Posted on December 31, 2015
Put Some ISIS On That
Mrs. Clinton assaults the truth
by
Daniel Clark
Hillary Clinton’s plan to deploy her husband in her
next campaign offensive may undermine her party’s ludicrous charge of a Republican
“war on women,” but it is entirely consistent with the Clintons' perpetual war
on the truth. How better to dodge criticism of her lie about Donald Trump
being used for ISIS recruiting than to introduce her husband, who infamously
feigned ignorance of the meaning of the word “is”? Now she’s pretending
to misunderstand the meaning of this organization called “is-is.”
During
the Democratic primary debate in New Hampshire, Mrs. Clinton casually declared
that the terror organization is “going to people, showing videos of Donald
Trump insulting Islam and Muslims in order to recruit more radical
jihadists.” Even the liberal “fact
checkers” could find no substantiation for this claim, but she stands by it,
and why not? She obviously knew it
wasn’t true when she said it, so there’s no reason why pointing that out to her
should make any difference.
What motivates Islamic terrorists is not tough talk
from a quirky presidential candidate; it’s the demonstrated lack of toughness
by the current American leadership. Mrs.
Clinton should know this as well as anybody, for it was after President Bill
Clinton fled Mogadishu that Osama bin Laden called America a paper tiger, and
charged that it lacked the stomach to fight when things got tough.
Hillary’s husband reinforced bin Laden’s point
repeatedly. The 1993 World Trade Center
bombing, if executed as planned, would have been far deadlier than 9/11. The plan was to topple one tower into the
other, then for both towers to fall across Manhattan, crushing countless people
below. President Clinton’s response was
to warn the rest of us not to overreact.
Through the Khobar Towers bombing, the embassy bombings in Kenya and
Tanzania, and the attempt to sink the USS
Cole, Bill Clinton responded tentatively, when at all. It could hardly be more clear that his
reticence in the face of each crisis further emboldened the terrorists.
If “insulting Islam and Muslims” were a driving force
behind jihadist recruitment as Hillary supposes, ISIS would now have fewer
members than the Milli Vanilli
fan club. In today’s politically correct
environment, you could sooner name a football team the Oriental Transvestite
Midgets than publicly insult Islam and Muslims.
When a Muslim commits a terrorist act against
Americans, the media try to conceal his identity for as long as possible. The police play dumb about what his motives
might have been. The feds instantly
declare him to be a “lone wolf,” and fret over the potential for an anti-Muslim
backlash. By the time everyone’s
finished, the narrative has been inverted to portray innocent Muslims being
victimized by irrational American hatred.
That’s
a narrative with which former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is very
familiar. After President Obama
abandoned Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans to be slaughtered
by sadistic Islamists in Benghazi, the administration publicly characterized
the coordinated assault as the outgrowth of a spontaneous demonstration over an
anti-Muslim YouTube video. Sec.
Clinton’s e-mails have recently demonstrated that she and the rest of the
administration knew all along that this story was false.
Islamic terrorists waged a deadly assault on an
American consulate, and the American president and his top diplomat cravenly sought
out an American Christian to blame. They
even found a technicality for which to have this person jailed, all the while boasting
that they were punishing him for creating the video, because, as President
Obama put it, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of
Islam.” To resort to such unscrupulous acts
in order to avoid facing up to the real enemy served to validate everything the
terrorists profess to believe about America.
If Hillary is so concerned about the sort of behavior that fuels ISIS
recruiting, she might want to start there.
Trump’s proposal of a moratorium on allowing Muslims
to enter the country may be ill-considered, but it’s not a recruitment tool for
Islamic terrorists. The policy that
Hillary supports, on the other hand, that 65,000 Syrian “refugees” should be
let into the country with virtually no questions asked, is practically an engraved
invitation to jihadists to come and blow us up.
The Democrats’ approach to terrorism is predicated on
the assumption that Islamic terrorists are motivated by legitimate grievances
against America. It’s as if they can’t
conceive of anyone being as genuinely evil, and totally consumed with hatred
and cruelty, as they often accuse their political opponents of being.
The Shinbone: The
Frontier of the Free Press
Mailbag . Issue
Index
. Politimals
. College
Football Czar