Skip to comments.Not Again! Obama vs. Petraeus (White House wants PC labels for terrorists)
Posted on 07/14/2010 8:35:50 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
div class="article_body"> Straight off the heels of the McChrystal-debacle, further conflict between the Obama administration and military officials appears to loom on the horizon - involving none other than newly appointed Commander of US Forces in Afghanistan, General David H. Petraeus.
Of the countless characteristics which define liberals, Democrats, and refusal to accept reality and to call a spade a spade.
Exhibit 9,999,999,999: the new White House policy to disassociate all mentions of Islam when describing terrorists.
John O. Brennan, President Obama's chief national security adviser for counterterrorism, delivered a major policy address on defining the enemy. He laid out the White House policy of detaching any reference to Islam when referring to terrorists, be it al Qaeda, the Taliban or any other group.
But Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the man tapped by Mr. Obama as the new top commander in Afghanistan, led the production of an extensive counterinsurgency manual in December 2006 that does, in fact, tell commanders of a link between Islam and extremists.
The Petraeus doctrine refers to "Islamic insurgents," "Islamic extremists" and "Islamic subversives." It details ties between Muslim support groups and terrorists. His co-author was Gen. James F. Amos, whom Mr. Obama has picked as the next Marine Corps commandant and Joint Chiefs of Staff member. [...]
The Petraeus counterinsurgency manual takes the position that, to understand the enemy, commanders must recognize terrorist links to Islam - its leaders in some cases, its fundraising and its infrastructure. Forces must fight "Islamic extremists," it says, differently from the Viet Cong or followers of Saddam Hussein.
"[I]t's precisely because of my identity that I consider comparisons between so-called Christianists (who seek to limit my rights via the ballot box) and Islamic fundamentalists (who seek to limit my rights via decapitation) to be fatuous," Kirchick wrote shortly after the murder of abortion doctor George Till in 2009.
"But the Christian right's responsible reaction to the death of George Tiller should put to rest the lie that Judeo-Christian extremists are anywhere near as numerous or dangerous as those of the Muslim variety."
If there is another 9/11 attack on us, these dumbshits are going to look like the fools they really are.
What? The POS usurper doesn’t want them referred to as muzzie terrorists? or ragheads?
For the zillionth time:
The reason Islam is associated with terror is not that 1% of muslims are terrorists. The reason is that 99% of terrorists are muslims.
Obama is a man-caused disaster..........
Now that’s a great tagline!
Human history is marked by “clarifying events.” These are events that are so significant, so monumental, that they produce instant clarity. World War II was one such event.
Right and wrong, good and bad, friend and foe become instantly and unmistakably clear. No president needs to stand up and say, “you are either with us or against us” - it will be obvious to all involved. And no “spin” or “BS” will make it otherwise.
Another 9/11 attack will be a clarifying event. And things will get ugly, but they will also get resolved. Clarity let's people see what must be done and do it.
Obama = Domestic Terrorist
My friend in PETA who likes the name “sea kittens” for fish laughed when I suggested “nitro kittens” for terrorists. I thought he was too far gone in liberalism to still have a sense of humor. I am (really) emailing the White House to see if they’ll go with that name. It’s possible that I’ll get a laugh, and the Obama Regime may actually be stupid enough to listen.
Another 9/11 attack? That’s an interesting question. Will Islamic terrorists attack the US again, or will they simply sit back and allow their man in the White House to destroy the United States FOR them. After all, an attack could work to discredit their biggest asset in the US—would-be King Hussein! For although the MSM and the rest of the left would work tirelessly to blame such an event on Bush, the American public would not buy it. At least not the ACTUAL American public.
Nah, Another 9/11 will only speed up Obama’s drive to expand the Caliphate.
“We must accommodate the muslims so they don’t attack us again” will be the refrain.
Easy one, just call them Democrat activists.
why should they attack yet, they are ruining us from their muslim in the white house. But I am sure they will anyway, once we are too weak to even proclaim Islam as the perverted crap of a fake god religion it is
99% of Islamic terrorists make the other 1% look bad.
Silly me, I thought they were all Amish..
Wonder if the phrase “Allahu Akbar” rings a bell for these azzhats?
“Calling a thing by its right name is the beginning of wisdom”
A rose by any other name....
C’mooon. How come every time there is a story about Islam, there are a handful of comments attacking Barack as a Muslim? He’s not a Muslim, he’s not a Christian. He isn’t anything, just like I’m sure (very very very rough estimate)half of the Presidents weren’t.
I didn’t say Barack was a muslim. I said he will go out of his way to remove the words “islam” and “muslim” and “jihad” from any connection to any terrorist attack.
I am SO sick of this idiot Obama .. he won;t call a terrorist a terrorist .. but he will call them racists when they attack a country in Africa??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.