Tag Archives: barack obama

Will Durant on the Mughal invasion of India – “the bloodiest story in history”

Posted on by
Reply

Barack Obama’s ignorance of almost everything relevant to politics and history is a phenomenon that never gets called out by the knee-padded media in the US. So on he goes, this time attempting to excuse the barbarity of the “Islamic State” by saying that Christians have been just as bad. There have been wars between Islam and the Christian West, sometimes fought in Europe (Tours 732 A.D.; Vienna 1529/1683), sometimes in the Middle East (Crusades 11th-12th centuries) and sometimes on the Mediterranean (Lepanto 1571 A.D.). These were defensive wars if ever there have been. We wished to preserve our way of life against an invading enemy.

But if you are looking for a truly horrific story of invasion and cruelty, you need to look at the virtually unknown Mughal invasion of India. I knew nothing of it until I came across it reading through Will and Ariel Durant’s eleven volumes on the history of civilisation. They begin with these words, from which they go on to show in complete detail just how sound their judgment is:

The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.

It is a story that is being repeated today in the midst of our own Western civilisation. It is being exactly repeated everywhere the Islamic State manages to find its way to power. I am not interested in debating theological issues with Muslims. But I am very interested in protecting our way of life from marauders who undertake their invasions in the name of Islam. The sickening inanities of Obama are pathetic in their ignorance, but are vastly dangerous in lulling us into any kind of limits on the defences we build against an enemy that remains as terrifying and barbaric today as it was a thousand years ago.

The Christie-Obama alliance

Posted on by
Reply

That under no circumstances would I ever support Chris Christie for President was resolved for me the moment he actively subverted Mitt Romney’s own presidential run in the last week of the 2012 campaign. If Romney won, Christie could not run in 2016. Therefore he did everything he could to ensure a Romney loss, with the effort made to make Obama look like a man of action in the midst of “Superstorm Sandy” the crowning moment. Were it not for the storm, Romney would have won. Were it not for Christie, Romney might still have won. But irrespective of whether or not it made a difference, that Christie did what he did has made him poison for me, aside from the fact that he is a leftist clown.

So now he is at it again, trying to knock off Scott Walker in Wisconsin. Think of this:

The RGA, chaired by Gov. Christie (R-N.J.), has been under pressure in recent days to do more to help Walker, a tea party favorite who rocketed to political stardom after he curbed bargaining rights for most public workers in his state. The Weekly Standard reported Thursday that there were brewing suspicions on the right that Christie, as RGA chairman, has been “undercutting” Walker, his potential rival for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.

Just showing form, merely form, expect nothing else, this is how he is. That no one ties it to Romney makes me think Christie is the one the established Republican Party wants. But here Obama seems to be on exactly the same side as they both seem to have the same agenda. OBAMA GOES TO WISCONSIN IN BID TO OUST GOV. WALKER.

President Barack Obama is making a rare appearance on the campaign trail just one week before Election Day in an effort to help a Democratic challenger oust Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker from office.

I would think that Obama is poison but he will do what he can. Also disgusting but normal politics. You would just think that just maybe the Republicans would understand that Walker is a potentially more formidable opponent than Christie given the efforts they are making to push him out. Politics in the US is just too hard for us outsiders since it is impossible to follow the money or whatever else it is that counts.

Who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?

Posted on by
Reply

The American economy is dead, dead, dead. That’s the reality. But then there is the politics. This is what the president says: Obama Claims His Economy Is A Success. And you know what? It’s hard to fault the politics even for a second. He is ruining the US and it is clear to anyone with the slightest awareness, even those media jerks who will never abandon their man. They all know, but they won’t say. So Obama just gives them copy and a story to run. The rest of us can say he is a liar but he has had six years’ experience walking all over every criticism which he knows he will never be called out on. Incredible to see, but the world always has been a mysterious place. This is the new politics:

President Barack Obama claimed Thursday that “the facts” demonstrate that his economic policies are safely guiding the nation’s towards middle-class prosperity.

“Those are the facts,” he said. “It’s not conjecture, it’s not opinion… I laid out facts,” he told his audience of upper-income progressives at Northwestern University in Illinois Oct. 2.

Obama’s pitch to the progressives combined a mix of flattery, selective data and visceral campaign pitches, including promises of cheap loans for his student audience, more power for would-be regulators and greater wages for women.

“If we make sure a woman is paid equal to her efforts, it won’t just give women a boost; it’ll give their families and the entire economy a boost… Let’s catch up to 2014, pass a fair pay law, and make our economy stronger,” he told his audience, which included many university-trained women, who comprise one of the most pro-Democratic voting blocs.

He also suggested that wise government leadership created many private-sector gains, such as the boom in oil-drilling and natural-gas fracking.

Progressive economic “policies are right for America, they are supported by the facts,” he said.

Someone says that Obama lied

Posted on by
Reply

Of course he lied. What else is new. If they report it in The New York Times, then I would like to know about it. This, however, is from The Daily Caller:

President Barack Obama has taken a lot of flack since his Sunday night “60 Minutes” interview, in which he blamed the intelligence community for his failure to tackle the threat posed by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. And that is right and proper. Because not only was his excuse of blaming us a lie, but when questioned on his lie, White House press secretary Josh Earnest doubled down with a whole new lie — both of which are easily, publicly proven false.

On Sunday, Obama said the intelligence community had underestimated the rise of ISIS, saying in an interview with CBS, “Our head of the intelligence community, Jim Clapper, has acknowledged that, I think, they underestimated what had been taking place in Syria.”

But we know that isn’t true, as nearly a dozen administration officials have testified to the threat posed by ISIS publicly over the last year.

The fact that the president chose to use the word “they” instead of “we” immediately drew condemnation from friend and foe alike, who saw it as the president’s attempt to pass the buck.

The article is by “a ranking Department of Defense official” who prefers to stay anonymous. But it’s not as if no one knows. Everyone knows, even those who deny it to your face, while the rest prefer Obama lies to conservative truth. So we go on until we are over the falls.

It’s the media that keep Obama’s presidency alive

Posted on by
Reply

It’s not as if everyone doesn’t know. It’s not the fear of speaking truth to power, it is the certain knowledge that pointing out the facts will have the media attack you as viciously as it can. Michele Bachmann tried to do what she could but who even amongst her own colleagues was willing to put their political future on the line. Still what Horowitz says is the truth, but saying it to us at National Review Online makes no difference of any kind to the way the world continues to evolve:

Barack Obama deliberately set out to lose the war in Iraq, and he did. He defied the advice of his joint chiefs of staff to secure America’s formidable military presence and keep 20,000 troops in country, and left Iraq to its own devices and the tender mercies of Iran. In doing so, he betrayed every American and Iraqi who gave his life to create a free Iraq and keep it out of the clutches of the terrorists.

Iraq is now a war zone dominated by the terrorist forces of the Islamic State, whose rise Obama’s policies fostered. Both his secretaries of state praised the animal Bashar Assad as a “reformer” and a man of “peace,” helping him to thwart his domestic opposition. The Islamic State was born out of the Syrian chaos that ensued.

Far worse was Obama’s open support for America’s mortal enemy, the Muslim Brotherhood, spawner of al-Qaeda and Hamas. During the “Arab Spring,” Obama essentially put America’s weight behind the legitimization of this murderous organization that had been outlawed for 40 years for its assassinations and conspiracies against the Egyptian regime. Secretary of State Clinton gave totally unfounded assurances to the world that the Brotherhood was ready to become part of the democratic process and give up its 90-year holy war against infidels, Jews in particular but also — and explicitly — America. During the Brotherhood’s brief tenure as the government in Egypt Obama gave these genocidal zealots more than a billion dollars in American aid and F-16 fighter-bombers that could easily reach Israel’s major population centers, which for 60 years the Brotherhood had sworn to destroy.

The word Horowitz then uses to describe Obama is “feckless”. Spare me. What a pathetic useless word. How weak and insipid! The right word is traitorous. Obama’s sympathies are with those who would wish to tear down Western civilisation. But unsayable and therefore unsaid even by David Horowitz.

Unfit to lead

Posted on by
Reply

This is what the most clueless and unfit President in American history said today:

“I know that many of you are rightly concerned about any American military action in Iraq, even limited strikes like these,” he said. “I understand that. I ran for this office in part to end our war in Iraq and welcome our troops home, and that’s what we’ve done. As commander in chief, I will not allow the United States to be dragged into fighting another war in Iraq.”

If he doesn’t want to fight it in Iraq, he or someone else will have to fight it somewhere else. This is from Diane Feinstein, for goodness sake, Democrat Senator from California:

The head of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Friday said the extremist group the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS or ISIL) must be confronted forcefully by the U.S., though she stopped short of calling for boots on the ground.

“It takes an army to defeat an army, and I believe that we either confront ISIL now or we will be forced to deal with an even stronger enemy in the future,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said in a statement.

The group is “operating with military expertise, advancing across Iraq and rapidly consolidating its position,” she added.

“Inaction is no longer an option,” according to Feinstein.

The senior lawmaker also said it had “become clear” that the group is recruiting and training fighters from Western countries and possibly sending them back to cities in the U.S. and Europe in order to “attack us in our backyard.”

“We simply cannot allow this to happen,” Feinstein warned.

Real reactions and their virtual facsimile

Posted on by
Reply

Comparing Tony Abbott’s reaction to Barack Obama’s over the shooting down of the Malaysian Airline flight made obvious the difference between a genuine reaction to an actual world event and the confected virtual reaction of a standard issue member of the left.

Abbott really was angry and felt the horror in his bones. Obama did not feel a thing but had to conjure the right kind of response since he did not seem to feel it personally himself.

The conservative right shows empathy on a personal level. The left seems to channel its response through a political galvanometer.

Obama is mentally deranged

Posted on by
Reply

I think it often about the American president, but this latest story makes me wonder even more just out of it he really is:

‘It looks like it may be a terrible tragedy’: Obama goes AWOL again with just 40-second mention of Malaysian plane crash feared to have killed Americans before his jokey 16-minute transport speech.

Seriously, how detached from reality must someone like this be:

President Barack Obama provoked fury in the U.S. on Thursday by casually devoting less than a minute to the deaths of 295 people aboard a Malaysian airliner, as he began an often jokey 16-minute speech about the need to expand America’s transportation infrastructure. . . .

Obama declared in Wilmington, Delaware that ‘it looks like it may be a terrible tragedy,’ but not before enthusiastically declaring that ‘it is wonderful to be back in Delaware.’

‘Before I begin, obviously the world is watching reports of a downed passenger jet near the Russia-Ukraine border. And it looks like it may be a terrible tragedy. Right now we’re working to determine whether there were American citizens on board. That is our first priority.’

‘And I’ve directed my national security team to stay in close contact with the Ukrainian governemnt. The United States will offer any assistance we can to help determine what happened and why. And as a country, our thoughts and prayers are with all the families and passengers, wherever they call home.
Obama then jarringly quickly returned to his prepared remarks.

‘I want to thank Jeremie for that introduction’ he said. ‘Give Jeremie a big round of applause.’

‘It is great to be in the state that gave us Joe Biden. We’ve got actually some better-looking Bidens with us here today. We’ve got Beau and his wife, Hallie, are here. Give them a big round of applause. We love them.’

No one says it although many must think it. Since it is apparently unsayable, it is also certain that no one will do a thing. Three more years, capped by his parting list of presidential pardons.

Stealing the election

Posted on by
Reply

It has seemed pretty straightforward that Obama stole the election in 2012, with the IRS suppression of opposition funding at the very core. The various precincts in Pennsylvania that went something like 52000 to zero – Obama v Romney – is an impossibility. In this post April Sands, a woman working for the Federal Electoral Commission, who as it happens was also a former co-worker of Lois Lerner’s, was running partisan, pro-Obama, messages from her office during the election. But the truly grotesque aspect is what happened when they came to investigate:

The FEC has a far-reaching mandate into the operations of elections, which means that partisanship in that agency is particularly corrosive. The Hatch Act requires strict neutrality of all federal employees while on duty, and one would expect that to be particularly observed in the FEC. Instead, Sands tweeted partisan messages from her office in 2012; sent out fundraising pleas for Obama’s re-election campaign, called Republicans her “enemy,” and said they should shut up and “stand down.”

When the Inspector General came knocking, however, the evidence had vanished. The FEC “recycled” her hard drive, which meant that criminal charges could not be pursued. How exactly could this have happened? Sands was under suspicion of a crime under a statute which would be updated later that year, in a bill signed by Barack Obama himself. Shouldn’t the FEC have taken steps to secure evidence rather than destroy it?

There is not, of course, any doubt at all that the hard drive would reveal massive illegality, just as would the also now lost hard drives of Lois Lerner.

And then there’s this from the UK, which means that they do the same in the US, which discusses a toolkit of software programs used to manipulate online traffic, infiltrate users’ computers and spread select messages across social media sites including Facebook and YouTube:

A number of interesting tools and their short descriptions are below:

ASTRAL PROJECTION: Remote GSM secure covert Internet proxy using TOR hidden service
POISON ARROW: Safe malware download capability
AIRWOLF: YouTube profile, comment and video collection
BIRDSTRIKE: Twitter monitoring and profile collection
GLASSBACK: Technique of getting a target’s IP address by pretending to be a spammer and ringing them. Target does not need to answer.
MINIATURE HERO: Active skype capability. Provision of realtime call records (SkypeOut and SkypetoSkype) and bidirectional instant messaging. Also contact lists.
PHOTON TORPEDO: A technique to actively grab the IP address of MSN messenger user
SPRING-BISHOP: Finding private photos of targets on Facebook
BOMB BAY: The capacity to increase website hits, rankings
BURLESQUE: The capacity to send spoofed SMS messages
GESTATOR: Amplification of a given message, normally video, on popular multimedia websites (YouTube)
SCRAPHEAP CHALLENGE: Perfect spoofing of emails from Blackberry targets
SUNBLOCK: Ability to deny functionality to send/receive email or view material online
SWAMP DONKEY: A tool that will silently locate all predefined types of file and encrypt them on a targets machine
UNDERPASS: Change outcome of online polls (previously known as NUBILO).
WARPATH: Mass delivery of SMS messages to support an Information Operations campaign.
HUSK: Secure one-on-one web based dead-drop messaging platform.

The US is near enough a one-party state in which it is almost impossible to imagine how, short of a catastrophe of some kind, a Republican president could again be elected any time soon.

The media as teenage groupies

Posted on by
Reply

obama cartoon naked foreign policy

The American media is just now beginning to point out what a useless incompetent Barack Obama is. A disaster at every turn and in relation to every policy, yet the media really have no one to blame for the breakdown in the system other than themselves. Here’s why:

By giving the president the benefit of the doubt at every turn, by making excuses to explain away fiascos, by ignoring corruption, by buying the White House line that his critics were motivated by pure politics or racism, the Times and other organizations played the role of bartender to a man on a bender.

Even worse, they joined the party, forgetting the lessons of history as well as their own responsibilities to put a check on power. A purpose of a free press is to hold government accountable, but there is no fallback when the watchdog voluntarily chooses to be a lapdog.

With hardly an ounce of character and sense, they bought the whole idiocy of Obama, from the “smartest man in the room” to “we are the change we have been waiting for”. The media has always been a sell out to the left and always will be, but this time they sold their soul and their birthright to a buffoon who holds them in the same low contempt he holds everyone else. Only now is the media just getting an inkling of why the rest of us think they are fools, utterly unworthy of the responsibility they had been entrusted with.