Irony: Obama Morphs Further into GW Bush, will use War-on-Terror Military Force Authorization that He Previously Wanted To Repeal

By Elizabeth Nelson

Obama's nightmare is realized, the more he wanted to distance himself from the man he's blamed for 6-1/2 years, the more he becomes him.  Now he's about to use the Authorization for Military Force (AUMF), a War-on-Terror authorization, that he swore he was going to repeal in 2013, because he "ended the War-on-Terror," so why would we need it, the "U.S. was "never going to go to war with Islam". 

Today Julie Pace, White House reporter, was calling Josh Earnest out on the irony of Obama's decision to use the Bush's authorization, and in typical speaker style, Earnest,  tried to change history by redacting key facts them.

Julie Pace: “Can I just ask whether you see any irony in using as your legal justification for these airstrikes an authorization for military force that the president himself has called for repeal of?”

Josh Earnest: "The president did give a speech in May of 2013, just a little over a year ago now, where he did describe -- let me just quote his sentence and then we can talk about it a little bit. The president said":

"I look forward to engaging Congress and the American people in efforts to refine, and ultimately repeal, the AUMF’s mandate."

Two sentences later he went on to say:

"Our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must continue."

The problem is, Earnest redacted some important information.  He forgot to mention what Obama said in between those two statements: "And I will not sign laws designed to expand this mandate further." 

Obama had every intention of "Ending the War on Terror" and his Means to an End was to not just dismantle the AUMF but recall it. However now he wants to use it to suit his own political needs? Don't be fooled, this has nothing to do with National Security, he doesn't do anything that doesn't end with a positive, Obama, political ending. So, how do you like your warmonger vote, liberals, and where are all the Hollywood anti-activists now? **crickets**




Proof, Karma is a fickle bitc*. The more Obama blamed everything on Bush, the more Bush's past imprinted on Obama's future.  Now he's fining himself in Bush's shoes, having to make the same decisions.  However, this time, we have two polar-opposite men in office.  One loved God, our country, and our military.  The other quotes from the Quran, professes to be Muslim and sides with Islam. 

George W. Bush's Ground Zero Speech - a Leader's Response to a Terrorist Threat

By Elizabeth Nelson

After the devastating terror attacks of 9/11, President George W. Bush went directly to Ground Zero in New York City, to meet wrap his arms around the survivors, responders and the family members that were left behind.  He wasn't just there to deliver a message to New Yorkers but to the terrorists that were trying to send us a message, in their attack. 

While there, he conveyed a rousing speech by bullhorn at the site.

G.W. reminded us what a strong leader's response to a terrorist's threat should look like.  His emotional speech at Ground Zero reminds us that not only is  America resilient, but we are strong in the face of terror, especially when we have a strong leader to guide us. 

So what does that mean for the U.S.A., when we have a "paper tiger" at the helm? One that thinks we can "degrade and manage the problem" we know as ISIS/ISIL, the "JV Team," especially when he doesn't want to admit or face what they really are, "ISIL is not 'Islamic'."  Is this because "he is one of them [Muslim]" or because he promised "the US will never be at war with ISLAM?"

Bridge Over Troubled Water - History will Repeat with No Alarm Sounded

By Elizabeth Nelson

America, did we learn nothing from letting our guards down and being attacked by terrorists on our own land on 9/11? Obviously we didn't, because here we are again, we've allowed ourselves to become complacent in the face of terrorism, even after Benghazi. Are we really looking forward to being reminded?

  

Will we not even listen to the warnings of our Lawmakers, when they tell us that ISIS is "unlike any terrorist group that we've ever seen," is more dangers than al-Qaeda ever was, is growing larger daily, and that they know of hundreds of Americans that are defecting America and the "American Dream," with their passports in hand, and are freely embracing ISIS and their "Caliphate," which includes the decimation and destruction of the United States?

America, when are we going to wake up and clear our eyes to the fact that the War on Terror is only over on one side, Obama's, because he'll "never go to war with Islam" as long as he continues to defend the cult of Islam and ISIS, the entities that hates the US, but Islam is more than happy to bring the the War to the US once again.

It's sad when we remember our history, yet we repeat it anyway; in that we either became too complacent and comfortable in our lives or because we were so egomaniacal that we really thought, "surely, we are so big that it would never happen again."  Guess what, we have another think coming.

“Prepare for the unknown by studying how others in the past have coped with the unforeseeable and the unpredictable.” ~ George Patton

Political Winds are Blowing - Mideast Expert: "Obama Switched Sides on War on Terror"

By Elizabeth Nelson

Obama didn't make a promise when he said, "we are 5 days from fundamentally transforming America." That wasn't a promise that he intended to keep, that was a terrorist, jihadist threat that he intended to keep and is in fact the results of his keeping, that we are seeing today.  Now a former CIA Agent, with impressive credentials, has come out and said that Obama went AWOL on the War on Terror and switched sides. What did we expect from an Islamist?

A former CIA agent bluntly told WND, America has switched sides in the war on terror under President Obama. Clare Lopez was willing to say what a few members of Congress have confided to WND in private, but declined to say on-the-record.

She said the global war on terror had been an effort to “stay free of Shariah,” or repressive Islamic law, until the Obama administration began siding with such jihadist groups as the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates.

Why the switch?

Lopez explained, when the so-called Arab Spring appeared in late 2010, “It was time to bring down the secular Muslim rulers who did not enforce Islamic law. And America helped.” And why would Obama want to do that?

As she told WND earlier this month, Lopez believed the Muslim Brotherhood has thoroughly infiltrated the Obama administration and other branches of the federal government.

She also came to the conclusion Obama had essentially the same goals in the Mideast as the late Osama bin Laden: “to remove American power and influence, including military forces, from Islamic lands.”

Why would Obama order the killing of bin Laden?

Oh, but wait; Obama didn't want to "Kill" Bin Laden, he wanted our 9/11 mastermind "killed or Captured." Obama's first preference was to capture and bring "Bin Laden to justice", as he had his Son-in-Law.  However, Obama went on to spike that football, even though he never set it up, Bush had, and never fired the shot, Seal Team Six had - whom he allowed to be outted, without punishment.

Because the president “couldn’t delay any longer,” once the opportunity was presented, Lopez told WND. There were “no more excuses” available to avoid it and he “thought it might look good,” she mused. The former CIA operative’s perspective affects her prescription for what the U.S. should do about the terror army ISIS, as she called for caution and restraint.

While there has been a sudden chorus of politicians and military experts calling for the immediate elimination of the terrorist army after it beheaded American journalist James Foley last week, Lopez believes the U.S. should have an overall strategy in place before fully re-engaging in the Mideast militarily. Continue Reading WND

Nothing this man does is for the best interests of our Country, but for himself and for his Muslim brotherhood.  Do you wonder why Obama has no strategy for ISIS? He's already said that America "will never go to war with Islam," so she is right, he has picked his side. The political winds have indeed shifted and he is standing with them.

A. The Proof from the Qur'an for the Commandment to Execute the Apostate

Here I wish briefly to offer proof that will quiet the doubt in the hearts of those who, for lack of sources of information, may think that perhaps the punishment of death did not exist in Islam but was added at a later time by the "mawlawis" (religious leaders) on their own.

God Most High declares in the Qur'an:

But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion. We detail our revelations for a people who have knowledge. And if they break their pledges after their treaty (hath been made with you) and assail your religion, then fight the heads of disbelief – Lo! they have no binding oaths in order that they may desist. (9:11,12)[1]

The following is the occasion for the revelation of this verse: During the pilgrimage (hajj) in A.H. 9, God Most High ordered a proclamation of an immunity. By virtue of this proclamation all those who, up to that time, were fighting against God and His Apostle and were attempting to obstruct the way of God's religion through all kinds of excesses and false covenants, were granted from that time a maximum respite of four months.

During this period, they were to ponder their own situation. If they wanted to accept Islam, they could accept it and they would be forgiven. If they wanted to leave the country, they could leave. Within this fixed period nothing would hinder them from leaving. Thereafter those remaining, who would neither accept Islam nor leave the country, would be dealt with by the sword. In this connection, it was said: 

"If they repent and uphold the practice of prayer and almsgiving, then they are your brothers in religion. If after this, however, they break their covenant, then war should be waged against the leaders of kufr (infidelity). Here "covenant breaking" in no way can be construed to mean "breaking of political covenants". Rather, the context clearly determines its meaning to be "confessing Islam and then renouncing it". Thereafter the meaning of "fight the heads of disbelief" (9:11,12) can only mean that war should be waged against the leaders instigating apostasy.[2]

So, verses 9:11-12 and 4:89 – the last verses revealed in the Quran concerning apostasy – clearly call for killing the apostates of Islam. Read more Islam-Watch.org 

Obama's Islam-based cult and Qur'an is far from "peaceable," they've already declared war and he's in denial Cleopatra.