Limbaugh: Is Obama setting off the violent protests around the Middle East?

On Thursday’s broadcast of his radio program, conservative talker Rush Limbaugh said it was a possibility that by blaming an anti-Islam video for violence in the Middle East, the Obama administration itself is at fault for the past, present and perhaps future unrest in the region.

“Let me ask you a quick question — we now know because of the Benghazi attack, it was not precipitated because of the video,” he said. “We know this now. We know that it was planned in advance, timed to 9/11. We know a former Gitmo prisoner had a role in it. We know that our ambassador and three others are dead. And we know that there is no leadership in this country that is dealing with this. Let me ask you a question: By feeding the false narrative about this video, this movie that nobody saw — could it be that the Obama administration is in fact setting off protests across the Middle East?”

Limbaugh noted this all began with the press release originally issued by the U.S. Embassy in Cairo — that had since been walked back — blaming the video.

“Isn’t it logical to conclude that every time a member of this administration goes on television worldwide and talks about this video — don’t forget how all of this started,” Limbaugh said. “Some wizard of smart in our embassy in Cairo sent out an official release from the embassy apologizing for this movie before anything had happened. Remember how incredulous we all were. And this apology tore into a nameless America who would do things that would hurt the religious feelings of Muslims. They put this apology out before anything happened.”

And that apology, in addition to the Obama-Biden ticket campaign slogan boasting that Osama bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive, gives some in the Middle East an excuse and motivation, said Limbaugh.

“My point is, now that — they’ve got a built-in excuse,” he said. “Terrorists all around the world have a built-in excuse, that video. They can engage in any terrorist activity they want. And they know that President Obama is going to blame the video, not them. They not only have a built-in excuse, they have built-in motivation. First you got Obama running around spiking the football, ‘I killed Osama. I shot him dead. May as well have been me that pulled the trigger.’ Twenty-one times at the Democrat convention, ‘Osama is dead. GM is alive.’”

Read more here.

‘Mature, Confident’ NPR Still Angry At Their ‘Pussies’ In Charge

While Mitt Romney has declared that he would support defunding the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, it seems strange that NPR’s program On The Media would devote its whole hour last weekend to rehashing a 2011 show exploring whether NPR has a liberal bias. (This is a bit like Julia Child having a show asking if escargot is correctly classified as French cuisine.)

Co-host Brooke Gladstone was still agreeing with Jon Stewart that NPR’s board was a “bunch of pussies” for firing people like NPR president Vivian Schiller (who trashed Juan Williams as mentally ill.) This, she said was not the act of a “mature, confident news organization.” Which raises the question: “mature” news organizations call their bosses “pussies”?

GLADSTONE: It seems to be the reflex of the NPR Board to fire any member of its staff who raises hackles in Washington, reigniting the argument over funding. Is that response the act of a mature, confident news organization? For instance, should it have fired NPR president Vivian Schiller? Frank Mankiewicz says no.

MANKIEWICZ: I don’t think this event should have been responsible for her fring. I think she was a very competent executive and she was taking NPR in the right direction.

GLADSTONE: Jon Stewart called NPR’s board a bunch of pussies.

MANKIEWICZ: A bunch of what?

GLADSTONE: Pussies.

MANKIEWICZ: Cookies?

GLADSTONE: Pussies!

MANKIEWICZ:Oh, pussies. Yeah, that may be true.

Read more here.

United States of O-merica

It’s difficult to understand how a president with the most failure-ridden foreign and domestic policy in modern history still stands to win some 47 percent of the American vote, according to the latest polls. But the answer is simple. Since 2007, Barack Obama has been building a cult of personality reminiscent of fascist leaders. That doesn’t mean he’s a fascist; it doesn’t mean that he’s Hitler or Mussolini or Stalin. But his semiotics and iconography are far more suited for a fascist country than a vibrant republic.

Yesterday, the Obama campaign tweeted about a brand new set of products on its website: “A poster to say there are no red states or blue states, only the United States.” Only the poster wasn’t of our flag. It was of a United States dominated by the Obama symbol:

Read more here.

Free Speech That Mocks Islam Is National Security Threat for U.S.?

There are religions that promote turning the other cheek even when mocked, but it appears Islam is not one of them. According to one of the most prominent imams in North America, Islam never condones violence, but it also, under no uncertain terms, “ever accepts” speaking ill of the Prophet Muhammad.

In fact, so grave is mockery of the prophet considered, that the cleric – Mohammad Qatanani, who leads one of the largest mosques in New Jersey – even believes free speech that criticizes Islam poses a national security threat to the U.S. and that those responsible should be investigated by the Department of Homeland Security.

“We, as Americans, have to put limits and borders [on] freedom of speech,” Qatanani, leader of the Islamic Center of Passaic County (ICPC), told TheBlaze. He explained that while Americans may ”have the freedom“ to speak their mind, ultimately, they “have no right to [talk about Muslim] holy issues“ as it will incite ”hatred or war among people.”

Qatanani said he thinks agitators who slander Islam, or, more specifically, the Prophet Muhammad, incite violence and hence, pose a national security risk that threatens the safety of Americans at home and abroad. Thus, America should disregard its First Amendment as it is typically applied and instead act in accordance with sharia law for the ultimate “good” of society.

In an exclusive interview with TheBlaze, the cleric, who was nearly deported in 2008 for failing to disclose his former ties to the terrorist organization Hamas on a 1996 Green Card application, explained that Muslims are required by Islam to respect the law of the land in their host-countries. He followed up that statement, however, with a treatise on how those who slander the prophet be pursued legally.

Read more here.

The U.S. Has Become More Religiously Intolerant & Socially Hostile

Religion, considering its mass appeal and prevalence, plays a key role in global and domestic events. Considering the fact that sociopolitical issues are often dictated or impacted by personal faith, new findings from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life are potentially concerning, specifically when it comes to faith in America.

The non-partisan research organization found that religious intolerance is on the rise across the globe. But — among the surprising data present within the study — Pew notes that the United States’ standing at both the governmental and societal level has devolved noticeably.

The report’s main emphasis is on governmental restrictions on religious beliefs and practices. Shockingly, the report finds that 75 percent of the world’s population (as of mid-2010) lives in nations “where governments, social groups or individuals restrict people’s ability to freely practice their faith.”

The latest results, which are certainly disconcerting for religious-freedom advocates the world-round, take into account the year ending mid-2009 to mid-2010. A previous report published in 2009 by Pew found that there were 31 countries with high or very high restrictions on faith; in the newest report, this number jumped to 37. While the U.S. government isn’t “high” on the list, it has officially moved from the low to the moderate level of religious restriction.

Read more here.