WorldNetDaily columnist Gina Loudon is promoting her book "What Women Really Want" by arguing today that Republicans should be "giddy" about the prospect of running against Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential race.
She calls on GOP politicians to attack Clinton for supposedly tolerating rape and other forms of violence against women: "If she stood passive while Islamic women were raped and stoned to death, what will she passively let happen to women were she president of the United States?"
Loudon goes on to claim that immigration reform and gun policy reform are part of the real "war on women."
The first war is one where women are being serially gang-raped and stoned to death by Islamists across the world who believe women are only one-fifth of a person. If a woman is raped, under Shariah law, five men must testify that they witnessed the woman being raped. Otherwise, she is stoned to death in front of her friends and family. Christian and Jewish women are being led like lambs to slaughter by Islamists. There is definitely a war on women, but not the one the statist elites in D.C. like to pretend is happening. That is but a ruse designed to distract the simple minded.
Where are the old-school feminists who cussed conservative icons like Phyllis Schlafly and burned their bras in protest of equal pay, in the face of this bloody war on women? Do equal rights not to be stoned matter less than equal pay or birth control?
Where is Hillary on this? If I were GOP leadership, I would be giddy about the thought of a Hillary run. Aside from Benghazi, think about a campaign based on what she never did to stop the real war on women. If she stood passive while Islamic women were raped and stoned to death, what will she passively let happen to women were she president of the United States?
Women with whom we spoke on our book tour are most concerned with safety and security, and that is because of failed foreign policy and open borders exacted on them by the pro-old-feminist administration (including old feminists like Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, Hillary Clinton, etc.). Economic security and national security are of grave concern to women today. Open borders give away jobs, especially starter jobs for youth. Open borders let terrorists in our country, and that threatens women’s families and futures. Open borders mean children with unknown, untreatable and, in some cases, latent diseases sit in classrooms with our children.
Even for those women who don’t care to ever touch a gun (and that is OK), most still wouldn’t want to take away the rights of other moms to protect their children, their families from abusers, or their homes from tyranny.
Don't let the recent bombing campaign against ISIS and other extremist groups in Syria and Iraq fool you, writes WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah.
Farah says in a column today that President Obama is really going after "Syria's Hafez Assad" (Bashar Assad's father who died in 2000) and "Obama is not really at war with ISIS."
He explains that Obama is simultaneously allied with the Muslim Brotherhood and "doing the bidding of Saudi Arabia," the Muslim Brotherhood's arch-nemesis.
Recall, if you will, what Obama’s prime foreign policy objective was just over a year ago: He was determined to bomb the regime of Syria’s Hafez Assad. That, to Obama, was the most important and critical foreign policy objective. Many people, myself included, were astonished. Assad’s regime, while despicable in many ways, was hardly a threat to U.S. interests. In addition, the people Assad was battling in his own country were ruthless killers, thugs and terrorists. In fact, it was ISIS. Assad was also providing protection of Syrian Christians and other religious minorities – and still is.
Obama didn’t get his way. He couldn’t get Congress excited about his bombing idea – thank goodness.
He did, however, provide arms and munitions and your tax dollars to those rebels. Most or all of it wound up in the hands of ISIS. Thus, Obama, more than anyone else, actually fed and nursed and gave aid and comfort to ISIS. He incubated the monster it has become.
Now Obama is using the crisis he created to get what he wanted more than a year ago – another shot at undermining Assad’s government. He’s going back to the well with what he describes as a strategy to defeat ISIS by supporting Assad’s Sunni opposition.
I can only assume the reason is that Obama is not really at war with ISIS.
I know that’s a remarkable conclusion. It’s not one I state lightly. But Obama is doing the bidding of Saudi Arabia, as many of his predecessors did. And the bidding of Saudi Arabia is Sunni jihad. It’s what Obama confusingly labeled “the Arab spring.” It is about deposing authoritarian rulers who are not Sunni jihadists, who are not disciples of the Muslim Brotherhood and who often actually serve as a moderating and life-sustaining force in the volatile Middle East.
Obama has not chosen to fight against an outrageously evil and vicious terrorist army in Syria and Iraq. Instead, he is demonstrating once again that he has chosen sides in a religious war in the Middle East – and the side he has chosen is not the sunny side, but the Sunni side. He has chosen the Muslim Brotherhood over innocent non-Sunni victims caught in the crossfire of jihad. He has chosen the dark side, the aggressor side, the sectarian side.
No American in his or her right mind should get behind this war.
Becoming the latest far-right pundit to sympathize with the grievances of extremist groups like ISIS, Mychal Massie of WorldNetDaily writes today that he understands why ISIS is no fan of the U.S. because gay rights, legal abortion and immigration reform have all emboldened militants and paved the way for America's demise.
"They view America in light of what she supports— and let there be not one doubt that these pagans understand that the homologation of same-sex marriage, sodomy, the wholesale slaughter of 54 million unborn children, weak politically correct officials, ad nauseum are not the qualities of the enlightened; they are the traits of the damned," he said.
"[T]hey openly cheer our downfall as corrupt politicians like George W. Bush, John Boehner, et al. are eagerly willing to reward illegals with full rights and citizenship – which means whether by outright attacks or attrition, they are positioned to do untold harm to America."
ISIS and the other Muslim threats are rabid followers of a false prophet (Muhammad) and a false god (Allah), but they are zealots in their service to their pagan beliefs. They view America in light of what she supports – and let there be not one doubt that these pagans understand that the homologation of same-sex marriage, sodomy, the wholesale slaughter of 54 million unborn children, weak politically correct officials, ad nauseum are not the qualities of the enlightened; they are the traits of the damned.
There was a time America prided herself on a belief in God. There was a time our government acted in accordance with the summum bonum of the people she was created to serve. Today such beliefs are scoffed at. There was a time that when America went to war, the oppressed and threatened in the world sighed a breath of relief, because they knew the God of America would vindicate them. Ask the French, Great Britain or the other European countries to whose aid America came.
But today the media controls our battles, not the generals. Weak ineffectual leaders like Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Obama have shown our Islamic enemies that America talks but doesn’t act. Globalists like George W. Bush have shown the enemy that America’s borders are nothing more than lines on paper. And they openly cheer our downfall as corrupt politicians like George W. Bush, John Boehner, et al. are eagerly willing to reward illegals with full rights and citizenship – which means whether by outright attacks or attrition, they are positioned to do untold harm to America.
America is similar to a skeletal structure waiting for a strong wind to cause it to fall, and that strong wind may well be ISIS and/or some other vulgar derivation of their genus. If (or probably more likely when) ISIS decides to make good on their promise to plant their flags on American soil, what will our so-called leadership do? Look back on the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks of 9/11 and consider how quickly America went from waving flags to cursing and blaming and posturing for political gain. Consider how the media undermined the effort then and how they ignore the threat today.
In the midst of a U.S.-led bombing campaign against ISIS, former House GOP leader Tom DeLay told Andy Parks of the Washington Times last week that President Obama is refusing to take action to stop the militant group.
DeLay offered his own strategy: “We have to do something.”
“The president ought to wear a pink t-shirt because he is an anti-war president,” he said, referring to the group Code Pink. “We have an anti-war secretary of state, we have an anti-war secretary of defense so everybody is a little anxious about what is to come. The president has realized that something has to be done, now he’s going to do as little as possible.”
Code Pink has actually disrupted remarks by President Obama, along with Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel.
Larry Klayman is once again calling for the military to remove President Obama from office, telling Tim Wildmon of the American Family Association in an interview today that military leaders should “rise up” and “go to the president and say, ‘Your time’s up,’ just like they did to Mohamed Morsi in Egypt, ‘Take a hike guy, you’re destroying the country.’”
Klayman, who organized a White House rally last year that he hoped would lead to Obama’s ouster, insisted that the move would not be a coup d’état because Obama is “not a legitimate president” and is “having our people killed for no reason.”
Klayman added that Obama is an observant Muslim who wears a “ring that says my only God is Allah,” while Wildmon said he believes the president “is a Muslim in his thinking.”
His claim that Obama wears an Islamic ring is completely false and originated with a debunked WorldNetDaily article.
At another point in the “Today’s Issues” interview, Klayman said Obama “protects his Muslim brothers at the expense of Christians and Jews.”
“This president is anti-Christian, he’s anti-Semitic, he doesn’t like white people,” Klayman continued. “We’re taking strong legal action hopefully to get him removed from office as soon as possible before we go under for the count.”
The right-wing activist went on to say that Obama is a “socialist, a black Muslim in the mold of Louis Farrakhan” who wants people to “pay back African Americans” by “deconstructing the country, trying to bring the country down, in effect like revenge.”
“We can’t take it anymore, we just simply can’t take it anymore.”
Perkins said that while he didn’t know about the Muslim ring (maybe because it doesn’t exist), he said he does know for sure that Obama is not a Christian and is “overly sympathetic” to “the Muslim world”: “The president has said he’s a Christian and I don’t think there’s the fruit there that he’s a follower of Christ from the standpoint of its evident in his actions and policy, I don’t see it. But I don’t see that he’s a Muslim. He had that influence as a child, I would say that he is extremely sympathetic to the Muslim world and overly sympathetic I would say.”
“His actions have not been in the best interest of the security of the United States, there’s no question about that,” he said. “What’s his motivation? I don’t know. But his actions are not in the best interest of America, that I know.”
On today’s edition of “The 700 Club,” Pat Robertson attempted to explain the difference between passages on war and killing in the Bible and the Quran.
Robertson, who regularly cites Qur’anic verses as proof that Islam is an inherently violent and genocidal religion, said the main difference is that God commanded the mass killings found in the Bible in order to curb the corrupting influences of idol-worshipers, while violent acts in the Quran were ordered by Allah.
“How can you say it’s not like the other? The other is in the name of Allah,” he reasoned.
Walid Shoebat took to BarbWire today to address the reports in a new documentary that ISIS is raping its recruits and using videos of the assaults as blackmail. Of course, the BarbWire columnist cited the rapes as proof that ISIS is part of the gay rights movement.
ISIS is truly the manifestation of the purest form of the homosexual agenda: sodomizing men as both torture and pleasure, and killing those who disagree with them.
The incredible testimony confirms a documentary broadcasted on August 27th on the Kurdish station STERK TV, it was said that ISIS has been raping men in a ceremony it describes as “marriage” and records them to use as blackmail and force them to join.
ISIS uses rape, including gang rape, as a tactic of fear to intimidate populations it seeks to control, according to an August 28th report by the Firat News Agency, a Kurdish agency based in Amsterdam.
Conservative talk show host Jesse Lee Peterson writes today in WorldNetDaily that criticism of the NFL’s handling of domestic violence cases is part of a “socialist political agenda” to “destroy the order of the family” and bring about “utter societal chaos.”
He claims that feminists want to “make criminals out of decent men and women” and have no business condemning domestic abuse anyway since they “support the murder of unborn children” through abortion rights and back marriage equality for gays and lesbians, which he says is “undermining society’s need for proper order.”
The movement to weaken men and destroy the order of the family is accelerating.
The latest target is the NFL. Why? It’s very simple. It’s a male-dominated sport and celebrates masculine attributes. And it makes a lot of money. That’s attractive to parasites.
The left has long sought to “liberate” women from the “control” of “dominating men.” And now they want to “liberate” children from the discipline of fathers. They’re destroying the natural order of the family, which ultimately would result in utter societal chaos.
Liberals are using the Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson cases to emotionalize the public about these issues to advance their socialist political agenda.
Procter & Gamble has joined the list of sponsors distancing themselves from the NFL, pulling its Crest toothpaste brand from a campaign held in conjunction with the league’s Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Good riddance. Football players have no business running around wearing pink socks and shoes!
They say they care about families, but NOW attacks parental rights advocates same-sex marriage (undermining society’s need for proper order).
These groups claim they’re concerned about the “children,” yet NOW and the NNEDV support the murder of unborn children.
If we go along with their definitions, it will make criminals out of decent men and women.
Men comprise the major block of NFL fans, but they don’t realize their God-given power. It’s time for men to use their power, and put an end to the feminists’ charade.