Obama admits to eating dog … fur finally flies

©2012 Nate Beeler, The Columbus Dispatch

Much has been made over the years about Mitt Romney’s decision to place the family dog Seamus in a pet carrier and strap him to the top of the family’s car during a 12-hour drive from Boston to Canada in 1983.

The story was discussed again Monday when Ann Romney told ABC’s Diane Sawyer “the dog loved” traveling that way. “He would see that crate and, you know, he would, like, go crazy because he was going with us on vacation. It was to me a kinder thing to bring him along than to leave him in the kennel for two weeks.”

Democrats haven’t been shy about reminding the American people of the tale to stir the pot and work up the pet and animal people.

Then in January, Obama adviser David Axelrod tweeted a picture of the president with first dog Bo in a car and talked about how “loving owners transport their dogs.”

And now the Romney campaign has signaled it’s not about to cede any ground when it comes to a candidate’s prowess as a pet owner.

Top Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom, re-tweeted Axelrod’s original message with a different take on Obama petting Bo.

“In hindsight, a chilling photo.”

It all began, according to ABC News’ Jake Tapper, with a Daily Caller story about the dog-eating: Obama Bites Dog, which Obama wrote about in his book “Dreams from My Father.” The president recalls being fed dog meat as a young boy in Indonesia with his stepfather, Lolo Soetoro.

Lolo Soetoro, Stanley Ann Dunham-Obama-Soetoro, Barry Soetoro, and little sister Maya Soetoro

“With Lolo, I learned how to eat small green chill peppers raw with dinner (plenty of rice), and, away from the dinner table, I was introduced to dog meat (tough), snake meat (tougher), and roasted grasshopper (crunchy),” the president wrote. “Like many Indonesians, Lolo followed a brand of Islam that could make room for the remnants of more ancient animist and Hindu faiths. He explained that a man took on the powers of whatever he ate (I believe it is still the excuse they use both under Islam and in many Asian countries, including China, for killing and eating domesticated animals, pets and endangered species… like elephants where they only use and take the tusks). One day soon, he promised, he would bring home a piece of tiger meat for us to share.”

The Obama campaign shot back, saying the Romney team was attacking a child, since the president was a kid when he ate the dog meat.

“What’s the next attack @EricFehrn and the RNC will surface on a 6-10 year old?” Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt tweeted.

The media has been all too eager to share the story of how Romney put his pet carrier on the roof of the car during a family vacation in an attempt to paint the GOP candidate as heartless. But did Romney ever eat dog? No. Who did? President Obama! Someone decided to do a little homework and finally found the passage in Obama’s book where he revealed that he ate dog meat as a child. Ok media…we’re are patiently waiting for the righteous and hypocritical outrage…

In Dreams from My Father, President Obama wrote, “With Lolo I have learned how to eat small green chili peppers raw with dinner, plenty of rice, and away from the dinner people I was introduced to dog meat, tough, snake meat, tougher, and roasted grasshopper.” and then went on to write:

“This is a very low standard for me. This is a very low standard, but I think – I think it’s one that we can all get behind.

I don’t want a President who knowingly ate dog,” Glenn joked.  Most people don’t!!

“The Democrats have been bashing Romney on the car carrier incident in 1983 where he left his dog on his roof,” Stu said. “This is from ABC News. Democrats have signaled that they have every intention of making sure the American people, especially dog lovers, know the tale.”

“In January senior Obama campaign strategist David Axlerod tweeted a photo of the President and Bo, his dog, in a car with the observation, ‘This is how loving dog owners transport their dogs.’”

“I would like to ask David Axlerod how do loving dog owners transport their dogs? In their bellies?” Stu said.

After Stu mentioned the tweet above, Glenn challenged viewers to submit their own photos interpreting Obama’s claim to have eaten dog.

The results?

I can only say that no matter how old you were, once you have eaten an animal that is a pet, no matter what your age you have no right to attack someone for putting his pet’s carrier on top of the car because there is no room in the car with 7-people.  And you need to stop your team from attacking your opponent for doing such.

Secondly… I do not condone, in anyway, putting your dog or cat in their carrier, strapped to the top of your car.  I would never do it. But believe it or not, (some) people did that in the 1950’s, ‘60’s and ‘70’s. And it was reported that Romney constructed a special windshield for the carrier, “to make the ride more comfortable for the dog.”   Also how many people do you see every day in 2012 with dogs in the back of their pick-up trucks untethered in all kinds of weather and on all kinds of roads? Do you speak up?

And no matter what… transporting your dog on top of your car so he can go along instead of staying at the kennel is not the same as eating a dog… Period!!

How many of you protested the China Olympics because of their poor human rights record and their record for cruelty to animals and people, which includes both dogs and cats?

My husband spent a year in South Korea and they eat a lot of odd, different down right offensive things.  He refused to eat animals like dogs, cats, monkeys and any animals that were prepared inhumanely.  And I can tell you that even at age 6, I would not have knowingly eaten dog or cat meat!

With all the problems we have, this issue is just another created distraction that backfired on Team Obama who was again trying to create a big issue over the Romneys transporting their dog, like the issues they tried to create over Ann Romney being a stay at home mom and changing the conversation from ObamaCare paying for abortions with taxpayer funds and requiring religious institutions who are employers to pay for them into a war on women and an attack campaign on Rush Limbaugh. Obama’s record is abysmal and he has fires burning all around him… so Team Obama’s focus is creating distractions and diverting the conversation.

Related:

• Jihad making lives “Ruff” for Dogs in Europe; PETA Silent
• Bo Obama’s dog trainer dies at age 52 (Jan. 2011)
• Muslims in Spain Declare Jihad on Dogs
• Man’s Best Friend in Shariah’s Cruel Crosshairs
• Dogs… Pets – Beyond Traditional Islam
• The Latest Enemies of Iran: Dogs and Their Owners
• Iran Cleric Says Dogs “Unclean” and Not to be Kept as Pets
• 1 Million Stray Dogs in Iraq to be Culled
• Banning Dogs as Pets
• President Bush and His Pets
• Bush and Barney, Just Like Old Times
• New First Pooch Is Arriving Soon
• Arrival of New First Pooch Imminent
• Stop Killing Dogs! 2 Million Dogs Killed in Horrible Ways Every Year in South Korea
• Dog Meat in Beijing Ordered Off Menu for Olympics
• Olympic Clean-up Chinese Style: Beijings Shocking Cat Death Camps
• Presidential Pet Museum.com
• Obama Lifts Ban on Horse Slaughter (for meat)

Banning Dogs as Pets

This is how it happens, folks. Little by little. Law by law. The proponents of sharia get themselves elected to positions of power – and then, before too long, they start trying to subject the rest of us to it, bit by bit:

Hasan Küçük, Hague councilor for the Islam Democrats, says dogs should be banned as pets in the city, reports De Telegraaf. The Muslim party says that the animals belong in nature, not inside the house. Küçük says that keeping dogs is animal abuse and should therefore be criminalized.

Needless to say, Hasan Küçük’s concerns have nothing whatsoever to do with animal abuse – and everything to do with the fact that Islam considers dogs to be impure. Like women, Jews, and gays, dogs are on the front line of the confrontation in the West between sharia-observant Muslims and the rest of us. When you see Muslims making trouble over dogs, you can bet that it’s just the beginning of all kinds of trouble over all kinds of things that run afoul of Islamic religious law.

To be sure, Küçük’s suggestion – which came in response to a proposal by animal-rights advocates that The Hague be made more dog-friendly – was immediately shot down by other members of the city council. Küçük was undoubtedly not surprised. He knows these things don’t change in a day – they change over time, by a gradual process of wearing down. People like Küçük are exceedingly patient. And they trust in their own patience and intransigence – and in our weakness, our distraction, our readiness to give in, eventually, under steady pressure, on what may seem to us like small matters that are not worth fighting over.

Küçük’s proposal is nothing new. For years now, the Western media have featured, with some frequency, news stories about blind people with guide dogs being refused taxi rides by devout Muslims cabdrivers, being thrown off buses because of complaints by Muslim passengers, or being refused access to stores by devout Muslim shopkeepers. Daniel Pipes has been assiduous in cataloging such cases, some of them dating back to the 1990s, in places ranging from Milwaukee to Melbourne.

The Muslims in these cases invariably argue that their religion commands them not to be around dogs. But it’s not just about dogs but about pretty much every little detail of daily life. The same people who object fiercely to the presence of dogs in their shops or cabs also maintain that their religion commands them not to do, or touch, or say, or see, or be in the vicinity of a great variety of things that are commonplace in the Western world. And once they’ve gotten their way with regard to dogs, they’ll move on to another thing – and then another, and another – at which they take offense, and once again spell out exactly how they expect non-Muslims to change their behavior in order to keep the peace.

It’s the logic of conquerors. But many authorities in the West have bowed to it. In British Columbia, cab drivers whose “honest religious belief…precludes them from transporting certified guide dogs” have been exempted from having to do so. The Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport has alsoworked out a “compromise” between blind people and Muslim cabbies. In Britain, in response to Muslim complaints about “sniffer dogs” used to identify terrorists at airports, authorities limited the dogs’ activities out of “cultural sensitivity.” When sniffer dogs are taken into mosques or Muslim homes, moreover, they’re fitted with “leather bootees” to avoid giving offense.

Generally speaking, as the Muslim percentage of a city’s population climbs, the demands for appeasement grow more and more aggressive. Last year,reports Soeren Kern, Islamic groups in the Catalan city of Lérida – which is 20% Muslim – called for a ban on dogs on public transport and in certain public spaces on the grounds that their presence violates Muslims’ “religious freedom and their right to live according to Islamic principles.” The city’s refusal to introduce such a ban was succeeded by a series of dog poisonings. No surprise there: this is precisely the kind of development that one can expect after a certain point in this process, when demands and pressure haven’t turned the trick.

To treat Muslims’ complaints about dogs as if they deserve serious and respectful consideration is, of course, absurd. But over time, even the absurd becomes familiar. That’s one thing these people are counting on. They’re counting on their ability to wear the rest of us down gradually, accustoming us to ideas, beliefs, and “sensitivities” that, at first blush, strike us as ridiculous. They’re counting on our ultimate willingness to compromise our values, one by one, out of fear of conflict and a misguided ardor for social harmony. They’re counting on our readiness to tell ourselves that we’re not surrendering or being submissive but are simply being good, respectful, cooperative neighbors.

It’s precisely in this way that sharia law is being introduced, step by inexorable step, into the West. The only way to put a halt to it is to ensure that everyone in a position of power in the West is aware of exactly what the Hasan Küçüks among us are up to, and is willing to stand up to them every step of the way – knowing that it’s not about dogs, but about dogma; not about puppies, but about power.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Source: FrontPageMag.com

Related:

Jihad making Lives “Ruff” for Dogs in Europe; PETA Silent

Muslims in Spain Declare Jihad on Dogs

Man’s Best Friend in Shariah’s Cruel Crosshairs

Dogs… Pets – Beyond Traditional Islam

The Latest Enemies of Iran: Dogs and Their Owners

Iran Cleric Says Dogs “Unclean” and Not to be Kept as Pets

1 Million Stray Dogs in Iraq to be Culled

Pakistani Blogger Slams Islamic Feast of EID

Operation Bagdad Pups – No Buddy Gets Left Behind

First the Greenies Want Us to Eat Our Dogs… Now the Academics Say it is Insulting to Call Them Pets

Shocking Report… Gov’t to Decide What Pets You Can Own

Jihad making lives “Ruff” for Dogs in Europe; PETA Silent

In the West, there is a saying about dogs being man’s best friend. They’re extremely loyal and they’re always thrilled to see you whenever you walk through the front door. In Europe, dogs have suddenly found themselves the targets of Jihad, particularly in the Netherlands and Spain.

Via Stonegate Institute:

A Dutch Muslim politician has called for a ban on dogs in The Hague, the third-largest city in the Netherlands.

Islamic legal tradition holds that dogs are “unclean” animals, and some say the call to ban them in Holland and elsewhere represents an attempted encroachment of Islamic Sharia law in Europe.

This latest canine controversy — which the Dutch public has greeted with a mix of amusement and outrage — follows dozens of other Muslim-vs-dog-related incidents in Europe. Critics say it reflects the growing assertiveness of Muslims in Europe as they attempt to impose Islamic legal and religious norms on European society.

The Dutch dustup erupted after Hasan Küçük, a Turkish-Dutch representative on The Hague city council for the Islam Democrats, vehemently opposed a proposal by the Party for the Animals (Partij voor de Dieren) to make the city more dog friendly.

Things appear to be worse in a certain Spanish city:

In Spain, two Islamic groups based in Lérida — a city in the northeastern region of Catalonia where 29,000 Muslims now make up around 20% of the city’s total population — asked local officials to regulate the presence of dogs in public spaces so they do not “offend Muslims.”

Muslims demanded that dogs be banned from all forms of public transportation including all city buses as well as from all areas frequented by Muslim immigrants. Muslims said the presence of dogs in Lérida violates their religious freedom and their right to live according to Islamic principles.

After the municipality refused to acquiesce to Muslim demands, the city experienced a wave of dog poisonings. More than a dozen dogs were poisoned in September 2011 (local media reports here, here, here, here and here) in Lérida’s working class neighborhoods of Cappont and La Bordeta, districts that are heavily populated by Muslim immigrants and where many dogs have been killed over the past several years.

Local residents taking their dogs for walks say they have been harassed by Muslim immigrants who are opposed to seeing the animals in public. Muslims have also launched a number of anti-dog campaigns on Islamic websites and blogs based in Spain.

Still awaiting word from PETA. Nothing yet. Will keep you posted.

Source: Foundation, Walid Shoebat

Related:

Muslims in Spain Declare Jihad on Dogs

Man’s Best Friend in Shariah’s Cruel Crosshairs

Dogs… Pets – Beyond Traditional Islam

The Latest Enemies of Iran: Dogs and Their Owners

Iran Cleric Says Dogs “Unclean” and Not to be Kept as Pets

1 Million Stray Dogs in Iraq to be Culled

Pakistani Blogger Slams Islamic Feast of EID

Operation Bagdad Pups – No Buddy Gets Left Behind

First the Greenies Want Us to Eat Our Dogs… Now the Academics Say it is Insulting to Call Them Pets

Shocking Report… Gov’t to Decide What Pets You Can Own

PAKISTANI BLOGGER SLAMS ISLAMIC FEAST OF EID: ‘CALL ME AN INFIDEL’ BUT I CAN‘T ’MAKE MERRY‘ AT ’MASS-MURDERING’ CUTE ANIMALS

One of the most significant religious holidays celebrated by Muslims across the globe is the Eid Al-Adha, or “Festival of Sacrifice.” The three-day feast commemorates the biblical prophet Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his son Ishmael in submission to God.  To this end, millions of animals – goats, sheep, cows and camels – are sacrificed for the occasion.

A few days before the holiday began on November 7 a Pakistani blogger, Saad Zuberi, wrote a semi-satirical, semi-serious piece for The Express Tribune newspaper titled, “10 Things I Hate About Bakra Eid.”

Zuberi also noted the hypocrisy in Muslim children being scolded for watching action movies but not for watching the “brutal” slaughter of animals en masse, stating, ”…some parents think that watching Jackie Chan act like a nincompoop in a movie is bad influence for their kids, but that watching four blood-soaked men brutally attack, slaughter, skin and butcher an 800-pound cow – live – is healthy entertainment.”

Below is Zuberi’s laundry list of the many things he hates about Eid:

“10 Things I Hate About Bakra Eid”

1. The smell of goats, blood and freshly slaughtered meat. It’s everywhere!

2. Call me an infidel, but I just can’t bring myself to make merry at the idea of mass-murdering a few hundred thousand cute, furry, unsuspecting farm animals in a span of 72 hours… and that too publicly, in front of a sadistically gleeful audience.

3. All the barbeque talk. Show some sensitivity, people!

4. The questions: Are you slaughtering a goat or a cow? How much will you be spending this year? Only two days left, dude, where’s your animal? Seriously guys, I’ll get whatever I want, whenever I want – the fact that I’ll probably only be able to afford an undernourished midget cow is my business and my business alone!

5. How everyone, including some highly intelligent people, lose their marbles a week before Eid, spending every day just staring at their animals. Poor thing’s bound to get the heebie-jeebies!

6. Eid morning – help me God if I have to leave the house and witness the genocide… which I always do, with unrealistic expectations of remaining all Zen at the sight of blood and gutted animals.

7. Becoming a vegetarian for a couple of weeks after freaking out at the sight of above-mentioned blood. Especially if you’re the kind of person who actually looks forward to his weekly steaks and hamburgers.

8. How the true essence of the tradition is lost on most of us – people would gladly spend bundles of cash on four goats and two cows at Bakra Eid [i.e. Eid-ul-Adha] so they can feed their own greed and gluttony by stuffing their deep-freezers to full capacity, but go berserk if a truly deserving person should ask them for a little meat to feed his/her hungry children some other time during the year.

9. How some parents think that watching Jackie Chan act like a nincompoop in a movie is bad influence for their kids, but that watching four blood-soaked men brutally attack, slaughter, skin and butcher an 800 pound cow – live – is healthy entertainment.

10. Post-Bakra Eid dinner parties with red-meat dishes in great abandon. How very subtle!

Posted on November 9, 2011 at 11:44pm by Tiffany Gabbay (h/t: MEMRI)

Source:  The Blaze

Related:

Muslims in Spain Declare Jihad on Dogs

Man’s Best Friend in Shariah’s Cruel Crosshairs

Dogs… Pets – Beyond Traditional Islam

The Latest Enemies of Iran: Dogs and Their Owners

Iran Cleric Says Dogs “Unclean” and Not to be Kept as Pets

1 Million Stray Dogs in Iraq to be Culled

Operation Bagdad Pups -  No Buddy Gets Left Behind

First the Greenies Want Us to Eat Our Dogs… Now the Academics Say it is Insulting to Call Them Pets

Shocking Report… Gov’t to Decide What Pets You Can Own