Share This Article with a Friend!


Jeb Bush’s Rollout Avoids Any Mention Of Winning The Economic War Islamists Declared On Us

Jeb Bush Detroit Economic Club

Former Florida Governor Bush’s much touted speech to the Detroit Economic Club on Wednesday was billed as the unofficial rollout of the themes of his fast-building campaign for President. But if it was, it will be a campaign of kid friendly, Mom approved Pablum, not the crusade to void the disastrous Obama plan to remake America that conservatives are looking for.

The speech (link to a transcript at the end of this article) was remarkable only for its blandness, and it did anything but rollout new themes in American politics or point the country toward new directions in policy toward anything of substance.

"The recovery has been everywhere but in American paychecks. The American Dream has become a mirage for far too many. So the central question we face here in Detroit and across America is this: Can we restore that dream -- that moral promise -- that each generation can do better?" Bush said Wednesday in the financially faltering city of Detroit. "We believe that every American and in every community has a right to pursue happiness. They have a right to rise."

Although in the rhetoric of defining a “right to rise” for every American it had a vaguely populist flavor to it, in substance – except for some sideways swipes at unions and big government and an endorsement of charter schools – it could have been given by Barack Obama back in 2008. In fact it sounded somewhat vaguely similar to comments Vice President Joe Biden made recently when he said the last six years had decimated the middle class.

And by defining the “right to rise” as a new civil right, and declaring that resurrecting failed Democrat-run cities was an important policy goal, many conservatives scented a lot of new federal spending coming to actualize Bush’s vision.

But most importantly, on the very day that Obama convened his Countering “Violent Extremism” Summit, Bush made no mention of the threat of the war Islamist have declared on the West or most importantly winning the war Islamists have declared on the West.

In answer to that criticism Bush may claim that he wasn’t prepared to announce his entire platform before he has actually become an official candidate for president, and that his was strictly an economics-themed event.

But make no mistake about it – there is an economic component to our war with ISIS and other Islamic supremacists which they understand very well, but which establishment politicians like Jeb Bush seem to want to ignore.

Nick Bloom, an Assistant Professor of Economics at Stanford, calculated that 9/11 led to the loss of one million jobs and investment equivalent to 3% of GDP over the next four months alone.

In a survey of estimates conducted by The New York Times, the conclusion was that, in addition to the 3,000 lives lost, in the ten years after 9/11 the economy lost some $3.3 trillion, or about what the federal government spent in 2014.

More importantly, this isn’t ancient history or a plan that stopped when Osama bin Laden was killed.

In October 2014, Kevin D. Freeman reported in “Global Economic Warfare, Risks and Responses” on a new English-language publication from al Qaeda that called for economic jihad against America, Israel, and the West more broadly.

The publication “Resurgence” was premiered in 2014 to recruit in English-speaking areas. The article on economic warfare is quite clear in its intentions: The threats mentioned directly match what was previously written in an al Qaeda timeline provided to a Jordanian journalist back in 2005. Targets include oil facilities, oil fields, shipping, the dollar, Western financial infrastructure and other infrastructure (no doubt including our power grid) reported Freeman.

Here are a few quotes from the Resurgence article titled “On Targeting the Heel of Western Economies.”

“Any of their ships are legitimate targets, but exports are the key to any economy, including the economies of the West,” American-born Adam Yahiye Gadahn wrote. “The mujahideen must seek to deprive the enemies of the precious oil and mineral resources they are stealing from us and using to fuel their war machine, by sabotaging crusader-run oil wells and mines in Islamic lands and destroying pipelines before the oil reaches the coast and falls into enemy hands, and by sinking their supertankers and sabotaging their oil rigs in enemy waters, and in the process, ruining their lucrative fishing industries….”

And further:

“Muslims must avoid as much as possible banks and financial markets, because not only are they based on the so-called “interest”, which is nothing but usury, whose users, abusers and beneficiaries Allah has threatened with war (see al-Quran 2:275-281). Banks are also an integral part of the Western-run global economic system which has become a tool for enslaving the Muslims and other oppressed people of the world.”

Perhaps Jeb Bush, like Barack Obama, does not like to go off-script, or maybe he was playing it safe to avoid a repeat of his father’s clownish remarks in Detroit where he made an unfavorable comparison between the efficiency of Soviet tank mechanics and the failures of Detroit’s auto workers, but Jeb Bush’s speech in Detroit was at best a missed opportunity to show his grasp of how economic warfare fits in the global jihad against the West and at worst an attempt to avoid making a commitment to winning it for America.

To read the transcript of Jeb Bush’s remarks to the Economic Club of Detroit click this link.

Share this

Milquetoast or Manhood?

I wonder about the Bush family. When 41 was elected, I wondered if he wanted to set up Saddam so Saddam would make the mistake of invading Kuwait. This way 41 could show his manhood, and not be seen as a milquetoast President after succeeding a strong President liek Ronald Reagan. Remember that April Glaspie (our representative to Iraq) was told that the USA could care less about Kuwait, and she relayed that to Saddam. Interestingly, Almost 2 decades later, Glaspie has the same attitude about the invasion of Kuwait, as to then Secretary Clinton's view of the Benghazi attack. A what difference does it make now attitude.

After his father was roundly criticize for not going to Baghdad, and the plot to kill 41 by Saddam, 43 jumped at the chance, even the weakest one to show his manhood with the invasion of Iraq, and the killing of Saddam. As we can see now, the invasion of, and the exit from Iraq has now put the world in a chaotic state with the introduction of ISIS.

If the 45th President has the same last name, I wonder if he will he create a war like situation to show his manhood and to exonerate his brother, and father?