Posted on 11/30/2016 9:15:49 PM PST by MtnClimber
Is political Islam in Americas best interests? This question should be central to our strategy of fighting ISIS and Islamist terrorism in general. Yet its one that many political leaders would rather not answer, because of our politically correct climate. But since Trumps transition team announced last week that its considering retired Gen. James Mattis for secretary of defense, this reluctance might fade.
In a speech given at the Heritage Foundation last year, Mattis spoke about Americas position vis à vis political Islam. Rather than equivocating on the matter in order to avoid saying something uncomfortable or politically incorrect, Mattis simply pointed out that America needs to make a decision about its stance toward this ideology.
Recall that political Islam, or Islamism, is a movement within Islam: it works toward the increasing implementation of Islamic law and values in all areas of lifeusually via state controlin order to make Islam a dominant force in the world.
Why We Dont Talk About Islamism
Mattis suggestionwhich sounds like a basic element of defense strategyhas been surprisingly neglected in the years since 9/11. The U.S. tends to deal with Islamism on a case-by-case basis. And so long as any particular group or political entity doesnt have a direct and obvious link to terrorism, we tend to give them a pass. Even then, this is sometimes too high of a bar, as is the case with the Muslim Brotherhood and associated groups.
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
Hope they kick CAIR all the way across the Atlantic where they belong.
Judeo-Christian Western culture is not amenable to control by our betters. All of that logic and liberty stuff.
But if islam is the predominant religion then reason and individual liberty go out the window and the infidels are kept in line through terror.
What better way to do it than to import millions of unskilled and uneducated muslims into the centers of Western Culture, pay them to not work and to breed each of their 4 wives.
Couple generations and demographics wins. And they tell us they are doing it!
This appears to be a statement of Fact - the geopolitical realities when trying to implement the US policy of working with Muslim 'allies' in the Mid East. It may not be a fact that we like, but it does closely represent reality. Mattis is not setting policy with this statement.
If chosen as SecDef, Mattis will implement the policies of his Commander in Chief and the treaties ratified by the US Senate.
What you say is scary. I would temper that view somewhat by saying the globalists also see value in making the public economically dependent on them by giving promoting free this and gimmedat.
So a mixture of good cop, bad cop gets them where they want to go — total subjugation of the people on everything that matters.
I agree.
This dangerous nonsense started when the World Trade Center was bombed the first time in 1993 ...
” when a truck bomb was detonated below the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City. The 1,336 pounds (606 kg) urea nitratehydrogen gas enhanced device[1] was intended to send the North Tower (Tower 1) crashing into the South Tower (Tower 2), bringing both towers down and killing tens of thousands of people.[2][3] It failed to do so but killed six people and injured more than a thousand.[4]
The attack was planned by a group of terrorists including Ramzi Yousef, Mahmud Abouhalima, Mohammad Salameh, Nidal A. Ayyad, Abdul Rahman Yasin and Ahmed Ajaj. They received financing from Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, Yousef’s uncle.”
— from Wikipedia (1993 World Trade Center bombing).
The Clinton administration made a decision to treat this as a criminal matter not as a matter of national security. This allowed them to turn a blind eye to the Islamic forces from abroad that wanted to wage jihad against The Great Satan. That didn’t change anything except it allowed the Clinton administration and the (D) party to continue their domestic agenda.
It is my belief that the OKC Bombing was also entangled in Islamism through through the support that John Doe Number Two gave to Timothy McVeigh. The federal government’s approach to that incident took a few hours to develop at which time it was treated as an act of domestic terrorism excluding foreign involvement.
Progressives are very focused on not allowing Islamists to derail them from immanentizing the eschaton, and even find common cause for the time being with them in this timeless goal.
Islamists on the other hand are hell-bent on conquering the Great Satan and are willing to work with any group, no matter how otherwise repulsive they may be, at least until Islam has achieved their goal. What Progressives don’t realize is that Islam fully intends on forcing them to submit to Islam too. That is those Progressives who survive.
I like the pick - but I want to know what is required (not “a waiver”, but EXACTLY what Congress must do, and when), because the open (D) and hidden (R) are going to be looking to put Trump in his place.
If they can block Mattis procedurally, by tabling some motion or by failing to act to get around the seven-year limit, they will do so, and then, emboldened, the Senate can go ahead and block Sessions.
It’s a great SECDEF pick only if Pence is sure it can get to an up-or-down vote in the Senate.
Mattis disapproves of the settlements...he is no friend to Israel.
He and Petraeus co-authored the COIN manual - the winning hearts and minds strategy that expects our servicemen to be further exposed in the hopes of winning the locals hearts and minds. I know he has been a great warrior, I just don’t trust his judgement as the Sec. of Defense.
I have strong doubts that he would be able to overcome his prejudices.
What he wrote is not a statement of fact. He said someone is not showing respect for Arab Palestinians. Presumably he means Israel. In Israel every day there are countless daily interactions between Jews and Arabs. I live in Jerusalem and Arabs shop at the same stores as I do, I have been to Arab dentists, have had Arab cab drivers, met an Arab cardiologist, and encounter Arabs throughout my day, every day.
The fact that he believes that Israel doesn’t show respect to Palestinian Arabs means to me that he is biased against Istael, probably irretrievably. The fact that he accused Israel of practicing apartheid against Arabs confirms it.
I hope that President Trump picks a Secretary of Defense who believes in the policies that President Trump espouses. If not, they can be sabotaged in a thousand different ways.
Until we as a nation officially recognize that Islam is NOT a religion, but a socio-political-legal system posing as one, it will continue to be protected by our own constitution.
There is no Allah but Satan, and Muhammad was his murdering pedophile.
Some friends of Israel oppose the settlements because they give the appearance that the Pali scum have legitimate complaints. Not that they need an excuse to attack Jews...that's who they are.
Perhaps he needs to be reminded that the so-called Palestinians CHOSE that path. They were told that their rights would be respected by the new government and invited to stay. Instead they fled, believing that when the Arab armies crushed the fledgling state they would get it all. They gambled and they lost.
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.