Thread: President Obama’s Accomplishments : Discuss

President Obama Gives One Of The Most Repulsive Speeches In American History In Hiroshima

The White House assured us last week that President Obama’s visit to Hiroshima would not be an apology photo-op. http://www.dailywire.com/news/5612/o...ar-ben-shapiro

They lied.

On Friday, President Obama said America’s use of the A-bomb to end the threat of Japanese fascism sprang from American desire for conquest, suggested that America had ushered in an age of “atomic warfare,” and said that we could achieve a “world without nuclear weapons” if only we clapped for Tinkerbell. This came shortly after his visit to Vietnam, where his White House announced that America would start selling weapons to the communist dictatorship.

Yes, our president is a total disgrace.

“Seventy-one years ago, on a bright cloudless morning, death fell from the sky and the world was changed. A flash of light and a wall of fire destroyed a city and demonstrated that mankind possessed the means to destroy itself,”

This ignored the fact that mankind had in fact nearly destroyed itself over the previous three decades in two world wars, and that the Soviet Union and China would murder well over 100 million people using non-nuclear means. But the point of Obama’s speech was that the technology of atomic weaponry itself was uniquely evil.

Obama continued:

Why do we come to this place, to Hiroshima? We come to ponder a terrible force unleashed in a not-so-distant past. We come to mourn the dead, including over 100,000 Japanese men, women and children, thousands of Koreans, a dozen Americans held prisoner. Their souls speak to us. They ask us to look inward, to take stock of who we are and what we might become.

In case you were wondering, at no point did Obama mention Pearl Harbor and the dead there, or the more than 100,000 Americans who lost their lives in the Pacific theater, or the half-million to one million Americans who would have had to sacrifice themselves to storm the island of Japan using conventional means. As Noah Rothman tweets this morning, veterans were overjoyed at the use of the A-bomb, knowing it ended the war and meant they would live to see their children.

Obama noted that war is not unique in human history; he even went full moral relativist with regard to World War II itself: “the war grew out of the same base instinct for domination or conquest that had caused conflicts among the simplest tribes, an old pattern amplified by new capabilities and without new constraints.”

This is disgusting. If you can’t spot the bad guys and the good guys in World War II, of all conflicts, you’re on the side of a valueless nihilism that allows the possibility of future world wars – after all, you can’t take a strong stand against evil if it doesn’t exist. Japan was wrong. America was right. Germany was wrong. America was right. End of story.

But Obama continued his relativistic reverie:

How easily we learn to justify violence in the name of some in the name of some higher cause. Every great religion promises a pathway to love and peace and righteousness, and yet no religion has been spared from believers who have claimed their faith as a license to kill.

Some religions are worse than others. Some ideologies are worse than others. But not according to Obama. We’re all equal in sin, according to the President of the United States – and the only solution is to destroy American nationalism, and replace it with some sort of Obama-created philosophy of peace:

The wars of the modern age teach us this truth. Hiroshima teaches this truth. Technological progress without an equivalent progress in human institutions can doom us. The scientific revolution that led to the splitting of an atom requires a moral revolution as well. That is why we come to this place….we have a shared responsibility to look directly into the eye of history and ask what we must do differently to curb such suffering again.

Here’s an answer: take pre-emptive action to stop tyrannically fascist states from starting wars and then vowing to fight them to the last man. But Obama forbids that solution expressly:

We may not be able to eliminate man’s capacity to do evil, so nations and the alliances that we form must possess the means to defend ourselves. But among those nations like my own that hold nuclear stockpiles, we must have the courage to escape the logic of fear and pursue a world without them. We may not realize this goal in my lifetime, but persistent effort can roll back the possibility of catastrophe. We can chart a course that leads to the destruction of these stockpiles. We can stop the spread to new nations and secure deadly materials from fanatics.

Obama is doing none of those things, because to deprive some nations of nuclear weapons while leaving moral nations with them would violate his code of moral equivalence. That’s why Iran will go nuclear within the next decade, why North Korea has gone nuclear, why rogue states around the world are rushing, in the absence of American power and influence, to arm up.

Obama doesn’t want realism. He wants the remaking of the world in his personal image. He wants humanity itself changed:

We must change our mind-set about war itself….we must reimagine our connection to one another as members of one human race. For this, too, is what makes our species unique. We’re not bound by genetic code to repeat the mistakes of the past. We can learn. We can choose. We can tell our children a different story, one that describes a common humanity, one that makes war less likely and cruelty less easily accepted…. Those who died, they are like us. Ordinary people understand this, I think. They do not want more war. They would rather that the wonders of science be focused on improving life and not eliminating it. When the choices made by nations, when the choices made by leaders, reflect this simple wisdom, then the lesson of Hiroshima is done.

Hiroshima was not a “mistake.” It was a wartime decision.

Pearl Harbor wasn’t a “mistake.” It was an attack driven by an aggressive and imperialistic Japanese policy that also resulted in the invasion of China and the murder of 100,000 civilians there.

But Obama thinks that the way to stop war is to kill ideology altogether, not to support and strengthen proper ideologies. This is John Lennon’s Imagine on crack. And in practice, it’s meant the death of hundreds of thousands of people as Obama has pulled out of Iraq, sinking the region into total war up to and including the use of chemical weapons; the murder of thousands in Ukraine, as Obama has left the field clear for Vladimir Putin; the strengthening of the Iranian and North Korean terror regimes. Obama’s foreign policy leads to Hiroshima faster than Ronald Reagan’s peace through strength.

Obama continued,

“The world was forever changed here, but today the children of this city will go through their day in peace.”

Neglecting to mention that Japanese children were living in peace thanks precisely to the use of the A-bomb he was decrying, Obama concluded,

“What a precious thing that is. It is worth protecting, and then extending to every child. That is a future we can choose, a future in which Hiroshima and Nagasaki are known not as the dawn of atomic warfare but as the start of our own moral awakening.”

As Jim Geraghty correctly notes at National Review,

“Hiroshima and Nagasake weren’t the dawn of atomic warfare. Nobody’s used an atomic or nuclear weapon since then… How many people would have bet in 1945 that no nuclear weapons would be used in war in the next seventy years?” Also worth noting: as Max Roser shows, war deaths have declined markedly since the advent of nuclear weapons and interstate-conflict war deaths have declined most dramatically, largely because everybody knows that if things go too far, someone will push the button. According to Milton Leitenberg of Cornell University, there were somewhere between 136.5 and 148.5 million war deaths during the 20th century. “Only” 41 million of those came after 1945.

But Obama can’t acknowledge facts or history – they undercut his basic argument, which is that peace can only be achieved by unilateral surrender of American patriotism and by the rise of a borderless, nationless, valueless world.

Hiroshima happened because the world slept as fascism rose; Obama wishes to sleep on evil again (or worse, forward it), hoping that national narcolepsy becomes contagious internationally, and we share the same peaceful dreams. We don’t. If we go to sleep again, our enemies will use that reverie to rise. But Americans increasingly believe in Obamaism – more Americans now think using the A-bomb was wrong than right. The result will be more Hiroshimas after 70 years of nuclear peace.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/6107/p...es-ben-shapiro

My dad fought in the Pacific theater. He saw islands that the Japanese "pacified" ... meaning they killed every living thing : men, women, children, the cats, dogs, goats, chickens... everything. And piled the severed heads in a cairn to be found. He was on the second ship to land at Nagasaki - he never wished to speak of it. No apology is needed... there was only one why to stop the bloodshed

War Crimes of Imperial Japan:
A Lesson In Moral Equivalence for Mr. Obama
by John Hayward 27 May 20164,216

President Obama made a single, vague reference to “evil” during his prepared remarks in Hiroshima:

“We may not be able to eliminate man’s capacity to do evil, so nations and the alliances that we form must possess the means to defend ourselves. But among those nations like my own that hold nuclear stockpiles, we must have the courage to escape the logic of fear and pursue a world without them.”

He spoke at length about the horrors experienced by the populace of Hiroshima:

We stand here in the middle of this city and force ourselves to imagine the moment the bomb fell. We force ourselves to feel the dread of children confused by what they see. We listen to a silent cry. We remember all the innocents killed across the arc of that terrible war and the wars that came before and the wars that would follow.

Mere words cannot give voice to such suffering. But we have a shared responsibility to look directly into the eye of history and ask what we must do differently to curb such suffering again.

“Let all the souls here rest in peace, for we shall not repeat the evil,” he said, when reading the inscription on a monument at the Peace Memorial Park.

He somehow forgot to mention the evils perpetrated by Imperial Japan or the unspeakable suffering it inflicted upon POWs and civilians who fell into its clutches.

Let’s correct that oversight, to help the President understand why moral equivalence is the dim refuge of lazy minds, and equating American troops with the Axis forces they defeated is an outrage.

Pearl Harbor

We can start with the one everybody knows about: the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor. That was a war crime, Mr. Obama, as very clearly stated in the relevant international laws of the day. It was accompanied by equally illegal bombings against Singapore, Hong Kong, and the Philippines, as part of a very deliberate Japanese strategy. In Hiroshima, Obama’s sole criticism of the Empire of Japan was some mumbled mush about “mistakes of the past,” and that wasn’t even exclusively directed at the Japanese. Nothing they did was a mistake.

Bataan Death March

Here’s another one every American school kid should know about: the Bataan Death March. There was no swift death for the thousands of Americans and Filipinos under siege by Japanese forces in the Philippines. They were already sick and starving when they surrendered to the Japanese.

In an act of pure, deliberate sadism, because they were enraged by stiff American resistance during the siege, the Japanese forced their prisoners to march a hundred miles to a prison camp on foot. Many of the prisoners were killed out of hand, including anyone who dared to ask for water… and anyone who collapsed from dehydration. POWs reported Japanese soldiers taking away their meager supply of water and feeding it to horses while they watched. Starving men were tortured with false offers of food. Prisoners who accepted gifts of food from civilians along the route were murdered.




Some were murdered merely for possessing Japanese items, including currency. They were killed by beheading and run through with bayonets, as well as gunshots. Bayonet victims died from orgies of frenzied stabbing, not clean and swift impalement. Some of the captives were reportedly driven insane by exposure to the sun. They were also crammed into barbed-wire pens were malaria, dengue fever, dysentery, and other diseases ran wild.

It has been estimated that between 5,000 and 11,000 of Japan’s prisoners were killed during the Bataan Death March. That wasn’t the only death march the Empire perpetrated, either. The prisoners of Sandakan were subjected to multiple forced marches, once the Japanese lost interest in using them as slave labor. By the time they were finished, only six of the original 2,390 prisoners were still alive.

One of the Japanese torture methods recounted by survivors of Sandakan involved pouring water down a prisoner’s throat until his stomach became distended, and then kicking him in the stomach.

About half of Japan’s captives in the Pacific died before the end of the war. Brave men who survived the experience spent the rest of their lives refusing to talk about what they went through.

The Rape of Nanking

Citizen of the World Barack Obama doesn’t much care for the idea of “American exceptionalism,” so he might want to consider the atrocities Imperial Japan perpetrated against the people of other countries, too. In Bataan and other POW atrocities, for example, the Japanese were even more brutal toward Filipinos than Americans. China, of course, still remembers the Rape of Nanking.

That was a literal rape, involving up to 80,000 sexual assaults. The once-prosperous city of Nanking, capital of Nationalist China at the time, was laid waste. Japanese conquerors murdered men, women, and children by the thousands, leaving bodies piled up along the streets. The Yangtze River turned red from all the blood.

The death toll ran into the hundreds of thousands, leaving some modern observers to speak of genocide. The exact body count remains a matter of political dispute between Japan and China to this day. The figure generally accepted at post-war trials was over 200,000, but some think the total number is closer to 400,000.

Imperial Japan approached its Chinese foes with the same strategy ISIS uses against its enemies today: maximum carnage and savagery, to terrorize the foe into submission. They used some of the exact same methods ISIS does, including burning captives alive, beheading them, and burying them alive in slaughter pits.

Also like ISIS, the Japanese occupiers were fond of taking triumphant photos of their atrocities, which is the only reason we know about many of them. They didn’t have Twitter or YouTube, of course, but Chinese working in photo shops smuggled out copies of photographs the Japanese government later attempted to destroy.

International visitors to Nanking tried to establish a safe zone for Chinese civilians, but it didn’t hold the Japanese at bay for long. One important chronicle of the occupation was the diary of an American woman named Minnie Vautrin, who wrote of girls as young as 12 being dragged away for rape, and piles of corpses burned to erase evidence of Japan’s crimes. Vautrin was one of the last victims of the Rape of Nanking. She killed herself in 1941.

Also horrified by what he saw was the man who wound up leading the unsuccessful effort to maintain an international safe zone in Nanking, John Rabe. He was the head of the local Nazi Party.

Unsurprisingly, China’s state-run media is very upset that Barack Obama didn’t mention Nanking, or other Japanese offenses against China, during his Hiroshima speech. “The death of Japanese civilians in the Hiroshima atomic bomb attack deserves global sympathy, but the tragedy was of Japan’s own making. Its then militarist government turned the city into the site of military headquarters, arsenals and camps and a vital part of its war machine that killed tens of millions in other countries,” writes Xinhua in a fiery editorial.

The Empire’s war on women was not limited to Nanking. For decades afterward, Japan has dealt with the legacy of the “comfort women,” girls forced into sexual slavery by the Japanese Army. Only last year, Japan and South Korea reached an agreement for roughly $8 million dollars in reparations to South Korean victims.

Murdering Doctors and Nurses

Working in a hospital afforded no protection from Imperial Japanese forces. When 65 Australian Army nurses tried to escape from Singapore ahead of Japanese occupation, Japanese planes blew their overloaded boat out of the water, then strafed the survivors. Many of those who made it ashore to Bangka Island were shot or bayoneted by Japanese troops, despite the nurses showing their Red Cross armbands when they surrendered.

The nurses had an opportunity to escape, but matron Irene Drummond would have none of it, because they had injured men to take care of. “Girls, we have run away from the wounded once,” she declared. “We are not going to do it again.”

Drummond’s last words, as she and 21 of her nurses were marched into the surf on Bangka Island for a machine-gun massacre by Japanese soldiers, were: “Chin up, girls! I’m proud of you all, and I love you all.”

We know this because one of the nurses, the Vivian “Bully” Bullwinkel, survived her gunshot wound and testified against the murderers at their war-crimes trial. She was captured by the Japanese again after she walked off the beach, and realized they might slaughter all of their prisoners if they knew she was eyewitness to such a war crime, so she hid her bullet wound from her captors and quietly treated it herself… even though she had been shot in the back.

At St. Stephen’s College in Hong Kong, which was serving as a relief hospital, Japanese troops murdered doctors, slaughtered their injured patients, and raped the nurses. The massacre at St. Stephen’s began on Christmas Day.

Imperial Japan deliberately attacked hospital ships on several documented occasions, including the Manunda and Centaur of Australia. Japan did not formally admit to sinking the Centaur until 1979.

Cannibalism and Medical Experiments

Imperial Japan was infamous for torturing and killing its prisoners, in defiance of all international laws. Sometimes execution was the best-case scenario for its prisoners.

In the 1990s, documents were uncovered that described widespread cannibalism by Japanese troops. The Japanese academic who collected these papers, Toshiyuki Tanaka, said the cannibalism was not primarily due to a shortage of food, but “to consolidate the group feeling of the troops.”

Tanaka documented at least 100 cases of cannibalism against Australian and Indian soldiers, and forced laborers in New Guinea, plus evidence of more such atrocities in the Philippines.

“A Pakistani, who was captured when Japan overran Singapore and taken to New Guinea, testified that in his area Japanese soldiers killed and ate one prisoner a day for ‘about 100’ days. The corporal said he saw flesh being cut from prisoners who were still alive,” reported the UK Telegraph in 1992.

A later Telegraph article cites research that suggests that four of the eight American airmen captured after bombing raids on Chichi Jima island, south of Tokyo, were cannibalized after all eight were tortured and executed with swords, bayonets, and bamboo stakes. A ninth pilot who had to bail out of his plane during the raids managed to evade capture by the Japanese. His name was Lt. George Bush.

Imperial Japan also conducted horrifying medical experiments on its prisoners, including the removal of their organs while they were still alive, without anesthesia. Some of these crimes were concealed with false claims by the Japanese government that American test subjects had been transferred to Hiroshima as POWs and vaporized in the atomic bomb blast.

The now-infamous Imperial Army Unit 731 conducted medical experiments on thousands of POWs and civilians, including chemical and biological warfare research. These weren’t just laboratory experiments – they field-tested “plague bombs” on Chinese towns. Plans were made to deploy these biological weapons against American cities with balloons and kamikaze attacks. Imperial Japan was very interested in developing and using weapons of mass destruction.

A veteran of Unit 731 recounted the story of vivisecting a live Chinese prisoner in 1995, as recounted by the New York Times:

The fellow knew that it was over for him, and so he didn’t struggle when they led him into the room and tied him down. But when I picked up the scalpel, that’s when he began screaming.

I cut him open from the chest to the stomach, and he screamed terribly, and his face was all twisted in agony. He made this unimaginable sound, he was screaming so horribly. But then finally he stopped. This was all in a day’s work for the surgeons, but it really left an impression on me because it was my first time.

Unit 731’s headquarters was straight out of a horror movie, with pieces of POW displayed in jars labeled by their nationality.

Conclusion

This list could be ten times as long as it is. Apologies to all those who lost family to Imperial Japanese atrocities that were not listed individually.

The purpose of this list is not to keep score on the horrors of war. It is the business of madmen to debate whether dying from radiation exposure is “better” than dying in a firebomb attack, or live burial alongside a few dozen friends and family members.

This is also not an assault on Japanese citizens of today. Japan is a good friend of the United States now, and that is the happiest ending one could ask from a story this horrible. The Empire of Japan is gone. It had to go. People who think like Barack Obama have no idea how to fight a war like that. God help us all if they are in power when the next such war is forced upon us.

This is, rather, an effort to help understand what was destroyed by the right, proper, and absolutely necessary bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This is the horror that would have claimed countless more victims if Japan had not been forced to surrender. It is very easy for callow politicians in 2016 to say that more Americans, and more Japanese, should have died in battle during a conventional invasion of Japan, to spare it the fury of the atomic bomb. Not many people felt that way at the time, especially if they were aware of the atrocities chronicled here.

Barack Obama treats the bombing of Hiroshima as a unique “evil.” No, sir. It was the end of an evil.

Some brave men – tragically, some good men – died fighting for Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany. Memorial Day is about showing our gratitude and respect to the heroes who had no choice but to kill them, including the crew of the Enola Gay. They saved a hell of a lot of lives, and souls, on that terrible day.

http://www.breitbart.com/national-se...ence-mr-obama/

Tom Tancredo 28 May 20166,549
Obama Dishonors Memorial Day at Hiroshima

uncertain is that what America needs in confronting the moral evil of radical Islam is moral resolution — the resolve to hold fast to the same moral principles that saved the world from nuclear war over the past 71 years since that fateful day in Hiroshima in 1945.

We can honor our fallen warriors this Memorial Day only by remembering such moral distinctions, not forgetting them as Obama did at Hiroshima.


Does anyone think it an accident that President Obama chose Memorial Day weekend to give his high-sounding moral equivalence speech in Hiroshima calling for a “moral revolution”?

What Obama proposed in his speech in Japan is moral disarmament, and the consequences of that moral capitulation will be horrific if the world follows his advice.

At Hiroshima, Obama was silent on the question of American sacrifice, American valor, and American virtue, but eloquent on the issue of American guilt.

What Obama did NOT do in his speech in Japan was to praise America’s fallen warriors, the men and women whose bravery and sacrifice saved the world from nuclear war over the 71 years since that first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima in 1945.

Obama is wrong, but if even half of Americans agree with the president, then we have abandoned the meaning of Memorial Day and substituted Atonement Day in its place. And if America’s future leaders think our nation has no further need to honor our fallen warriors, America may discover we have no warriors willing to tread in their path.

Obama’s moral capitulation presents a stark and sobering contrast with the patriotism of a different President, America’s chosen leader only one generation ago. Thirty-two years ago in 1984 Ronald Reagan went to the beaches of Normandy to honor the fallen warriors of many nations who made the ultimate sacrifice to liberate Europe from Nazi tyranny.


The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity….It was a deep knowledge– and pray God we have not lost it — that there is a profound moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest.

And like every president since the dawn of the atomic age, Reagan was mindful of the terrible destruction that can be unleashed by nuclear weapons. He spoke to that fear on that beach at Pointe du Hoc, France, overlooking a cemetery filled with the graves of American, British, Canadian and French soldiers:

I tell you…we want to wipe from the face of the Earth the terrible weapon that man now has in his hands….And I tell you we are ready to seize that beachhead. We look to the Soviet Union for some sign that they are willing to move forward…there must be a changing there that will allow us to turn our hopes into action.

The difference between Obama’s attitude toward nuclear weapons and Reagan’s attitude is the difference between night and day. That is easy to see. But the deeper question is this: Is it also the difference between two generations? Does Obama’s generation see no evil in the world — and no virtue in America — that would justify the use of those terrible weapons?

The meaning and value of Memorial Day has been lost if Obama’s view of the world is representative of an entire generation. Eight presidents from Truman to Kennedy to Reagan saw the importance of American resolve in confronting evil and possessing the resolve to use whatever force is necessary to defeat evil.

Does Obama’s moral ambivalence on the use of atomic bomb in 1945 speak for America or only for his own peculiar idea of American guilt? We will have to wait five months for the the answer.

But what is not uncertain is that what America needs in confronting the moral evil of radical Islam is moral resolution — the resolve to hold fast to the same moral principles that saved the world from nuclear war over the past 71 years since that fateful day in Hiroshima in 1945.

We can honor our fallen warriors this Memorial Day only by remembering such moral distinctions, not forgetting them as Obama did at Hiroshima.


http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...day-hiroshima/

'VFW Halls All Across America' Have Warped View of Economy

5:24 PM, Jun 01, 2016 | By Chris Deaton


President Obama said Wednesday that people in "VFW halls all across America" and other places with access to cable news and talk radio have a warped view of the economy.


The president's comments came as part of a riff in Elkhart, Ind. on what he saw as distorted perceptions of the nation's jobs and fiscal situations during his tenure in the Oval Office.


The relevant portion of the transcript is below:

I hope you don't mind me being blunt about this, but I've been listening to this stuff for a while now. And I'm concerned when I watch the direction of our politics. I mean, we have been hearing this story for decades: tales about welfare queens, talking about takers, talking about the '47 percent'. It's the story that's broadcast every day on some cable news stations, on right wing radio. It's pumped into cars and bars and VFW halls all across America, and right here in Elkhart. And if you're hearing that story all the time, you start believing it. It's no wonder people think big government is the problem. No wonder public support for unions is so low. No wonder that people think the deficit has gone up under my presidency when it's actually gone down.

According to the RealClearPolitics average, the president has received roughly an equal amount of support and disapproval for his handling of the U.S. economy in recent months.

Gallup's measure of the confidence Americans have in the economy has held steady in the last year after dipping substantially in the months following January 2014. The current level is -14, with +100 meaning all respondents saying the economy is good or excellent and getting better, and -100 representing the opposite. Nearly six out of 10 Americans said the economy was getting worse in Gallup's tracking poll concluding May 15.

Video Link : http://www.weeklystandard.com/obama-...ticle/2002639/

Every Deadly Radical Islamist Attack That Has Happened on American Soil Since Obama Took Office
By Sigrid Johannes (1 day ago)

The label of radical Islamic terrorism has become a political football, even in the wake of the attack in Orlando that left 50 people dead. Regardless of political posturing, 91 Americans have been killed in the United States by perpetrators motivated by radicalized Islamic beliefs since Obama assumed the office of the Presidency.

Here is a grim history of the last seven years of Islamist attacks of American soil.

1. Little Rock, Arkansas (2009)

The victims: 1 U.S. soldier killed, 1 injured

The killer: Born Carlos Bledsoe in Tennessee, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad converted to Islam as a teenager. He shot and killed a soldier outside a recruiting center. Reportedly, Muhammad was angry about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and how the United States had treated Muslims.

2. Ft. Hood, Texas (2009)

US First Lady Michelle Obama and President Obama walk past the Fallen Hero Memorial at Fort Hood on November 10, 2009 during a service honoring the soldiers and civilians killed in a shooting rampage on November 5. US Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, 39, a psychiatrist and specialist in combat stress, who allegedly killed 13 people and wounded 42 in a shooting rampage at Fort Hood, is believed to have acted alone by investigators and no motive has been established.

The victims: 12 were killed and 31 were wounded. The victims were all military personnel, except for 2 civilians.

The killer: Major Nidal Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, opened fire inside the medical center at Ft. Hood. He was reportedly upset about an upcoming deployment to Iraq. Later, in 2014, Hasan petitioned to become a citizen of the Islamic State.

3. Boston, Massachusetts (2013)

BOSTON, MA - APRIL 15: Two blood stained feet of a man hangs outside an ambulance outside a medical tent located near the finish of the 117th Boston Marathon after two bombs exploded on the marathon route on April 15, 2013 in Boston, Massachusetts. Two people are confirmed dead and at least 23 injured after two explosions went off near the finish line to the marathon.

The victims: 3 people were killed, including a young child. More than 100 people were injured, some requiring limb amputations.

The killers: Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev were brothers. By all accounts, Dzhokhar was an average American college student before falling under the influence of his older brother, Tamerlan, and becoming radicalized. Tamerlan was shot by police and Dzhokhar was found after a massive manhunt. He was sentenced to death and is currently in prison.

4. Richmond, California (2013)

The victim: Daniel Stone, a hardware store employee.

The killer: Daymond Agnew, a 34-year-old California resident. Agnew entered the hardware store and spray painted his face before stabbing Stone 17 times. He claimed that Allah had told him to do it.

5. Seattle, Washington and West Orange, New Jersey (2014)

The victims: Brendan Tevlin, who was shot at a traffic light. Ahmed Said and Dwone Anderson-Young, gay men who were lured from a club and shot. Leroy Henderson, also shot dead.

The killer: Ali Muhammad Brown, the killer of 4 men in 2 states, is a self-proclaimed ISIS supporter. He was the first person to be charged under New Jersey’s 9/11 terror laws. He explained the killings as retribution for Muslim deaths in the Middle East.

6. Moore, Oklahoma (2014)

The victim: Colleen Hufford was decapitated at the food plant where she worked.

The killer: Alton Nolen converted to Islam and filled his Facebook feed with angry statements about Americans, women, and Judgement Day.

7. Morganton, North Carolina (2014)

The victim: John Bailey Clark was robbed, shot, and buried in a shallow grave near his home.

The killer: Teenager and ISIS supporter Justin Sullivan murdered and robbed his 74-year-old neighbor. He hoped to use the stolen money to purchase an assault rifle and carry out more attacks.

8. Chattanooga, Tennessee (2015)

The victims: 5 U.S. service members were killed, 4 Marines and a Navy officer.

The killer: Mohammad Youssuf Abdulazeez opened fire at a recruitment center in a strip mall before driving to a Naval support center to continue his rampage.

9. San Bernardino, California (2015)

The victims: 14 people were killed and 22 injured while they enjoyed a county employees’ holiday party.

The killers: Couple Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik assembled an arsenal of weapons and plotted for almost a year before they were married. Farouk was an American, Malik was from Pakistan. Both were shot dead by police.

10. Orlando, Florida (2016)

The victims: 49 people were killed and 53 more were injured at a popular LGBT nightclub in Orlando. The club was hosting a Latin night.

The killer: Omar Mateen was born in the U.S. to Afghan parents. Family and acquaintances say he didn’t seem particularly devout, but his father claims he was enraged by the sight of two men kissing. Mateen was killed by police. His attack was the deadliest mass shooting in American history.

The total death toll from these attacks is 91.

http://injo.com/2016/06/628323-here-...a-took-office/

A MAN IN THE INNER CIRCLE OF POLITICS JUST REVEALED THIS IN PRIVATE: There is a surge in Muslims shootings in the United States and the press gives various reasons "why." According to an American Muslim who has left the religion, he says the radicals have heard Obama and the Democrats over and over say they want to either limit the types of guns or ban guns altogether (which is Obama's last goal before November - he is placing this under Homeland Security), thus they believe if they begin shooting police, military, high profile individuals, this will force the gun ban and after a major confiscation (they see one coming like they did in Germany prior to the Holocaust) the radicals will be able to attack at will and take out massive numbers of casualties in the future.

Several military experts are warning that the massive number of foreign immigrants pouring into America, are not vetted properly and ISIS agents are among them. Two days ago ISIS released a "hit list" in America, listing all fifty states, the cities and there is also a list of some names which the government has not released in public, to prevent some "lone wolf" from targeting specific places or people.

In Texas, several attacks were stopped including one in a Walmart because of armed guards. Both Texas and Tennessee are strong gun supporting states.

While some see this as a "negative" others note that according to actual research, criminal elements are less likely to break into a house or commit a gun crime if they believe their targets are armed. This will become a debate in this election, as there are now two totally opposing sides. Remember, we have not stopped illegal drugs and illegal individuals from crossing our borders, and if our weapons of protection are removed from us, the gangs and criminals will get whatever they want to continue committing crime. This is not and will not be a perfect world until Christ returns, and each family has a right to protect themselves according to our founders' documents.

Actor Scott Baio on President Obama’s terminology toward terrorists and why Baio supports Donald Trump.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJ2DB...ature=youtu.be

I can no longer sit on the sidelines without saying this…
Written by Allen West on June 22, 2016

I just have to ask, does the White House talking head, Josh “Not So” Earnest really believe the words he says? Or is this just a real bad case of brain farts? The latest to emanate from the oral orifice of Earnest just has to make you scratch your head. But it’s very apparent that the Obama White House is more comfortable attacking political enemies than the enemy actually killing Americans.

As reported by Real Clear Politics, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...ing_point.html

“It is outrageous,” to claim that the president is “scared” to utter the words “radical Islamic terrorism,” WH spokesman Josh Earnest said on CNN’s ‘New Day’ Tuesday.

“The truth of the matter is, the individuals who spend most of their time talking about radical Islamic terrorism, are individuals like Republicans in the Senate, who would prevent those individuals from being able to buy a gun. And those are individuals who have not actually put forward their own strategy for keeping the country safe,” he said.

“Using the term ‘radical Islamic extremism’ is not a counter-terrorism strategy, it is a political talking point. Plain and simple. And what the president of the United States has done is to put forward a comprehensive strategy to squeeze the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, to inhibit their ability to recruit individuals around the world.”

“The president has implemented a strategy that has increased the pressure on ISIL and has made the country safer. He has not relied on a political talking point as a substitute for a counterterrorism strategy. Republicans in the Senate who like to talk have that luxury… The president does not have that luxury,” he said. “The president is focused on a strategy, you have Republicans in the Senate who are focused on a talking point.”

First of all, let me make one thing clear for Mr. Earnest. It is not the responsibility of the Senate Republicans to put forth a strategy for keeping the nation safe. That is the job of the president of the United States as the chief executive.

Congress develops legislation — uh, not the executive branch. The most important role of the president is commander-in-chief. So where does Earnest come off attacking Senate Republicans for not having a war strategy? And what delusional chucklehead would come out, after the second largest Islamic terror attack on America since 9-11, and state that our country is safer? Are you kidding me?

This is why the progressive socialist left doesn’t want to utter the words Islamic jihadism, Islamic terrorism, or Islamo-fascism. To do so would evidence their abject failure in keeping America safe. Let’s be very clear here; after 9-11, the next three worst Islamic terrorist attacks have occurred on Barack Obama’s watch: Orlando, San Bernardino, and Ft. Hood. We also have nearly 1,000 open Islamic terrorist investigations being conducted by the FBI. Hello, McFly, is there anyone inside that little brain of yours? How could you even consider making such inane comments as you did representing the White House?

Defining the enemy is not a political talking point; it is a matter of strategic military decision-making, plain and simple. As I have stated and will reiterate, we fought against and defeated Nazism, fascism, Japanese imperialism, and communism.

The key to defeating the enemy is to understand their ideology, which gives you a comprehension of their goals and objectives. To obfuscate and deny identifying the enemy just means either you are dismissive or complicit in the actions of the enemy — doggone, perhaps if someone would tell Obama that Islamic jihadists are conservative that would draw his ire.

President Obama and his ilk have deceived themselves into believing that firing off a drone and killing a fella or two here or there is some great strategic victory. It’s reminiscent of President Lyndon Johnson approving bombing targets in Vietnam, the ultimate in micromanagement.

Josh Earnest says President Obama has “put forward a comprehensive strategy to squeeze the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria and inhibit their ability to recruit individuals around the world.” That is the biggest crock of cookie dough I’ve heard in quite sometime.

In case you progressive socialists haven’t been paying attention, the Islamic State is still centered in Raqqa in Syria; they still hold Mosul in Iraq. We’ve gone back and forth in Fallujah several times. The Islamic State threatens Kurdistan and they’ve expanded into Libya — you know, that resounding military success of Obama and Hillary Clinton. And inhibited the recruitment of foreign jihadists? So perhaps that’s why the attorney general redacted the 911 transcripts – she just did not want us to know Omar Mateen pledged his allegiance to ISIS.

Ladies and gents, you just cannot make this stuff up, but sadly there’s more.

“WH spokesman Josh Earnest responds to tweets from Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Chris Murphy saying that Senate Republicans “have decided to sell weapons to ISIS.” Earnest says that that characterization is basically correct. People suspected of being terrorists “are able to buy a gun with impunity,” he said. “Because Republicans are protecting the [gun show loophole] at the behest of the NRA. Those are the facts.” “I’ll leave it to Republicans to try to defend that position.”

Ok Mr. Earnest, here is my response, first tell us why you want to free Islamic terrorists captured on the battlefield? Secondly, tell us why you’re allowing CAIR to influence the training materials on Islamic jihadism for the FBI and the DoD?

No one wants Islamic terrorists to have weapons — actually, we want them dead. But since you and President Obama won’t handle it, yep, we need to be armed to protect ourselves, not disarmed by you and your ideologues, and especially by someone like you who works under armed protection.

Omar Mateen should never have been taken off the terrorist list, so why was he Mr. Earnest? Tashfeen Malik should not have been allowed entry into the United States, so why was she Mr. Earnest? Simply put, I have no need to defend the Second Amendment; it is an individual right to law-abiding citizens. What you need to explain is why we have Islamic jihadists on our soil killing our citizens and yet you spew forth idiocy telling us we are safer.

And Mr. Earnest, Josh ol’ boy, if you want a tutorial on how to outline a strategic vision to defeat Islamic jihadism, check out this article written for the Military Review. If there are words too difficult for you to comprehend, feel free to call me. I’m happy to give you and President Obama some study hall time. After all, y’all do have seven months left. I’m here to help because this is my country. However, I’m getting about tired of your obfuscating, denying and lying to us — which I must admit, you do oh so very well.


http://www.allenbwest.com/allen/dumb...ent-of-the-day

“WH spokesman Josh Earnest responds to tweets from Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Chris Murphy saying that Senate Republicans “have decided to sell weapons to ISIS.” Earnest says that that characterization is basically correct. People suspected of being terrorists “are able to buy a gun with impunity,” he said. “Because Republicans are protecting the [gun show loophole] at the behest of the NRA. Those are the facts.” “I’ll leave it to Republicans to try to defend that position.”

This coming from the same WH that sold guns to Mexican drug cartels under "Fast and Furious" ??

The same WH that made a deal with Iran ... admitting that the money could be used to sponsor terrorism ?