"I don't want to put the cart before the horse. We don't have a strategy yet."I guess this is what happens when all you have to worry about is the next fundraiser or when the next tee time is. Because this weekend, Obama has two fundraisers to attend in Westchester County, New York, as well as the wedding of an MSNBC talking head.
Meanwhile, across the pond in England, Prime Minister David Cameron seems to understand the threat being faced by the free, Western world (AP via ABC News).
Prime Minister David Cameron pledged Friday to plug gaps in Britain's armory to combat terror, describing the extremist threat posed by the Islamic State group as being more dangerous than even that of al-Qaida.But in America, the collective head of our government is placed in the sand. Two weeks away from the 13th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks in New York, and the two year anniversary of the attack on the Benghazi compound, the Obama Regime, the Democrat Party and their liberal sycophants in the media are still in denial about the threat of Islamists against the free world.
Cameron's remarks came just moments after authorities raised Britain's terror threat level to severe, the second-highest level. The decision was related to developments in Iraq and Syria, but there was no information to suggest an attack was imminent.
"What we are facing in Iraq now with ISIL is a greater threat to our security than we have seen before," Cameron said, using an abbreviation for a longer name the Islamic State previously used: the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant.
He told reporters that while the Taliban facilitated al-Qaida terrorism, the Islamic State group is "effectively a state run by terrorists." He said the ambition to create an Islamist caliphate isn't something that could be ignored.
"We could be facing a terrorist state on the shores of the Mediterranean and bordering a NATO member," he said, referring to Turkey.
Intelligence and security services now believe around 500 Britons have gone to fight in Syria and potentially Iraq. Some of the plots are likely to involve fighters who have traveled from Britain and Europe to take part in fighting in the Middle East.
To prove my point...liberal media pundits Paul "The Forehead" Begala and Alan "The Eyebrow" Colmes.
Begala sent out the follow Tweet to defend his liberal President while attacking President Bush.
So, to liberal Clintonoid Begala, our military are a bunch of conquerors and occupiers, the typical line of the radical hate-America-first left since they flew the Vietcong flag in the 1960s and spit on returning soldiers, calling them "baby killers."
Colmes showed another example of the "See No Evil, Hear No Evil" attitude toward Islamic terror that the Left has had since 9/11 last night on the O'Reilly Factor (The Blaze).
Colmes and I went at it on Twitter earlier.Fox News host Greg Gutfeld clashed with liberal guest Alan Colmes Thursday night, pushing back against Colmes’ contention that the Islamic State does not currently pose a direct threat to the United States.
“Why is it that lefties like you … have a hard time identifying actual existential evil unless it’s a Republican or a stay-at-home mom, where you can condemn them?,” asked Gutfeld, who was filling in for Bill O’Reilly. ”But when it comes to somebody who wants to kill you, oh, you know, they’re nobodies.”
Colmes, who posited that it seems as though the Islamic State threat is being ginned up in an effort to potentially lead the U.S. into another war, said that he was by no means defending the Islamic State, but that he didn’t want to see yet another American-led conflict unfold.
“I guess what it is is they’re not reaching the Colmes level of barbarism,” Gutfeld said. “They’re just not vicious enough for you.”
Colmes later wrote:
Gullible Alan? Was the following below not enough bloodshed to wake Alan Colmes and his liberal bed wetters up to the threat of radical Islamists toward our fellow citizens?
This is not to say that President George W. Bush, nor any other US President, is ever off limits from criticism. Bush certainly deserves criticism for his domestic spending (biggest government spender post LBJ, pre-Obama), his pro-amnesty position, and even some decisions in war planning in the War on Terror (which Iraq was a part of). But it is an entirely different subject when certain members of our government engaged in an effort to embolden the enemies by declaring the "war is lost" (Harry Reid), calling our troops Nazis, Soviet gulags, or Pol Pot (Dick Turbin), or that US Marines killed civilians in cold blood (Jackoff Murtha), or "air raiding villages and killing civilians" which Obama said in 2007 on his road to the Presidency while campaigning to reverse the Bush policies...all this for political gain.
The Democrats fought their war against Bush and the GOP, with (to Bush's shame) no effective response in defense. And what happened? The War on Terror became "Overseas Contingency Operations" or "Man Caused Disasters." A jihadi attack at an Arkansas recruiting station, the Marine Corps Museum and Chantilly VA Marine Recruiting station were blips on the media radar, while Eric Holder's Racial Justice Department announced Muslims would get their protection. And we saw the fruition of that as the Ft Hood jihadi Nidal Hassan's act of terrorism was classified as "workplace violence."
Meanwhile, patriotic American citizens who were opposed to higher taxes, more government intrusion in our daily lives, government-run healthcare, etc, were dubbed by the new Obama Regime as "domestic security threats." Obama talked about "punishing enemies" and his thuggish underlings used terms like "punch back twice as hard."
And while Obama golfs as ISIS beheads Americans and kills Iraqi Christians and other infidels, news broke this week on how the Regime is funding a database monitoring Twitter for "hate speech."
The National Science Foundation is financing the creation of a web service that will monitor “suspicious memes” and what it considers “false and misleading ideas,” with a major focus on political activity online.Why would this Regime want to monitor speech on the Internet, and who would be defining what is and isn't "hate speech"?
The “Truthy” database, created by researchers at Indiana University, is designed to “detect political smears, astroturfing, misinformation, and other social pollution.”
The university has received $919,917 so far for the project.
“The project stands to benefit both the research community and the public significantly,” the grant states. “Our data will be made available via [application programming interfaces] APIs and include information on meme propagation networks, statistical data, and relevant user and content features.”
“The open-source platform we develop will be made publicly available and will be extensible to ever more research areas as a greater preponderance of human activities are replicated online,” it continues. “Additionally, we will create a web service open to the public for monitoring trends, bursts, and suspicious memes.”
“This service could mitigate the diffusion of false and misleading ideas, detect hate speech and subversive propaganda, and assist in the preservation of open debate,” the grant said.
For all the talk about "political extremism" coming for the right, it is the Left who keeps tabs on "hate speech" and inspires their crazies to act in deadly ways, such as the attempted attack on the Family Research Council by a homosexual activist who wanted to kill and smear Chick-fil-A sandwiches in the faces of his victims. He was inspired by the Leftists at the Southern Poverty Law Center, who listed the FRC as a hate group.
But what Obama, the Democrats, Alan Colmes, Paul Begala, and the other liberal apologists for Islamic terrorism forget, is the phrase I heard from some after 9/11.
"We are all in this together."
The al-Queda terrorists on 9/11 didn't ask what political party or ideology, sexual orientation, gender, race or religion the victims on the four planes, the Pentagon and the Twin Towers were. They were all equally infidels and were all equally targeted.
The threat of terrorism is bigger than loyalty a President, a political party or ideology.
We are all equally a threat.
And for those like Colmes, Begala and others who want to deny that threat, while looking at conservatives/Tea Party members as the real enemy, well, you are part of the problem.