THE PATTERN BETWEEN RADICAL ISLAM AND THE WHITE HOUSE

The PATTERN
Radical Islam and the White House are behaving in very similar fashion these days in that both are now acting as if they are above any and all reproach, criticism or blame for wrongdoing on any level, real or imagined.

The Islamists, when questioned or blamed for ANYTHING immediately translate that to criticism of ALLAH or the Prophet Mohammed and unleash a torrent of hatred and threats up to and including murder.

           (Uh oh! Somebody somewhere said something someone thinks may be critical of Islam!!)

The White House, when questioned, criticized or blamed for ANYTHING immediately translate that to criticism of THE STATE and the intent being political only and unleash the Mainstream Media and the IRS.

 (The IRS Campaign against the Tea Parties started the day after Colleen Kelley, head of the IRS's National Treasury Employees Union met with Obama at the White House. An INCREDIBLE coincidence? You tell me.)

No criticism or blame for ANYTHING leveled at either group is EVER considered legitimate.

Radical Islamists can commits acts of barbaric savagery and inhumanity while rejecting any criticism of them as intolerance and hatred of their God, which gives them an opportunity to unleash even more barbarism and hatred.

The White House can illegally ship guns to Mexico causing hundreds of actuals deaths and leave Americans to die AT the hands of Radical Islamists or use the IRS to choke the growth of political opponents and reject ANY blame for wrongdoing or incompetence as merely political opposition whose creating scandals "out of whole cloth" is illegitimate.

The track record of radical Islam is readily apparent with literally thousands of examples that the mindset of muslims is that NO blame for their actions or behavior, since it can be directly tied to Islam will be permitted.
The track record of Barrack Obama's White House, being exposed more and more with every overreaching scandal is revealing a chilling parallel.

It's nothing unusual for a White House Administration to try and duck blame for a fiasco or deny ownership of a bad decision, especially when a fair number of the accusations may be leveled at them by the opposition party but this White House literally accepts NO BLAME for ANYTHING on any level at any time.

When mistakes or actual breaches of the public trust have been made too great to be ignored lower level apparatchiks are inevitably put forward to fall on their swords to protect the higher ups who were clearly calling the shots.

What blame, since Obama took residence, has the White House taken for any action or decision?

Are you sensing a pattern? I certainly am.

                                           (To question ME is to question YOUR future!!)


The author of the Science Fiction Epic Dune, Frank Herbert once said of Religion that the clergy attempting to administrate to a Divinity had one cardinal rule which was "Thou shalt not Question!!"

To question, criticize or blame Muslims or Democrats for ANYTHING they have done unleashes a torrent of backlashing hatred and venom and it is clear you are attacking them PERSONALLY by attacking their beliefs

With Radical Islam, this clearly falls into that pattern.

How about the White House?

To a Stateist the STATE IS GOD. To criticize it is to attack their ALLAH, their worldview and them personally.

A White House run by Radical Leftists whose Stateist philosophy IS the equivalence of a religion, they adopt very similar patterns of behavior to Islamists in their response to any and ALL criticism of THE STATE.

When the mid-term elections of 2010 handed them a serious and significant defeat their reaction seems to have been to call for and arrange an IRS campaign to deny the Tea Parties tax exempt status and thereby chill and seriously impede their ability to grow and influence the 2012 elections.

Follow this with the recent MEDIA scandals with the AP and Fox News and the trend becomes even more solidified.

Need I even go into the BIZARRE 17 days after Benghazi when hubris met the American people as the White House made the OFFICIAL RESPONSE of the United States an apology for a YouTube Video? The abject, pathological and political NEED for the attack to be ANYTHING but a terrorist attack by an Al Qaeda sponsored Ansar Al Sharia left us sitting in STUNNED DISBELIEF as they and their willing lapdog media tried to jackboot that false narrative down our throats for over two weeks.


But Benghazi happened SOOO long ago what difference at this point, does it make?

The Dems and their supporters profess none of these scandals are legitimate scandals and that America needs to move on.

No blame will ever accepted by the White House on any level EVER.
They can't accept blame! THEY CAN'T DO IT!

This would mean THE STATE, their GOD, their machine is not perfect. THE STATE cannot fail them (only weak and flawed scapegoats sacrificed on the altar of political necessity) therefore no official blame on any level can ever be accepted.

                                   (You can't criticize PERFECTION stupid, so don't even try!)

Haven't you noticed Obama never accepts blame for anything? He is not the "strong father" persevering through hardship and inevitable mistakes for our sakes taking responsibility when things go south, he literally accepts NO blame as legitimate.

He is much more in step with Uncle Joe Stalin than he is with Abraham Lincoln, a man who weathered numerous party scandals and criticism in his day yet remains one of our greatest Presidents.

One needs look no further than social media as each scandal has cracked off or intensified through new revelations and facts coming to light to see people asking rational, reasoned questions responded to with unreasoning hatred and threats of violence from the left.

When radio talk show host Dana Loesch, a conservative and ardent supporter of the 2nd Amendment appears on Piers Morgan's show to defend our right to bear arms she does this knowing he compared her to Nancy Lanza and claimed her kids may grow up to commit their own "Sandy Hook".

(Sure, you can disagree with Dana Loesch but keep it POLITE or you just might end up in a corner in the fetal position wondering what logic bomb just hit you.)

After defending our God given right to self defense on both Pier's show and her talk show she routinely receives a barrage of hate mail and death threats from leftists enraged by her traditional positions.

She also, by the way responds to these missives of misogyny by reading them aloud on her show with very entertaining and hilarious voices during her "Mailbag of Hate" segment that usually ends the broadcast.
Go Dana! (Check out her shows podcasts or livestream 12-3 M-F CST at this link:http://www.971talk.com/dana/)

The "Mohammedans" as Churchill referred to them have been seen by many western leaders as a growing threat for over two centuries as their intolerance and barbarity occasionally required direct confrontation (Churchill warned of Radical Islam in the 1880's as a participant in the British Campaign against the Mahdi) as their access to technology and industry propels them into world affairs.

The inclusion of nations that see ANY and ALL concern or blame for their actions and behavior as a direct affront to their GOD is problematic and our world is now struggling to resolve this.

The resolution of modern Marxism via the Progressive Left now residing in our White House is also now a struggle as it is becoming readily apparent it considers no moral or ethical boundary legitimate in it's pursuit of political power as it at the same time treats ALL reproach and exposure as unfounded and illegitimate.

(Sure you could "insult" Joe Stalin by criticizing him and his mistakes, but you might want to get your affairs in order first. Gulags have lousy mail service!)

At the end of the day we must ask ourselves, how do we respond?

What is the best way to react when truth logic and reason are assailed by people hell bent (pun intended) on agendas both cultural, religious and political that undermine, corrupt and devalue the very principles, standard and values by which you live?

By living them even more.

Seek the truth, know the truth and speak the truth.

Hold onto it as dearly as your own soul.

Defend truth as you defend yourself BUT take responsibility and accept ownership of mistakes and wrongdoing and LEARN from it! Their side CAN'T and never will.

You can weather this storm of hatred and venom because the positions of both Radical Islam and the White House are based on arrogance, mistruths and force.

Weather the blows without giving in to hatred or despair and when time has passed you will find the unnatural, unreasoning positions of your enemy has brought their own downfall BY THEIR OWN ACTIONS.

They will destroy themselves in time.

Never give in.

Never give up.

And when they are knocked down and despairing, lost in ignorance and fear, offer them a hand and the truth that is the birthright of us all.

Jihad Aeon follow me on twitter  @jihadaeon 

WHEN ARROGANCE MEETS TRUTH: THE FALSE NARRATIVE'S DEMISE

This has been a week of STUNNING REVELATIONS as the wheels at long last come off for all time the bizarre politically driven narrative the Obama White House, along with their stenographers in the media tried to JACKBOOT down our throats for over two weeks.

The YouTube Video defaming Islam and insulting the Prophet Mohammed was decidedly politically incorrect and was clearly meant as an insult by it's Coptic Christian director and it is also clear this video WAS used as a rallying cry by Imams in Cairo to get crowds of protesters in the streets and surrounding our Embassy in Cairo.

Al Qaeda was clearly the driving force behind the protest to get masses of people in proximity to the Embassy to enable their attack and overrunning of our soil.

However, through testimony delivered on May 8th by three members of our U.S. Diplomatic Corps who were directly involved with the attack of our Benghazi Consulate it is now clear that video has absolutely nothing to do with what is now clear was a direct, coordinated insurgent attack on Americans.

This seven hour attack killed our Ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens as well as Information Management Officer Sean Smith and two former Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty who were working for the State Department in various roles involving security.

In the weeks following this tragic loss and outrage the American People were assured our Nation would respond accordingly and appropriately while at the same time the White House continued to characterize this attack as similar to the assault on the Embassy in Cairo as being a "spontaneous riot" caused by a video insulting to Islam.

Even the assault on our Cairo Embassy has been mischaracterized as the Mainstream Media performed pretzel logic, desperate to NOT recognize the Black Flag proudly displayed by rioters chanting "Obama ,we are a million Osamas!"as that of Al Qaeda.

As numerous conflicting sources came to light in the weeks that followed it became clear our President and Government had wedded itself to an inane and demonstrably almost laughably false narrative to excuse serious lapses in judgement and competence as they and their desperate partners in the media continued to lie to the American people about what happened.

Susan Rice, U.N. Ambassador selling the False Narrative to America out of political desperation.

THE FALSE NARRATIVE:

They were NOT caught napping on the anniversary of 9-11.

Napping being the repeated DENIALS of the Libyan Embassy's Staff repeated requests for more security in light of ACTUAL ATTACKS cracking off in the weeks and months prior as well as no special measures scheduled for 9-11.

This attack was the result of a "spontaneous riot" caused by a disgusting and inflammatory YouTube Video that they could not be prepared for so therefore they could not be RESPONSIBLE for.

Since this attack was carried out by a mob of angry Libyans this was NOT Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda is finished since they killed Bin Laden.

They were just on Stage at the Democratic National Convention just two weeks earlier doing high fives and taking kudos for that, so the optics of the Black Flag of Al Qaeda seen WORLDWIDE waving over our Embassy in Cairo or Al Qaeda killing our Ambassador would be really REALLY bad just 56 days before a Presidential Election, therefore AL QAEDA CANNOT BE ACKNOWLEDGED as involved.

In light of this extreme political environment I suppose blaming the video made some kind of twisted sense.
As long as your moral and ethical compass is nonexistent or completely overridden by the desire to avoid consequences at all cost.

Now that that narrative has been placed in it's political grave by months long questions and scrutiny by new media and several tireless members of Congress who apparently still take their Oaths of Office and jobs seriously the Benghazi Whistleblowers just hammered the lid on it's coffin.

Three men determined to tell the truth regardless of threats and intimidation.

Testifying before the U.S. House Oversight Committee were Mark Thompson, acting deputy assistant Secretary of State for counterterrorism, Greg Hicks, former deputy chief of mission in Libya, and Eric Nordstrom, former regional security officer in Libya.

There are seven relevant revelations that happened during this Hearing.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/05/08/seven-things-we-learned-from-the-benghazi-whistleblower-hearing/?singlepage=true
*******************************************************
1. There were multiple stand-down orders, not just one. Special operations forces were told, twice, by their chain of command not to board aircraft to Benghazi to rescue the Americans then under attack. The U.S. deputy diplomat, Greg Hicks, testified that the military commander, Lt. Col. Gibson, had his team ready to go twice.

They were on the runway about to board a flight to Benghazi in the middle of the attack. They were ordered to stand down and remain in Tripoli to receive wounded who would be coming out of Benghazi.
One of the orders came in the middle of the attack, the other came toward the end after Hicks’ team had traveled from Tripoli to Benghazi.

The fact that Hicks’ team was able get to Benghazi before the end of the assault strongly suggests that the special operations team could have made a real difference.

At the same time, the State Department’s commander on the scene, Hicks, ordered his personnel into Benghazi and went there himself. Hicks testified that Gibson never told him who issued the stand-down orders. He commented that Gibson told him that the military stand-down was a shock: “This is the first time in my career that a diplomat has more balls than someone in the military.”

Hicks also testified that the U.S. government never even requested military overflight to support the Americans in Benghazi. The U.S. had an unarmed drone overhead and could have gotten permission to fly fighters over the scene, at least, but never asked.

2. Ambassador Stevens’ reason for going to Benghazi has been cleared up. Hicks testified that Ambassador Stevens traveled to Benghazi to fulfill one of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s wishes.

Despite the fact that security was worsening in Benghazi for months leading up to the 9-11 attack, Clinton wanted to make the post there permanent. Her State Department had denied repeated requests from the U.S. team in Libya to upgrade security there, but she wanted to use the permanent post as a symbol of goodwill. Stevens was committed to that goal and told Clinton he would “make it happen.”

He was in Benghazi on 9-11 furthering Clinton’s goal. She had denied requests to beef up security at Benghazi and then blamed his death on a YouTube movie. Hicks’ testimony raises the question of Clinton’s competence and grasp on reality, strongly suggesting that she put political perceptions ahead of the facts on the ground in Benghazi.

3. Clinton was briefed at 2 am on the night of the attack, was never told that a movie had anything to do with the attack by those on the ground in Libya, yet blamed the movie anyway.

Hicks also testified that he was shocked when Ambassador Susan Rice blamed a YouTube movie for inspiring the 9-11 attack. He testified that he had briefed Secretary Clinton directly via phone at 2 a.m. and told her that Benghazi was a terrorist attack.

He never mentioned a YouTube video, which he never once believed had anything to do with the attack. But Clinton shocked him by blaming the movie on Sept 12. She would blame it, again, while standing before the coffins of the slain Americans, on Sept. 14. During the attack, Clinton told Hicks that no help would be on the way to relieve the Americans under sustained assault.

4. Whistleblowers were intimidated into silence.
Hicks testified to a pattern of behavior that leads to the reasonable conclusion that many officials within the State Department wanted him to remain silent after the Benghazi attack. He said that on the night of the attack he was personally commended both by Secretary Clinton and President Barack Obama. But he later questioned why Ambassador Rice blamed the YouTube movie, and from that point on his superior, Acting Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs Beth Jones, questioned his “management style” and told him directly that no one in State should want him on their team in the field again. 

He was eventually demoted to a desk job after having been deputy to Ambassador Stevens, and remains in that post. Hick also testified that the Accountability Review Board, convened by Clinton last fall allegedly to determine the facts of the attack, never had stenographers in the room during his tw0-hour interview.

Nordstrom concurred. Thompson was not even allowed to testify to the ARB despite having direct knowledge of the attacks due to his position on the U.S. Foreign Emergency Support Team. Thompson testified that the FEST was designed to go from zero to wheels up very quickly but was not deployed at all. He wanted to tell his story to the ARB, but was not allowed to.

Hicks also testified that for the first time in his career, the State Department assigned a lawyer/minder to attend witness interviews with the ARB. He also testified that Jones told him not to be personally interviewed by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, the Republican House member who was investigating the attack on behalf of the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee. It all adds up to a pattern of witness control and intimidation.

5. “The YouTube movie was a non-event in Libya.” 

Hicks directly testified that the YouTube movie, for which a man remains in jail, was not in any way relevant to the attack in Benghazi. Why Obama, Clinton, Rice et al blamed that movie for the attack remains an unanswered question.

 Hicks said that no American on the ground in Libya that night believed the movie was to blame. He also testified that there was no protest prior to the attack. When the attack began, he was in Tripoli. He texted Stevens, who was in Benghazi, to advise him of the riot in Cairo at the U.S. embassy. In that riot, jihadists had stormed the walls and replaced the American flag with the black flag of Islam. Stevens had not been aware of the Cairo situation at all, but shortly after Hicks texted him about it, Stevens called and told Hicks that the Benghazi consulate was under attack. He never mentioned a protest.

Hicks also testified that blaming the movie had strongly adverse real-world effects. According to him, it humiliated Libya’s president, who had correctly stated that Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Blaming the movie, Hicks said, did “immeasurable damage” to our relations with Libya and delayed the FBI investigation. On Sept. 12, Ambassador Susan Rice told the first of her many untruths, claiming in an email that the FBI investigation into the attack was already underway. It would not actually get underway for 17 days after the attack, by which time the scene of the attack had been compromised and contaminated.

We still do not know who decided to change the original CIA talking points and blame the movie, but the finger is pointing directly at Hillary Clinton. She was briefed by Hicks during the attack, the movie was never mentioned, but in her first public statement on September 12, she blamed the movie. Her subordinate, Ambassador Susan Rice, also blamed the movie the following weekend. The fact that Obama himself blamed the movie repeatedly, though, strongly suggests that he took part in the decision as well.

6. Democrats were uninterested in getting at most of the facts, but were very interested in destroying Mark Thompson. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) set the tone for the Democrats’ angle on the hearings in his opening remarks. He used his opening to attack the committee chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa, and to pre-question the witnesses.

Most of the Democrats who followed him failed to ask many questions of the witnesses. Instead, they delivered speeches or blamed budget cuts, an argument that has already been debunked by the State Department itself.

One sadly hilarious moment came during Rep. William Clay’s questioning. The Missouri Democrat blamed the repeated denials to enhance security at Benghazi on budget cuts. Issa reminded him that the State Department has debunked that line, in the person of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Charlene Lamb. She testified last fall that budget cuts had not impacted the decisions not to enhance security at Benghazi. Clay claimed not to remember Lamb’s testimony, then moved quickly to cite the ARB, which backed his side. His selective memory proved politically, if not factually, reliable.

Mark Thompson, member of the Foreign Emergency Support Team (FEST) testified that his section had been cut out of decision making during the attack. The Democrats consistently circled on him to try to get him to contradict himself or attack his boss, Daniel Benjamin, who has claimed FEST was included throughout the attack. They never really succeeded, and now Benjamin will be called to testify in a future hearing to clear up the dispute. The heads of the ARB, Ambassador Thomas Pickering and Admiral Michael Mullen, will now be called as well.

7. House hearings are a poor way to determine who did what and why during and after the attack.

The Republicans, as I said, should have broken today’s hearing out across several days. When they did question the witnesses, they kept their speeches short and focused on getting answers. Their Democratic counterparts consistently gave speeches and raised red herrings. They were able to waste time and stall long enough for the Arias trial to push the hearing off the TV, and for energy to flag and boredom to set in. The Benghazi attack needs to be properly investigated by someone outside the political process and outside the Obama administration. State cannot be trusted; its own investigation failed even to interview Clinton. Defense may also have officers and political appointees to protect. A special prosecutor is in order and should be appointed.
*******************************************************
These revalations are damning.

The Obama Regime left our Ambassador dangerously exposed weeks prior to the attack even in the face of ACTUAL terror attacks (Attmpted Assassination of the British Ambassador, attack on the Red Cross and a bombing of the Police Station) and even downgraded security prior to 9-11-2012.

During the SEVEN HOUR attacks the narrative has been there were NO military or security assets that could have responded in time. Anyone even moderately familiar with our military knows that is simply ludicrous and would dismiss that assertion immediately.

We are now told there WERE ground assets in place and available in Tripoli and air assets in range in Italy and those personnel were ORDERED to stand down TWICE in DIRECT conflict with assertions made by our President that no one was ever ordered to stand down. ANOTHER LIE.

The political machinations of the government then moved to cover up and bury all culpability, enablement and consequence their poor leadership and incompetence opened them up to.

May I also point out our Special Operations Community have said we are well aware who the Mastermind and Leader of the Consulate attack is and our government has taken no action due to not wanting to "upset anyone"

So much for an appropriate response. So far there has been up to eight months after the attack NO RESPONSE!

In one sense they have been wildly successful.

Thanks to Stalinistic tactics, intimidation, deception and stonewalling Obama sailed into a second term.
Benghazi was not even a speed bump on their way to re-acquire power.

Now the truth is coming into focus and the monstrous nature of what has been hidden and lied about by those desperate to escape justice is going to be seen and known by the American people they have lied to.

The very fact they attempted to float that false narrative speaks VOLUMES about what they must think of us, about us.

I say let that be their political epitaph.
                                                                   

                                                                      JIHAD AEON