Posts Tagged ‘but radical Islam could have been one of the reasons?’

Obama AG Eric Holder Refuses To Acknowledge That Radical Islam Even AMONG Reasons For Terrorist Attacks

May 19, 2010

We have seen that Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder has been lightening fast to denounce and demonize the residents of an entire state as being racist over a law that he admits he never even bothered to actually read.

But now watch how careful the top American law enforcement official is to not say that radical Islam has even been AMONG the reasons that the recent rash of terrorists have attempted to murder Americans, even after repeated requests to do so:

Reading a transcript should drive you nuts as you plumb the depths of the ignorance, political correctness, and moral cowardice of the highest law enforcement official in the land:

SMITH: Let me go to my next question, which is — in — in the case of all three attempts in the last year, the terrorist attempts, one of which was successful, those individuals have had ties to radical Islam. Do you feel that these individuals might have been incited to take the actions that they did because of radical Islam?

HOLDER: Because of?

SMITH: Radical Islam.

HOLDER: There are a variety of reasons why I think people have taken these actions. It’s — one, I think you have to look at each individual case. I mean, we are in the process now of talking to Mr. Shahzad to try to understand what it is that drove him to take the action.

SMITH: Yes, but radical Islam could have been one of the reasons?

HOLDER: There are a variety of reasons why people

SMITH: But was radical Islam one of them?

HOLDER: There are a variety of reasons why people do things. Some of them are potentially religious…

SMITH: OK. But all I’m asking is if you think among those variety of reasons radical Islam might have been one of the reasons that the individuals took the steps that they did.

HOLDER: You see, you say radical Islam. I mean, I think those people who espouse a — a version of Islam that is not…

SMITH: Are you uncomfortable attributing any other actions to radical Islam? It sounds like it.

HOLDER: No, I don’t want to say anything negative about a religion that is not

SMITH: No, no. I’m not talking about religion. I’m talking about radical Islam. I’m not talking about the general religion.

HOLDER: Right. And I’m saying that a person, like Anwar Awlaki, for instance, who has a version of Islam that is not consistent with the teachings of it…

SMITH: But…

HOLDER: … and who espouses a radical version…

SMITH: But then is — could radical Islam had motivated these individuals to take the steps that they did?

HOLDER: I certainly think that it’s possible that people who espouse a radical version of Islam have had an ability to have an impact on people like Mr. Shahzad.

SMITH: OK. And could it have been the case in one of these three instances?

HOLDER: Could that have been the case?

SMITH: Yes, could — again, could one of these three individuals have been incited by radical Islam? Apparently, you feel that that they could’ve been.

HOLDER: Well, I think potentially incited by people who have a view of Islam that is inconsistent with…

SMITH: OK. Mr. A.G., it’s hard to get an answer yes or no, but let me go on to my next question.

I mean, it would have been easier to teach a pre-schooler  the mathematical intricacies of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.  That’s the way it is with moral idiots.  They simply cannot understand.   Objective morality and common sense are like an alien language to them.  They are so open-minded their brains have fallen out and splattered all over the floor.  They were so committed to their “liberal studies” that all room for any competing idea whatsoever has been utterly discarded and cannot even for the briefest nanosecond be considered.  They have determined themselves to be utterly stupid by sheer brute force of will.

The Obama administration respects the terrorists, their religion, their culture, and their worldview so very, very much.

It’s a bleeping long-string-of-profanities-type shame that Barack Obama and his top law dog don’t have so much as a fraction of the same respect for the American citizens and residents of the state of Arizona.

The National Review had this to point out:

How can you ever hope to stop something when you refuse even to speak its name?

Interesting, by the way, to hear Mr. Holder has become such an expert in Islam that he now purports to know more about the subject than people who have spent years studying it. He referred to al Qaeda recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki as beholden to “a version of Islam that is not consistent with the teachings of it.” I wonder if he will enlighten us on what exactly Awlaki has gotten wrong. Hopefully, Mr. Holder will at least let Secretary Clinton know because the State Department is showcasing the Dar al-Hijra Islamic Center — Awlaki’s old Virginia haunts, where the imam used to minister to 9/11 hijackers and the Fort Hood mass-murderer — as the model depiction of Islam in America. (See Steve Emerson’s reports at the Investigative Project on Terrorism, here and here).

Sun Tzu – in one of the great analyses of warfare, said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles.  Barack Obama and Eric Holder won’t even consider their actual enemy, and it is almost as shocking how utterly ignorant they are concerning themselves and their many flaws.

These people are dangerous and depraved.  And they need to go.

Advertisements