Monday, January 12, 2015

Obama Declares War On ‘Extremism’ – Are You An ‘Extremist’ According To His Definition?

Via avordvet

 Prison Camp - Public Domain

Do you know what an “extremist” is?  In the wake of the horrible terror attacks on the offices of Charlie Hebdo in France, Barack Obama is speaking very boldly about the need to win the war against “extremists”, and he has announced plans to host a major global summit on “extremism” next month.  And on the surface that sounds great.  But precisely how are we supposed to determine whether someone is an “extremist” or not?  What criteria should we use? 

As you will see below, your definition of an “extremist” may be far, far different from the definition that Barack Obama is using.  When you do a Google search, you will find that an “extremist” is defined as “a person who holds extreme or fanatical political or religious views, especially one who resorts to or advocates extreme action.”  According to Wikipedia, “extremism” is “an ideology (particularly in politics or religion), considered to be far outside the mainstream attitudes of a society or to violate common moral standards.  Extremism can take many forms, including political, religious and economic.”

Please notice that neither of those definitions uses the word violence.  In this day and age, you can be considered an “extremist” simply based on what you believe, and as you will see later in this article there are now tens of millions of Americans that are considered to be “extremists” and “potential terrorists” according to official U.S. government documents.

When you use the word “extremist”, you may have in your mind a picture of ISIS fighters or the terrorists from the Charlie Hebdo massacre.

But for elitists such as Barack Obama, the word “extremist” has a much broader meaning.

13 comments:

  1. Where'd this post go? Link: http://freenorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2015/01/nc-city-agrees-to-remove-statue-of.html

    I had another comment to add to it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I received a legal letter which prompted its removal. I asked for permission to post it, but was requested not to do so. Thanks.

      Delete
    2. Ah, got it. Yeah, that would be a good reason.

      Delete
    3. Shame on the Daily Caller then. That said the solution would be for the city to take a page from the enviro Nazis. They often secure small tracts in the middle of larger ones, often only a few square inches. This allows them to prevent t development t of the large tract.

      So th . The city should sell a small section of well placed public land to a similarly constituted private conservancy along with the now unusable (by the city) statue. Let them re-erect and maintain it through private donations. It's no longer on public land and still visible from the public streets. Would be fun to watch the damn atheists blood boil.

      Delete
    4. Good idea and reminds me of Point Lookout. When the feds wouldn't allow Confederate flags and wanted to clear speeches before given, private funds were raised to buy a park across from there which pissed the PTB off to no wits end Love it! :)

      http://confmemparkinc.plpow.com/

      =================

      One of my great uncles was imprisoned there.

      http://www.namsouth.com/viewtopic.php?t=53&highlight=lookout

      Delete
  2. Under the Western concepts of liberty and freedom as understood by the founders (Russo, Locke, the Roman and Greek Republics etc.), someone is your enemy because THEY have chosen to be and declared and acted on that choice. The west's failure in the post WWII, post cold war era to act and react accordingly is the greatest source of our weakness. The concept of "proportional responds" and the lame stations about any collateral damage, i.e. dead " civilians is anethma to any such understanding of what an enemy is.

    General Patton summed it up quite simply. "No one ever won a war by dying for his could try. Wars at won by making the other bastard die for his country."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Once again the Left/elitists are abusing the langauage and twisting a word to be used as a political weapon. The word "extremist" still has a very negative connotation, but the meaning has been diluted, to mean what ever you want it to mean. Now in the FUSA, if you believe in the founding principles of country or believe in the basic core tenents of Christianity you are now labled as an "extremist".
    This weapon of the Left has worked very well for them in neutering their opposition. Notice how the party of the dead eliphant will go to great lengths not to be viewed as "extremist", but rather as a "moderate". And it is one sided as only those on the right are labled as "extremist", but if you are a leftie you are immune from such a lable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, the 100 million deaths kindness of Communism are irrelevant.........

      Delete
  4. Close all the mosques and then mass deportation starting with the Illegal Alien poser in the WH - to those who say that is not realistic, Mr. Smarty Pants Vox responds:

    http://www.voxday.blogspot.com/2015/01/mailvox-deportation-is-not-war.html

    ReplyDelete
  5. I was just reading somewhere that the response of the elite rulers in the EU (to the muslim violence) is going to be MORE crackdown on the populace.. LESS free speech (speech is already criminialized there, if you are not PC) and more state control of everything.

    First response at the violence, is OH yeah, now they will do something about it. Not going to the correct thing to do. We are going to continue down the wrong path til we go over the cliff and hit the bottom. And no one will ever be accountable and they will look back in history and think, "why didn't anyone DO anything?"


    .

    ReplyDelete