Leaders Of The World Would Like Us To Stop Calling The Islamic State ‘Islamic’ Please And Thank You

Screen Shot 2015-07-02 at 9.26.42 AM

I’ve been waiting for this day to come. In fact, I’m surprised it took so long. You know. Calling the Islamic State the Islamic State. Isn’t that kind of mean? To Muslims?

The rest of the world thinks so.

British Prime Minister David Cameron and over 100 MPs want everyone to reconsider the ways they describe the monstrous terror group, ISIS. Because Islamic? That’s just plain hurtful.

Why are you all so Islamophobic? Why?

World leaders are basically worried that the “peaceful” Muslims will get all offended and “recoil” if we continue to refer to the Islamic State as such.

They suggest using the word  “Daesh.” France does. And don’t we just so want to follow in their footsteps? (sarc)

Critics warn that referring to ‘Islamic State’ legitimises the group’s attempt to carve out parts of Iraq and Syria.

Oh! So they’re getting away with all of this beheading and raping and stoning and drowning and conquering because we’re referring to them as “Islamic State” militants? That somehow legitimizes them and therefore gives them magical super powers to conquer the Middle East? It has nothing to do with the fact that White House officials are more concerned with getting their rainbow light displays just right?

I had no idea it worked that way.

Mr Cameron, who uses ISIL, said in an interview on Radio 4 yesterday: ‘I wish the BBC would stop calling it Islamic State because it’s not an Islamic State; what it is – an appalling, barbarous regime,’ Mr Cameron said.

Ah, good ol’ BBC. (Not really. I kind of hate them. Mostly because my manatee of a liberal professor who hated my guts LIVED by it. I remember her telling us she’d only listen to BBC because all other networks were too lowly or something. Besides the New York Times, which she encouraged us all to read because the writing is “almost poetic.”)

“It is a perversion of the religion of Islam and many Muslims listening to this programme will recoil every time they hear the words ‘Islamic State.”

‘So-called’ or Isil is better,’ he added.

Good grief. Why is everyone too scared to recognize the Islamic State for what it is? They’re a bunch of barbarians who are actually following the teachings of Muhammad­. The raping children, hating/killing infidels­– it’s all in the Quran. It’s not a perversion, really. They’re just following the instructions of their holy book. (And I get that not all Muslims are like that, but at the same time, I don’t see a giant group of them coming against all of these barbaric actions. And even the ones who do condemn ISIS still refuse to condemn Sharia Law, which ISIS abides by pretty perfectly, I might add.)

The 120 MPs said: ‘The BBC has an opportunity to lead on this issue and call this organisation what it really is rather than allowing it to be linked with religion.

‘We hope that you will take up this issue and adopt Daesh as the official title for them.’

They argue that US Secretary of State John Kerry and the French foreign minister Laurent Fabius both use Daesh.

Well golly gee. If John Kerry is doing it, it MUST BE a good idea.

SNP Westminster leader Angus Robertson said: ‘The time has come in the English speaking world, to stop using Islamic State, ISIS or ISIL, and instead we and our media should use Daesh as the commonly-used phrase across the Middle East.’

But Mr Cameron replied: ‘I personally think that using the term ISIL or ‘so-called’ would be better than what they currently do.

Can you even wrap your head around this? World leaders are having this lengthy debate over the most appropriate name to call these animals. That’s what they’re worried about.

While ISIS is raping, killing and conquering, European morons are freaking out over what we call them, and American morons are marveling over the “cool” the rainbow lights shining on the White House.

We are so doomed.

UN WANTS “URGENT MEASURES” TO CONTROL GUNS AFTER CHARLESTON KILLINGS

Screen Shot 2015-06-23 at 3.19.18 PM

Americans will be unable to defend themselves against the most violent armed force ever created: government

by JOE WOLVERTON, II, J.D. | GOVTSLAVES | JUNE 23, 2015

 Not to be outdone by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in calling for civilian disarmament, the United Nations is taking advantage of the Charleston shootings to join the chorus of confiscators.

In a statement issued on June 19 by the United Nations Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent (yes, that actually exists), committee chairwoman Mireille Fanon Mendes-France demanded that “urgent measures must be taken to prevent gun violence.” Making a point of distinguishing this crime for its effect on “the security of Afro-Americans,” the UN group sent their “heartfelt condolences to the people of the United States of America.”

If the United Nations has its way, there will much more to mourn about in the United States of America. As part of the global effort to grant monopoly control of weapons of all sizes to UN-approved “state actors,” the Arms Trade Treaty mandates the forcible disarmament of all others.

The scheme was endorsed in the “name of the people of the United States” by Secretary of State John Kerry on September 25, 2013.

“I am very pleased to have signed this treaty here today. I signed it because President Obama knows that from decades of efforts that at any time that we work with — cooperatively to address the illicit trade in conventional weapons, we make the world a safer place. And this treaty is a significant step in that effort,” Kerry said at the signing ceremony.

Promptly, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon thanked Kerry and Obama for their complicity in consolidating UN control over weapons and ammunition: “Today, a number of countries signed the Arms Trade Treaty, pushing the total number of signatures to more than half of all Member States.”

The secretary-general, as the depository of the treaty, welcomes every signature to this important pact. At the same time, it is of particular significance that the largest arms exporting country in the world, the United States, is now also among those countries who have committed themselves to a global regulation of the arms trade. He believes this will contribute to efforts to reduce insecurity and suffering for people on all continents. He calls upon other countries to follow suit.

Since the date of the treaty’s signing by Kerry, a number of senators have warned President Obama not to try to enforce the terms of the agreement by use of his infamous “pen and phone.”

In 2013, Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, sent the president a letter reminding him that:

As you know, Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution requires the United States Senate to provide its advice and consent before a treaty becomes binding under United States law. The Senate has not yet provided its advice and consent, and may not provide such consent. As a result, the Executive Branch is not authorized to take any steps to implement the treaty.

President Obama knows this and he also knows that in March of that year, 53 senators voted “to uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.”

Americans know something, too. They know that this administration has never failed to use every murderous act of armed violence as a pretext for tyranny. From Newtown to the Navy Yard to the latest atrocity committed at a church in Charleston, President Obama has issued scores of executive orders directly violating the Constitution’s explicit prohibition on the infringement of the right to keep and bear arms.

In a statement made to The Blaze, Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina pointed to this predilection on the part of the president and bolstered her position, saying that “South Carolina has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation.”

As reported by The Blaze, “South Carolina is one of five states that have an outright ban on open carry firearms.” Adding, “South Carolina’s concealed carry law requires permit applicants to undergo a background check, submitting two sets of fingerprints, and take a state-approved class on gun safety before passing a written test and a live firing range test.”

Regardless of the rigorous background checks to which one must submit in South Carolina before being permitted by the government to purchase a gun, the question remains: Why should any government possess the power to disarm its citizens? Do I have the power to disarm my neighbor if I believe him to be “dangerous?” Certainly not. If I tried to go over and take his weapon I’d likely be arrested for trespass and assault. Where, then, does government — that is nothing more than the collective expression of the people’s natural right of self-defense — get the power to make legal for them what would be illegal for an individual?

While the UN’s Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent may be correct in calling the barbarous act committed at the Emanuel African Methodist Church a “racist crime motivated by prejudice,” nothing in the words or executive orders of President Obama would have prevented it from happening.

The same goes for the Arms Trade Treaty. The secretary-general, the secretary of state, and every presidential candidate can claim that they want to talk about additional gun regulations out of consideration for the safety of innocent people, but what they really intend to do is take liberty from innocent people and leave those people defenseless to do anything about it.

Arguably, the Arms Trade Treaty would become the law of the United States if the Senate were to ratify the treaty.

While that is the process that the Constitution establishes for the implementation of treaties, fundamental principles of construction and constitutional law dictate that no treaty that violates the Constitution can become the supreme law of the land.

In the case of the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty, there is no doubt that regardless of presidential signatures or congressional consent, this treaty cannot pass constitutional muster and therefore will never be the valid law of the land.

Unless, of course, Americans once again acquiesce to President Obama’s assumption of illegal authority and relinquish their rights and weapons regardless of the reasons they should not do so.

This nightmare scenario took a giant leap toward reality on Thursday, June 18 when 218 members of Congress voted to grant the president “trade promotion authority (TPA),” the so-called “fast track.”

With this new power, the president is free to unilaterally issue international executive orders that are binding on the United States, so long as those orders concern trade.

Is there any question whether President Obama will use this new power over “trade” to implement the provisions of the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty? Somewhere, perhaps, a teleprompter is being loaded with a speech mourning the death of so many innocent men and women and promising to “heal” the country by making it more difficult for people to “own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer” (the language from the ATT) firearms.

There is not a person of sound mind who doesn’t deplore and denounce crimes such as that committed in Charleston. Senseless brutality leaves us all scarred and diminishes our collective virtue.

Wise men, however, would also recognize that statements such as that issued by the United Nations Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent demanding that “urgent measures” be taken to reduce gun violence will — as with all similar statements made since the establishment of the modern state — have no effect on violence.

It will, however, leave Americans unable to defend themselves against the most violent armed force ever created: government.

Look What 121 Criminal Illegals Did AFTER Obama Set Them Free… Media Silent

Screen Shot 2015-06-18 at 3.26.14 PM

President Barack Hussein Obama apparently believes that allowing illegal immigrants to set up shop in America somehow benefits us as a society. However, newly released evidence suggests otherwise.

According to a government report released Monday, 121 of the detained illegal immigrants that his administration released back into our country went on to kill people.
Take for instance Apolinar Altamirano, who, after being released by Obama’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, was subsequently arrested on Jan. 22 for “first-degree murder, armed robbery and related offenses.”

Another 33 illegal immigrant murderers were released because of immigration court orders, while 21 were released because of a 2001 Supreme Court decision that capped the amount of time that illegal immigrants can be detained. The rest were released directly by ICE.

Furthermore, critics of Obama’s pathetic immigration enforcement suspected that “the violence rate for released immigrants is probably much higher and the 121 charged are only those who have been caught.”
“Illegal immigration is not a victimless crime,” Maria Espinoza, an advocate for victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants, explained to reporters. “This further supports what we have been fighting for. The safety and welfare of Americans must be the priority of the administration and the Republican-led Congress.”

The problem is that neither President Obama nor congressional Republicans take illegal immigration seriously. The president used executive actions to set up amnesty for illegals, and 75 Republicans voted to fund the program.

This is not to say that all Republicans have sold us out. A few them, including Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Sen. Jeff Flake, have been diligently trying to get Secretary of State John Kerry to “put more pressure on other countries to take back their citizens whom the U.S. wants to deport.”

However, according to The Washington Times, the Obama administration’s endless intransigence has unsurprisingly gotten in the way.

The sad truth of the matter is that Obama and his goons care more about protecting the supposed rights of illegal immigrants than they do about protecting the lives of Amrican citizens.

Who Can Identify With the Common Man? Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio

Screen Shot 2015-06-10 at 5.51.06 PM

Liberal media are terrified of Marco Rubio.

They have now attacked him for drinking water, having a fishing boat while living in Florida that’s not even a fraction of the cost of John Kerry’s yacht , and his wife having a few speeding tickets (Obama had just as many, but in THREE years). Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton should be in prison for what she’s done, and instead of investigating and writing about that, these “journalists” talk about how good Hillary “Dead Broke” Clinton is at saving money. Give me a break.

From Katie Pavlich at Townhall:

This is so ridiculous I’m actually laughing at my computer right now. Rubio had student loan debt? Yeah, so? A lot of people do. The Rubios had trouble balancing their spending? Who doesn’t? Rubio took out a loan on his home to make ends meet? Good for him, lots of people do. He was paid a hefty amount of money to write a book about his upbringing that he used to pay off debt? Even better. He had more than one home now? Cool, wish I did too. He spent $80,000 on a speed fishing boat in ocean surrounded Florida after paying off his debt? How could he?!

Marco Rubio and his family are normal people chasing the American Dream and that scares the hell out of “dead broke so we could pay mortgages” Hillary Clinton supporters. The different between Rubio and Clinton is that Rubio embraces success and policies that allow every American to own multiple homes and a speed boat someday. Clinton, however, relishes in wealth instead of encouraging Americans to become wealthy themselves to live the good life. According to Clinton, not everyone can be queen.

President Obama’s Record: The Terrorists are Winning

Screen Shot 2015-06-05 at 3.14.40 PM

BY DONALD LAMBRO

WASHINGTON – Barack Obama’s mistake-filled, trouble-plagued presidency is slipping into history as Americans begin their search for a successor who can clean up the mess he created.

You’ve probably noticed that Obama isn’t making much if any real news lately. Days go by when he isn’t on the nightly network news or on the front pages of the nation’s newspapers.

It isn’t because he’s being ignored by the news media. It’s because he has nothing new to propose to deal with America’s problems, or, if he does, little chance of being taken seriously by the Republican Congress.

Second presidential terms are historically empty of the kind of major reforms and legislative initiatives that usually take place in the first four years of an administration.

That is, unless the president runs on a meaty, second term agenda — as President Reagan did in 1984 when he campaigned on cleansing our dysfunctional tax code and his success on getting the U.S. economy running again at full throttle.

No one writes about this because the economic growth comparisons to Obama’s first term record are shamefully embarrassing.

But, for the record, here are the robust quarterly growth figures Reagan produced in the fourth year of his first term: 8.5 percent, 7.9 percent, 6.9 percent and 5.8 percent.

He carried 49 states that year and went on to enact a sweeping overhaul of the tax code, with strong Democratic support, that cut the top tax rate to 28 percent.

Now, here’s Obama’s mediocre economic performance in 2012, the fourth year of his first term: 2.3 percent, 1.6 percent, 2.5 percent, and 0.1 percent.

(In his seventh year, the economy is getting worse. It has not only stopped growing in the first three months of this year, it actually contracted by 0.7 percent.)

Flash forward to the present day as the listless Obama administration stumbles through the last year and a half of his presidency. It isn’t a pretty picture.

In foreign policy, newly resurgent terrorist armies, from the Islamic State (ISIS and ISIL) to al-Qaeda, have seized large swaths territories across the Middle East and North Africa.

In a strongly-financed, far more lethal, multi-pronged offensive, these extremist groups have swiftly seized large strategic targets in Syria and Iraq. And their brothers in bloodshed and beheadings are making sporadic attacks in other adjoining states — a sign of their ambitious plans to wage war across the Middle East and beyond.

Remember how the administration responded to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s use of deadly, toxic chemical weapons on his own people, and Obama’s declaration that they had crossed a “red line” that would not stand?

Something was fishy when Russian thug Vladimir Putin, Assad’s friend, offered a diplomatic plan to negotiate the elimination of the chemical stockpiles, and Obama and secretary of State John Kerry fully embraced the idea and signed on the dotted line.

That took the spotlight off Assad’s continued attacks on Syrian population centers with barrel-bombs that killed as many or more civilians as the chemical weapons did.

But Obama’s naive belief that he could trust Assad to keep his word wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on.

It was reported this week that Syria is using chlorine gas in oil barrels and gas cylinders, dropped by airplanes and helicopters on civilian residents in rebel-held areas.

Last month, international inspectors for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, that was part of the pact agreed to by Obama and Kerry, discovered traces of sarin and VX nerve agent at a military site in Syria.

And what about Putin’s seizure and annexation of the Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula and his defacto takeover of territory in its eastern region?

Obama and the European Union imposed economic sanctions on Russia, but the slap on the wrists have not deterred Putin’s ambitions to swallow Ukraine whole in his demonic dream of restoring a Greater Russia.

Sensing Obama’s fast-declining influence on the world stage, Putin has given the green light to resume military actions by pro-Russian rebels as renewed fighting broke out this week — blowing a huge hole in the tenuous cease-fire signed in February.

Ukraine’s pleas for increased military arms assistance has fallen on deaf ears in the White House where officials still insist a lasting diplomatic solution is possible. Kerry made back-to-back trips to Moscow last month in the fairy tale belief he could persuade Putin to end his aggression against the the Kiev government.

Meantime, back here at home, Obama’s apologists in the national news media have been working overtime to persuade voters that the economy’s ominous decline is not the president’s fault. It’s tight-fisted consumers who have driven the economy into a three-month recession, they say.

The day after the Commerce Department reported the economy’s collapse, the liberal Washington Post ran an excuse-filled story on its front page under this headline:

“Recession yields a culture of savers,” followed by this subhead: “Economy shrinks again as consumers continue to hang on to their cash.”

This is the time “for American consumers to feel good,” because job growth “is brisk,” wages are up, and gasoline prices have dropped, the Post’s well-paid reporters said.

What planet are they on? Job growth has been tepid at best, compared to previous recoveries. Wages are virtually flat. Gas prices have been rising again. College graduates can’t find good paying, fulltime jobs.

“The U.S. economy continues to stumble,” writes the Post’s economic columnist Robert J. Samuelson.

Obama’s impotent, job-killing, anti-growth economic policies are responsible for the mess we’re in — not the spending habits of hard working, hard-pressed, frugal Americans.

Obama was given a second term in 2012 when he should have been voted out of office. Next year we get a chance to correct that regrettable mistake.

Mini-me missiles? N Korea claims it has made miniaturized nuclear warheads

Capture

Pyongyang says it has developed miniaturized nuclear warheads making it possible to fit them into missiles. The report comes just weeks after North Korea claimed its first submarine-based missile test.

“It has been a long time since we began miniaturizing and diversifying our means of nuclear strike,” North Korea’s National Defense Commission said in a statement, as cited by the official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

“We have also reached the stage where the highest accuracy rate is guaranteed not only for short- and medium-range missiles, but long-range missiles as well.”

South Korean intelligence believes Pyongyang initiated development of new strategic ballistic missiles in 2010.

On May 9, Pyongyang announced a successful test launch of a submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) – a game-changing “world-level strategic weapon,” according to North Korean leader Kim Jong-un.

READ MORE: N. Korea says it tested submarine-launched ballistic missile
Capture

Meanwhile, US Admiral James Winnefeld claimed Tuesday that North Korean specialists doctored the images and in fact are “many years” from developing submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

“They have not gotten as far as their clever video editors and spinmeisters would have us believe,” Reuters reported Winnefeld, vice chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, as saying.

Last November, South Korean media claimed that North Korea had “imported a Soviet-era Golf-class diesel submarine and modified it,” Yonhap news agency reported, citing a government source.

READ MORE: North Korea launches upgraded Soviet-era ballistic missile submarine – report

The commander of US forces on the Korean peninsula, General Curtis Scaparrotti, said in October 2014 that though it was difficult to verify what Pyongyang actually possesses in its arsenal, he believed that North Korea had “the capability to miniaturize a device at this point and they have the technology to actually deliver what they say they have,” AFP reported.

There has so far been no credible report about North Korea effectively testing a miniature nuclear device.

READ MORE: N Korea capable of launching ‘mobile’ nuke missile into US – NORAD

US Secretary of State John Kerry said this week that North Korea “continues to pursue nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles” and warned that Washington is considering implementing new sanctions against Kim Jong-un’s regime.

Our very own Baghdad Bama!

Screen Shot 2015-05-14 at 11.16.08 AM

Yes, we have Baghdad Bama and his trusty sidekick John Kerry! As national and satellite pictures were showing American troops taking over Baghdad airport and moving towards the city, Baghdad Bob proclaims, “There are NO AMERICANS infidels in Baghdad. Never!” on live TV… as you can hear the shells going off in the background! Reports came in from various news sources with Baghdad Bob saying, “I blame Al-Jazeera – they are marketing for the Americans!” When asked by reporters how the Iraqi army would do against the Americans he replied, “My feelings – as usual – we will slaughter them all.” And let’s not forget, “Our initial assessment is that they will all die.” Baghdad Bob had so many gems that he tries to sell but fails.

I believe we are seeing that same thing here in America. We consistently hear from the White House that the economy is good, jobs are on the rise, people are feeling better, and the biggie… we are living in the safest time in history! In what universe? Consumer confidence is down, most jobs created are part-time, the economy can’t maintain a 2% misery index, credit card debt is up, home sales are down. Do you need more?!

This Administration also goes on to say there are no scandals, and no issues at the IRS. Benghazi, though a tragedy, was played out by the U.S. perfectly, and it all happened because of a movie maker. We are stuck in a Twilight Zone marathon featuring the Obama Chronicles.

The economy, after the (real) Great Depression of 1930 made a strong comeback. The US saw growth rates of 11, 8, and 13 percent over the 3 years it took to recover. Most experts agreed, if the government had gotten out of the way recovery would have been so much quicker! What wouldn’t I give for a 5 or 6% recovery today?

Screen Shot 2015-05-14 at 11.18.09 AM

According to President Obama, his Administration’s growth tactics were the way to go. He had no problem blaming Republican’s for fearmongering with their warnings that his plan wouldn’t work. It should be clear by now, his plan has NOT worked, nor will it work, not in any situation or universe! In 2010, the economic recovery was only at 3%. In 2011, 1.7%. In 2012, it tripped over 2%. In 2013, it stumbled to 1.8%. And then, in 2014, it wobbled on the 3% line. So far, for 2015, the average is 2.8%.

In Obama’s State of the Union address he said the economy, though growing slowing, is doing great and we are on our way to a recovery! WHAT?!

Just a poke in the eye for a moment… under George W. in 2001 after the 9-11 attack the economy tumbled and crashed hanging in at an average of 0.5% until 2002 when it started to rise again to a high of 4.3%. But the damage had been done. The low GDP and slowing of the economy had started to undermine the Bernie Madoffs of the world with their phony investment schemes that started to crumble. From 2006 forward and in 2008 it couldn’t hold anymore. Obama even lost Bill Clinton on this one. Bill openly stated in interviews that the economy was stumbling and was still having issues.

This Administration has touted itself as the most transparent ever. Yet even the mainstream media who were in a deep love affair with Obama said they have been the most secretive ever. Veteran journalists from almost every major paper were shocked when this “transparent” Administration said they were no longer welcome at most of the events in and around the White House. To add insult to injury, the White House said they would release pictures and stories to the media that they deemed newsworthy. Sounds like an open environment to me! (Yes, that’s sarcasm.)

Obama ChoomThere are so many of these examples it pains me to leave them out, but I want to focus on the comment that the world is the safest it’s been than at any other time in history. Where does he get this stuff? Both Obama and Kerry must be smoking from the same crack pipe. None of the military officials or advisors believe this statement – NONE of them!

Race relations haven’t been this bad since the 1960’s. We haven’t seen this much inner city violence since the violent protests of the Vietnam War and the race riots of the 1960’s. For all intents and purposes, we were moving in the right direction with racial issues, maybe not fast enough, but at least moving forward nonetheless.

This president has set us back 50 years with race-baiting and his own racial bias. He started with the infamous “beer summit” saying that the incident where a black college professor was arrested by a white cop for breaking into a house had to be racially motivated. It couldn’t be a mistake. It had to be an overt racist act. This was just the beginning. For a president who recently stated that he never gets involved until the investigation is over, you can’t prove it by his record.

This country is teetering on the brink of a major outbreak of violence, but it will be aimed at the government, not just a “black and white” thing. The racial violence we have seen in some of these cities will look like a game of Battleship compared to what will happen if this Administration keeps trampling on the rights of Americans by putting illegals first before the American people and taking more and more of their less and less hard-earned money to provide services for those here illegally.

Like Baghdad Bob, this president either sees none of these issues raised before him or he chooses to keep feeding us the propaganda he has been manufacturing since his first days in office.

To paraphrase what Obama said in the last election; I am choosing to do the will of those who stayed home and didn’t vote. They think everything is going fine, so they simply stayed home.

Baghdad Bama has spoken!
Read more at http://eaglerising.com/18410/our-very-own-baghdad-bama/#efo6zj197ddAZKdS.99

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,091 other followers