Following the “most devastating loss in the history of American politics,” Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah addressed the military and told them that they can “protest against authority” and “criticize our president.” He went on to state that the war on terror should not be considered a war between the united States and Islam.
On Tuesday, Obama gave a speech at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida. During that speech, he mentioned that he wanted to “talk about the foundation that we will leave for the next administration.”
At one point, Obama reminded the troops “that each of us has…the universal right to speak your minds and to protest against authority; to live in a society that’s open and free; that can criticize our president without retribution.”
Really? This didn’t turn out so well for those questioning Obama’s birth certificate if you recall. LTC Terry Lakin was imprisoned for doing that. Furthermore, what about those in the military who might actually know the Constitution they swear to uphold and refuse to be deployed to unconstitutional wars? Would they not face retribution?
“This is a speech that President Obama was prepared to give before the election,” said White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest.
Obama then told the troops that the nation depends on them “to carry forward what is best in us, that commitment to a common creed, the confidence that right makes might, not the other way around.”
Actually, that is really up to the people, not the troops, as our Constitution is clear about who is to enforce the laws, the militia.
Obama then talked about the contrived “war on terror” that he inherited, but failed to mention that it is Islamic in nature. Rather, he turned it around to poison the well by speaking of “violent extremism,” which under his administration has targeted evangelical Christians.
“So rather than offer false promises that we can eliminate terrorism by dropping more bombs or deploying more and more troops or fencing ourselves off from the rest of the world, we have to take a long view of the terrorist threat. And we have to pursue a smart strategy that can be sustained. In the time remaining, let me just suggest what I think should guide this approach.”
He then claimed to want to uphold the rule of law in fighting terrorists. While I agree that we should be lawful in our dealings, the fact is that we have documented more than 1,000 instances of his lawbreaking, lying and corruption. The hypocrisy of this man is simply amazing.
Obama also said he wanted to uphold American values, but how does a Marxist, Islamic sympathizer uphold American values? I wonder if he could even articulate what those values are and show the foundation for them. I’m guessing not.
“Terrorists would love to see us walk away from the type of work that builds international coalitions and ends conflicts and stops the spread of deadly weapons,” he said. “It would make life easier for them; it would be a tragic mistake for us.”
The spread of deadly weapons? This is a man whose administration was illegally trafficking guns to Mexican drug cartels that resulted in the murders of hundreds of people on both sides of the border, including two federal agents. This is a man that has armed Islamic jihadists all of the Middle East. He’s helped fund and train them too! He is the creator of the Islamic State.
Yet, he went on to say, “If we act like this is a war between the United States and Islam, we’re not just going to lose more Americans to terrorist attacks, but we’ll also lose sight of the very principles we claim to defend.”
Well, since I have the right to criticize the usurper-in-chief, let me just be clear: Islam does not hold to the principles of the united States. Islam is not here to assimilate. Listen to Islam’s leaders, Islam is here to dominate. Their own leaders speak against Obama’s taqiyya by saying that they are “above the law.” This has been Islam’s worldview down through history.
He then added, “The United States of America is not a country that imposes religious tests as a price for freedom. We’re a country that was founded so that people could practice their faiths as they choose.”
No, this is not true. No religious test oath has ever been imposed for freedom per se. However, from our earliest times, religious test oaths were issued, according to the Christian faith, to determine true representatives. Furthermore, God-given freedom was not established to grant such a right as to worship false gods such as Allah.
You know, I don’t mind that people have the right of free speech, provided that speech is in accordance with law. If military members are truthfully criticizing any president, which is a right they have and should not be infringed, then that criticism needs to be heard. However, if they are engaged in slander, that is something else and they should be dealt with under the law. In my opinion, many of the troops should be openly running to the press right now to criticize their current, impotent commander-in-chief. Where are their voices?