By Jim Lyde
Chief Operating Officer
FIRST PUBLISHED JULY 7, 2014
Let’s assume a belligerent dog attacks, you provide the dog with a little space and he continues to attack. He attacks your children from the bed of his puppies, and if you injure a puppy when you respond, the dog howls about your cruelty. Suppose a neighbor suggests a solution that is agreeable to you but not to the dog? What do you do? Would it be appropriate to ask the dog to discontinue the attacks as a prerequisite to further discussion? What about providing the dog with more space, closer to you, hoping that the dog with change his behavior? Perhaps, after repeatedly trying unsuccessfully to reason with the dog you should kill the dog and take back your space.
Israel now and historically faces this situation with its Islamic neighbors. The current aggressor is Hamas, a terrorist organization that is attacking from Gaza that was given to the Palestinians by Israel. President Obama treats this latest conflict as being between adversaries who each have a valid agenda. It most certainly is not. The rightful “ownership” of the territory Israel now occupies is a moot issue. Would it be appropriate to demand the resurrection of the Weimar Republic? Considering the issue on a local level, what about the land of Canaan or the Hittite Empire? The truth is that the geo-political landscape in the Middle East historically has been in constant transformation forever. Diplomatically, common sense related to this situation is in very short supply. How would the world react if Israel acted on the decision that Hamas/Palestine did not deserve to exist?
When analyzing Obama concerning the Middle East and elsewhere the tendency is to characterize him as being incompetent. He does radiate the odor of incompetence but the belief here is that the smell is that of arrogance. The incompetence characterization would be correct if Obama’s agenda involved objectives that are in accordance with American tradition. However, Obama has no such objectives. He is fine with what appears to “right thinking” Americans to be cowardly folly regarding “negotiations” with Iran. He has no objections to Iran having military nuclear capacity. Likewise, he is OK with the strife between Ukraine and Russia. This president has no qualms about the mess on our southern border, either. In fact, he is the principal creator of the mess. International turbulence is his preferred state of affairs.
Chief Operating Officer
FIRST PUBLISHED JULY 7, 2014
Let’s assume a belligerent dog attacks, you provide the dog with a little space and he continues to attack. He attacks your children from the bed of his puppies, and if you injure a puppy when you respond, the dog howls about your cruelty. Suppose a neighbor suggests a solution that is agreeable to you but not to the dog? What do you do? Would it be appropriate to ask the dog to discontinue the attacks as a prerequisite to further discussion? What about providing the dog with more space, closer to you, hoping that the dog with change his behavior? Perhaps, after repeatedly trying unsuccessfully to reason with the dog you should kill the dog and take back your space.
Israel now and historically faces this situation with its Islamic neighbors. The current aggressor is Hamas, a terrorist organization that is attacking from Gaza that was given to the Palestinians by Israel. President Obama treats this latest conflict as being between adversaries who each have a valid agenda. It most certainly is not. The rightful “ownership” of the territory Israel now occupies is a moot issue. Would it be appropriate to demand the resurrection of the Weimar Republic? Considering the issue on a local level, what about the land of Canaan or the Hittite Empire? The truth is that the geo-political landscape in the Middle East historically has been in constant transformation forever. Diplomatically, common sense related to this situation is in very short supply. How would the world react if Israel acted on the decision that Hamas/Palestine did not deserve to exist?
When analyzing Obama concerning the Middle East and elsewhere the tendency is to characterize him as being incompetent. He does radiate the odor of incompetence but the belief here is that the smell is that of arrogance. The incompetence characterization would be correct if Obama’s agenda involved objectives that are in accordance with American tradition. However, Obama has no such objectives. He is fine with what appears to “right thinking” Americans to be cowardly folly regarding “negotiations” with Iran. He has no objections to Iran having military nuclear capacity. Likewise, he is OK with the strife between Ukraine and Russia. This president has no qualms about the mess on our southern border, either. In fact, he is the principal creator of the mess. International turbulence is his preferred state of affairs.
Colonel Peters, who is a hero of mine, underestimates the President. The depth of the negative reaction may be more than he anticipated, but otherwise all is well in Obama's eyes thus far. The internal scandals and world situations fit nicely into his plan to reduce the economic power, political strength and exceptionalism of this nation. The only appropriate response is impeachment. Even if Speaker Boehner’s lawsuit against Obama achieves legal standing, it would not be resolved until years after Obama’s Constitutional term of office has expired. If Boehner should happen to "grow a set" and initiate impeachment proceedings the belief here is that Obama will try to declare martial law. He will use the international turbulence previously mentioned and growing national “lawlessness” as excuses. He may do so anyway if he sees a need to attempt to avoid the consequences of November's elections.
TLC has often opined that if one assumes Obama is a Muslim many things are better explained. Obama is an avowed Christian, but his Christianity is that of Jeremiah Wright, who espouses what is known as Black Liberal Theology. This “denomination” was founded by Marxist James Cone, and is at least as similar to Islam as it is to Christianity. Colonel Allen West is sharing an article he found by Thomas Lifson in the American Thinker. Lifson lists many Obama quotes on Islam and Christianity and offers comments. The first two presidential comments on Islam are: #1 - “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.” #2 - “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer.”
TLC has often opined that if one assumes Obama is a Muslim many things are better explained. Obama is an avowed Christian, but his Christianity is that of Jeremiah Wright, who espouses what is known as Black Liberal Theology. This “denomination” was founded by Marxist James Cone, and is at least as similar to Islam as it is to Christianity. Colonel Allen West is sharing an article he found by Thomas Lifson in the American Thinker. Lifson lists many Obama quotes on Islam and Christianity and offers comments. The first two presidential comments on Islam are: #1 - “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.” #2 - “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer.”
      | Democrats are currently softening the jaded appearance of the Obama fundraising tour in the face of crises the world over by using the term “optics,” as in “the optics are bad, but Obama is great,” etc. Let’s look at some “optics” related to Islamic symbolism and the President. We begin with what could be called the “classic crescent.” The crescent is a misnomer because it actually is the space between two circles and symbolizes Islamic domination of the world. Just below is the insignia of The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Note that the crescent has entirely surrounded the smaller circle. Does the white shape on the left remind you of Israel? The logo of the Islamic Palestine Block leaves no room for doubt. Here we have the earth resting on the Quran and encircled. The methodology for the takeover is war, as illustrated by the automatic weapon. Next let’s take a look at the icon for the Muslim American Society. Once again we have global domination depicted, in this case with special attention to the Americas. Finally, let’s look at the modern symbol for the United States Missile Defense Agency, then compare it to the icon for the Obama presidential campaign. How does this progression of symbols relate to your view regarding America’s continuing right to independently exist? To quote Colonel West: In my assessment, there is a very clear and evident bias, and when combined with certain actions — as in Libya, Egypt, and towards Israel — well, you assess for yourself. Be an American Thinker. And then be a Guardian of the Republic. |
RSS Feed