Obama Whines About Being “Treated Differently” Because of the Color of His Skin in India

obama_1755936c

Good God, this president is mortifying:

NEW DELHI (AP) – President Barack Obama gently nudged India Tuesday to fulfill its constitution’s pledge to uphold the “dignity of the individual,” drawing on his own experience as a minority in the United States as he closed out a three-day visit to New Delhi.

Obama said that while he has had extraordinary opportunities, “there were moments in my life where I’ve been treated differently because of the color of my skin.” As he touted the importance of religious tolerance, he noted the persistent false rumors that he is a Muslim, not a Christian.

“There have been times where my faith has at times been questioned by people who don’t know me, or they’ve said that I adhere to a different religion, as if that were somehow a bad thing,” Obama said.

He forgot to mention how people judge him because of his “funny name.” Oy.

Yeah, Obama’s faith has been questioned by people who know him to be a pathological liar – someone who will lie about literally anything – including his own mother’s health insurance status when she was battling cancer. Not to mention about a gazillion other things – too numerous to catalog. It’s safe to assume at this point that about 75% of what comes out of the man’s mouth is utter BS.

Would such a man lie about his religious convictions?

By their fruits ye shall know them.

Enough said?

Hat tip: Weasel Zippers

SEE ALSO:

Jack Cashill, WND: YES, OBAMA HAS EXPERIENCED ‘CONSTANT BIAS’

The bias started early. Obama biographer David Mendell tells the reader that Obama “won” a full scholarship to Occidental, but as a bench-warming, B-minus student in his fancy Honolulu prep school Obama had to know what he had done to “win” it.

The bias continued in college. Biographer David Remnick tells us that Obama was an “unspectacular” student in his two years at Columbia and at every stop before that going back to grade school.

A Northwestern University prof who wrote a letter of reference for Obama reinforces the point, telling Remnick, “I don’t think [Obama] did too well in college.” As to Obama’s LSAT scores, Jimmy Hoffa’s body will be unearthed before those are.

How such an indifferent student – he did not graduate from Columbia with any kind of honors – got into a law school whose applicants’ LSAT scores typically track between 98 to 99 percentile and whose GPAs range between 3.8 and 4.0 is a subject Remnick bypasses.

The bias continued in law school. Obama, it seems, did not make the Law Review the old-fashioned way, the way HLR’s first black editor, Charles Houston, did 70 years prior.

To Obama’s good fortune, the HLR had replaced a meritocracy in which editors were elected based on grades with one in which half the editors were chosen through a writing competition.

This competition, the New York Times reported in 1990, was “meant to help insure that minority students became editors of the Law Review.”

If Obama’s entry in the writing competition had begun like this bogus passage from “Audacity of Hope” – “I know what it’s like to have people tell me I can’t do something because of my color and I know the bitter swill of swallowed back anger” – I suspect his odds of being chosen for the Law Review would have improved considerably.

“By the time Barack got to campus, in 1988,” fellow alum Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan would tell Obama biographer David Remnick, “all the talk and the debates were shifting to race.”

No one benefited more from this talk than Obama. In the same spring 1990 term that he would stand for the presidency of the HLR, the Law School found itself embroiled in a nasty racial brouhaha.

 

 

 

Ralph Peters: Obama Would Have “Easier Time Dealing With GWOT If Terrorists Were Southern Baptists or Israeli Jews”

That Lt. Col. Ralph Peters has been on quite a tear lately. And he must be good for ratings, because he’s been on Fox every day this week.

On Hannity, Wednesday night, the host wanted to talk about the apparent snubs by French President Hollande toward Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, which Peters felt was bad judgement but could be explained by France’s geopolitical interests.

“What I find inexplicable is President Obama and his cabinet’s refusal to go – to participate – the apparent order to even Eric Holder not to show up even though he was in Paris,” Peters said, repeating a suggestion he made earlier this week, that cabinet members were ordered not to go.

Sean pressed Peters to explain what possible reason Obama had to behave this way.

“I think it goes back to Obama’s insistence that there’s no such thing as Islamist terror,” Peters declared. “And Obama — once he makes up his mind about something — I suspect he made up his mind about Islam 30-40 years ago — you can’t move him. He can’t learn from new facts. And even though it’s six years into his office, he’s seen the proliferation of Islamist terror, literally around the world, he’s still clinging to this idea that Islam is somehow benign.”

He added, “You’ve got to look at the background of the man – in Indonesia, his nutcase left-wing mom, all his years in Chicago and elsewhere in the company of leftists… And I do believe …that the president romanticizes Islam, and he really sees the religion of Islam as oppressed while he sees Christianity and Judaism as the oppressors. I sincerely believe this president would have an easier time dealing with a war on terror if the terrorists were Southern Baptists or Israeli Jews.”

SEE ALSO:

NRO: Krauthammer’s Take: Islamic Terrorism Is Not on the Run, It’s Out in the Open

On Wednesday’s Special Report, Charles Krauthammer said the Obama administration’s distinction between “core al-Qaeda” and various groups of Islamic terrorists around the world has become functionally meaningless.

“What you’ve got is a competition between, on the one hand, ISIS, on the other hand, core al Qaeda with its core and its affiliates, and the fact that we focus on one or the other is beside the point,” Krauthammer said. “What’s new is the geography of this terrorism. Each of these now is developing its own sovereign territory.”

Andrew McCarthy, NRO: I’m Glad Obama Skipped Paris

Over the objections of the Egyptian government, the administration invited top officials of the then-banned Muslim Brotherhood to Obama’s Cairo speech — notwithstanding that the Brotherhood is rabidly anti-American and had just been proved in an American criminal trial (the Holy Land Foundation case) to be the driving force behind a multimillion-dollar Hamas-support conspiracy. After the Egyptian government fell, Secretary Clinton exerted pressure on the generals then in control to cede power to the elected Brotherhood government, which had vowed to implement a sharia constitution. When the generals agreed to step aside, and the Islamists predictably released terrorist suspects, stepped up the persecution of non-Muslims, and engineered adoption of a sharia constitution, the Obama administration continued to support it with lavish financial and military aid — aid it threatened to cut off only after the Egyptian armed forces, with broad public support, ousted the Brotherhood from power.

Obama is so preternaturally averse to acknowledging jihadist terrorism that he absurdly rebranded the War on Terror as “Overseas Contingency Operations.” His administration refused to acknowledge that the Fort Hood Massacre, in which a brazen jihadist mass-murdered thirteen American soldiers, was jihadist terrorism, insisting, instead, on the ludicrous label of “workplace violence” — belittling the heroism and ultimate sacrifice of those who were about to deploy to battle terrorists in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, when Afghan Muslims rioted and murdered over the accidental destruction of Korans, Obama . . . apologized to Afghanistan.

The president and his underlings purged information about Islamic supremacism and its instigation of terrorism from materials used to train intelligence, military, and law-enforcement personnel. Instructors who lectured on these materials were terminated, as were others who refused to conform to the administration’s delusional, counter-historical, counter-commonsense smiley-face jihad.

Consistent with the administration’s undermining of the First Amendment in the Istanbul process, the Justice Department refused to rule out proposals to criminalize speech unflattering to Islam. In congressional testimony, Attorney General Eric Holder refused to utter the words “radical Islam,” much less to concede the nexus between Islamic-supremacist doctrine and terrorist attacks by Muslims. Even this weekend, after the jihad mass murders in Paris made it politically impossible to resist the word “terrorism” and the discussion of Islam’s connection to it, Holderrejected the phrase “radical Islam” –  blathering, instead, about how terrorists “use a corrupted version of Islam” to rationalize their attacks (while conveniently omitting mention of the authoritative scriptures and mainstream sharia jurists endorsing jihadist terror).

 Gateway Pundit: ONE WEEK AFTER PARIS TERROR ATTACKS – Obama Releases Five More Gitmo Detainees

One week after the Paris terrorist attacks Barack Obama has decided to release five more Yemeni Guantanamo terrorists.

Al Qaeda in Yemen took credit for the Paris attacks in a video released Wednesday.

The terrorists will go to Oman and Estonia.

He is relentlessly evil.

Obama Regime Leading From Behind On ISIS – Wants Blank Check AUMF

In an appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Tuesday, Secretary of State John Kerry said the Obama administration wants Congress to approve an Authorization for Use Military Force that would specifically target ISIS, but without any geographic limitations or restrictions on  ground forces.

Kerry emphasized that President Barack Obama still has no intention of deploying ground combat troops but doesn’t think the Senate should “preemptively bind the hands of our commander in chief” in responding to unexpected contingencies in combating the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL. Kerry’s testimony suggests Obama will be seeking broader authority than congressional Democrats — and some Republicans — will be willing to approve.

At Hot Air, Ed Morrissey argues that the Regime is asking for a blank check to do whatever they want to do militarily, without a political paper trail.

Obama got elected by promising to end the war in Iraq, and then got re-elected by bragging that he’d done so by pulling out. All he did was set the stage for the war to expand exponentially, and with it the threat to the region and the West. Now Obama wants to avoid the political consequences of the failure of his policy by trying to get Congress to step in front of him while Obama prepares to re-enter the war he left behind. Republicans aren’t going to take the bait no matter how much they see the need for a forward strategy against ISIS, and neither are Obama’s Democratic allies.

The defining characteristic of this administration’s foreign policy has always been a failure to lead. It’s just becoming a lot more obvious these days.

Ace of Spades let our Nobel Peace Prize winning SCOAMF- who will never admit that he made a mistake – HAVE IT:

President Obama is a coward of impossible dimensions.

He is attempting to fight a war without alerting the public to the fact that it is a war, because he is ideologically committed to claiming that war is always a mistake, and yet for political reasons he must be seen as pretending to fight IS.

He knows he needs — get this — an actual resolution from Congress to fight this war. But, because of the political optics, he does not wish to be seen asking for one, nor engaging in the process of securing one.

Did you notice who was sitting behind Kerry at the Senate hearing holding a pink sign? Yeah, that’s right. Obama doesn’t want to upset or disappoint the likes of her.

So the Administration refuses to tell the Senate what should be in an AUMF, or what shouldn’t be there. He wants them to just guess, because he is such a clownish, cartoonishly cowardly malefactor that he can’t be seen to have actually sent over a memo.

This is the worst man — not just the worst president, but the worst man — I have ever seen in a leadership position.

Yep.

America In Crisis and POTUS Won’t Lead: Former Officials Seem “Scared,” Worried,” “Alarmed” (Video)

Former Obama CIA Director and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has been making the media rounds promoting his book, Worthy Fights: A Memoir of Leadership in War and Peace – seen by many as an attempt to inoculate Hillary Clinton (and himself) from Obama’s disastrous foreign policies.

In an interview described as “devastating” to Obama, Tuesday night,  he shared his thought’s with Bill O’Reilly on what he perceives to be the president’s lack of leadership on the world stage.

Following the interview, O’Reilly had Charles Krauthammer on the Factor to discuss what was said. Dr. K said that “even though his tone was measured and restrained,” the content of the interview was “utterly devastating” to the president.

He was basically saying this president cannot lead. He is indecisive and he is weak” Krauthammer declared.

He added “what was so interesting is, it wasn’t even in the discussion that Iraq or Afghanistan, but this won’t even be reported, but the thing he said about Ukraine where he just sort of he laid out what should be done…and he said this just outright, you said, ‘why doesn’t he do it?’ He had absolutely no answer.”

Krauthammer concluded “it’s not just indecisiveness and how tentative Obama is, but it’s also how political he is. Remember when Gates, Bob Gates wrote his book, he talked about how the decision-making about the surge in Afghanistan and then leaving in Afghanistan was essentially dictated by the political types in the white house, and you get the same thing in the Panetta book about Iraq. He knew we had to leave troops in Iraq. It is one of the worst decisions ever made by this president.” And “it was the political nature of that [the withdrawal from Iraq] that, I think, is the biggest indictment of Obama, where he put the White House concerns about the political partisan fortunes of the president above the national security of the country.”

Former White House Press Secretary under President Bush, Dana Perino, appeared on the Kelly File Tuesday with Megyn Kelly to discuss the interview which aired right before her show.

Calling it a “scathing” interview, Kelly noted that he is the third top Obama Cabinet member to openly criticize the president’s decision-making –  first Former Defense Chief Robert Gates, then former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton, and now former Defense Sec. Leon Panetta.

Kelly and Perino were struck by the undercurrent of worry and alarm present in these former top officials’ books.

Perino noted that all of them have said in their books that they gave Obama advice and he went the other way. She wanted to know “if they felt so strongly at the time that politics was trumping people, then why didn’t they resign on principle?”

Kelly said Panetta seems “scared” and “genuinely worried.”  She added, “he seems to be trying to telegraph to us that he’s very concerned about the man sitting in the Oval Office right now.”

Even former president Jimmy Carter (the 2nd to worst president in American history) is harshing on Obama’s mellow:

Via TIME:

Former President Jimmy Carter has criticized the Obama administration’s handling of the crisis in the Middle East and the growing threat of the Islamic State, joining a growing list of the president’s allies who are scrutinizing his strategy in Syria and Iraq.

In an interview with the Fort Worth, Tex. Star-Telegram published Tuesday, Carter said the U.S. had waited too long to respond to the growing power of the Islamic State in Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) extremist group, which also goes by the name Islamic State.

“We let the Islamic state build up its money, capability and strength and weapons while it was still in Syria,” Carter said. “Then when [ISIS] moved into Iraq, the Sunni Muslims didn’t object to their being there and about a third of the territory in Iraq was abandoned.”

The White House sent out political hack Bill Burton – not to discuss Panetta’s criticisms on the merits – but to verbally attack him with childish name-calling taunts.

The White House dispatched long-time Obama hack Bill Burton to smear Panetta.

Via TWS:

A former spokesman for President Barack Obama, Bill Burton, went on CNN last night to unload on the president’s former defense secretary and former CIA director, Leon Panetta. Burton is upset about some of the things Panetta wrote in his memoir, which hit shelves yesterday, and called the long-time public servant “sad,” “dishonorable,” “small and petty.”

The RNC couldn’t have done a better job proving Panetta’s point that this White House is unserious and overly concerned with petty politics to the nation’s detriment.

Linked by Maggie’s Farm, thanks!

Of Course: The Brand New, Just Came Out Of Nowhere “Khorosan Group” Is al Qaeda

download-81

Barack Obama is a liar.

Often the lie comes in the form of a promise he has no intention of keeping:

– “Today I’m pledging to cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term in office.”

– “We’ve got shovel-ready projects all across the country.”

– “As soon as we’re out of this recession, we’ve got to get serious about starting to live within our means.”

– “We agree on reforms that will reduce the costs of health care. Families will save on their premiums.”

– We “will ensure that federal contracts over $25,000 are competitively bid.”

– We “will eliminate all income taxation of seniors making less than $50,000 per year.”

– “We are going to work with you to lower your [health care] premiums by $2,500,” and we’ll “do it by the end of my first term as president.”

– “I don’t take a dime of their [lobbyists’] money, and when I am president, they won’t find a job in my White House.”

– “I pledge to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.”

– And of course PolitiFact’s 2013 Lie Of The Year: “If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what. … You can keep your family doctor.”

Sometimes the lie is the result of ideological blindness.

– “If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

– “It’s here that companies like Solyndra are leading the way toward a brighter and more prosperous future.” After Obama’s administration gave the company $535 million, Solyndra and its solar panels went belly up.

Sometimes his lies are self-aggrandizing boasts or attacks on his political opponents:

– Claims that virtually all economists – all healthcare experts – all scientists etc agree with his remedies to fix a given problem. (Too many examples here to cite but it’s one of his favorite conceits, and the MSM is fooled every time.)

– Claims vast majority of Americans agree with his policy prescriptions (Again – examples too numerous to list.)

– Accuses opponents of bad faith – not genuine disagreement.

–  al Qaeda is “on the run”, “on its heels”, “decimated” (Repeatedly claimed during the 2012 campaign.)

And sometimes he lies to save his hide when a bad policy decision or a previous lie has been exposed.

– “We reject the use of national security … to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime.”

“The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed.”

– “I didn’t set a red line [in Syria].”

– “What we said was, you can keep (your plan) if it hasn’t changed since the law passed”

– “What I just find interesting is the degree to which this issue (withdrawal of troops from Iraq) keeps on coming up, as if this was my decision,”

– “When we said we decimated al Qaeda, we meant al Qaeda core.”

Obama’s biggest lie of the 2012 campaign – al Qaeda is “on the run”, “on its heels”, “decimated” has been laid bare by recent events.

The Khorosan lie is meant to paper over that lie. Khorosan is core al Qaeda in Syria. We may as well call them Khor-al Qaedaosan.

I should have smelled the BS when I blogged about the “new terror organization” the “Khorosan Group” four days ago. The Regime’s brazen mendacity surprises even me, sometimes.

Via Andrew McCarthy, NRO: 

We’re being had. Again.

For six years, President Obama has endeavored to will the country into accepting two pillars of his alternative national-security reality. First, he claims to have dealt decisively with the terrorist threat, rendering it a disparate series of ragtag jayvees. Second, he asserts that the threat is unrelated to Islam, which is innately peaceful, moderate, and opposed to the wanton “violent extremists” who purport to act in its name.

Now, the president has been compelled to act against a jihad that has neither ended nor been “decimated.” The jihad, in fact, has inevitably intensified under his counterfactual worldview, which holds that empowering Islamic supremacists is the path to security and stability. Yet even as war intensifies in Iraq and Syria — even as jihadists continue advancing, continue killing and capturing hapless opposition forces on the ground despite Obama’s futile air raids — the president won’t let go of the charade.

 Hence, Obama gives us the Khorosan Group.

The who?

There is a reason that no one had heard of such a group until a nanosecond ago, when the “Khorosan Group” suddenly went from anonymity to the “imminent threat” that became the rationale for an emergency air war there was supposedly no time to ask Congress to authorize.

You haven’t heard of the Khorosan Group because there isn’t one. It is a name the administration came up with, calculating that Khorosan — the –Iranian–​Afghan border region — had sufficient connection to jihadist lore that no one would call the president on it.

The “Khorosan Group” is al-Qaeda. It is simply a faction within the global terror network’s Syrian franchise, “Jabhat al-Nusra.”

 

Tip of the hat to Bizpac Review for helping me tabulate the lies.

 

 

Whoa Baby: Obama tanks to 35% In latest Approval Poll

obama-sad-and-frustrated

Now, we’re talking.

Barack Obama’s approval rating slid into dangerous territory this week, with the latest Reuters-Ipsos poll showing just 35 percent of Americans approve of the president’s job performance even as he leads the nation into a war against Islamic fundamentalism in the Middle East.

Fifty-eight percent of Americans expressed disapproval of the White House’s current occupant — 37 percent of them “strongly.” Just 17 percent strongly approved of Obama’s current performance. The poll is based on a five-day rolling average.

I’ve always said – don’t even talk to me until it gets down to at least 35%. He finally got there.

Man, it sure took a lot of scoamf-tastic suckage for the vast majority of the American people to finally see what a thoroughly corrupt, abysmal failure the man is.

Via the Washington Examiner’s Naemie Emery, Democrats havWords of advice for a failing president:

Dear Mr. President:

Speaking for many who wish you success, we urge you to seek professional counsel concerning a number of serious matters that are causing us and some others concern.

Your approval ratings are down, Democrats in key states have resorted to running against you, and you were recently named the worst president since World War II ended — defeating (if that’s the word) both Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon, with whose names the words “malaise” and “Watergate” are forever entwined. Assuming you find this prospect distasteful, we suggest for a start that some small steps be taken, beginning with the first and perhaps most important: admit that you have been wrong.

You may think “Don’t do stupid stuff” is a really cool slogan, but stupid describes most of your actions since you took your hand off the Bible in 2009. It was stupid to let Vladimir Putin know you don’t care about eastern Europe; stupid to not give early support to Iranian dissidents; stupid to intervene in Libya and then leave the country; stupid to not arm the Syrian rebels back when they had a chance of succeeding; stupid to draw a line in the sand and let Syrian dictator Bashar Assad cross it; stupid to abandon Iraq against the warnings of all your advisors; and stupid to turn a blind eye toward the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria when it still could have been easily handled, long before it had taken two cities Americans died for, and almost dismantled Iraq.

Read the rest at the link.

SEE ALSO:

I’ve been busy at The Conversation:

Obama’s Disrespectful ‘Latte Salute’ Shocks and Offends

As he disembarked from his U.S. Marine Corps helicopter in New York, today, the president returned a formal military salute with a sloppy and careless salute while wielding a coffee cup, prompting some to dub it the “latte salute.”Sep 23, 2014 2:56 PM PT 400

Steve Emerson: Holder DOJ ‘Handcuffed’ the FBI From Investigating Islamic Extremism In US (Video)

Steve Emerson of the Investigative Project on Terrorism  said on Justice With Jeanine Pirro, Saturday night,  that there are now 300-400 American Volunteers fighting for ISIS. (The US State Dept. says there are only 12. Defense Sec. Hagel says about 100,  and Mike Rogers, the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, says hundreds.)

He told Pirro, “they can return to the United States any time they want. (Currently, there is no policy in place to revoke passports of Jihadists, but Republicans in Congress are working on legislation to address that.)

The FBI has been handcuffed in terms of investigating religious extremists in mosques as a result of guidelines put out by the Attorney General earlier, this year.” He added,  “there is a definite problem in investigating those militants in the United States who are either recruiting for ISIS or have returned from Syria or Iraq having fought for ISIS, ready to carry out freelance or directed terrorist attacks on behalf of ISIS against the United States.

Asked by Pirro to elaborate, Emerson said, “the Department of Justice has put out guidelines that restricted the FBI and other other law enforcement agencies from using religious actors in identifying National Security threats to the United States…”

His portion of the video begins 5:00 in:

According to The Center For Security Policy, back in January, the DOJ was poised to  “prohibit religious profiling in terror cases,”  completely blinding federal law enforcement to the threat from Islamic extremism.

Already, the department has forced the FBI to bleach references to “Islam” and “jihad” from its counterterrorism training materials. It’s also made it harder for agents to infiltrate radical mosques.

But Attorney General Eric Holder reportedly now wants to make it illegal for agents to even consider religion in their investigations.

Democrats on the Hill are cheering the changes, along with the ACLU and radical Muslim Brotherhood front groups, who have all lobbied the administration for them. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which has seen several of its officials jailed on terror-related charges, calls it “a step in the right direction.”

Appearing before the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee in 2012, CAIR demanded the administration remove religion as a factor in terrorism investigations, even though just four years earlier Justice had named CAIR an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator.

The Islamic Society of North America, another designated co-conspirator, hailed the move as a civil-rights victory worthy of praise from “Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.”

The timing couldn’t be worse. Experts say that if anything, the U.S. should be expanding its terrorist profile to include radical Muslim women along with men. Russian intelligence warns female suicide bombers are threatening next month’s Winter Olympics.

The FBI missed the Boston Marathon bombings because it failed to focus on radicalized local Muslims. The only way law enforcement can effectively head off future attacks — including possibly the upcoming Super Bowl in New Jersey — is by gathering predictive intelligence in the Muslim community — namely, inside mosques.

Holder cut off these investigative avenues for the FBI, “as well as for border agents charged with protecting the nation from Islamic extremists at airports and land crossings.”

 See Also: 

Bill Gertz, Washington Free Beacon:FBI National Domestic Threat Assessment Omits Islamist Terrorism: Internal report labels white supremacists, black separatists, militias, abortion extremists main domestic extremists…

Surreal…

The FBI’s most recent national threat assessment for domestic terrorism makes no reference to Islamist terror threats, despite last year’s Boston Marathon bombing and the 2009 Fort Hood shooting—both carried out by radical Muslim Americans.

Instead, the internal FBI intelligence report concluded in its 2013 assessment published this month that the threat to U.S. internal security from extremists is limited to attacks and activities by eight types of domestic extremist movements—none motivated by radical Islam.

They include anti-government militia groups and white supremacy extremists, along with “sovereign citizen” nationalists, and anarchists. Other domestic threat groups outlined by the FBI assessment include violent animal rights and environmentalist extremists, black separatists, anti- and pro-abortion activists, and Puerto Rican nationalists.

The Conversation: State Dept: Fighting With ISIS Doesn’t Automatically Mean Your Passport Will Be Revoked

The Conversation: Fighting for ISIS is no reason to keep someone out of the country, huh?

Linked by Doug Ross and iOWNTHEWORLD, thanks!