Is the President dense, in denial, delusional, or a liar? Let's go with liar - recall he lied about his own health plan.
Why does “BO” “BS?” A compelling theory as to why he lies and glosses over extremist Muslim atrocities is because he’s angling for the UN Secretary-General job and he needs to be a toady to Islam if he wants the 57 members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to back him.
It would be nice if the president could see the Muslim-macabre elephant in the room - instead of declaring the elephant, irrelevant, but the Secretary-General position fits. It’s a useless job, and he’s been useless, so he should do well - by United Nations standards.
For those that believe that Islam, 100% is swell, and that “terrorism knows no religion" how do they square the fact that ISIS stands for: Islamic State? It’s a shame such people, usually on the left, can’t connect the dots.
Obama, and other Americans in the Democratic Party blithely, insanely, or naively, assume that the name is a false flag; ISIS, in no way, is acting in an Islamic way.
(Note to all: ISIS is but one of a myriad of Muslim-terrorist groups that loathe Jews 1st, Christians 2nd, all other infidels 3rd - and non-correct Muslims 4th.)
Lefties - academics, liberals, progressives - always harp on us heathen regressives about how dumb we are. Geez, we ignoramuses should aspire to be smart, like Bernie Sanders, who, in the Saturday demo-party debate, said weather (climate change) was the biggest world worry, despite knowing of the Friday Paris Islamic-terrorist strikes.
Al-Azhar is a mosque/university, tethered in Cairo. It’s an A-list intellectual institution, so far as Sunni thoughts go. And in December, 2014 they said they don’t consider ISIS apostates but also said ISIS was NOT in lock-step with mainstream Muslims mores.
But not surprisingly, mainstream media stupidly took either the politically correct route, or the scaredy cat route, in giving radical Islam a pass for the Paris debacle.
Reuters pussy footed around, proffering non-defined gunman and bombers as culprits. The Canadian Broadcasting Network cited ISIS first, Marine Le Pen second, and the American Republican Party third, as concerns, in its initial take. Slate Magazine pondered: Why France Again, then talked tactics with “Urban warfare” tritely brandished and bandied up...
NBC News missed the putt. They were flummoxed “...unknown motivations.” The UK Guardian surmised: “It is possible that the targets hit last night were chosen to send a particular message.”
You don’t say...
France 24 quoted the Islamic State’s bragging, but euphemized them as “militants” not terrorists.
Even French President Francois Hollande didn’t get it right in his reaction – though he could be excused of being a bit shell shocked as he was at the soccer game during the jihadists killing fields action – when he vowed to wage a "merciless" fight against terrorism.
Every thinking person knows the amorphous “terrorism” is useless as a description because it doesn’t pin point the source(s) or rationale(s) behind it. Are the Baptists or the Methodists to blame? Or possibly the secularists or atheists? As Bill Maher would say, it’s probably not the Amish.
Barack talked of the “universal values we all share.” It’s a throwaway line of his, and it’s totally wrong in ALL contexts. There are NO universal, planetary, global, local, or yokel values our world holds in unity. The Islamic terrorists, blowup-job-atrocitists, who wasted themselves and razed and ruined scores of others’ lives, share nothing of western, first world - Judeo-Christian – you know, decent - beliefs, credos, or values.
Barack, however, says he wants to help.
Start at home.
Shout out Malik Hassan’s Fort Hood massacre as an act of terror. Right now your administration, in egregious error, calls it “workplace violence.”
Back to France. Despite the latest carnage there, it seems that that country, inexorably, if somewhat initially unwittingly, or unknowingly, is going to replace Gallic with Islamic, thanks to their acceptance of Islamic peoples via immigration and to those Islamic folks having high birth rates once settled.
Germany, in 40 years or so, could be a majority-Muslim country.
Merkel probably feels guilty for Nazi evils and thinks drowning Germanic peoples in Muslim cultures is the way to pool resources.
Until France, Germany, Sweden – no forget Sweden, their Islamic nuts are pretty happy with the Paris plot - America, and Canada - under the newly elected Justin Trudeau - admit publicly, that the battle is against radical Islamic-Muslim elements, such travesties in the west, third world - and Muslim-majority countries - will continue – despite UK’s David Cameron declaring Islam is a religion of peace.
British Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, warned of a rush to judgment, and then warmed to a rush of judgment - saying multiculturalism was wondrous...
French President Hollande said the attack was from elements outside of France, though at least five of the eight terrorists were French nationals. There are an estimated 1.7 million Muslims in the greater metropolitan Paris area. How many of these people are disaffected or disappointed in the French model?
How many would resort to, or abet, or silently support, terrorism against fellow citizens due to discrimination, French actions in Syria, or perceived decadence of the West-French?
That’s the percentage that approves of ISIS, in France, in the 18-24 year old group, regardless of religious affiliation, according to a poll taken in 2014.
For Barack Obama, however – in 2015 - he went as extreme as he could go – saying:
Paris was a setback.