The connection between the Paris and Mali attacks that CAN’T be ignored

Greetings everyone. If you’re down in South Texas, maybe I’ll get a chance to see you at the Neuces County Republican Party dinner at the Solomon Ortiz International Center in Corpus Christi. It’ll be my first time that far down south in Texas. I’m looking forward to being in Corpus Christi and looking out over the bay.

What concerns me, however, is here we are for the second straight week dealing with an Islamic terrorist attack. I think it’s time we get the language correct: there’s nothing radical about this, it’s just plain Islamic terrorism and jihadism.

We need leaders who are students of history and comprehend the various phases of Islam: First Mecca, Medina, Second Mecca and the global jihad. Those who continue to drone on about the “peaceful” Islam must come to realize that period is what’s called the First Mecca phase and lasted just over 10 years, 610-622 AD.

Upon Mohammad departing Mecca, in what’s referred to as Al Hijra for Medina, Islam took a violent turn — starting with the Nakhla raid, led by Mohammad, followed by approximately another 30 combat operations. This ended with the taking of Mecca, second phase, in the 628 AD Battle of the Trenches.

At Mohammad’s command, some 3,000 male members of the Banu Qurayza tribe were beheaded. Then came the export of Islamic jihadism globally, initiated by Mohammad’s letter to Byzantine Emperor Heraclius offering three options — conversion, subjugation/submission or death. This is the current phase in which we find ourselves today.

It took a while, but Constantinople fell in 1453 AD. And if it hadn’t been for the Venetian fleet’s victory at the naval Battle of Lepanto in 1571 and the Germanic and Polish knights’ at the Gates of Vienna in 1683, Europe could look very different.

However, it appears some things don’t change. Al Hijra is happening now, along with violent Islamic jihadism. Now, of course, the Islamapologists will castigate me — and they’re entitled to their opinions, not their own “facts,” which in this case cannot be debated. Liberal progressives love to revise history to meet their ideological objectives. However, this time it’s not possible, because the enemy wants to be known.

Even Thomas Jefferson realized after meeting with the Dey of Algiers in Paris that this is an enemy that can’t be appeased, and paying jizya is a version of subjugation.

Last week, Paris; this week, Mali. (And Brussels on terror lockdown as we speak.) And we still have people who advocate we don’t need to respond with strength and might, because that’ll just inflame the situation. Folks, that’s pure bovine excrement.

As reported by Fox News:

The deadly hostage situation at a luxury hotel in Mali’s capital city ended Friday, with a U.N. report indicating dozens of bodies were littered across multiple floors of the building. One of those killed was an American, according to the State Department. 

The siege “has concluded,” State Department spokesman John Kirby announced Friday. He said about a dozen Americans were rescued uninjured from the Radisson in Bamako, but a State Department official later said one American had been killed. That person was not immediately identified. 

Some of the freed Americans were U.S. embassy personnel, Kirby said. 

Some attackers may have remained inside the hotel. A Mali security ministry spokesman told Reuters they “dug in” on upper floors of the building. 

Al Qaeda-linked jihadists claimed responsibility for the siege. 

A U.N. official told The Associated Press that initial reports from the field indicate 27 people were killed in the attack. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the operation is still ongoing, said 12 bodies were found in the basement and 15 bodies were found on the second floor. 

At least one guest reported the attackers instructed him to recite verses from the Koran before he was allowed to leave the hotel, Malian army commander Modibo Nama Traore told The Associated Press. 

Let me make something very clear, the Koran is the book of the Islamic belief. We continue to be faced with incidents where individuals are asked to recite Koranic verses or else they’re killed. Remember what happened twice in Kenya, most recently to Christian college students. And of course, we have to endure President Obama’s inane drivel about “religious tests” — funny, mum’s the word when the ones conducting religious litmus tests are those with whom he, and Hillary Clinton, sympathize.

So, here we are, two consecutive weeks and we have Islamic terrorist dueling banjos — last week ISIS, this week al-Qaeda. So now it becomes a matter of which group of maniacal savage Islamic jihadists will outdo the other as they vie for top dog status. We’ve allowed ISIS to develop a sanctuary in Iraq and Syria.

And now we’ve come to understand the Obama administration has been denying strikes against ISIS targets. As reported in the Washington Free Beacon:

U.S. military pilots who have returned from the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq are confirming that they were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their ordnance on terror targets because they could not get clearance to launch a strike, according to a leading member of Congress. 

Strikes against the Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL) targets are often blocked due to an Obama administration policy to prevent civilian deaths and collateral damage, according to Rep. Ed Royce (R., Calif.), chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. 

The policy is being blamed for allowing Islamic State militants to gain strength across Iraq and continue waging terrorist strikes throughout the region and beyond, according to Royce and former military leaders who spoke Wednesday about flaws in the U.S. campaign to combat the Islamic State. 

“You went 12 full months while ISIS was on the march without the U.S. using that air power and now as the pilots come back to talk to us they say three-quarters of our ordnance we can’t drop, we can’t get clearance even when we have a clear target in front of us,” Royce said. “I don’t understand this strategy at all because this is what has allowed ISIS the advantage and ability to recruit.”  

See Mr. President, it’s not the “rhetoric” of Republicans aiding and abetting ISIS recruiting efforts, it’s your cowardice and reticence in engaging the enemy, instead emplacing artificial rules of engagement and other restrictions. Funny, I don’t think ISIS was concerned about collateral damage and civilian casualties last Friday, 13 November, in Paris. And now we have another major Islamic terrorist sanctuary we’ve allowed to develop and thrive –northern Mali, home of al-Qaeda in Maghreb (that’s North Africa, for those of you unaware).

And does anyone think this attack in Mali is a matter of coincidence? After all, Mali is a former French colony. And recall Obama’s diarrhea of the mouth, stating ISIS was contained last Friday, just hours before the Paris attack. Well, John Kerry didn’t want to be outdone, claiming just hours before yesterday’s attack that al-Qaeda has been neutralized. Sadly, we’re being led by two very delusional individuals in Obama and Kerry. Their policies are failing and their rhetoric is deceitful and enabling the enemy.

Saying we’re not at war with Islam doesn’t hide the fact that militant Islamism is at war with us. When we were in combat in Iraq, I told my troops you had two options in a firefight — you can get to fighting or you can get to dying. Which option has Barack Obama chosen for America?

Remember he said at the G-20 press conference in Turkey, “What I’m not interested in doing is posing or pursuing some notion of American leadership or America winning or whatever other slogans they come up with that has no relationship to what is actually going to work to protect the American people and to protect the people in the region who are getting killed and to protect our allies and people like France,” Obama said, adding, “I’m too busy for that.”

So there you have it folks, President Barack Obama is too busy to pursue some notion of American leadership of America winning. Sad.

However, do any of you remember a true American president’s response when Ronald Reagan was asked how he defined victory in the Cold War? “We win, they lose.” It would be doggone awesome to have an American president again who’d look the enemy in the eye and tell them what victory means. Sadly, Obama is doing a lot of posing and people will continue to be beheaded, crucified and murdered by savage barbarians because he’s just too busy.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here