I wrote earlier this week about the perplexing stand that President Obama has taken which seemingly aligns him with Islamists. The only plausible deduction is that Obama and his administration are complicit in aiding and abetting the enemy – especially given the desire to release more unlawful enemy combatants from detention in GITMO.We have a rate of recidivism of approximately 30 percent. In other words, one in three of these jihadists return to the battlefield to fight against our men and women. However, Obama seems more focused on campaign promises and his far left ideology than our national security.
Now it appears the White House has found a way to promote the safety and security of our men and women in uniform — by surrendering one of our most fundamental rights.As reported by The Daily Caller, “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.”
“The unprecedented reversal of Americans’ civil-military relations, and of the president’s duty to protect the First Amendment, was pushed by Earnest as he tried to excuse the administration’s opposition in 2012 to the publication of anti-jihadi cartoons by the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.”
So President Obama is now using our men and women in uniform in his blatant attempt to deny our First Amendment rights? Instead of a president who stands up and defines the Islamic terrorist enemy and open a dialogue and debate on the truth, he will now hide behind protecting our troops as a reason to suppress our First Amendment rights of free speech and free press.I have no words to describe this action. Now I know why Obama didn’t attend the rally or dispatch any senior member of the administration. Apparently he agrees with the savages who assaulted the offices of Charlie Hebdo – it was they who provoked the Islamic barbarians.
The president of the United States does not have a “moral responsibility to push back on the nation’s journalist community” — he has a duty to faithfully execute our laws, the Constitution.
In that Constitution you will find the very First Amendment — which is the duty of the president to defend. And instead of trying to “push back” or control the journalist community, why not leverage every aspect of our nation’s power — which includes our the dissemination of information (and theoretically the truth) — to defeat the ideology of the Islamo-fascists?Why is the White House advocating the suppression of our voices? I guess he really meant it when he stated at the United Nations, “The future does not belong to those who slander the prophet Muhammad.”
The Daily Caller says, “in 2012, there was a genuine concern that the publication of some of those materials could put Americans abroad at risk, including American soldiers at risk,” Earnest said. “That is something that the commander in chief takes very seriously,” he added, before saying that “the president and his spokesman was not then and 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.”
This is a major policy statement by the White House when they see it as their “moral responsibility” to prevent jihadist attacks against our military by surrendering our First Amendment rights. As Benjamin Franklin once quipped, “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”And excuse me, but when did Obama become so caring about jihadist attacks against our military? He didn’t care enough about Nidal Hasan’s December 2009 Islamic jihadist attack — since it’s still classified by his administration as workplace violence. And what “anti-jihadi” articles sent Hasan over the edge? Or what about Carlos Bledsoe who traveled to Yemen and Somalia for Islamic terrorist training after he converted by way of radicalization – and then returned to the United States and shot two Soldiers at a Little Rock recruiting station, killing one. So what “anti-jihadi” articles sent Bledsoe over the edge?
I’m sorry, but it must be stated clearly and distinctly. There can no longer be any equivocating: the decisions, actions, and policies of President Obama confirm he is an Islamist sympathizer.
This was the final nail in the coffin for me — and should be for all of you. I’m just waiting for the progressive socialists who will condemn what I just said. I ask y’all simply, are you willing to have your First Amendment rights eradicated under the guise of protecting our troops from jihadist attacks, when this administration has allowed them to be the target of jihadist attacks — and said nothing?
This is nothing more than a ruse and why? Why is it so important to President Obama to cover for the Islamists? Yes, let me remind you of Voltaire’s words: “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”
Sadly, we are finding out who is ruling over us — those who cry “Islamophobia” as a means of censorship. Those who burn media offices and kill journalists or folks like Theo Van Gogh — and the progressive socialists sit back and don’t blame the 7th century Mohammedans but rather the victims — Western civilization, its principles and values.
This is inexcusable and cannot be tolerated — our troops can take care of themselves and don’t need Obama’s protection, since it hasn’t stemmed the tide of jihadist attacks.
Perhaps the president should stop releasing Islamic jihadists from GITMO who return to the battlefield against our men and women in uniform.
Eric Holder once said that America was a “nation of cowards.” As Michael Jackson sang, I recommend Barack Obama, Eric Holder and Josh Earnest look at “the man in the mirror.”