Tag Archive for: national security

The 3 greatest internal Islamic threats to U.S. National Security: CAIR, ISNA, MSA

/in , , , , /by

For those who stay informed on the threat posed by Islamists, this interview will reinforce what many have been talking about for years.

Dr. Mark Christian, an Egyptian-born Christian convert from Islam and who is related to high-ranking leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood, is now engaged in a battle to root out the Brotherhood influence in what is called the Global Faith Institute, a project in Omaha, Nebraska.

Thanks to Front Page Magazine for passing this along to us. Dr. Mark Christian on The Rick Amato Show:

Are We Witnessing America’s Death by Political Correctness?

/in , , , , /by

Please read the below article by Colonel Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. concerning the history of the progressive political correct propaganda programs first developed by the Communist Party and promoted by progressives in the U.S. since the early 1950s.  Over the past six years the progressive movement has been implemented by the Obama administration by integrating progressive and politically correct policy in all Government Bureaus with the help of 45 czars appointed by Obama who were never confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

The progressive and political correctness indoctrination has been force fed to the captive U.S. Armed Forces negatively affecting combat effectiveness, unit cohesiveness, and moral.  While this has been on going, the left of center liberal media establishment has been promulgating progressive political correctness in their reporting, in order to indoctrinate the American people.  At the same time, the Obama appointees at the Department of Education have promoted Obama’s progressiveness and political correctness in the new anti-American Common Core teaching curriculum for secondary and college educational courses, in keeping with the progressive indoctrination of unsuspecting students by leftists college professors that has been going on since the early 1960’s.

Unsuspecting students at all levels of education are being indoctrinated with this new progressive political correct Common Core agenda approved by the Obama administration which has eliminated civics courses, information about the Founding Fathers, study of the Bill of Rights, analysis on the US Constitution, positive history about how the US abolished slavery, the impressive history about how the US Armed Forces freed millions of people in foreign lands from oppressive dictators and returned the land to the people in those countries, how the free enterprise created the most effective economic engine in the history of mankind, and cover up the Socialism has never worked in any country where it has been tried.

Now progressives in the Obama administration appointed to the Center for Disease Control are doing nothing to keep American citizens safe from the Ebola epidemic, and are delaying the required precautionary steps necessary to prevent the spread of the Ebola infectious disease from spreading throughout the Republic, because it would not be politically correct.  Obama administration officials have been insinuating that it would be racist to restrict the entry of travelers with passports from countries in West Africa where the Ebola epidemics are rampant.  However, in order to protect their citizens from an Ebola epidemic, the intelligent leaders of African and European countries are restricting flights from West Africa from entering their countries.  The primary function of the leader of any country is to protect the lives of their citizens.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Officials are not properly screening arriving international passengers insuring where they have traveled, asking the passenger if they have a fever, screening passengers to see if they are sick, and are not thermo-scanning passenger’s temperatures.  Yet, US Immigration and Custom Officials are quarantining dogs and cats entering the US, and demanding to examine the medical records of those animals.  Even though the citizens of West African countries have been exposed to a serious Ebola epidemic—and despite repeated calls for restricting flights from West Africa to the United States as African and European countries have restricted those flights from arriving in their countries, the Obama administration refuses to restrict flights from West Africa from entering the US – after all it would be racist and politically incorrect.

rgb on political correctnessA postscript:

When the Obama administration asked Israel to send members of its Armed Forces to provide medical assistance to Ebola infected countries in West Africa, their Defense Minister, Moshe Ya’alon, said  “The hell I’ll expose my troops to Ebola.”  It kind of makes you feel warm inside to know that Obama is exposing 3,000 U.S. military personnel to Liberia where the infectious disease is rampant. No other member of the 192 United Nations is exposing their sons and daughters to that killer disease.

However, Obama won’t deploy one member of the U.S. Armed Forces to seal the wide open southern border, in order to prevent drug smugglers, human smugglers, Islamic terrorists, 200,000 illegal youth from central America, and Ebola infected illegal immigrants from entering the United States.

Dinesh D’Souza wrote:

“Obama is the architect of American decline, and progressivism is the ideology of American suicide. Decline is a choice, but so is liberty. Let us resolve as Americans to make liberty our choice.”

Sellin

Colonel Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. , U.S. Army (Ret.)

National suicide by political correctness

by LAWRENCE SELLIN, PH.D. October 1, 2014

Barack Obama said “ISIL is not Islamic. No religion condones the killing if innocents.”

That definition includes: al- Qa’ida, Abu Sayyaf, Gama’a al-Islamiyya, Hamas, Hizballah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e Tayyiba, Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, Asbat al-Ansar, al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb, Jemaah Islamiya, Ansar al-Islam, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, al-Shabaab, al-Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula, Boko Haram, al-Nusrah Front, Ansar al-Shari’a in Benghazi, Ansar al-Shari’a in Darnah, Ansar al-Shari’a in Tunisia – Well, you get the idea.

As noted recently by Diana West, Americans continue to be perplexed as to how the Obama Administration and the media keep repeating the politically correct propaganda that Islam has nothing to do with jihad. Such widespread, politics- and mass-media-driven brainwashing is not new.

Just as today’s politicians, journalists and academics seek to separate Islam from its radical impact; brutal conquest, forced conversion, sex slavery and beheadings. Past opinion-makers worked equally hard to separate communism from its own brand inhuman impact; brutal conquest, forced collectivization, concentration camps and mass murder.

Few Americans realize that political correctness, a policy implicitly promoted by Democrats and established as the de facto totalitarian legal system on American universities, was designed by communists in the 1930s to undermine western civilization and democracy while disguising the nature of the threat.

After the successful 1917 communist revolution in Russia, it was widely believed that a proletarian revolt would sweep across Europe and, ultimately, North America. It did not. The only two attempts at a workers’ government in Munich and Budapest lasted only months.

As a result the Communist International began to investigate other ways to create the state of societal hopelessness and alienation necessary as a prerequisite for socialist revolution.

The single, most important organizational component of this conspiracy was a Communist think tank called the Institute for Social Research, popularly known as the Frankfurt School. The task of the Frankfurt School was first, to undermine the Judeo-Christian foundation of Western civilization that emphasized the uniqueness and sacredness of the individual and, second, to determine new cultural forms which would increase the disaffection of the population.

Political Correctness is cultural Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. Just as in classical economic Marxism, certain groups, i.e. workers and peasants, are a priori good, and other groups, i.e., the bourgeoisie and capital owners, are evil. In the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness certain groups are good, such as feminist women, blacks, ethnic minorities and those who define themselves according to sexual orientation. These groups are deemed to be “victims,” and therefore unquestionably good. Similarly, white males and, by extension Western civilization, are determined to be automatically evil, thereby becoming the equivalent of the bourgeoisie in economic Marxism.

Perhaps the most important, if least-known, of the Frankfurt School’s successes was the shaping of the electronic media of radio and television into the powerful instruments of social control which they represent today.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union, American universities now represent the largest concentration of Marxist dogma and political correctness in the world. This is not the academy of a republic, but Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD rooting out deviationists in the guise of racial, ethnic, gender and cultural sensitivity.

The policies of the Obama Administration reflect what David Horowitz described as an unholy alliance between leftists and radical Islam. They have been brought together by the traits they share – their hatred of Western civilization and their belief that the United States is the embodiment of evil on earth. While Islamic radicals seek to purge the world of heresies and of the infidels who practice them, leftist radicals seek to purge society’s collective “soul” of the vices allegedly spawned by capitalism — those being racism, sexism, imperialism, and greed.

Given the existential threat posed by such ideologies, political correctness can no longer be considered merely a peculiarity of cowardly politicians, a biased media or tenured radicals, but a dangerous subversive element of an anti-American and anti-Western strategy.

But frankly, Mr. Obama, I don’t care if ISIL is “Islamic” or not. Wanting us all dead is a sufficient reason to take the war directly and aggressively to them.

ABOUT LAWRENCE SELLIN, PH.D.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq. Colonel Sellin is the author of “Restoring the Republic: Arguments for a Second American Revolution “. He receives email at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Goodbye, Columbus Day? PC school board celebrates ‘Indigenous Peoples’ Day’ instead

Obama’s List of Most Disrespectful Insults to the Military

The Three Things You Don’t Need Robert Gates’s Book to Know

/in , , /by

“Excerpts from a new tell-all book made quite a splash in Washington yesterday. Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates apparently blasts President Obama on foreign policy and the U.S. military in his upcoming book, Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War,” writes Amy Payne from the Heritage Foundation.

But as Heritage’s James Jay Carafano said, “You don’t need a book from the former Secretary of Defense to know that many of the decisions Obama made during Gates’s watch were a disaster.”

Gates started as Secretary of Defense during President George W. Bush’s second term, and Obama asked him to stay on during his first term.

The revelations from Gates’s book come as no surprise to Heritage experts, who have been warning that Obama has made decisions based on his personal preference for domestic policy—at the expense of America’s standing in the world and our men and women in uniform.

Here are three things you don’t need to read the book to know.

1. President Obama is reaping what he has sown on foreign policy.

“The President has never had a coherent approach to foreign policy,” explained Heritage’s Ted Bromund. “Instead, he entered office with a string of liberal platitudes about the world and a deep desire to focus on domestic policy.”

Obama’s style? “Instead of leading from the front, the President emphasized multilateral institutions (such as the U.N.), international law, and engagement with hostile regimes,” Bromund said. The essence of the Obama Doctrine—the President’s foreign policy approach—is that Obama has “placed hope above reality” when dealing with countries like Russia, Iran, China, and North Korea, said Heritage’s Luke Coffey.

2. Lessons learned in conflict are costly.

Fighting terrorism and state-sponsored enemies is a deadly business. As the focus of 2014 turns to the Administration’s promise to pull out of Afghanistan, the specter of Iraq looms large.

“The withdrawal from Iraq was a colossal failure,” says Carafano, Heritage’s E. W. Richardson Fellow. “Violence is higher today than when Obama took office. The country is near civil war.”

And our enemies haven’t taken a break.

“We are already seeing the Taliban and al-Qaeda staging a comeback following Obama’s mishandling of the surge in Afghanistan and the drawdown of forces planned in 2014,” Carafano said. He wrote yesterday that “what we need from the White House is leadership that reestablishes America’s ability to influence outcomes in the region for the good—rather than trumpeting easy ‘fixes’ while doing as little as possible.”

3. The state of the U.S. military matters.

During Gates’s tenure, the military began to shed war-fighting capabilities, canceled missile defense programs, and compromised on readiness. Again, this reflected the place of defense among the President’s priorities. But this directly impacts America’s ability to respond to a crisis.

“Throughout his Administration, the President has sought—successfully—to cut the defense budget. But, inevitably, there came a time when he thought it was right to use force,” Bromund said. “His successors will, at some point, be in exactly the same position, perhaps when action really is in America’s vital national interest—but by that point, his cuts will have made successful action difficult or even impossible.”

America has to be ready to defend itself—and reducing the military’s capabilities carries the risk that the country may not be ready when action is needed.

Decisions have consequences. Heritage’s Carafano and Distinguished Fellow Kim Holmes predicted years ago that Obama’s approach to foreign policy would prove to be bad for America and the world.

“Ultimately, the Obama Doctrine will force friendly nations to look elsewhere, not to Washington, for arrangements that bring them greater security. And that will make this a far more dangerous world indeed.”

Rubio Condemns Obama’s Failure To Recognize Hugo Chavez’s Threat To U.S. National Security

/in , /by

U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) issued the following statement regarding President Obama’s assessment that Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez does not pose a serious national security threat to the U.S.:

“It’s now disturbingly clear that President Obama has been living under a rock when it comes to recognizing the national security threat posed by Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez.

“Hugo Chavez is not only a threat to the Venezuelan people’s freedom and democratic aspirations, he has also supported Iran’s regime in its attempts to expand its intelligence network throughout the hemisphere, facilitated money laundering activities that finance state sponsors of terrorism and provided a safe haven for FARC narco-terrorists, among many other actions. Just yesterday, the Wall Street Journal detailed how Hugo Chavez circumvents U.S. and EU sanctions to help prop up the Assad regime in Syria. And even Obama’s own State Department belatedly but rightly expelled Chavez’s consul general in Miami for her ties to a plan to wage cyber-attacks on the U.S.

“President Obama continues to display an alarmingly naïve understanding of the challenges and opportunities we face in the Western Hemisphere.”

In an interview that aired last night on Miami’s Channel 41, President Obama said, “We’re always concerned about Iran engaging in destabilizing activity around the globe. But overall my sense is that what Mr. Chávez has done over the last several years has not had a serious national security impact on us.”