Obama Reviews Please. First, He Did Not Mention The Name/Race Of The San Bernardino Shooters.

[Contumacious]

I guess nobody has told him, but putting someone on a no-fly list without due process and infringing on someone's right to keep and bear arms without due process are both wrong. The latter is a Second Amendment violation, and both are Fifth Amendment violations.

Not that he or his followers care, of course.

obama forgot to mention that he created ISIS when he took our soldiers away from IRAQ

Then it would be Bush who created it by invading a sovereign country without just cause. See ACTION=REACTION....Bush's ACTION caused a REACTION when we did the right thing and left..course you idiots blame Obama...we should have never fucking been there. On another hand I can't believe anyone even watched that shit. I didn't bother.

WITHOUT A JUST CAUSE IS CORRECT

BUT OUR PREZ IS CONTROLLED BY THE ZIONUTS

SO TO HIM ANNEXING A PART OF SYRIA TO ISRAHELL AND MAKING THE LATTER A REGIONAL POWER IS A "JUST CAUSE"


.

You're a nutbag who needs to be on the terrorist watch list.

SHALOM.


HOW IS THE WEATHER IN TELAVIV?

NOW GO FELLATE BIBI

 

[Hossfly]

Did anyone else say the same thing. As Obama was giving the details of who the shooters were, he didn't mention their names and race. Yet we all know their names, so why not just say it in the speech?
But you have to wonder, if the guys name was something like "Michael Andrews" and was a "White Conservative" from a western state, you think he would of brought up his name?

Also, Obama said he goes to all of his "Daily Briefings"? yah, and 65% of all Americans are that dumb to believe that!

And give these two assholes the publicity they were craving? No, no need. They've been given enough air time as it is.

In other words, if ISIS should cause another attack similar to 9/11, we should send them fruitcakes for Christmas in order to keep from pissing them off by going after them? Makes sense to me.

 

[Preacher]

I guess nobody has told him, but putting someone on a no-fly list without due process and infringing on someone's right to keep and bear arms without due process are both wrong. The latter is a Second Amendment violation, and both are Fifth Amendment violations.

Not that he or his followers care, of course.

obama forgot to mention that he created ISIS when he took our soldiers away from IRAQ

Then it would be Bush who created it by invading a sovereign country without just cause. See ACTION=REACTION....Bush's ACTION caused a REACTION when we did the right thing and left..course you idiots blame Obama...we should have never fucking been there. On another hand I can't believe anyone even watched that shit. I didn't bother.

Except for Hillary saying AQ was in Iraq and Bill saying Iraq had WMDs when Bush took office, ignorant stooge tool.

And you seem to think democrats are any smarter or truthful than republicans are...and you have the balls to call ME ignorant....whew boy. I don't give a SHIT who says what....the US had NO RIGHT and NO BUSINESS invading Iraq.

Everything was FINE in IRAQ/surrounding nations until BAMBI came along!

Sure if you didn't mind the 2nd Vietnam war going on there....I personally have a problem with American boys and girls dying for politicians and corporations..and an American Empire.

 

[Timmy]

Did he mention the name and race of the planned parenthood shooter? The Oregon school shooter?

Oh I forget , we don't talk about those shootings . Even though they are the latest in a long line .

 

[SwimExpert]

Everything was FINE in IRAQ/surrounding nations until BAMBI came along!

 

[Contumacious]

Did anyone else say the same thing. As Obama was giving the details of who the shooters were, he didn't mention their names and race. Yet we all know their names, so why not just say it in the speech?
But you have to wonder, if the guys name was something like "Michael Andrews" and was a "White Conservative" from a western state, you think he would of brought up his name?

Also, Obama said he goes to all of his "Daily Briefings"? yah, and 65% of all Americans are that dumb to believe that!

And give these two assholes the publicity they were craving? No, no need. They've been given enough air time as it is.

In other words, if ISIS should cause another attack similar to 9/11, we should send them fruitcakes for Christmas in order to keep from pissing them off by going after them? Makes sense to me.

ARE YOU A ZIONUT , REALLY?


IN THAT CASE, WHAT IS YOUR BEEF?

DAESCH IS SELLING YOU FUCKERS OIL AT $15 A BARREL; AND IS FIGHTING ASSAD FOR YOU.

A WIN WIN SITUATION FOR YOU BASTARDS.


.

 

[KevinMcCarthyToo]

I guess nobody has told him, but putting someone on a no-fly list without due process and infringing on someone's right to keep and bear arms without due process are both wrong. The latter is a Second Amendment violation, and both are Fifth Amendment violations.

Not that he or his followers care, of course.

obama forgot to mention that he created ISIS when he took our soldiers away from IRAQ

Nope. ISIS was formed by al-Baghdadi while imprisoned at Camp Bucca in Iraq in 2005-2006

Obama complied w SOFA treaty of 2011 and was obligated to have all troops out by December 31, 2011

 

[Timmy]

He has never said "Islamic" and "terrorism" together.
Why?
He is a traitor.

Guess GW bush is also a traitor ?

 

[KevinMcCarthyToo]

Did he mention the name and race of the planned parenthood shooter? The Oregon school shooter?

Oh I forget , we don't talk about those shootings . Even though they are the latest in a long line .

Paris attacks are just a distant memory

 

[Contumacious]

He has never said "Islamic" and "terrorism" together.
Why?
He is a traitor.

Guess GW bush is also a traitor ?

YEP, WAR CRIMINAL BUSH

1) ALLOWED THE ZIONUTS TO TAKE CONTROL OF THE PENTAGON

2) COMMITTED TREASON AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION

 

[Sunni Man]

I feel Obama is a traitor to America and her citizens.

Obama is a incompetent president.....but No, he is not a traitor. ......

 

[Timmy]

Did he mention the name and race of the planned parenthood shooter? The Oregon school shooter?

Oh I forget , we don't talk about those shootings . Even though they are the latest in a long line .

Paris attacks are just a distant memory

Paris ain't america .

FRench are big boys . They can take care of Themsleves .

 

[Hossfly]

Did anyone else say the same thing. As Obama was giving the details of who the shooters were, he didn't mention their names and race. Yet we all know their names, so why not just say it in the speech?
But you have to wonder, if the guys name was something like "Michael Andrews" and was a "White Conservative" from a western state, you think he would of brought up his name?

Also, Obama said he goes to all of his "Daily Briefings"? yah, and 65% of all Americans are that dumb to believe that!

And give these two assholes the publicity they were craving? No, no need. They've been given enough air time as it is.

In other words, if ISIS should cause another attack similar to 9/11, we should send them fruitcakes for Christmas in order to keep from pissing them off by going after them? Makes sense to me.

ARE YOU A ZIONUT , REALLY?


IN THAT CASE, WHAT IS YOUR BEEF?

DAESCH IS SELLING YOU FUCKERS OIL AT $15 A BARREL; AND IS FIGHTING ASSAD FOR YOU.

A WIN WIN SITUATION FOR YOU BASTARDS.


.

Not me, Sweetums. I pray they kill each other off.

 

[Contumacious]

Did anyone else say the same thing. As Obama was giving the details of who the shooters were, he didn't mention their names and race. Yet we all know their names, so why not just say it in the speech?
But you have to wonder, if the guys name was something like "Michael Andrews" and was a "White Conservative" from a western state, you think he would of brought up his name?

Also, Obama said he goes to all of his "Daily Briefings"? yah, and 65% of all Americans are that dumb to believe that!

And give these two assholes the publicity they were craving? No, no need. They've been given enough air time as it is.

In other words, if ISIS should cause another attack similar to 9/11, we should send them fruitcakes for Christmas in order to keep from pissing them off by going after them? Makes sense to me.

ARE YOU A ZIONUT , REALLY?


IN THAT CASE, WHAT IS YOUR BEEF?

DAESCH IS SELLING YOU FUCKERS OIL AT $15 A BARREL; AND IS FIGHTING ASSAD FOR YOU.

A WIN WIN SITUATION FOR YOU BASTARDS.


.

Not me, Sweetums. I pray they kill each other off.

HUH?

EACH OTHER?

 

[Papageorgio]

It is a special stupid that post in all caps. I know I won't read a post that is all caps.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I guess nobody has told him, but putting someone on a no-fly list without due process and infringing on someone's right to keep and bear arms without due process are both wrong. The latter is a Second Amendment violation, and both are Fifth Amendment violations.

Not that he or his followers care, of course.

obama forgot to mention that he created ISIS when he took our soldiers away from IRAQ

I forgot to mention that only retards believe that, so I'll mention it now.

 

[Contumacious]

I guess nobody has told him, but putting someone on a no-fly list without due process and infringing on someone's right to keep and bear arms without due process are both wrong. The latter is a Second Amendment violation, and both are Fifth Amendment violations.

Not that he or his followers care, of course.

obama forgot to mention that he created ISIS when he took our soldiers away from IRAQ

I forgot to mention that only retards believe that, so I'll mention it now.

YEP.

ISIS IS A BLOWBACK - AN UNINTENTIONAL CREATION

BUT WILLING TO LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE SHOWING OTHERWISE

 

[Timmy]

ISIS is more trouble for a lot of other countries . Not so much us . Let those other countries put troops down.

 

[Weatherman2020]

He has never said "Islamic" and "terrorism" together.
Why?
He is a traitor.

Guess GW bush is also a traitor ?

Pull your head out of your fat arse.

[President Bush and] Naming the Enemy
by Daniel Pipes
New York Sun
August 17, 2004



3



Comment (28)
Translations of this item:

• Arabic
• Chinese (S)
• French
• German

• Italian
• Polish
• Portuguese
• Russian

• Slovak
• Spanish
• Swedish

In a striking admission, George W. Bush said the other day: "We actually misnamed the war on terror. It ought to be [called] the struggle against ideological extremists who do not believe in free societies and who happen to use terror as a weapon to try to shake the conscience of the free world."

This important concession follows growing criticism of the misleading term "war on terror" (how can one fight a tactic?) and replaces it with the more accurate "war on ideological extremists." With this change, the battle of ideas can begin.

But who exactly are those ideological extremists? The next step is for Mr. Bush to give them a name.

In fact, he on occasion since September 11 has spoken candidly about their identity. As early as September 2001, he referred to the enemy being "a fringe form of Islamic extremism" which seeks "to kill Christians and Jews, to kill all Americans, and make no distinction among military and civilians, including women and children." This Islamic extremism also is heir to "all the murderous ideologies of the twentieth century," including "fascism, and Nazism, and totalitarianism."

In January 2002, Mr. Bush was more specific yet, adding that the terrorist underworld includes "groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, [and] Jaish-i-Mohammed." In May 2002, he pointed out that a "new totalitarian threat" exists whose adherents "are defined by their hatreds: they hate … Jews and Christians and all Muslims who disagree with them" (implying that they are Muslims). Those adherents, he noted, feel entitled to kill "in the name of a false religious purity."

A year later, in May 2003, the president provided details about the Islamists' goals, observing that "nineteen evil men—the shock troops of a hateful ideology—gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of [Ramzi Binalshibh, the Al-Qaeda leader accused of directing the 9/11 operation], that September the 11th would be the ‘beginning of the end of America.'"

The terrorist acts of the past two decades, Mr. Bush noted in April 2004, are the work of fanatical, political ideologues who "seek tyranny in the Middle East and beyond. They seek to oppress and persecute women. They seek the death of Jews and Christians, and every Muslim who desires peace over theocratic terror."

Last month, Bush for the first time used the phrase "Islamic militants," perhaps his most explicit reference until now to the Islamist threat, saying that until he closed a so-called Islamic charity based in Illinois, the Benevolence International Foundation, it "channel[ed] money to Islamic militants."

Rolling these comments into a single summary statement establishes how Mr. Bush – and by extension the whole of the U.S. government – sees the enemy: A false doctrine of Islamic purity inspires a totalitarian ideology of power and domination. In its ruthlessness, murderousness, and global ambition, it resembles the Nazi and communist ideologies. The extremists who advocate this doctrine see America as the chief obstacle to achieving their goals. To defeat America, they initially seek Washington's retreat from the outside world. Ultimately, they hope to bring about a collapse of America as it now exists. Toward this end, they are prepared to murder any number of Americans.

This is a fine description of Islamism, its mentality, methods, and means. It also shows that Mr. Bush draws the subtle distinction between the personal faith of Islam and the political ideology of Islamism (or militant Islam).

In this, he parallels what a number of Muslim leaders – including even some Saudis – have said. Following acts of terrorism in Riyadh in May 2003, Interior Minister Prince Naif publicly attributed this violence to "ideology" and "fanatical ideas." And if Naif – himself an Islamist – attributes the problem ultimately not to acts of violence but the ideas behind them, surely Americans can say no less.

Mr. Bush has already alluded to America having to confront its third totalitarian ideology. Now he should name that ideology. I hope he will surround himself with a group of distinguished anti-Islamist Muslims, foreign and domestic alike, and formally announce America's acceptance of leadership in the war against Islamism.

Only with such specificity can the civilized world start on the path to victory over this latest manifestation of barbarism.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aug. 17, 2004 update: I have collected many more quotes of "Calling Islamism the Enemy" in my weblog.

Sep. 29, 2004 update: To the contrary, I also collect quotes of those who are "Not Calling Islamism the Enemy."

Oct. 11, 2005 update: I praise Bush for calling Islamism the enemy at "Bush Declares War on Radical Islam."

July 3, 2007 update: And I rue Bush's backpedaling at "Shoeless George Bush[ Discusses Islam]."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[bripat9643]

Did anyone else say the same thing. As Obama was giving the details of who the shooters were, he didn't mention their names and race. Yet we all know their names, so why not just say it in the speech?
But you have to wonder, if the guys name was something like "Michael Andrews" and was a "White Conservative" from a western state, you think he would of brought up his name?

Also, Obama said he goes to all of his "Daily Briefings"? yah, and 65% of all Americans are that dumb to believe that!

And give these two assholes the publicity they were craving? No, no need. They've been given enough air time as it is.

He doesn't give a crap about that.