Allen West: You Are Seeing This Global Jihadist Movement Coming Together

Allen West

Lt. Col. Allen West appeared on Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Journal on Tuesday to discuss the vacuum left by the pullout in Yemen – also categorized as Obama’s “success story” – and Iran’s expanding control amidst nuclear talks.

While President Obama continues to disregard Congress in the nuclear negotiations, West voiced his concerns about the imminently nuclear Iran.

“The biggest argument of not allowing Iran to have a nuclear device is they’re on the terrorist list,” West said. “I mean, they’re the number one state sponsor of Islamic terrorism in the world.”

West argued that the administration should not be accepting any deal with Iran because it has not changed its terroristic behavior, and added that it is currently holding four Americans hostage.

The host then asked West if he thought that, if Obama pushes the Iranian deal through, Saudi Arabia and other U.S. allies would go off on their own to counter the terror threat.

“What I am really looking at, from a strategic perspective, is from Nigeria all the way across over to the Philippines you’re seeing this global jihadist movement coming together,” West said. “…[War on terror] is a horrible misnomer that we have to get away from because terror is a tactic.”

“What you really are seeing is Islamic totalitarianism come together, and we have to understand that you have non-state, non-uniform, unlawful enemy combatants and state sponsors that we have to deal with,” he concluded. “And right now this administration is sitting back and they’re not focused on it whatsoever.”

h/t: Allen West Republic

Share this article on Facebook if you agree with West and believe a nuclear Iran is a threat to the U.S.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

She’s Baaack! Watch State’s Marie ‘Jobs For Jihadists’ Harf (Oh Snap) Prove Her Critics Right

Image Credit: YouTube/LSUDVM

As Western Journalism reported over a month ago, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf opened herself up to unrelenting ridicule when she told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews that America’s war against ISIS cannot be won by killing terrorists.

What the murderous Islamists really need, asserted Harf, is economic opportunity — a way out of poverty, deprivation, and despair. It was a far-left view of the West’s bloody conflict with radical Islam — an awkward attempt at excuse-making that came to be labelled the much-maligned “jobs for jihadists” approach to fighting Muslim militancy.

To Matthews’ credit, he was having none of Harf’s argument.

So then, the State Department flak headed on over to CNN to double down on the “jobs for jihadists” relief effort for terror-waging malcontents, while also sneering at her critics by saying her earlier comments were simply “too nuanced for some” to grasp. In other words, those who so passionately disagreed with her were, sadly, of an inferior intellect.

Well, now — just as the furor over the “jobs for jihadists” brouhaha was calming down — Marie Harf put herself squarely back in the harsh glare of the social media spotlight by offering another reason for the pounding criticism she’s received.

Her detractors who felt she was naive or nonsensicial in her claim that ISIS wreaks terror because the terrorists lack economic opportunity…well, they’re just “crazy”…crazy and sexist, charges Harf. They don’t respect what she said because, claims State’s official spokeswoman, she IS a woman.

Harf actually said she didn’t think her “jobs” remarks to be “in any way controversial.”

As noted on the website BizPacReview.com, Marie Harf raised this sinister specter of sexism at a foreign policy conference hosted by Historically Black Colleges and Universities.

In response to a question asking what has been her biggest professional gaffe or mistake, she also revealed how shocked she was that her original “jobs for jihadists” suggestion caused such a firestorm…which, predictably, set off another firestorm on social media.
Screen shot 2015-03-23 at 4.17.21 PM
Screen shot 2015-03-23 at 4.17.54 PM
Screen shot 2015-03-23 at 4.18.35 PM
Screen shot 2015-03-23 at 4.19.07 PM
It will be interesting to see if Marie Harf makes yet another attempt to defend her comments that overlook the religious dogma of radical Islam as a reason for the murderous rampage of ISIS across the Middle East.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Bobby Jindal Doubles Down On Preventing Radical Islamists From Entering The U.S.

Megyn Kelly & Bobby Jindal

Governor of Louisiana and potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate Bobby Jindal joined Megyn Kelly on The Kelly File to discuss his controversial statements regarding immigration and the prevention of certain beliefs from entering the U.S.

Jindal faced backlash for his comments from the Muslim Public Affairs Council and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which essentially called him a “fear-mongerer” out to “regain the GOP spotlight.”

While noting that the U.S. is built on religious liberty and acknowledging that there are moderate Muslim American patriots, Jindal said in response to his critics that there are radical Islamists who solely “want to use our freedoms to undermine the freedoms of others.”

“It makes no sense to let those types of folks come into our country,” Jindal said. “It’s just common sense.”

Host Megyn Kelly pushed back against his viewpoint, asking him, “Who decides who’s a radical Islamist, and who’s just an Islamist?”

“This is a country with lots of crazy beliefs,” Kelly added. “…Are we going to start banning everybody who doesn’t treat women or children or criminals, for that matter, the way we like?”

Jindal drew the line, saying any person can come in and believe what they want, as long as they do not harm others.

h/t: Right Scoop

Share this article on Facebook and let us know what you think. Should we or could we regulate who comes in?

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Mark Levin To Obama: What About The Anti-Semitism That ‘Reeks From Your Administration’?

Mark Levin

Syndicated talk show host and author Mark Levin joined Sean Hannity on Fox News to tear into the Obama administration for their handling of the Israeli election and their “anti-semitism” directed towards Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel in general.

Levin suggested that if Eric Holder wants the nation to have a discussion about racism, we should also have a discussion about anti-semitism.

“This White House is reaching out to [Al] Sharpton, the Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR, all these radical nut jobs and groups,” Levin said. “… It’s not just Netanyahu, they’re willing to throw Israel over the side for the Islamo-regime in Tehran.”

“I don’t care how many liberal Democrat donors he [Obama] has who are Jewish. He can hide behind them all he wants,” Levin added. “But Mr. Holder, Mr. Obama, let’s have a national discussion about the anti-semitism that reeks from your administration!”

Hannity asked Levin if he believed Obama was anti-semitic, to which Levin responded with a resounding, “Yes I do!”

“Israel is surrounded, Israel was under attack with Hamas,” Levin explained. “His state department puts out these preposterous statements about moral relevancy. Israel is taking missiles, this president is holding back ammunition – slow walking it.”

“Does this sound like a guy who has a rational reason for his belief system?” Levin added. “I don’t think so!”

h/t: Right Scoop

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Shocking Details Emerge About Air Force Vet Caught Trying To Join ISIS

Capture

A grand jury this week voted to indict 47-year-old Tairod Nathan Webster Pugh on charges related to his alleged attempt to cross Turkey’s border into Syria with the goal of joining forces with the Islamic State terror organization. The Muslim convert faces charges of obstruction of justice and providing material support to America’s enemy.

During the trial, which included a not guilty plea from the defendant, prosecutors presented a variety of evidence indicating Pugh embraced radical Islamic principles. A document left on his laptop, for example, reportedly included a phrase indicating Pugh hoped to serve as “a sword against the oppressor” and “use the talents and skills given to me by Allah to establish and defend the Islamic States.”

His web browsing history, prosecutors asserted, included searches for terrorist propaganda videos and information about “borders controlled by the Islamic State.”

As far back as 2001, a colleague during Pugh’s employment at American Airlines voiced concern that he had expressed sympathy for Osama bin Laden.

The incident resulting in his current charges occurred in January, when prosecutors say he boarded a flight from Egypt to Turkey. Authorities at his destination, however, were apparently suspicious of his intention to continue on to Syria and did not allow him to enter the country. He was sent back to Egypt and detained, reports indicate, at which time he was found to be in possession of several modified electronic devices.

A grand jury felt prosecutors presented sufficient evidence to take the charges against Pugh to trial. If convicted, he could serve up to 35 years behind bars.

h/t: Dc Gazette

Share this article on Facebook if you want to see ISIS destroyed. 

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom