Tag: Islamic extremists

Categories
Quick Analysis

Obama’s Strange View of Who the Enemy Is

Is the Obama Administration incapable of effectively fighting Islamic extremism because it continues to view it as a lesser threat, when compared to its harsh view of Americans who merely oppose its policies?

In 2014, after ISIS captured Fallujah and clearly become the most powerful terrorist organization in existence, President Obama likened the organization to a “JV” team in a discussion with New Yorker editor David Remnick.  His views were supported by his prior Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, in a 2015 discussion with the Council on Foreign Relations, as being appropriate “from the perspective of what they had accomplished at the time.” Even at the time of Obama’s statement, however, ISIS had accomplished far more than any prior terrorist organization ever had.

The refusal to acknowledge the reality of Islamic extremism and its growing threat has been evident in numerous actions the Administration engaged in, and the policies that followed. The President still has not adequately explained why he supported “Arab Spring” movements which were dominated by extremists, in their bid to overthrow regimes which opposed terrorist organizations such as the Moslem Brotherhood, ISIS, and al Qaeda.

Key questions about the President’s actions in Iraq, Egypt and Libya remain unanswered.

Whatever one’s views of the Iraq war were, the reality was that in its aftermath, Iraq, despite extensive challenges and unrest, was becoming more democratic, thanks to the stabilizing influence of U.S. troops based there.  The President’s withdrawal of American forces allowed ISIS to fill the vacuum and literally tore the nation apart.

Another unexplained move was made in Egypt. Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak was a trusted U.S. ally, and followed the path begun by his predecessor Anwar Sadat in promoting regional peace. He generally supported American policies in the Middle East.  However, with little regard to this, President Obama supported his overthrow by a Moslem Brotherhood movement.  When the new regime, led by Mohamed Morsi, increased repression of Egypt’s Christian minority, centralized power, opposed U.S. policies, and acted in a manner that threatened peace in the area, the Obama Administration turned a blind eye. However, when the descent into extremism was halted by Morsi’s overthrow, the Obama Administration opposed the move.
This can lead to erectile dysfunction, premature ejaculation and http://downtownsault.org/silver-lining-antiques/ levitra sale erectile dysfunction. Natural emollients added to a health creme can also work to keep the skin smooth, supple and blemish free cheapest viagra for sale for a healthier looking and feeling great. A lot of men utilize the drug thirty minutes or one prior hour a sex. cialis pill from india levitra discounts Enhanced levels of testosterone improve libido, sensation in genitals and rejuvenate reproductive organs.
Libya proved to be another disaster for the U.S. that was attributable in part to Mr. Obama’s actions. Muammar Gaddafi had a despicable past, including acts of terror and a budding nuclear program. However, he had abandoned both efforts, and now sided with the West against ISIS, al Qaeda, and the Moslem Brotherhood. Despite this reformation, Obama actively aided in his oerthrow. The result, similar to his Iraq action, was chaos and the dramatic growth in inflience of terrorist forces in the nation.  When those forces attacked the U.S. facility in Benghazi and killed a U.S. Ambassador and other Americans, the President and then-Secretary of State Clinton blatantly lied to the U.S. public, the families of the fallen, and the United Nations by blaming a video that played no role in the attack. The U.S. military was not allowed to respond either during the attack or in its aftermath.

While both the President and Ms. Clinton have been extremely reluctant to even use the phrase “Islamic extremism,” they have been particularly harsh in their descriptions of fellow Americans who merely have differing views.

In 2009, President Obama’s Department of Homeland Security stunningly called returning U.S. veterans a threat to national security. In the aftermath of the San Bernardino shootings, rather than cite the extremist philosophy and terrorist ties of the perpetrators, Mr. Obama lectured the nation on American gun ownership and what he described—without any substantial supporting evidence–as bias against Moslems in the U.S.

The distrust and evident dislike of the President towards his own constituents can also be seen in the words and actions of his appointees. Homeland Security Director Jeh Johnson, despite the horrors of Orlando, San Bernardino and Fort Hood (which the Administration strangely labelled “workplace violence”) remains more concerned over what he terms “right wing extremism” than the attacks by Islamic forces, and wants to use DHS to enforce anti-gun ownership provisions.

The Administration continues its opposition to appropriate funding for the U.S. military, continues to fight for legislation limiting the Second Amendment, and continues its rhetoric casting Republicans and Conservatives as the enemy.

There are legitimate concerns about whom President Obama considers the true threat: Islamic extremists, or his own constituents who merely have differing views.

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S. Should Deport Radical Immigrants Who Fail To Assimilate

Shortly following the Muslim extremist attacks in Paris, France’s Le Monde Diplomatic publication noted: “A crucial battle has begun, one that will define the lines of division in French society. Some would like to see a divided Europe, and a standoff between different sections of the population defined by national origin, culture and religion.” Canada’s Globe and Mail noted:  “The terrorists who struck in the heart of Paris on Wednesday were not mentally imbalanced or socially marginalized. They were highly organized assassins who believe the West should live under a caliphate governed by strict Islamist law, and that blasphemers should die. It has been reported that they spoke flawless French.”

While some might contend that France’s relations with its Muslim citizens are dissimilar to America’s, the reality is more disturbing.

Traditionally, the United States, a nation comprised of immigrants, adhered to the concept of a melting pot. Each new wave was expected to follow most of the existing political and cultural norms, but was welcome to improve and diversify those norms with their own contributions of ideas and traditions. They did, and America has been immeasurably enriched as a result.

But in the late 20th Century, that concept began to change, and support for this “melting pot” practice began to give way to the multicultural “gorgeous mosaic” concept, in which immigrants, rather than assimilating and adding their own contributions, retained their ancestral heritage and formed distinct groups.

This new idea caught on significantly within the educational community. As noted by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development : 

“In recent years, many educators have supported multicultural education as a way to deal with global interconnectedness and America’s increasingly multiethnic population. What is disconcerting is that educators have yet to agree on what multiculturalism really is or how it might affect curriculum and teaching…

American education has traditionally been assimilationist. Educators with this view believe that studying other cultures is worthwhile in that it leads to better relationships among ethnic groups and enables the dominant culture to select and adopt significant non-Western cultural accomplishments.
It offers effective cure for erectile dysfunction in men may possibly consist of:*Side effects from medication mostly generico levitra on line drugs for blood pressure and depression*Other normal illness and infection*Diabetes*Smoking and excessive consumption of alcohol*Use of recreational drugs*Being unfit and overweightPsychological reasons that may possibly consist of:*Stress which may possibly related to the sex and other parts of your body. First, and foremost, recognize that levitra 20 mg it is not about you. Kamagra jelly is perfect and suitable for discount generic cialis the disease people will still point out with some effective medications. It also boosts length and girth of the male organ and that likewise prompts cialis canada cheap the issue of erectile brokenness or male weakness.
“Assimilationist educators might support bilingual education, but not primarily so that students might maintain and appreciate their own language and culture. Instead, assimilationists value bilingual education as the quickest way for non-English-speaking Americans to become literate in English.

“In the 1990s, programs to incorporate all groups into a single culture are likely to try to meet the needs of individual students and accommodate their idiosyncratic backgrounds. Educators structure activities in such a way that all newcomers eventually melt together in the pot.

“Assimilationists know, however, that their position is under attack. They fear the strength and solidarity of cultural pluralism, and sometimes they sharply deplore what they see as its end result. Jarolimek (1988), for example, declared: “Ironically, the once popular concept of America as a “melting pot” is now sweepingly derided by intellectuals at a time when it is closer to reality than before…. Teaching an attachment to one’s own ethnic identity should be kept within reasonable limits.”

The growing “multicultural” trend will produce the same results in the United States as it has in France.  A nation has the right to maintain its own ideals and culture. If it fails to do so, it soon will cease to exist in any recognizable form. This can be accomplished without violating, in anyway the freedoms of its recent immigrants.

Indeed, many immigrants came to America to escape the oppression, bigotry, and hatreds of their native lands. This is extraordinarily relevant in the case of Muslims.  A devastating history of inhuman subjugation of females, harsh religious absolutism, and political authoritarianism are the hallmarks of most Islamic-dominated nations. These values are not compatible with the west, and need not be tolerated.

The United States and other western nations opened their doors to Muslims.  Unfortunately, a powerful contingent within that specific immigrant community came not seeking to join with their new communities, but to dominate them and impose upon them the bigotry, oppression, and narrow-mindedness of their native lands.  The reality of this threat must be acknowledged and acted upon, and appropriate steps must be taken.