RUTHFULLY YOURS

More than a few analysts and political writers have noted that U.S. President Barack Obama ‎seems to enjoy driving his political opponents up a wall. On the domestic front, the strategy has been to get ‎under the skin of Republicans, so the political battles are waged on Obama’s ‎chosen playing field, and his opponents come off as angry if not crazy when they ‎fight back. ‎

At times, the president has sounded like a Chicago gang ‎leader, including this memorable comment at a Philadelphia fundraiser during his initial ‎run for the White House in 2008: “If [the Republicans] bring a knife to the fight, we bring a ‎gun. Because from what I understand, folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”‎

This kind of “elevated” discussion of campaign strategy (often with ‎sports associations) fits with a broader strategy Obama has put ‎into place as president of appearing to consciously shrink the ‎dignity of the office he serves by regularly appealing to the ‎audiences of the lowest common denominator talk shows and ‎interview programs, such as “The View.” On Thursday, two days ‎after delivering the annual State of the Union address, the president will follow up with sure to be weighty discussions with a ‎trio of popular young YouTube filmmakers.‎

Truly, there must be peace loving people in every religion. It is for this reason there are a number of interfaith events among Christians, Jews and Muslims.

In hopes of achieving peace, many Christians and Jews assume all their Islamic counterparts enter the meetings with similar values and honesty. Obviously they are not aware that the Q’uran approves of Al-Takeyyah: Lying For Allah. Nor have they become aware that so many Islamic leaders preach hate of infidels and Islamic domination.

According to “Islamic Commentaries” falsehoods (Al-Takeyyah) are permitted to protect Islam, to protect oneself, a fellow Muslim or to promote the cause of Islam. This is sanctioned by the Qur’an (16-106). This, in many cases, includes lying under penalty of perjury in testimony before the United States Congress etc

President Obama’s State of the Union speech last night brought to mind the opening scene in “Cabaret,” when the garishly made up nightclub entertainer begins – in 1930s Berlin, against the backdrop of Hitler’s rise to power – by proclaiming “In here, life is beautiful. The girls are beautiful. Even the orchestra is beautiful!”

To Obama, congress is the orchestra. And he means to force them to play his tune.

Obama spoke in full campaign mode, alternately charming, humorous and caustic. But his attitude was triumphant. He spoke as a man convinced that he is still in charge, essentially daring House and Senate Republicans to prove him wrong.

Near the beginning of his speech, Obama promising to veto anything that would change immigration policy, Obamacare, or the Dodd-Frank anti-business law, as well as any new Iran sanctions. He dusted off his old tactic of placing blame on the Republicans for anything that he believed could be characterized as a financial showdown or a threatened government shutdown. He said those actions – which are the only way congress can stop him from abusing his power through executive action – would slow down business or risk the economy.

Speaking about the wars and economic crises that have plagued America since the start of the century, Obama said, “The shadow of crisis has passed and the State of the Union is strong.”

Obama claimed credit for all that’s going right, even when it wasn’t (and for a lot of things that are benefitting our economy which neither his policies nor his executive actions caused, such as lower gasoline prices.) Time after time, he glowed with satisfaction, especially where there was nothing to brag about.

Though the White House had said the speech wouldn’t be just a laundry list of proposals, there were so many that it was hard to keep track of them unless you had Joe the Plumber in the back of your mind.

“Sunni and Shiite believers of the fictional “religion of peace” could not have chosen a better time to expand their jihad against the infidels. The misleading portrait of the religion whose symbol is the sword, whose fanatic adherents’ principal aspiration is martyrdom by killing the nonbelievers, is not new. However, the twentieth-century Muslim Brotherhood fib of separation between the mosque and the state, at the time Western economies’ dependence on Arab/Muslim oil provided vast amounts of money, helped the believers to propagate this lie, and to increase their influence in the West, even while attacking it.

Deception, a major weapon in the arsenal of Islam. Accordingly, as David Bukay, professor of Middle East Studies at the University of Haifa, has explained, “they portray Muslims as peaceful, tolerant human beings, while non-Muslims are aggressors, imperialist-colonialist occupiers. Therefore their victims and even their potential victims, i.e., all Muslims, must fight to defend themselves and retaliate against the Kuffar (non-believer), who always instigates war.

Exclusive: Bruce Phillips concludes 2-part analysis of 50-year-old Fatah party
Published: 15 hours ago 16 Note: This is Part 2 of an article examining whether or not the Palestinian party Fatah is really as moderate is we have been led to believe. Part I provided an analysis of Fatah’s own trademark logos and posters. Part 2 will examine some of the recent statements and actions of Fatah chief Mahmoud Abbas and current Fatah leadership.

Introduction A revealing irony came to light while writing this article. The West is debating whether it is appropriate to publish (or even show) the post-attack issue of the Charlie Hebdo magazine, which includes a caricature of Muhammad. At the same time, Muslim leaders from several countries have issued explicit warnings about the consequences of publishing such images. In fact, after Friday prayers on Jan. 16, 2015, Muslims across the Middle Eastern marched and protested against the new Charlie Hebdo cartoon, while several countries issued warnings that the drawing could “fuel hatred.” Meanwhile, this is all happening while Fatah observes its 50th anniversary by posting images and/or issuing statements that are orders-of-magnitude more violent than any Charlie Hebdo cartoon, but without any discernible response from the Western media, let alone the Islamic world.

The ‘moderate’ Mahmoud Abbas

In one form or another, Mahmoud Abbas has been the leader of Fatah, the Palestinian Authority (PA) and/or the PLO since 2003, when the U.S. refused to conduct any further peace negotiations with Yasser Arafat. Often described as a “moderate” alternative, Mr. Abbas has frequently renounced violence and terror, but has nonetheless remained complicit as other members of Fatah and/or the PA maintain an intense campaign of provocation and incitement to violence.

Long War Journal reports that the Obama administration has released Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri from a U.S. prison – not from Gitmo, but from a civilian jail after a federal terrorism conviction.

Al-Marri is an al-Qaeda operative who was planted as a “sleeper” in the United States by Khalid Sheikh Mohamed to await instructions on carrying out a second wave of attacks after the 9/11 atrocities – against water reservoirs, the New York Stock Exchange, U.S. military academies, and other targets. The Justice Department quietly sprung him on Friday so he could return to his native Qatar, a country the administration regards as a crucial counterterrorism ally . . . and a country that is notorious for providing material support to jihadists.

While appalling, this news was inevitable. The al-Marri case was a cause célèbre for the Bush-deranged Left because he was detained as an enemy combatant, rather than arrested and charged in court as a criminal defendant, despite being apprehended in the United States. Upon taking office, Obama ordered him transferred from military detention under the law of war to the civilian criminal-justice system. Once there, he was given a bargain-basement plea deal by Attorney General Eric Holder and his minions.

As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton orchestrated peace talks with the Taliban. The first meeting took place in Germany on November 28, 2010. Clinton sent a State Department official to meet with the Taliban leader’s chief of staff. Additional meetings were held after that, and Clinton continued to push negotiations with the Taliban right up to the time she left office on February 1, 2013.

In the months leading up to that first meeting in Germany, the Taliban in Afghanistan killed 10 medical aid workers, including 6 Americans. In the Kunduz province of Afghanistan Taliban commanders ordered the stoning of a 19-year-old woman. She was put in a pit, was stoned, tried to crawl out, and was then shot three times in the head. In Pakistan, the Taliban blew up two girls’ schools.

Two thousand seven hundred seventy-seven Afghan civilians were killed in 2010, with 75% of those deaths attributed to Taliban attacks, according to the U.N. In that same year, 496 American military were killed, as were another 212 coalition forces. Five thousand two hundred forty-six Americans were wounded. Eight hundred twenty-one Afghan army and security forces were killed.

We are importing a group of people whose holy book commands them to kill us. Even a child could figure out that doesn’t make sense if you hope to survive.
Even when Muslims are a minority population they can and do transform whole cultures and societies. And not for the better.

Why? Because their holy book is a totalitarian ideology founded on submission and world domination. And toward that end, Islam is on the march. Meanwhile, the West remains mired in cowardice and complicity. Nowhere can this be seen more clearly than in Europe, which is on the fast track to join the Caliphate.

Not to be outdone by Europe’s madness, the United States is traveling down the same bloody path, importing large numbers of Muslims from Islamic countries thanks to the Islamophile sitting in the Oval Office and a nation full of dhimmis.

Given the breathtaking remarks by Gruber and Ezekiel Emanuel, key architects of Obamacare, it behooves all Americans to be reminded of the overarching power that Obama has bestowed upon the Independent Payment Advisory Board or IPAB, a central feature of the ACA or inaptly named Affordable Care Act.

In June 14, 2012, Diane Cohen and Michael F. Cannon co-authored Policy Analysis No. 700 highlighting the egregious assault on the Constitution via IPAB. Entitled “The Independent Payment Advisory Board: PPACA’s Anti-Constitutional and Authoritarian Super-Legislature” it underscores the absolute dictatorial hold the government now has on all Americans. The salient features of this report bear constant repetition and the need for the Republican-dominated Congress to act swiftly to repeal every single part of this law.

Well, it’s that time of year again – the State of the Union! Here are my traditional thoughts on the occasion – after which we’ll deal with the peculiar circumstances of tonight’s festivities:

Strange how the monarchical urge persists even in a republic two-and-a-third centuries old. Many commentators have pointed out that the modern State of the Union is in fairly obvious mimicry of the Speech from the Throne that precedes a new legislative session in British Commonwealth countries and continental monarchies, but this is to miss the key difference. When the Queen or her viceroy reads a Throne Speech in Westminster, Ottawa, or Canberra, it’s usually the work of a government with a Parliamentary majority: In other words, the stuff she’s announcing is actually going to happen. That’s why, lest any enthusiasm for this or that legislative proposal be detected, the apolitical monarch overcompensates by reading everything in as flat and unexpressive a monotone as possible. Underneath the ancient rituals — the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod getting the door of the House of Commons slammed in his face three times — it’s actually a very workmanlike affair.