Family Security Matters
The anti-American political philosophies underlying the policies of Barack Hussein Obama can be defined as the juncture of three ideologies: socialism, Islam and opportunistic racism to foster resentment among minority groups and promote race and class conflict as a lubricant for his radical transformation of the United States.
On face value, there would seem to be no more unlikely an alliance than between Western leftists and Islamists, the latter of whom emphatically and unambiguously reject virtually everything for which the socialist left has traditionally professed to stand: the peaceful resolution of international conflict; respect and tolerance for other cultures and faiths; civil liberties; freedom of expression; freedom of thought; human rights; democracy; women’s rights; gay rights; and the separation of church and state.
Not only have socialists proved to possess none of those beliefs, but, as David Horowitz has noted, they have been brought together with Islamists by the one overriding trait they do share — their hatred for the United States; their belief that our country is the very embodiment of evil on earth and, therefore, must be destroyed. While Islamic radicals seek to purge the world of heresies and of the infidels who practice them, leftist radicals seek to purge society’s collective “soul” of the vices allegedly spawned by capitalism — those being racism, sexism, imperialism, and greed.
Both socialism and Islam fuse religion and government. In “Sociologie du Communisme” (1949), Jules Monnerot wrote that communism and by extension socialism combine a secular religion with the state, while:
“Islam has provided the type of society in which the political and the sacred are indissolubly merged. The law of the Koran was religious, political, and civil all in one.”
British philosopher Bertrand Russell, in his “The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism” (1920), said communists are, like socialists and Islamists, “religious fanatics,” who are “impervious to evidence and commit intellectual suicide in the service of an expansionist empire which is striving for world dominion.”
Both socialists and Islamists, imagine themselves possessing a morally superior position determined by Allah and historical inevitability, respectively, which justifies any action or behavior contributing to the goal of worldwide submission to their agenda.
Just as Islamists attempt to impose their religion on the world in a totalitarian fashion requiring unwavering obedience, so do radical leftists strive to create an omnipotent socialist state that will control every aspect of daily life and will enforce a universal brand of “social justice” on all mankind.
In his brilliant and prescient book, “Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism,” Stanley Kurtz wrote:
“From his teenage years under the mentorship of Frank Marshall Davis, to his socialist days at Occidental College, to his life-transforming encounters at New York’s Socialist Scholars Conferences, to his immersion in the stealthily socialist community-organizer networks of Chicago, Barack Obama has lived in a thoroughly socialist world.”
It was, however, Obama’s friendship with Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour and his sponsorship of Obama as a prospective Harvard law student that probably helped harden Obama’s Islamist, leftist, black-nationalist and anti-American views. It is likely that Obama, while attending Columbia University, became closely associated with al-Mansour when the latter was invited to lecture by Obama’s Columbia professor and later friend, the Yasser Arafat apologist and Israel-hating Edward Said.
Formerly known as Donald Warden, al-Mansour, an American, was a mentor of Black Panther founders Huey Newton and Bobby Seale in the early 1960s. He changed his name after studying Islam and learning Arabic. He is well known within the black community as a lawyer, an orthodox Muslim, a black nationalist, an author, an international deal-maker and an outspoken enemy of Israel, the United States and white people, in general. His writings and books are filled with anti-American rhetoric reminiscent of Rev. Jeremiah “God damn America” Wright, Obama’s disgraced former pastor. Al-Mansour is a personal advisor to Saudi Arabian Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, the world’s 19th wealthiest person and the individual, who allegedly funded Obama’s Harvard education.
Alwaleed bin Talal is the Saudi sheik to whom Mayor Rudy Giuliani handed back his $20 million check in the aftermath of 9/11 because of bin Talal’s intemperate remarks at the time about American foreign policy.
Many Obama policies seem inexplicable to patriotic Americans because they often run counter to the interests of the country. They include unsustainable federal spending, lax border security, a weakened military and the undermining of individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
There are also persistent questions by a growing number of Americans regarding the extent of Obama’s allegiance to the United States. Two recent examples provide fuel for those misgivings.
It has been reported that Saudi billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal warned that the kingdom’s oil-dependent economy is increasingly vulnerable to rising U.S. energy production. He specifically indicated that the boom in U.S. shale oil and gas will reduce demand for crude from members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.
Assuming that bin Talal was indeed the benefactor responsible for financing Obama’s Harvard education, it would explain Obama’s opposition to the Keystone pipeline and his refusal to increase oil and gas exploration on federal lands.
Even more troubling, the recent revelations by CNN’s Jake Tapper regarding the ongoing Benghazi terror attack cover-up and the analyses found here, here and here suggest that Benghazi was a gunrunning operation to Syria in support of the Sunni Islamist rebels sponsored by Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood. They are fighting against the government of Bashir Assad buttressed by radical Shi’a Iran and Hizbullah. In essence, Benghazi was not a terror incident per se, but a state-sponsored, terrorist-executed attack in retaliation for Obama’s support of the Sunni-dominated and al Qaeda-infiltrated Syrian rebels.
It is clearly not in the interest of the United States to be a proxy in a war where both sides are radical Islamists and where either outcome is a losing proposition for us.
Is there now any doubt why Obama bowed to the king of Saudi Arabia?
Read more: Family Security Matters http://familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/electing-the-enemy-anti-american-philosophies-underlying-obamas-policies#ixzz2b5T7wQBH Under Creative Commons License: Attribution