The religious omission Obama hasn’t addressed
In all the uproar about Obama’s refusal to label terrorists of the Muslim faith as being terrorists of the Muslim faith, what’s gotten somewhat lost is Obama’s failure to explain why he won’t label their Christian victims as Christians, and why he is so reluctant to label their Jewish victims Jews as well.
You may or may not accept his explanation of the Muslim-omission phenomenon. But at least he deigned (and I think that’s the correct word) to address it. I have seen nothing that even acknowledges his omission of the faith of the victims, much less explains it. Just denials/excuses/minimization.
I’ve written quite a few posts on it (see this and this, for example), and so have many other observors. The reasons Obama gave for his avoidance of the “Muslim” designation for terrorists cannot possibly apply to his refusal to acknowledge the faith of the victims, either. Whether or not Obama calls the Coptic Christians whom the terrorists beheaded (as the terrorists declared the victims’ Christian faith was the reason for the killings) “Christians” or not is not going to affect terrorist recruiting—except to the degree it makes Obama look ignorant or frightened, which would be likely to enhance recruiting.
I think Obama has not answered this charge because he has no answer that’s even marginally acceptable. All answers reflect very badly on him. So I think he hopes people will just forget about it as new crisis after new crisis comes our way.
It actually seems logical to me (not right, of course) that he does not mention the religion of “the folks” who were just brutally murdered. He wants to avoid religious labeling and “those folk’s” religions are the flip side of the coin he’s trying to ignore. Black&white, hot&cold, soup&sandwich.
KLSmith:
It may seem logical, but what is logical about avoiding religion entirely, unless you have some very odd ideas about religion or hatred for it? His stated reason for not mentioning the perps’ religion is that mentioning it would help recruiting and ignores the root causes that help them attract their followers. Those stated reasons cannot possibly apply to the reason he omits the religion of the victims. Why would not calling them “Christian” reduce recruitment? The only explanation is a hostility to religion in general, a hostility to Christians (or to Jews, when he omits Jews as victims), or a desire to whitewash and cover over the terrorists’ actual motives.
Also, another motive would be to avoid increasing calls for him to DO something, because he doesn’t want to do anything. But not to call them Christians or Jews is not fooling anyone (except maybe the LIV, who may not be paying any attention anyway).
OK, that’s “Obama” in three out of three headlines.
Thou must needst regroup.
Neo: you have provided several good answers to your question. He has at times seemed hostile to religion, the bitter clingers and God help Israel(not against Islam though – “the most beautiful sound on earth is the Muslim call to prayer”). And of course, even all these years after 9-11 we have to make sure not to rile up the RWNJ’s that are itching to go on a murderous rampage against Muslim’s as soon as they get a wink and a nod from the president. Also, I think he is still fooling a lot of people and there are just as many that are puzzled, but he’s a Dem – so it must be OK.
I would agree with you, Neo, that Obama is possibly an atheist. His only lengthy exposure to “Christianity” was the long deep drafts of Kool-Aid ladeled out by that hate-filled nut in Chicago (whose name escapes me at the moment, for which I am glad), whose church is part of a branch of Protestantism that has been fleeing cheerily from the Gospel for decades to embrace some sort of politically correct “progressive” quasi-gospel. (okay, I just remembered, “Rev.” Wright). Obama seems largely ignorant of Christianity’s basic precepts, uncomfortable with what little he does know, and pretty much disinclined to treat or take Christianity seriously except when it may be politically expedient. On that beach in Libya, 21 Christians died rather than renounce Jesus Christ. Couldn’t their faith have been acknowledged? No, that was a bridge too far for the President of the United States. Embarassing. Pathetic.
Last week, three people young people were killed in North Carolina in a violent bit of rage by a pathetic human being.
The Obama administration IMMEDIATELY identified the three victims as being MUSLIM.
The inference was that it was a racially motivated murder—–NOT PROVEN, nor is there significant evidence to this.
Most of the evidence leads to the notion that it was a result of a parking dispute (as insane and asinine as it seems).
MY POINT? Obama immediately inferred religious victimization. How CONVENIENT.
_______________________________________
Obama immediately lashed out at Cambridge Police Department as, “ACTING STUPIDLY” when it was ultimately determined that the black officer followed policy, protocol and normal procedures in answering a citizen’s 911 call reporting a possible burglary next door. Professor Gates was returning from an out-of-town trip and had OBAMA not gotten involved, this incident would NOT have appeared on anyone’s radar screen. BUT——OBAMA cried, “racism”.
_______________________________________
Obama declared that his own son would have looked like Trayvon Martin had Baraka had a son. His motivation was to make a racial incident of the George Zimmerman shooting. When the dust settled, NO PROOF ever contributed to Obama’s hysterics—-and his employing Al Sharpton to further foment the racial agitation.
_______________________________________
Ferguson, MO?
Despite Obama and Holder and Sharpton providing the catalyst for RIOTS and ANGER and CHAOS, when the video was released, and the black witnesses chimed in, and the grand jury made their decision——“NO RACIAL MOTIVATIONS”.
_______________________________________
How many more examples does anyone need to conclude that Obama is a “RACE BAITER”, and a creepy opportunist when it comes to religiously convenient allegations and religiously bigoted motivations and reconciliations and decisions?
_______________________________________
As Reverend Wright drummed into the head of Baraka and Michelle for TWENTY TWO (22) YEARS while they sat in the church hearing, “GOD DAMN AMERICA…GOD DAMN AMERICA…”
It is contorted, and difficult to explain the messiah’s language as anything other than his hatred for the West and its colonialism of the ME and Africa at large. He wants the son to pay for the real and imagined sins of the father. He actually identifies with the rabid dogs of islam, but vicariously, as he lacks the testicular fortitude to behead the infidels himself.
vanderleun: so? we only have 700 more days of this. Then we will have to settle for O being on some talk or comedy show every couple of days.
Obama arrives quickly to conclusions which favor and benefit his ideology, his bigoted belief system, his “GOD DAMN AMERICA” narrative.
This man-child HATES America. And he invited questionable muslim groups to his “summit” this week to assist him in his ever-evolving effort to hurt this country. To solidify the cement which holds together his mindset on soft-peddling the approach to ISIS, al Qaeda, and any aggressions carried out by radical muslims towards Christians and Jews. Period.
If Obama recognizes Muslims are murdering Christians and Jews, he has to admit there is a holy war going on and he is MIA. He has effectively denied full support to Jordan, Egypt, and the Kurds in their fight with ISIS. He doesn’t want responsibility for a war.
parker : nah. it’s probably just lack of upper body strength; have you seen those scrawny arms?
It occurs to me, didn’t Josh Earnest acknowledge that “the folks” were Christian the next day? Like they realized they had made a mistake. But they did keep digging about the random Jews in Paris. Trying to figure this bunch out is a little like explaining why a dog chases his own tail.
“It is contorted, and difficult to explain the messiah’s language as anything other than his hatred for the West and its colonialism of the ME and Africa at large.”
_______________________________________
I don’t disagree with this assessment—-HOWEVER——any rational individual would argue:
1.) America did not colonialize Germany after defeating it in WWII. Although USA occupied Austria in 1945-55, it was NEVER colonized.
2.) America did not colonize Japan after defeating it in WWII. Nor did America colonize the Phillipines after occupying it in 1944-46.
3.) America did not attack and take over and colonize Cuba. Cuba remains under its own control and pathetic leadership.
4.) America did not wipe clean and subsequently colonize North Korea.
5.) America did not take over and colonize Panama after it built the Panama Canal. Oh…….and who owns that economic powerhouse of international trade? Yes, Panama…
6.) America made no effort nor overtures to colonize Vietnam.
7.) America made no effort to colonize Dominican Republic following the 1965 “Operation Power Pack” where we sent 20,000 troops to crush a revolution there.
8.) America never attempted to colonize Cambodia after sending troops there in 1970.
9.) America made no attempt to colonize Iran in 1980 or anytime.
10.) America never attempted to colonize Nicaragua, Honduras, Lebanon, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Colombia, Bolivia, or Peru.
11.) America left Kuwait following Operation Desert Storm. No colonization in that country.
KLSmith,
With a sharp blade and a smooth stroke a 12 year old can behead an infidel. The boychild king simply is squeamish at the sight of blood. Like all tyrants and would be tyrants he wants others to do the killing for him, as hands on killing is beneath his imperial majesty. Always remember we are dealing with the self described smartest human to ever walk the earth.
“American Colonialism”?!?!?!
Where?
parker: true but some of those bastards prefer a dull blade. I read a Mark Steyn column a while back on them deliberately using a technique that prevents a quick death. But let’s please don’t hurt their feelings.
Mr. Frank Says:
“February 19th, 2015 at 6:14 pm
If Obama recognizes Muslims are murdering Christians and Jews, he has to admit there is a holy war going on and he is MIA.”
Bingo. Mr. Frnak and KLSmith have it right. If Obama admitted that some of the targets are Christians and Jews who have been murdered because of their religion and only because of their religion, he would have to admit that ISIS is a Muslim religious organization.
Since Obama claims that he himself is not a Muslim, one has to wonder how he thinks he has standing to determine who is Muslim and who is not a Muslim. Has anyone else ever heard of a similar case in which outsiders claim the authority to determine membership in someone else’s religion?
“The only explanation is a hostility to religion in general, a hostility to Christians (or to Jews, when he omits Jews as victims), or a desire to whitewash and cover over the terrorists’ actual motives.
Also, another motive would be to avoid increasing calls for him to DO something, because he doesn’t want to do anything.” neo
All of the above with a slight caveat; “a hostility to religion” with the notable exception of Islam.
I also find of note the corollary that Obama avoided when he said that “we are not at war with Islam”, which is true. The corollary is of course that Islam is at war both directly and indirectly with America and the West. That is a fact that Obama is striving mightily to obscure with his primary audience; the LIVs and liberal ‘useful idiots’, most recently represented by Ben Affleck.
All politicians know that the very best way to lie is through a lie of omission, rather than an easily disproved lie of commission.
Addendum: while it is true that “we are not at war with Islam”… it is also true that we are in a war with Islam. That most in the West and half of America refuses to acknowledge the truth doesn’t change that reality in the slightest. But it does and will increase the death toll… of Westerners. And those deaths are upon the head of one Barack Hussein Obama.
I strongly recommend reading this article:
“The Dilemma of Islamic Terrorism”
Ali Sina, FaithFreedom.org
The rest of the article is also well worth reading. I only doubt that the author’s concluding preference would be effective.
My daughter and I have discussed this many times in the last few months, and come to the conclusion that although he likely is not a Muslim himself – the smoking, drinking, partying, etc. – he likely has warm sympathies for the general Muslim world. As in the poor Muzzies are the downtrodden and unfairly done-by — and that the US is the Big Bully of the world, and he will see that fairness is done. The poor pitiful downtrodden Muzzies will be defended, and the powerful Big Bully of the US will be diminished, admonished and put into it’s rightful place.
Makes sense to me … and when his good work is done, he will swan off to some comfortable sinecure – a nice house, well-paid speaking engagements, and international honors and positions which do not require any actual work at all.
I don’t think that he personally and directly can do much damage to us which cannot be remedied eventually … but the damage done by those people who put him into office, kept him there, and put a fine shiny polish on his deeds once there, and the fools that voted for him … yes, there is where the damage is felt the worst.
neo…
Barry is the linguistic son of the “Black Knight” of Monty Python.
Denial is ALL.
The Black Knight was still ‘in the fight’ with every single limb missing.
With Barry, his maladministration is still slinging it — even after entire nations have been cleaved off!
[ cf Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Egypt,…
Ukraine and Afghanistan are losses in progress… ]
I believe that Obama’s rhetoric about “violent extremism” is deliberate.
It is intentionally vague and open-ended, and can be applied to anybody he deems to be an “enemy of the state”.
In short, it is aimed squarely at traditional, patriotic, white Americans. I can easily see the government announcing a crackdown on Second Amendment “extremists”.
Or even First Amendment “extremists” for that matter, what with their “hate speech” against Muslims.
There have repeatedly been little ‘hints’ of much deeper levels to Obama. Those hints oh so briefly surface and lacking confirmation, seemingly dissipate upon closer examination but which nevertheless leave me with the uneasy feeling that this man is indeed a ‘Manchurian’ candidate.
Here’s just some of the ‘circumstantial’ evidence of which I speak;
A Red Carpet for Radicals at the White House
“A year-long investigation by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) has found that scores of known radical Islamists made hundreds of visits to the Obama White House, meeting with top administration officials.” http://www.investigativeproject.org/3777/a-red-carpet-for-radicals-at-the-white-house#
Obama Praises Muslim Cleric Who Backed Fatwa on Killing of U.S. Soldiers
“President Barack Obama favorably quoted and praised on Wednesday in his speech before the United Nations a controversial Muslim cleric whose organization has reportedly endorsed the terror group Hamas and supported a fatwa condoning the murder of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.” http://freebeacon.com/national-security/obama-praises-muslim-cleric-who-backed-fatwa-on-killing-of-u-s-soldiers/
Pictured: Obama’s half-brother wearing Hamas scarf that boasts ‘Jerusalem is ours — WE ARE COMING’
“Malik Obama runs the Barack H. Obama foundation and was the Best Man at the president’s wedding. The president has been tight-lipped about his relationship with Malik, who told GQ in 2013 that the two are closer than Americans think.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2548243/Obamas-half-brother-photographed-wearing-Hamas-scarf-boasts-Jerusalem-WE-ARE-COMING.html#ixzz3SFKXuDpQ
Obama’s ring: ‘There is no god but Allah’
“He’s worn band on wedding-ring finger since before he met Michelle”
http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/obamas-ring-there-is-no-god-but-allah/#JUKMUdSW2qHkwSCM.99
And tip of the hat to commenter AesopFan, “Obama and the Muslim
GangSolidarity Sign”I freely admit that none of this individually is definitive proof but in the aggregate it easily fits the adage that “where there’s smoke there’s fire”.
Sgt. Mom Says:
February 19th, 2015 at 8:08 pm
My daughter and I have discussed this many times in the last few months, and come to the conclusion that although he likely is not a Muslim himself — the smoking, drinking, partying, etc. — he likely has warm sympathies for the general Muslim world.
&&&&&&
You are entirely mistaken: a Muslim on jihad is permitted to do ALL THINGS.
This includes denying his Islamic being, committing any crime — especially lying — and engaging in ANY behavior.
Famously, the 9-11 fanatics had been working the strip clubs of Vegas and drinking heavily — in the days prior to September 11, 2001.
They then took a shower, performed ritual abolution, and murdered thousands.
They are hailed far and wide within the ummah — to this very hour — as the acme of Islam.
Barry Soetoro is of the same cloth.
By his fruit, you shall know him.
And if he’s not technically a moslem, he sure acts like their bestest pal: what more do we need to know?
The enemy within the gates.
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.
“An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.
“But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.
“For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men.
“He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist.
“A murderer is less to fear.”
–Marcus Tullius Cicero
According to the Progressive Victimhood Hierarchy ™, people whose ethnic or sexual or social group has been more victimised have higher authority to tell the rest of us what we can and can’t do. If Christians were being victimised, even in a foreign country, that would mean that Christians have at least some authority to tell us what to do. But Christians are the progressive movement’s main enemies, and it would be absolutely intolerable if we were all expected to do what Christians tell us to. Hence Christians can’t actually be persecuted at all, and if anyone treats a Christian badly, then the victim’s religion must be wholly incidental to the mistreatment. Since it’s incidental, there’s no point mentioning it.
Mayor Rudy was absolutely correct in his assessment two nights ago that that King Putz Barack ‘doesn’t love this country..’
He had Rev’runt Jeremiah spiritualizing with him for..what..20-years. That’s what we call a TELL.
Lets not waste time discussing Bawack Hussein Obama. The issue is:
The danger to America is not Barrack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with no accomplishment or qualification to give any hint that he would or could execute the duties of the world,s most important job..
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of this President than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved uneducated electorate looking for handouts thus willing to elect such unqualified men for their president.
The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince.
The Republic can survive a Barrack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president.
” Author …..Former Premier of the Czech Republic Vaclav Klaus.
A Muslim prayer was recited at the start of the second day of the White House summit on “Countering Violent Extremism,” but no other religious text was presented during the portion of the event that was open to the press.
Imam Sheikh Sa’ad Musse Roble, president of the World Peace Organization in Minneapolis, Minn., recited a “verse from the Quran” following remarks by Obama administration officials and Democratic members of Congress.
he has ommitted other prayers favoring muslims
he has said he will stand beside them against others
he has bowed to the head of islamic groups
he is sitting with heads of islamic terror
he shows the hand symbol of such
but dont worry… he is a true patriotic american…
neo-neocon Says: It may seem logical, but what is logical about avoiding religion entirely, unless you have some very odd ideas about religion or hatred for it?
once again we return to… you dont read what they read, so you dont understand what they think and why… then you sit around trying to make up an excuse that fits that your ok with, cause you made it up
its one rule, not attribution…
in this way, you avoid grouping outcomes to the different things that they are associated with.
so by not stating blacks, you keep the persons from tallying up what they percieve X does and Y does… ie. remove the distinction and you cant divide up the actions into the different slots
so dont report on things blacks do… so you cant tally up their bahavior against the outcomes
DO report on the outcomes by race, that way you can show its unfair without the reason blocked by the above.
[you really must learn how they screw with minds, as its obvious once they do]
do NOT show distinction as to what religion is causeing the harm compared to others.
do show the distinction in the outcomes caused by such, and claim abuse.
if its a hated group, reverse the principal
DO show that jews do X (while not showing what the opposition does)
Dont show what jews suffer (so as to pretend they dont get punished)
mix well, cause directed hate..
when its a republican, and bad, put up (r), or republican
whern its a dem, and bad, put up rep. not (d)
they follow formuleas. i said long ago they are confucian, in that by holding progress steady, and applying rules, we all can be geniuses as the rules over time solve problems… just so long as the world does not change, the power people dont change, etc.
could be why they get along so well with the chicoms..
but anyway… once you get this you can lay it out in simple rules.
favored, bad, do not show distinction, bury it in the whole
favord, good, show distinction, break it out from the whole
unfavored, bad, show distinction, break it out from the whole
unfavored, good, do not show distinction, bury it in the whole
not more complicated than that…
just apply the rule, and your golden…
this allows dear leaders to make rules and create the outcomes by sending out the tiny mind dumb automatons…
oh. add to this the other rule. break the rules above trying to do better, be truthful, etc… you become target, as your not following dear leader, but thinking for yourself.
Three Rules for the social workers under the sky,
Seven for the senators in their halls of stone,
Nine for Jihadies doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord Obama on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ruler to rule them all, One Ruler to find them,
One Ruler to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.”
–Artfldgr tweak to J.R.R. Tolkien’s epigraph to The Lord of The Rings
Artfldgr Says:
February 20th, 2015 at 12:39 pm
Well done sir. In short, communist inspired dialectic. First words and when possible, behavior.
In Spain they eventually dug out the bodies of priests and nuns and danced with the remains and,
later, Dachau, ‘the largest cemetery of Catholic priests in the world’
It ended well.
In the land of Mordor, where the Shadows lie …