also hoping for sex slaves.




Tweet

Obama al-Jazeera bin Lyin

How different is Al-Jazeera's whitewashing of Islamic barbarism from the Obama administration's? Answer: as different as identical twins.

Al-Jazeera America began by pretending it would cover the news honestly and in depth, but it apparently has as much depth as the snake oil salesman, Al Jazeera Gore, who sold them the slot in 2013 from Current.

The National Review obtained an email that directed Al Jazeera's propagandist "reporters" to not use terms such as "jihad," Islamist," and "terrorist." A top executive for the company, Carlos Van Meek, wrote to the New York and Washington newsrooms about how words can become problematic and also said, "One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter."

"Freedom fighter" shoots unarmed cop

Or "activist," if you work for CNN, as Christiane Amanpour called the Charlie Hebdo terrorists who massacred the staff at the newspaper. 

Scum buckets who kill children, behead journalists and others while screaming "Allahu Akbar!" are not freedom fighters. The children and journalists they kill are not in any way compromising their freedom. They are terrorists, and Islamic terrorists to be clear. The people who killed 3000 Americans and others on 911 were not freedom fights or militants; they were terrorists, of the Islamic kind.

Van Meek, who fits his name, said we should call terrorists "militants," or "fighters." He said that calling them extremists is forbidden. "Do not use the term Islamist," he said, because it's a "simplistic label."

Van Meek's level of political correctness has reached a point of pandering to Islamic terrorists. Al Jazeera is a champion at pandering--before they pandered in America, they pandered to Osama bin Laden and his terrorists of the Islamic kind. 

But don't fret, patriots, Al Jazeera has about as many prime-time viewers (18,000) as an Al Sharpton anti-white march.

So what about Obama and the boys on the left? Well, they're trying to convince us that Jordan's plan to swap Sajida al-Rishawi the terrorist, for Muath al-Kaseasbeh, the Jordanian pilot, is not the same as the Bergdahl trade last year. 

Bergdahl, a deserter at best, and a traitor at worst, was traded for the release of 5 Taliban terrorists at worst, and Islamic terrorists at best from Gitmo. 

Eric Schultz from the State Department made the case that the Taliban is not a terrorist group but an "armed insurgency." This Obama butt-boy claimed that "we don't pay ransom, we don't give concessions to terrorist organizations." So by this logic, the Taliban cannot be a terrorist organization because we made a concession. That's what we call an argument from fallacy:

We only make concessions with non-terrorist organizations.
We made concessions with the Taliban.
Therefore, the Taliban is a non-terrorist organization.

What we need to consider, in order to determine whether or not the Taliban is a terrorist organization, is our observations and the answers to the following questions:

1. If the Taliban was designated a terrorist organization during the Obama administration in 2010, and identified Hakimullah Mehsud and Wali ur-Rehman as specially designated global terrorists, has anything changed to declassify the Taliban as terrorists?

2. Does the killing of 141 people, 132 of them children at a Peshawar school by the Taliban, qualify them as terrorists?

3. Does the use of Improvised Explosive Devices, used to indiscriminately kill human beings, qualify the users of such devices (i.e., the Taliban) as terrorists?

If you still think the Taliban is merely an "armed insurgency," you might be a lberal.

Tweet

Deal of a Life

Not even her hairdresser knows

Jordan has finally agreed to release "the sister of the Caliphate," Sajida al-Rishawi, a one-time Islamic beauty queen, whose explosive vest failed to go off and kill innocent civilians in a Jordan hotel back in 2005. She wants a "do-over," I suspect. 

By releasing the fetching hijab-covered Sajida, ISIS said it would release the Jordanian pilot held hostage, but left Japan in the dark about their journalist who they planned to behead as they did with the other Japanese man who was killed.

By dealing with the enemy of human life, the door has been left open over the issue of negotiating with puss-bags. When asked about Jordan's position, Jen Psaki, State Department spokes liberal said that every country "has the ability and right to make decisions.," but added, "we don't make concessions to terrorists."

Unless it's to trade five Islamic terrorists for a deserter and traitor. But it must not be important since she wasn't pinned down with a question about that deal.

Eric Schultz (no relation to Ed Schultz, who isn't human to begin with) said that U.S. policy insists "we don't pay ransom, we don't give concessions to terrorist organizations," tried to distinguish the current proposed trade with the terrorist scumbag-traitor trade (i.e., 5 Taliban for 1 Bergdahl) by claiming it was part of an "end of conflict interaction." He then threw more bull excrement claiming the Taliban are an "armed insurgency," while ISIS is a "terrorist group."

Honestly, how stupid does this administration think the American people are? I thought after the Gruber nailing they would have learned their lesson, not to insult our intelligence. But then again, they did fool the left into thinking Obama can walk on water. It was easy to do because Obama believes it himself.

Sajida exposes herself

To say the Taliban is not a terrorist group is an insult to terrorist groups. When you shoot a woman in the back of the head for showing her wrist, what would you call them, a disciplinary team?

I think the trade Jordan plans to make is actually a good one. Surprise! I believe so because the pilot, Lt. Muath al-Kaseasbeh, is a valuable asset with all the training he has received. That is not to minimize the propaganda value of the hottie who wasn't hot enough to go off. She may go off in the future, which would be a tragedy. Hopefully, she will go off prematurely and kill a few comrades along the way. (Does she get 72 virgin dudes when she goes?)

We don't know what Kenji Goto the Japanese journalist's fate is going to be. I don't think my making a prediction matters one iota, but I can only hope they make him part of the deal. 

I don't know how much Jordan cares if they deal for the journalist or not. After all, he is an infidel.

Tweet

Obama's Future Plan for Gitmo and the USA

Hussein Obama may be preparing to close the Guantanamo Bay prison facility in Cuba. According to a Wall Street Journal story, the White House is "drafting options" allowing our jihad-sympathizing president to close Gitmo by overriding congressional restrictions on bringing Islamic jihadists to the U.S.

I pray the prisoners all head over to Gwyneth Paltrow's mansion where she can volunteer to become their sex slave and "go jihad" all over her.

The White House responded to the story by claiming Barack Hussein opposes the restrictions (he likes his jihadists up close and personal here in the U.S. A.) but his first choice is to work with both parties in resolving this issue (and do things his way).

If you believe he really wants to work with both parties, check out this genuine Rolex watch here inside my coat.

"For many years now, we've always looked at options to close Guantanamo Bay," White House butt-boy, Eric Schultz told the press. You remember Schultz--he was the Nazi Sergeant who said "I don't know nuthink; I don't see nuthink."

It doesn't matter to Obama that most Americans oppose by a huge margin the closing down of the facility. Nor does it matter to our illustrious community organizer Alinsky socialist that we are in the throes of war with ISIS, even though he refuses to call it a war.

What matters to Obama is that he fundamentally change America.

And the change is going according to plan. He is reducing the influence of the U.S. in favor of a global government, where no one nation stands above another. Where none is really exceptional. Where a global economy rules the earth.

He might even call it Communism.

Tweet