Skip to comments.Hillary Lets the Jihadist Cat Out of the Bag.
Posted on 01/24/2013 7:35:08 PM PST by CharlesMartelsGhost
After four years of pretending there is no jihad against the free world, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton blurted out the truth during her testimony on the Benghazi jihad massacre Wednesday: We now face a spreading jihadist threat, she said, adding: We have to recognize this is a global movement.
We do? Yet the Obama administration has for years steadfastly and repeatedly denied both that there was a jihadist threat at all and that it was a global movement. So far has the Obama administration been from acknowledging that there was a jihad threat that less than two months into Obamas first term, on March 16, 2009, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano noted proudly that in her first testimony to Congress, I did not use the word terrorism, I referred to man-caused disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.
Even terrorism, absent a modifier, was a politically correct euphemism for jihad violence that demonstrated an unwillingness to examine the beliefs of the jihadists, for to have done so would have led straight into Islam. Those who described those dedicated to destroying the United States simply as terrorists generally did not want to admit that Islam had anything to do with that war. George W. Bush had started this ball rolling when he proclaimed Islam a religion of peace shortly after 9/11; however, Bush officials could and did explore the Islamic texts and teachings that illuminated jihadist motives and goals. Under Obama, it became official U.S. policy not to do so.
On May 13, 2010, Attorney General Eric Holder testified before the House Judiciary Committee, where he was questioned repeatedly by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) about whether the Fort Hood jihad mass murders, the attempted jihad car bombing in Times Square, and the Christmas underwear jihad bomber over Detroit could be attributed to radical Islam. Holder repeatedly refused to agree to this, going only so far as to say: There are a variety of reasons why people do these things. Some of them are potentially religious.
Noted Smith: I dont know why the administration has such difficulty acknowledging the obvious, which is that radical Islam might have incited these individuals. If you cant name the enemy, then youre going to have a hard time trying to respond to them.
Indeed. Nonetheless, Obamas nominee for CIA director, John Brennan, who is the current Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, echoed Holders reluctance to say that Islam had anything to do with jihad terrorism on May 26, 2010, during a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He declared: Nor do we describe our enemies as jihadists or Islamists because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam meaning to purify oneself or ones community. Brennan has repeated this many times, and has defined the enemy not as a global movement, but as a small fringe of fanatics consisting of al-Qaeda and its terrorist affiliates.
It was no surprise, then, that Brennan readily agreed in October 2011 to demands from Islamic supremacist groups with links to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Islamic Society of North America, to purge all training materials for law enforcement and intelligence agents of all mention of Islam or jihad. Dwight C. Holton, former U.S. Attorney for the District of Oregon, emphasized that training materials for the FBI would be purged of everything politically incorrect: I want to be perfectly clear about this: training materials that portray Islam as a religion of violence or with a tendency towards violence are wrong, they are offensive, and they are contrary to everything that this president, this attorney general and Department of Justice stands for. They will not be tolerated.
In December 2011, when Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA) asked Paul Stockton, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, whether we are at war with violent Islamist extremism, Stockton did his best to dodge the question and finally answered: I dont believe its helpful to frame our adversary as Islamic with any set of qualifiers that we might add, because we are not at war with Islam.
This created numerous absurd situations, since Islamic jihadists so often spoke of Islam and jihad in explaining and justifying their actions, but the Obama administration plowed ahead anyway. Most notoriously, it characterized the November 2009 Fort Hood jihad massacre, when Major Nidal Hasan, a self-described soldier of Allah who had given numerous indications of his jihadist proclivities and was shouting Allahu akbar as he murdered thirteen Americans, not as Islamic jihad or even terrorism, but as workplace violence.
And now, after years of politically correct obfuscation, Hillary Clinton describes our enemies as jihadists. Will Brennan rebuke her? Will Obama? Probably not, since they can be sure that an ever-compliant mainstream media wont ever ask the uncomfortable questions that should be asked at this point: Does this signify a departure from administration policy? Is the Obama administration going to reevaluate its refusal to examine the role that Islam plays in motivating those who identify themselves as mujehedin, jihadists, warriors of jihad and Islam? Doesnt Hillarys statement undercut everything the administration has stood for all along and, incidentally, demonstrate the cynicism and dishonesty of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations campaign to make Americans think that jihad is just getting in your exercise or taking the kids to school?
But of course, it was just a slip of the tongue. No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar, said Abraham Lincoln, and in doing so, he demonstrated why the Obama administrations See-No-Jihad, Speak-No-Jihad policy is doomed to failure: the Muslim enemies of the United States are obviously Islamic jihadists, as shown by their own words, their largely unchallenged claim within the Islamic world to represent authentic Islam, and their references to Islamic texts and teachings to justify their actions and gain new recruits again largely unchallenged. Hillary Clinton knows theyre jihadists, and thats why she called them that, although she would almost certainly not have done so if she had been more collected and not caught off guard. But it is when one is under pressure that the lies give way. And so they did.
Emboldened as always by Dimocrat do-nothings in the White House...
Aren’t obamas daughters about draft eligible?
So the “Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy” is off the hook?
I guess it “just doesn’t matter”...
I think sometimes my life is stress-laden; I can’t imagine fighting the cognitive dissonance inside your cerebellum and cerebrum being a liberal entails.
Guess that’s where the hot iron comes in.
What difference does it make?
Obama has been spiking his football so often that it finally popped a seam. The truth always has a way of leaking out.
“Gee, had” that comin’. Just because we are not at war with Islam does not mean that it is not at war with us.
From the Toms River area?
Perfect opportunity for Rand Paul to ask this of John Kerry at his confirmation hearing.
Clinton throwing Obama under the bus as a farewell gift.
Maybe it was her opening shot in the 2016 presidential run.
I asked to have one removed. Sorry.
Yes, for now. Sure would be nice to move south though.
US Relied on Muslim Brotherhood for Benghazi Consulate Security
Front Page Magazine ^ | 9/21/2012 | Daniel Greenfield
Two U.S. intelligence officials told The Daily Beast that the intelligence community is currently analyzing an intercept between a Libyan politician whose sympathies are with al Qaeda and the Libyan militia known as the February 17 Brigadewhich had been charged with providing local security to the consulate. In the intercept, the Libyan politician apparently asks an officer in the brigade to have his men stand down for a pending attackanother piece of evidence implying the violence was planned in advance.
Criminal Negligence: Benghazi Gave 1-Month Warning November 1, 2012
When the U.S. mission in Benghazi called an Aug. 15 emergency meeting, it wasn't to discuss an obscure Internet video. It was to discuss the lack of security for a consulate surrounded by at least 10 terrorist camps.
An Aug. 16 cable to the office of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and obtained by Fox News reported that the State Department's senior security officer "expressed concerns with the ability to defend post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support and the overall size of the compound."
BUT BIN LADEN IS DEAD!
Just a few guys walking around the neighborhood. What does it matter?
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.