Inasmuch as I’ll be having some extensive oral surgery in a few hours, I was planning simply to announce a day off from Liberty’s Torch. What actually happened was a powerful lesson about not reading Internet news sources this early in the morning:
President Barack Obama has a moral responsibility to push back on the nation’s journalism community when it is planning to publish anti-jihadi articles that might cause a jihadi attack against the nation’s defense forces, the White House’s press secretary said Jan. 12.“The president … will not now be shy about expressing a view or taking the steps that are necessary to try to advocate for the safety and security of our men and women in uniform” whenever journalists’ work may provoke jihadist attacks, spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at the White House’s daily briefing.
Clearly, despite all my efforts I don’t catch every important development just as it develops. But wait: there’s more!
Obama’s willingness to pressure media outlets, to quit defending First Amendment rights and also to mollify jihadis, reflects Obama’s overall policy of minimizing conflict with militant Islam.Throughout his presidency, Obama has tried to shift the public’s focus away from the jihadi threat toward his domestic priorities.
He also repeatedly praised Islam and Muslims, and criticized criticism of Islam. “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” he told a worldwide TV audience during a September 2012 speech at the United Nations.
It’s always been clear that Obama favors Islam over American interests and the Western code of justice. What’s now all too apparent is that he’s resolved to destroy the right to free expression for that reason.
Why not? Freedom of expression is a thorn in Obama’s flesh. This isn’t just consistent with his pro-Islam personal views; it’s also a perfect entering wedge for politically motivated censorship and manipulation of the media. It will provide him with a rationale for taking control of the Internet, for putting government “advisors” – armed, no doubt – into the editorial departments of major media organs, and for demanding “equal time” from any such organ that dares to act other than in accordance with his wishes.
There can be only one answer to this, short of forcibly evicting this pretender from the White House and decorating a prominent District of Columbia lamppost with his remains. Every American with any public voice, no matter how small, must immediately raise it in the strongest possible act of defiance.
You Camel-Fellating Fairy:
Let hell come to breakfast. It’s time and past time. Now if you’ll excuse me, I should let my blood pressure drop a bit before I go under the knife.
I don't keep up my read-by-almost-no one blog, but I will post this there to demonstrate my solidarity with Fran's sentiments concerning this SCFOAMF.
ReplyDeleteIt saddened me to discover recently that an author I used to admire - Michael Z. Williamson - feels that most muslims are sweet. loving, incredibly nice people maligned by us "islamaphobes" simply because there are a few bad muslim boys out there making islam look bad. I thought he was brighter than that, but evidently I was wrong.
Worse, he wasn't adult enough to respond with a cogent argument, he simply ran a rabid ad hominem attack against my comments re: ISIS being a perfect example of an open and honest demonstration of islam.
Never would have thought he and Obama saw eye-to-eye like that. What a shame.
hope your surgeon is not a muslim - or at least doesn't read this until you're in recovery :)
ReplyDeleteYou couldn't insist on written surgery instead?
ReplyDeleteMessage to Obama, and all the other apologists for Islam: No.
ReplyDeleteIt's not peaceful. It's not morally equivalent. And it's not Islamophobic to point that out.
When Islam has launched over 700 attacks on the West in 1400 years, and the West has "died hard" protecting itself, there is something more than Obama's press secretary trying to make it all better going on.
As Ann Barnhardt might say, "There's a war goin' on."
What's obscene is how few of the 435(?) Congressmen, 100 Senators, 9 SC justices and millions of other fed, state and local members of our "government" seem willing to admit this thousand-year, fundamental and undeniable truth.
I didn't know better when I first heard about multi-culturalism and diversity. But I believe it now: A culture isn't multi-cultural; not all cultures are equal; and diversity is often a code word for undermining the morals that maintain a culture.