What If Islamists Took Control of the White House? --- like the jews have? On Thursday, February 6, 2014 3:49:22 PM UTC-6, Travis wrote: > > > > > > > *What If Islamists Took Control of the White House?* > > Posted By *Howard Rotberg* On November 25, 2013 > > Dear me, I worry so much about the future of our freedoms in the West, as > so many begin to “submit” to the values and demands of radical Islam, or > what is called “Islamism.” > > The other day, I began to worry what would happen if the Islamists took > over the American government and placed one of their own in the White House. > > I started to think about the agenda that an Islamist president would > fulfill. Here are some of my thoughts: > > [1] He would make it clear that the American Constitution and the history > of American freedoms were no more exemplary than the history of Islam. He > would argue that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in > competition. Instead, he would say, they overlap and share common > principles. He would be clear in his moral equivalence between America and > the totalitarian Islamic regimes. He might go so far as to say the > “common principles” were justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of > all human beings. And if he got away with comparing the American justice > system and the tolerance of most Americans with the totalitarian justice > systems of the Islamic states and with comparing American tolerance to the > intolerance of peoples who riot and kill if they think political cartoons > are offensive, then he would go further: He would assure everyone that it > is *Islam* that has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibility > of religious tolerance and racial equality. If the American people were > too stupid to know about the persecution of Christians and Jews in Muslim > countries (including the often-ignored fact of nearly a million Jews being > expelled from Arab countries in the ‘40s and ‘50s), then that would just > make his task all the easier. > > [2] He would as quickly as possible give out important awards, like the > Medal of Freedom, to those complicit with the goals of radical Islam, who > head NGOs and United Nations bodies that support the notion that the > Israelis are the new Nazis and the Palestinians are the new Jews. And he > would announce such awards on a date of symbolic significance to the Jews – > Tisha B’Av, the historic day of mourning for the loss of the Jewish temples > and the occurrence of other national tragedies, so that the Jews knew that > he was putting them in their place, for the sooner they got the message, > the better. > > [3] He would make a quick symbolic snub to Eastern Europe so as to > emphasize that the quid pro quo for Russian support of Islamists (outside > the former U.S.S.R only, of course) would be the removal of defensive > missiles from Poland. He would drive home the point by not informing the > Poles very much ahead of the announcement and would make the announcement > on September 17, 2009, which everyone in Central Europe knew was the 60th > anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland, followed by the annexation of > eastern Poland to the USSR. This would be another important symbolic act > to show how in the future the world would be divided between radical Islam, > Russia and China. > > [4] To further the goals of Radical Islam, the U.S. must be dramatically > weakened from the inside, including its once strong and proud economy. He > would have to create unheard of budget deficits. He would make a budget > that spends more than any other in history, creates the largest deficits in > history and imposes the largest tax increases in history. He would spend > over a trillion dollars more each year than he took in, and would project a > cumulative deficit within ten years of $14.29 trillion – more than the > country’s GNP. That way, the U.S. would end up being owned by China and > other foreign lenders and the American people would be so preoccupied with > their economic woes, and his governments lies about the terms of a > socialized medical system, there would be little regard paid to the > increasing rate of Islamification of its culture and freedoms. > > [5] Any captured terrorists would be given civilian trials, with the same > constitutional rights as American citizens, rather than giving them > military trials like enemy soldiers receive. This would show that Islamic > terrorists are really the same as American citizens and would make it > difficult to secure convictions. It would also make it difficult to keep > anti-terrorist measures secret, because they would be subject to pre-trial > discovery of civilian trials. > > [6] He would change many of the terms that are meant to suggest American > values are superior to Islamic values. He would downplay any sense that > America is at war with radical Islam. In fact, he would avoid using the > term “Global War on Terror” [GWOT] and instead use “Overseas Contingency > Operation.” > > [7] He would refer to any terrorists that kill dozens of Americans on > American soil not as “terrorists” or “murderers” or “agents of Islamism” > but as mere “extremists” – making such killers no more evil than, say, > right-wing Republicans. He would not do anything to stop Islamists > infiltrating the American military. > > [8] He would assure Americans that acts of terrorism that obviously should > be caught by American authorities, were in fact business as usual, and if > he was on vacation during such incidents, he would not bother to return to > work. That would show that not only were the terrorists winning but that > was entirely normal. > > [9] He would appoint an Iranian-born political associate without any > special military, security or nuclear knowledge to be put in charge of > secret negotiations with Iran and then pretend to make a deal with Iran to > stop its nuclear weapon program (which nuclear weapons Iran has been > promising since 1996 would be used against Israel, and even a few days > before the deal was made, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, who > really rules Iran, said that the Jews of Israel “cannot be called humans, > they are like animals, some of them” and that Israel was “the rabid dog of > the region”). He would, in an act of appeasement that was Chamberlain-like, > make an agreement that allowed Iran to keep all its centrifuges and proceed > to make its nukes, with the sanctions that have finally begun to bite being > eased in return for nothing at all. He would allow the Parchin site and > other secret military installation to be out of sight of the inspectors, > allow for the possibility of “dirty bombs” using nuclear material probably > through its terrorist arm, Hezbollah, allow it to keep up its production of > centrifuges, and boost its stock of 3.5 percent enriched uranium, thereby > accumulating enough material to enhance its capacity for producing enough > weapons-grade uranium to break through to a nuclear bomb rapidly enough to > defy detection by the IAEA or Western intelligence until it is too late. > > [10] He would make it clear that Israel would be on its own (at least up > until an Iranian first strike nuclear attack killed an estimated 200,000 > Israelis) and he would delay the delivery of “bunker busting” bombs > promised to be sold to Israel. He would also delay delivery of helicopters > and other military hardware so as to pressure Israel to do nothing in the > face of a threatened nuclear war. > > [11] He would have his secretary of state warn Israel that unless it gave > into demands from a terrorist entity that teaches its children hatred and > violence, Israel would end up with a Third Intifada, which presumably would > be Israel’s fault. > > [12] He would make Israel the object of his demands, and demand nothing > from Arab countries or the Palestinians. He would try to stop all Israeli > settlement even within established cities, if they were on “disputed” > lands. He would thus create a situation where the Palestinians had no > interest in compromise, since all demands were only made on the Israelis. > > [13] He would befriend radical Islamist professors and Americans with > records of terrorist violence against American institutions, so young > Americans would know who he deemed worthy of the respect inherent in > friendship, and they would understand the way of the future. > > [14] He would make it clear that the only “radical” part of Islam is Al > Qaeda, and therefore there is no threat to America from any other Muslims, > who after all, as pointed out in point one above, are tolerant and > followers of justice just like all Americans. > > [15] He would court the Muslim Brotherhood, support it in Egypt and > elsewhere, and allow its operatives to participate at the highest levels of > American government. > > Oh, dear. I think we have a problem. > > *Howard Rotberg is a Canadian writer. His latest book is TOLERism: The > Ideology Revealed. He is also President of publisher Mantua Books > (www.mantuabooks.com <http://www.mantuabooks.com>).* > > * > > Don’t miss *Josh Brewster’s* video interview with *Jamie Glazov* about > why the Obama administration reaches its hand out in solidarity to > America’s adversaries: > The Glazov Gang - Part 1 of 2/ Jamie Glazov Discusses His New Book > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNJg6w6CB0o > > > > *Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: **Click > here*<http://www.frontpagemag.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&field-keywords=david+horowitz&rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&qid=1316459840&rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&sort=daterank>*. > > * > ------------------------------ > > Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: *http://www.frontpagemag.com > <http://www.frontpagemag.com>* > > URL to article: > *http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/howard-rotberg/what-if-islamists-took-control-of-the-white-house/ > > <http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/howard-rotberg/what-if-islamists-took-control-of-the-white-house/>* > > > > > __._,_.___ > > > > > > __,_._,___ > > >
-- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
