A new report out of Australia indicates that radical Muslim extremists aren’t motivated by the cause of jihad. Rather, they are driven to terrorism by Islamophobia and a high unemployment rate. The report raises one inescapable question: Just what the hell are they putting in the water down under?
A new report paints a devastating picture of Muslim unemployment in Australia and links workplace discrimination to terrorist attacks such as the Bali bombings.
The report says that reducing the deep-seated hostility toward Muslims by a minority of Australians was hard to achieve in an atmosphere created by an open-ended war on terror.
The Newcastle University report was completed last year and quietly released on the Immigration Department’s website.
Using Census data, it found that the jobless rate for Muslim men was more than double the national average and that only 57 per cent of Muslim males aged 15 and older had jobs compared with 68 per cent of all working-age men.
Suburbs with high Muslim concentrations such as Broadmeadows and Dallas had jobless rates of more than 15 per cent in 2006, said the report.
“In total, 58 per cent of Muslims earned less than $400 per week compared to 41 per cent of the Australian population,” it said.
The seven-person research team, led by Prof Terry Lovat, said that Muslims faced workplace barriers including poor English proficiency, difficulty having overseas qualifications recognised and cultural and religious issues.
Apparently, a higher-than-average unemployment rate can lead to a bombing that kills over 200 people. I’m sorry, but the unemployment rate here in the States is double for the African-American community, and nearly double for the Hispanic community. It is also quite high for women. And yet none of these groups – African-Americans, Hispanics, or women – have taken to strapping 1,000 kg. bombs into the backseat of their minivan in an attempt to blow up buildings and people.
Oddly enough, Osama Bin Laden put out an audio tape shortly after the Bali bombings which stated that the attack was a direct retaliation for support of the United States’ war on terror, and not due to the frustration in finding a good 9-5 job with quality health insurance, and a decent coffee club.
This kind of kills the gutsy call narrative, doesn’t it?
Wonder if they can CGI Panetta’s head onto Obama’s body in the upcoming Osama Bin laden TV movie?
Via Gateway Pundit:
FOX News Lt. General Tom McInerney (retired) dropped this bomb on America Live today:
“I’m greatly impressed with Secretary Panetta because he’s the real man who gave the execute order on Osama Bin Laden and led that.”
Democrats for some reason seem to think that the singular act of killing Osama bin Laden equates to a successful foreign policy.
Problem is, the President’s other foreign policy tactics – disarming our Marines, creating a policy of ‘courageous restraint’, negotiating with the Taliban by releasing their commanders in exchange for a “promise” of peace talks, and failing to provide adequate security to our consulate buildings – demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of world events.
There is real concern over the President’s weak foreign policy.
On CNN’s The Situation Room yesterday Democratic Rep. Donna Edwards joined Stephanie Cutter and Team Obama in dismissing real concerns over Libya.
Watch as she first admonishes that we must “take the politics out of this,” then drops this bomb:
“…what voters care about, they may not care about Benghazi, but they care about Bin Laden.”
Apparently the theme the Obama administration is going with is that the Middle East is doing just fine because – you guessed it – the President has killed Osama bin Laden!
Just ask spokeswoman Jen Psaki:
What could possibly go wrong?
The Long War Journal reports:
The Obama administration has released a list of 55 Guantanamo detainees who were approved for transfer by the Guantanamo Bay Review Task Force. The task force, which was authorized by President Obama as one of his first acts in office, completed its work in January 2010. The Obama administration has worked to resettle many of the detainees the task force approved for transfer, but the detainees on the newly-disclosed list remain at Guantanamo.
Before the task force was authorized in January 2009, Joint Task Force Guantanamo (JTF-GTMO) had previously assessed all of the detainees held in Cuba. JTF-GTMO’s threat assessments for 760 current and former detainees have been leaked online. (Approximately 167 detainees remain in custody at this time.)
The Long War Journal has matched those threat assessments to the 55 detainees on the task force’s list.
JTF-GTMO determined that 34 of the 55 detainees on the newly-released list were “high risk(s)” who are “likely to pose a threat to the US, its interests, and allies” if freed from custody. One detainee was deemed a “medium to high risk.”
JTF-GTMO assessed that 19 of the 55 detainees are “medium risk(s)” who “may pose a threat to the US, its interests, and allies.”
Just one of the 55 detainees was assessed to be a “low risk, due to his medical condition.”
It’s not like former Gitmo detainees would ever launch terrorist attacks against the U.S. again … wait, what?
As we reported Thursday:
There are reports tonight that a radical left-wing organization is responsible for helping to free a former detainee at Guantanamo Bay named Abu Sufian bin Qumu. Bin Qumu has been cited by multiple sources at Fox News as at least being involved with, and possibly playing the lead role in the attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Those attacks resulted in the deaths of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other American diplomats.
Well … um … Osama’s dead! Yea, that’s our foreign policy…
The Obama administration is weighing the release of blind Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman — the spiritual adviser to the 1993 World Trade Center bombers — in a stunning goodwill gesture toward Egypt that has touched off a political firestorm, officials said yesterday.
The Egyptian government “asked for his release,” an administration source told The Post — and Rep. Peter King (R-LI) confirmed the request is being considered.
The White House, State Department and Justice Department each issued statements denying any deal is in the works, but, “There’s no way to believe anything they say,” said Andrew McCarthy, the former assistant US attorney who prosecuted Abdel-Rahman. “I believe there may already be a nod-and-wink agreement in place.”
Let me get this straight. We have our embassies attacked and diplomats murdered in the name of radical Islam, and the administration’s answer is to run apology ads in Pakistan, and reward the attacks by negotiating the release of a man who was not only very actively involved in the WTC bombing in 1993, but many other attacks in Egypt itself?
Why not just say, ‘thank you sir, may I have another?’
New York’s own Wendy Long released the following statement:
The Obama Administration is reportedly considering the Egyptian government’s call for the release of convicted terrorist Omar Adbel Rahman, also known as the ‘Blind Sheikh,’ who was sentenced to life in prison in the U.S. for his role in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
U.S. Senate candidate Wendy Long said, “The reports are so outrageous that they are hard to believe. But Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi is on record saying that he will seek the release of this convicted criminal terrorist from President Obama when they meet next week in New York. President Obama and Senator Gillibrand must assure New Yorkers and all Americans that the United States will not cave in to Morsi’s demand.”
Long continued, “There is now evidence that suggests that Egyptians attacked the U.S. embassy nine days ago for the very reason of pressuring the United States to release Rahman. We cannot possibly reward the attacks on American sovereign territory and American lives with more apologies, concessions, and now the possible release of a terrorist killer of Americans. New Yorkers and all Americans want this insanity to stop.”
There is no better word to describe this – insanity.
Has there ever been a weaker or more out of touch President when it comes to foreign policy than this one? The proper response to Egypt’s request to release the sheikh is to Fed Ex pictures of Osama bin Laden’s bullet riddled dome, and including a post-it note that says shut the f*** up.
It was just over a year ago that Defense Secretary Robert Gates was hailing the President’s decision to raid the Osama bin Laden compound as a “gutsy call” and “one of the most courageous” he’s seen a president make.
Question: Is it still considered a ‘gutsy call’ if you avoided making the decision three times prior to finally pulling it off?
A campaign ad from team Obama previously questioned whether or not Mitt Romney would have the courage to make such a decision, but now it appears the President himself couldn’t pull the trigger on raiding the bin Laden compound on multiple occasions.
In a new book due to be released in August titled, Leading from Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide for Him, author Richard Miniter reveals that President Obama may have called off the mission kill Osama bin Laden on three separate occasions.
Part of the book description on Amazon reads:
Obama delayed and canceled the mission to kill Osama bin Laden three times and then committed an intelligence blunder that allowed dozens of high-level members of al Qaeda to escape.
A new report from the Daily Caller cites a portion of the chapter in Leading From Behind which deals with the topic.
At the urging of Valerie Jarrett, President Barack Obama canceled the operation to kill Osama bin Laden on three separate occasions before finally approving the May 2, 2011 Navy SEAL mission, according to an explosive new book scheduled for release August 21. The Daily Caller has seen a portion of the chapter in which the stunning revelation appears…
… Richard Miniter writes that Obama cancelled the “kill” mission in January 2011, again in February, and a third time in March. Obama’s close adviser Valerie Jarrett persuaded him to hold off each time, according to the book.
Miniter, a two-time New York Times best-selling author, cites an unnamed source with Joint Special Operations Command who had direct knowledge of the operation and its planning. Obama administration officials also said after the raid that the president had delayed giving the order to kill the arch-terrorist the day before the operation was carried out, in what turned out to be his fourth moment of indecision.
Perhaps Obama doesn’t, as Joe Biden once claimed, possess “a backbone like a ramrod” after all.
Nothing like putting the life of a national hero in jeopardy by leaking his name, all for the sake of spiking the football on the Bin Laden raid.
Investor’s Business Daily writes:
National Security: New documents obtained by a watchdog group show our commander in chief gave the name of a Navy Seal Team 6 commander to the makers of a movie about Osama bin Laden. Valerie Plame, call your office.
Those documents, recently obtained by Judicial Watch, reveal that the Obama administration not only spiked the football and did an end-zone dance after the Navy SEALs dispatched bin Laden from his Club Pakistan abode, but was also willing to expose to the other side our playbook and the name of a SEAL commander.
“These documents, which took nine months and a federal lawsuit to disgorge from the Obama administration, show that politically connected filmmakers were given extraordinary and secret access to bin Laden raid information, including the identity of a SEAL Team 6 leader,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
“It is both ironic and hypocritical,” Fitton noted, “that the Obama administration stonewalled Judicial Watch’s pursuit of the bin Laden death photos, citing national security concerns, yet seemed willing to share intimate details regarding the raid to help Hollywood filmmakers release a movie ‘perfectly timed to give a home-stretch boost’ (as described by New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd) to the Obama campaign.”
Here is a copy of the document in question, a meeting transcript from July 14th, 2011, in which the filmmakers are given the identity of a “planner, SEAL Team 6 Operator and Commander.” The name has been blacked out…
Of course, it was a couple of weeks ago that the Obama administration was caught in the deliberate outing of a British covert agent, placing that agent’s life in danger all for the sake of reigniting his ailing campaign.
From the PJ Tatler:
Just a week ago the establishment media was aflutter with news that a CIA double-agent had thwarted a new type of underwear bomb attack targeting U.S. flights in a plot devised by al-Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula.
But as the week progressed, a developing bombshell story got buried under President Obama’s gay marriage announcement. Not only is the supposed CIA asset not a CIA asset at all, but the entire operation was exposed prematurely and the double-agent’s life was immediately threatened by an intelligence leak that very well may have come out of the White House for political gain.
As the story broke, the establishment media was more than happy to attribute the intelligence coup to the CIA and the Obama administration, describing the mole as a “CIA informant.”
It turns out that wasn’t true. The double-agent hadn’t been recruited and placed by the CIA, but by British intelligence, who also managed the operation. In fact, the Americans had only recently been made aware of the joint British-Saudi effort.
The leaks about the operation from the American side have infuriated British intelligence officials, who had hoped to continue the operation. The leaks not only scuttled the mission but put the life of the asset in jeopardy. Even CIA officials, joining their MI5 and MI6 counterparts, were describing the leaks as “despicable,” attributing them to the Obama administration.
If they only knew just how despicable this administration is… Putting politics above national security and the safety of vital covert agents? What must Scooter Libby think?
All the glory, none of the blame.
Why would the administration have to draft a legal memo, when the media clearly would have covered him and blamed the military if the raid was unsuccessful?
Is a memo really capable of convincing people you have a spine?
Via Fox News (Video below):
Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey told Sean Hannity tonight that the Obama Administration drafted a memo to protect the president from blame if the mission to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden would have failed. That way Obama could blame the general instead of taking the blame himself. Mukasey wrote about it this week in The Wall Street Journal.
“That was a highly lawyered memo (designed to protect the president politically). . . I think there’s going to be more that’s going to be tumbling out about that escapade but so far that memo is enough.”
More veterans reactions to Obama’s ‘I Killed Bin Laden Tour’.
It is clear that the man who once refused to ‘spike the football’ on the bin Laden killing, is now doing an endzone celebration in an attempt to divert America’s eyes away from the economy, away from the debt, and away from his failures as a President.
Worse, Obama is taking an event that should galvanize the nation in their pride, an event that demonstrates our military’s strength and resolve in avenging the tragedy of 9/11, and making it all about him.
But that’s what narcissists do.
Heroes on the other hand? Well, just watch…