Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton has been commenting on her Republican rivals’ positions on Islamic immigrants, saying that the next president needs to be able to coalesce with "Muslim-majority nations," even if they are sponsors of terrorism as Saud Arabia is. If one does not quite understand what Clinton is proposing it is for the west to embrace Islam and its intentions, to literally grow together into one body with them, to unite, blend or come together, to cause to unite in one mass. That is what coalesce means. It is what we continue to try to do with Saudi Arabia even though the evidence is rising that they were involved in the 9-11 terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center, which we will discuss below.
Trump repeatedly has predicted “thousands upon thousands” of people from the Middle East would “pour” into the United States with no security screening or monitoring, under policies either already enacted by President Barack Obama or soon to be embraced by Clinton. He said many of the Middle Eastern immigrants “have the same thought process as this savage killer.” The gunman’s father said the shooting had “nothing to do with religion,” but what is religion and culture but thought process?
Trump is not the only one who wants to limit immigration. The “Leave” campaign in England focuses on reducing immigration is resonating with at least fifty percent of the voters. England’s largest newspaper The Sun just came out in favor of leaving the European Union and the financial markets in Europe are starting to freak out.
“When I am elected,” Trump said in a prepared speech at Saint Anselm College outside Manchester, “I will suspend immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies, until we fully understand how to end these threats.”
Trump believes that the Orlando killer would not have committed the atrocity had his Afghan parents been denied entry to the U.S. “According to Pew Research, 99% of people in Afghanistan support oppressive Shari‘a law,” Trump said.
Time Magazine throws out impartiality when it asserts that “Shari‘a, or Islamic law, is often misconstrued in the West as a system that relies on ghastly retributive justice — such as punishing adultery with death by stoning, or cutting off the hand of a thief.” Ghastly does not cover the full ramifications of Sharia.
Relying primarily on Islam’s own sources, "House of War: Islam’s Jihad Against the World," cogently demonstrates that Islam is a violent, expansionary ideology that seeks the subjugation and destruction of other faiths, cultures and systems of government. Islam is as much a system of government as it is a religion, and it seeks to extend its own peculiar legal code, Sharia law, over the entire world. Pamela Geller, Ann Corcoran and others such as Islam scholar Bat Ye’or have long warned that there are two methods of creating Islamic supremacy in the world. One is through violent jihad. The other is through al-hijra, or the Islamic doctrine of immigration.
“Islam is not a peaceful religion. No religion is, but Islam is especially not. It is certainly not, as some ill-informed people say, solely a religion of war. There are many peaceful verses in the Quran which — luckily for us — most Muslims live by. But it is by no means only a religion of peace… this is the verifiable truth based on the texts,” writes The Spectator.
Hillary Clinton has said that if she becomes president she will not only continue Obama’s refugee program but expand it, bringing in more Syrians and more Muslims from the Middle East. What is the bottom line to the migrant invasion of the West? Europol director Robert Wainwright’s certainly is clear saying that “several hundred” battle-trained European jihadists are likely plotting further major attacks, and that his agency is supporting some 50 ongoing terrorist investigations. “The threat is alive and current. Another attempted attack is almost certain.”
Americans can assume the same applies to them. Every gay person needs a gun published the New York Daily News. ISIS, which is now at the heart of Islamic extremism, takes joy in attacking infidels, especially American infidels. “No attack is too small,” ISIS spokesperson Abu Muhammad al-Adnani advised, specifically naming the United States as a target. “The smallest action you do in the heart of their land is dearer to us than the largest action by us,” he said, “and more effective and more damaging to them.”
Clinton and Obama make light of radical Islamic terrorism and for that, they deserve no place in the fight for the security and integrity of the United States. They have zero understanding that this war is for the minds (imaginations) of men and women who are drawn into the darkness. And it is all backed by holy scripture.
Obama gets it completely wrong when he insists that Trump’s rhetoric about Muslims betrays American values and risks helping al-Qaida and the so-called Islamic State. Islam is at war with the West, is out to destroy the west, rape its women, but for unwise liberal reasons the West simply does not want to see that as a naked reality. The heart of Islamic religion is reaching across a great span of time with a power given it by terrorism.
The violence is just starting yet certain people would put a muzzle on any defense against the rising threat. In 2013, a U.S. attorney in Tennessee, William Killian, said it is possible that some inflammatory comments about Muslims posted on social media could violate civil-rights laws. He later backed off his plan to criminalize an entire segment of speech deemed offensive to Muslims, a decision Geller notes came only after an intense public outcry. “You know, we have real problems, they’ve disarmed the American people, misinforming them or not informing them at all,” Geller concluded. Everyone knows that America has uncounted enemies around the globe but do we, with Clinton in the lead, really need to get into bed with them?
Coalescing with the Enemy
The Times in Australia is saying that there is new evidence of a definitive link between Saudi Arabian officials and the 9/11 terrorist attacks "further raising tensions as President Obama travels to the kingdom. Meanwhile the president made it clear the White House would veto the bipartisan bill to let families victimized by the 9/11 terrorist attacks sue Saudi Arabia. The White House and State Department are bluntly warning lawmakers not to proceed with the legislation due to "fears" it could have dramatic ramifications for the United States.
To most Americans it is incomprehensible why Obama would roadblock something that is so critical to getting to the bottom of the worst terrorist attack on US soil. Obama has promised to think about it, but prefers to keep it all secret meaning, letting the possible planners of 9-11 to get away with their murder of many Americans.
Former congressional representative and 9/11 Commissioner Tim Roemer (D-IN) testifies before the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade Subcommittee said there’s a “glaring contrast” between Saudi Arabia’s high-level cooperation in uncovering terrorist plots and its “society and culture exporting extremism and intolerance.”
"I am strongly in favor for declassifying this information (secret 28 page 9-11 report) as quickly and as soon as possible" for national security reasons and because families of victims of the Sept. 11 attacks deserve it, Roemer said. The former lawmaker, who also served as U.S. ambassador to India, was cited in a report on CBS’s “60 Minutes” in April that suggested a Saudi diplomat “known to hold extremist views” may have helped the hijackers after they traveled to the U.S. to prepare for the attacks.
On May 24, the Republican-controlled Senate unanimously approved bi-partisan legislation that would allow for families of the victims of the devastating 9/11 terrorist attacks to sue the government of Saudi Arabia. “This bill is very near and dear to my heart as a New Yorker because it would allow the victims of 9/11 to pursue some small measure of justice,” said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY). Obama, who has an extensive Muslim background including a Muslim father, promises to veto.
The Saudi press is furious over the U.S. Senate’s unanimous vote to release the 28 pages. The London-based Al-Hayat daily has claimed that the U.S. planned the attacks on the World Trade Center in order to create a global war on terror. The intention of the attacks was to create “an obscure enemy – terrorism – which became what American presidents provided justification for any “dirty operation” in other countries.
Clinton talks big about preserving the security of America. Many think she would fail in that if she allowed waves of Muslim refugees into the country. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky), in a Senate hearing said to her, “I think ultimately with your leaving (as Secretary of State) you accept culpability for the worst tragedy since Sept. 11,” Paul said. “If I’d been president at the time and I’d found that you did not read the cables from Benghazi, you did not read the cables from Ambassador Stevens, I would have relieved you of your post.” Let us hope the country and the press come to their senses about Hilary.
Former Secret Service agent Gary Byrne is a 29-year veteran of the military and federal law enforcement, and his new book entitled “Crisis of Character” was the topic of the top headline on the Drudge Report for two days in a row. According to Byrne, Hillary Clinton was so angry and so violent while the Clintons were living in the White House that Secret Service agents and White House staff constantly “lived in terror of her next tirade,” and wondered if they would have to someday protect the president from his wife.
The Times writes, “Demonizing every Muslim by equating Shari‘a and terrorism is akin to describing every Christian as a radical fundamentalist; the Bible can also be interpreted as requiring brutal punishments for archaic offenses. Meanwhile, the same Pew survey showed that majorities in every Muslim region — including the South Asian nations where support for Shari‘a runs highest — say it should apply only to Muslims.”
The Times is doing something that is quite reprehensible. Of course they believe it should apply only to Muslims for the rest of us are infidels and are subject to unusually harsh and cruel treatment by a different set of Shari‘a laws. That includes the right to capture, rape and make sexual slaves of our women. One would think that the first possible woman president of the United States would be sensitive to this issue but only Trump the half-mad man is. Many think he is half-mad but he even has it right about global warming (which is global cooling) setting him apart in the political world as a man who knows the forest from the trees.