Well, Obama manages to pry himself away from the Golf Course to deal with the act of workplace violence Jihad in San Bernadino and the BBC is here to try and sell us his vacuous codswallop as if it were Holy Writ.
US President Barack Obama has made a rare Oval Office address after the San Bernardino shootings that left 14 dead. He said the killings were “an act of terrorism designed to kill innocent people”. But “freedom is more powerful than fear,” said President Obama, warning that falling prey to divisiveness in American society would play into the hands of extremists. He also said the US must make it harder for potential attackers to obtain guns.
Obama was wriggled like a worm on a hook over this one. Initially his regime sought to play down the Islam/Jihad angle but when that became impossible in the light of evidence it then turns into being all about gun control. Who knew? Islam control might be a better idea.
So when you have a problem with a specific section of society, is it really the rational thing to do, to ignore it and live with it, thus allowing it to fester and grow into a much much bigger problem?
Obama is a Muslim, and his Taqiyya is becoming harder and harder to hide.
As for making guns illegal? Well all the guns used in this latest Islamic Jihadi attack are currently illegal in California. Secondly, mass murder is also illegal, but that fact is not stopping the mass-murders. And such mass-murders are happening a hell of a lot more under Obama’s tenure, than under any previous president. In fact they have gone up by an order of magnitude. Perhaps Obama should answer why?
Obama is many things but a Muslim he is not.
I cannot stand his politics or his weakness in the face of Islamic fundamentalism, however, his actions are matched by the behaviour of the majority of the Western governments and the autocrats in Brussels.
Al-Taqiyya is just the Islamic version of the crap spouted by politicians in our own Parliament, none of them believe a word they utter, the only real difference is that most of our own MPs would never support terrorism (openly or privately).
If we are going to discuss mass murders and which US President had the most occur during their tenure than I would suggest that FDR, Truman, Eisenhower and Kennedy have a worst record than Obama ( Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler and the Pashas).
Lets attack Obama for his appeasement policies, his politics and of course his servile approach to all thinks Islamic, however, we should leave the hyperbole & fake statistics to the pathetic left who make themselves less and less credible by the month.
As Mark Steyn noted regarding Obama’s address-
‘In the third Oval Office address of his presidency Sunday, Obama spoke for 1,910 words. He spent 372 words telling Americans not to discriminate against Muslims, compared to 160 words directly referencing the threat of ISIS.
As I said somewhere or other a while back, if the President were working for the other side, what exactly would he be doing differently? He’s now adopted the central talking-point of CAIR and the other duplicitous Islamic supremacists – that, when there’s a big pile of corpses in the streets of a western city, the real victims are always Muslims, because racist westerners might give them funny looks on the bus the next morning.’
As always, Steyn nails it.
Excellent point about the imbalance in the text of Obama’s apology – sorry – speech.
It really makes a much more convincing argument if you can call upon facts and data.
That’s what we try to do at:
http://wisermonkeys.uk/islam.html
Also, Bill Warner’s analyses are well worth reading at:
http://www.politicalislam.com/trilogy-project/statistical-islam
For example, here’s some food for thought for those who glibly assert that “the Bible is just as violent as the Quran”:
Note: the Islamic trilogy comprises the Quran, Sira and Hadiths
Where did you find that bullshit?
Pardon? Please reason.
If you’re referring to graph, it can be found through politicalislam.com link above.
Reason from that quarter may be a big ask. Or the two fellow insomniac likers in complement.
The default resort to colourful patois in stead of coherent debate is oddly familiar too.
Insomniac? I’m a shift worker thank you.
Ok I believe you, but you haven’t elaborated as to why you think the above is ‘bullshit’
See below…
I couldn’t find the graph through the link, but I did find it here: http://examine-islam.org/political-islam/ but I still can’t find any reference to the source of the stats. It’s important because I suspect – looking at the graph itself – it comes from a very biased source.
‘I suspect … it comes from a very biased source.’
You should start a website documenting what you suspect. See how it goes.
I have a website that I started back in 1998 that discusses religion and politics, but I publish under an alias, so I’m not prepared to post a link here. Sorry.
You might be surprised to find that I’m on your side of the argument, it’s just that I don’t agree with the pro-Christian bias here, and that’s when people start falling out with me. Sharing graphs that attempt to demonstrate Christianity as less violent than Islam is biased in my opinion, and doesn’t convince me that Christianity is squeaky clean; although the graph shared by Wiser Monkeys would suggest that. It’s the kind of misleading data Christians use to ‘prove’ that atheists have killed more people throughout history than all the religions put together. It’s bull.
“Sharing graphs that attempt to demonstrate Christianity as less violent than Islam is biased in my opinion”
Surely to goodness you are not implying that Christianity is as violent as Islam.
I think he is. It’s a common call from the left – moral relativism and all that.
I wonder which Islamic country would be the domicile of his choice.
He’s already there, the United C̶a̶l̶i̶p̶h̶a̶ Kingdom.
If you have evidence to the contrary I’m all eyes and ears. I look forward to your reply.
Actual data in form of PDFs can be downloaded from:
http://cspipublishing.com/statistical/charts.html
Also look at alternative analysis: http://www.amberpawlik.com/IslamonTrial.pdf
No one could ever maintain that Christianity is “squeaky clean”, but its treatment of non-Christians is fundamentally different from how Islam regards kafirs. Anyhow, it’s the Old Testament which mentions most violence; the New Testament, more important to practising Christians, is much more peaceful.
The PDF file is just a PDF version of the graph. I need to know how “Words Devoted to Political Violence” are defined.
You presented the graph in the context of comparing religions according to how violent they are. This graph (or chart, whatever you want to call it) is not an illustration of how violent Islam is compared to other religions, but about how Islam is a political movement rather than a religious one (which I actually agree with). Take a look at the website where you got the illustration from and you might realise it’s about the politics and not the religion.
Putting to one side the argument of whether the data is right or wrong, attempting to promote your own cause by disassociation rather than positive evidence is never going to convince the masses.
The obvious clue as to your position in this debate is on your website:
“We see the constant erosion and airbrushing away of the UK’s Judeo-Christian culture, as public services, businesses, schools, etc buckle to political correctness and fear being labelled “racist” or “islamophobic”.”
The “UK’s Judeo-Christian culture” has been eroded away for the last thousand years! It’s what makes us a peaceful and fair society. We no longer burn witches. We no longer keep slaves (if you’re a Methodist I’m willing to tip my hat). We no longer imprison scientists (wizards). We no longer have the death penalty. We have sexual equality. We have human rights.
None of these things would have been possible if it wasn’t for the rational thoughts and behaviours of those brave enough to stand up to the religious establishment.
Less religion is good! That’s what your graph shows! Even though you had no idea.
When religion is entwined with politics, it becomes repressive. It is worse than socialism. It kills everything that does not conform. Britain is not a secular nation, and yet it acts as though it is. That’s what makes us special in the world. Britain is unique and we should be proud of that.
The Hebrew Bible contains 34,000 words devoted to political violence? The Islamic Trilogy 328,000 words?
I think you made a mistake by orders of magnitudes. The books aren’t that big.
Yup, he is acting exactly as a Muslim engaged in Taqiyya in his position would.
Maybe it should be harder to get Korans?
Unfortunately for the good ol’ US of God blessed A, the second amendment is non-negotiable and Obama-proof. The right to bear arms is (historically) the right to defend against the Brits (or any other organisation/country) even though it was a British law in the first place.
The problem isn’t the second amendment – it’s the Muslims!
Perhaps it was a misprint and it was really about the right to wear a T-shirt.
Obama should record a tv message about guns and Islam and then after each attack they could play the same thing over and over. He’s just repeating himself so with this pre recorded message he can get on with his golfing and not be inconvenienced by having to come out with the same old stuff.
About guns. We hear that only a tiny percentage are used in these killings but he wants to make them illegal.
About muzzies. We know that a large percentage support Isis and other miscellaneous killing gangs yet our politicians want more and more of them.
Where’s the logic here?
Is Obama a Muslim? A question for historians as the evidence either way is not compelling. But a look at his advisors shows he has considerable trust in Muslim appointments.
Something I saw floating around the net.
‘John Brennan, current head of the CIA converted to Islam while stationed in Saudi Arabia. Obama’s top advisor, Valerie Jarrett, is a Muslim who was born in Iran where her parents still live. Hillary Clinton’s top advisor, Huma Abedin, is a Muslim, whose mother and brother are involved in the now outlawed Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Assistant Secretary for Policy Development for Homeland Security, Arif Aikhan, is a Muslim. Homeland Security Advisor, Mohammed Elibiary, is a Muslim. Obama advisor and founder of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, Salam al-Marayati, is a Muslim. Obama’s Sharia Czar, Imam Mohamed Magid, of the Islamic Society of North America, is a Muslim. Advisory Council on Faith-Based Neighbor-hood Partnerships, Eboo Patel, is a Muslim. It’s questionable if Obama ever officially took the oath of office when he was sworn in. He didn’t repeat the oath properly to defend our nation and our Constitution. Later the Democrats claimed he was given the oath again….in private? CIA director John Brennan took his oath on a copy of the Constitution, not a Bible. Congressman, Keith Ellison took his oath on a copy of the Qur’an. Congresswoman Michele Bachman was vilified and almost tarred and feathered by Democrats when she voiced her concern about Muslims taking over our government. Considering all these appointments, it would explain why Obama and his minions are systematically destroying our nation, supporting radical Muslim groups worldwide, opening our southern border, and turning a blind eye to the genocide being perpetrated on Christians all over Africa and the Middle East. ‘
Add to this his loyal UK servant, Dave Cameron, might not be a Muslim, but does a good impersonation when defending them
Even on leftie CNN a commentator rips Obama’s false platitudes to shreds – they are laughing at him in Raqaa :
http://hotair.com/archives/2015/12/07/cnn-panelist-isis-will-laugh-at-this-speech/
…..while this article compares the twaddle that Obama spouts with Baghdad Bob :
http://thefederalist.com/2015/12/04/on-isis-barack-obama-is-baghdad-bob/
But no hint of criticism from the BBC. They are not concerned that the President is a lying wimp, but get excited at the slightest sign that Donald Trum may be articulating what a lot of people are thinking.
http://www.wsj.com/article_email/fighting-terror-by-self-reproach-1449533593-lMyQjAxMTA1MjA3ODQwNTg0Wj
Bret Stephens, now at the Wall Street Journal, slams Obama. Even after 14 deaths Obama fails to react properly – does he want to wait for 140 or 1400 jihadi deaths on American soil before he starts worrying about defending the US rather than possible offence to Muslims.?