Reason 38: Living A Transformative Muslim Fantasy
Categories: Inability to recognize and acknowledge reality, incompetence, laziness, cultural confusion, inability/unwillingness to learn from history, deadly arrogance and narcissism.
From the October 9 edition of the Washington Post:
A 14-year-old Pakistani student who won international acclaim for speaking out for girls barred from school by the Taliban was critically wounded Tuesday by a gunman who boarded her school bus, asked for her by name, aimed his pistol at her head and fired, officials said.
The Pakistani Taliban asserted responsibility for the attack on ninth-grader Malala Yousafzai, who gained notice in early 2009 when she wrote a diary about Taliban atrocities under a pen name for the BBC’s Urdu service. Yousafzai lives in Mingora, a city in the scenic northwestern Swat valley, where Taliban insurgents imposed harsh Islamic law for two years before being routed by a major military operation in May 2009.
Ihsanullah Ihsan, chief spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban, said in calls to the media that the militant group targeted Yousafzai because she generated “negative propaganda” about Muslims.
‘She considers President Obama as her ideal leader. Malala is the symbol of the infidels and obscenity,’ Ihsan said, adding that if she survived, the Taliban would try again to kill her.
And as Malala Yousafzai was being shot on a school bus, the Obama Administration continued to cover up the terrorist murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans on 09-11-12 in Bengahzi, Libya. An ad from the Heritage Foundation provides a good overview of the timeline and the administration’s blatant lies. Ongoing congressional hearings are also revealing that the Obama State Department was determined not to provide sufficient security, despite the repeated pleas of security personnel, over months, for that help.
Rewind back to Mr. Obama’s military intervention in Libya where his administration proudly coined the concept of “leading from behind.” We found ourselves providing military support for—well, we were never really sure who we were supporting or of their ultimate goals, other than deposing Col. Gaddafi. Of course, Gaddafi was a brutal dictator, but a dictator providing help to us in the war on terror, and apparently out of the terror business himself. It remains unclear why or how our military intervention was in any way helpful to American national security, the interests of regional stability, or how it in any way was harmful to our enemies.
The best justification the Obama Administration has been able to provide is a sort of vague support for the “Arab Spring,” which, rather than a blossoming, has turned into a withering of freedom and democracy in the Middle East. Mr. Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper claimed the Muslim Brotherhood was essentially a non-violent, secular, social welfare organization, despite its creed:
Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Koran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the path of Allah is our highest hope.
The Muslim Brotherhood is, in fact, the wellspring of the modern jihadist movement, heavily influenced by Sayyid Qutb, its most important and influential writer—the founder of modern Islamism–whose work focused in large part on his hatred of American and western culture and society. The Looming Tower by Lawrence Wright is essential reading for those wishing to understand Qutb, his place in Islam, 9-11 and the modern Jihadist movement.
As in Egypt, the overthrow of Arab hard men has resulted in the ascendency of Islamic hard liners, men and a movement which cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be considered moderate, religiously or socially tolerant, or even neutral toward western democracy. Because America under Mr. Obama has left enormous power vacuums throughout the region and has continually confused friends with enemies, Jihadists have rushed in to seize power, influence and advanced weapons. We learned only recently that from 10,000 to 20,000 man portable anti-aircraft missiles–each capable of shooting down an airliner–are missing in Libya alone, and the conflagration in Syria continues apace as Jihadists and Iranian operatives and surrogates rush to the conflict while Iran rushes toward the nuclear finish line.
Through all of this, Mr. Obama claims transcendence in killing Osama Bin Laden and resurrecting General Motors, and suggests that the “Arab Spring” is a great victory for peace and regional democracy. His “open hand” remains extended while jihadists grow bolder, most recently killing Ambassadors Stevens and three other Americans on the anniversary of 9-11. Mr. Obama initially blamed that act of war on a video no one has seen, and abandoned that painfully obvious lie with only the greatest reluctance, still mentioning the video six times at a United Nations speech when that lie was obviously not remotely viable.
Even during the 2008 campaign, Mr. Obama sold himself as a transformative figure, a man whose Muslim background and associations and his very being would cause America’s Jihadist enemies to embrace peace and conciliation. Now he struggles to maintain that fiction and his hold on power. How could he have been so wrong? Let’s explore a few of the likely reasons:
Barack Obama: The Muslim/Christian who never was Muslim.
During the campaign, before he threw Reverend Jeremiah Wright under the bus, Mr. Obama proclaimed himself a Christian born in the church of Rev. Wright and steeped in its doctrines for some two decades. That Rev. Wright’s church was one of the foremost hotbeds of Black Liberation Theology, an offshoot of Marxism, which preaches racial division and hatred, is well known, but that’s a topic for another time.
Americans are generally willing to accept others at their word on religion. If Mr. Obama wants to profess Christianity, most Americans are willing to go along, which is merely a manifestation of American religious tolerance. For his part, Mr. Obama and his surrogates have worked hard to deny that he ever was Muslim, despite significant evidence to the contrary. And even if he was Muslim in his youth (and he was), Americans are generally willing to embrace those who convert from one faith to another and consider such things unremarkable and not at all troubling.
For Muslims—particularly those who adopt a literal reading of the Quran and Hadiths–life is far less diverse, tolerant and accepting. In fact, it’s brutally simple. Mr. Obama was born the son of a Kenyan Muslim father, hence, he is a Muslim, then and forever. Islam does not allow anyone to leave the faith, and those who do are apostates. There is but one punishment in Islam for apostasy: death.
So we have Mr. Obama, who has sought political advantage in denying his Muslim origin and who claims to be Christian. This has won him some points among Americans, and most foreign Jihadist Muslims are illiterate and uninformed about such matters, so there is relatively little downside there. Yet he has claimed cultural sympathy and special knowledge of Islam because he lived in Indonesia while a child, that and his many and fawning overtures to Islamist enemies while simultaneously picking off their leaders here and there via drone-launched Hellfire missiles has produced little but confusion.
Is it possible that Mr. Obama does not understand the inevitable effect of his willful apostasy, or is this merely another of his serial attempts to have things both ways? Does he think he is winking at the Muslim world, in essence merely pretending to be Christian and American? How can he be sure that a terrorist cell training in Yemen for attacks in America will get that message or care?
Barack Obama: The Man Islamists Love To Hate.
For one reason and one reason alone, Mr. Obama cannot possibly win understanding or friendship from Islamists or Islamist states: he is the President of the United States. This is true for anyone who occupies that office. Any Jihadist who could murder the President would instantly achieve iconic status in the Muslim world, and no doubt, millions of Jihadists dream of such an achievement. Islamists would embrace Mr. Obama—and any American President—only to get close enough to detonate a bomb vest.
Mr. Obama’s arrogance is truly boundless. Consider that as he walked off the stage in Denver, Mr. Obama actually believed he won the debate against Mr. Romney. In delivering his epistle to the Muslim world in Cairo, in his bizarre belief in his supposedly superhuman powers of charisma and persuasion, he actually thought he could succeed where all before him had failed, he could cause Islamists to deny Islam and cause those who seek the blood of Americans to embrace him and them.
Consider poor Malala Yousafzai, a Muslim shot because her Muslim attackers believed she had some appreciation for Barack Obama and because she believed girls deserve to be educated.
Consider what Jihadists would think of Mr. Obama if they actually realized he was not only the POTUS, but also an apostate. Can he be so dim as to fail to understand the implications, or does his arrogance lead him to believe that this, like the Constitution, does not apply to him?
Barack Obama: The First Post-American, Post Democracy President.
Much has been written about Mr. Obama’s true political philosophy. It surely contains elements of Marxism, Socialism, Islamism, Black Liberation Theology (yes, I know he sat in Rev. Wright’s church for 20 years and never heard a word) and a variety of other anti-American creeds. One can be sure that he will always embrace power and self-aggrandizement, yet here too arrogance denies him one essential insight: Islam is absolutely incompatible with and harbors deadly hostility toward democracy.
One might be tempted to believe this would not be a concern of Mr. Obama who has consistently proclaimed his desire to fundamentally transform or change America. It is difficult to imagine that a man worshipped as the greatest intellect ever to occupy the Oval Office would fail to understand the very nature of Islam.
There is, in Islam, no separation of church and state. For all intents and purposes, the church is the state. Sharia—Islamic Law—is the code of law and behavior for all, and takes absolute precedence over every other kind of man-made law. Thus does a man who supposedly defends women and homosexuals embrace a way of life that murders both on the most ephemeral pretexts. Under Sharia, women are absolutely second-class, and barely human. They have no civil rights and are essentially the property of the male members of their families. As with apostasy, there is one Islamic punishment for homosexuality: death.
For the Islamist, democracy is as foreign a concept as treating women as equal to men. Democracy allows people to choose their religions, hence it is against Islam and must be destroyed. How is it possible that a man with such special understanding of and connection to Islam does not understand this?
The Benghazi Coverup: How could Mr. Obama’s administration have refused necessary security to our diplomatic personnel in Libya when the danger was so well documented, so obvious and so potentially explosive? How could he have denied knowing that the attack was anything other than a well planned and executed act of war?
We now know from the testimony of State Officials Charlene Lamb and Eric Nordstrom that the repeated denial of security was done to avoid harming the Obama political narrative that Libya is a success and Al Queda is “back on its heels,” as Mr. Obama is fond of saying. In fact, Ms. Lamb admitted that she was actually in telephone contact with the Benghazi Consulate “in almost real time”—for hours–on 9-11. There can be no doubt the Obama Administration knew the attack had nothing to do with a video and was a terroristic act of war from the very night of the attack. Mr. Obama reacted, initially, by going to bed, and later, by lying.
To maintain the fiction of a successful Middle East policy, Mr. Obama denied adequate security to our diplomats, which resulted in their deaths. To maintain that fiction and his political viability, he lied about their deaths and continues to cover up his lies.
But a matter even more disturbing remains definitively unanswered: why did Mr. Obama ignore the simple truths I’ve presented here relating to Islam? How could he ignore the foundational basis for rational policy and embrace inevitable failure? Is it a mixture of arrogance, anti-American philosophy and Islamist sympathies, or is he simply, horrifyingly incompetent? Both?
Which option, gentle readers, is worse?
And we elected him president.