Straining the Facts Mightily
Vol: 132 Issue: 21 Friday, September 21, 2012
Pakistan declared Friday ‘A Day of Love’ for Mohammed, the founder of Islam, whom everyone from Osama bin Laden to Barack Hussein Obama refers to as a prophet. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama used that honorific as recently as yesterday, something I find intriguing.
Using the keywords, “Jesus” “Lord” and “Clinton” in Google, I tried to see how many times I could find Hillary Clinton’s use of the phrase, “The Lord Jesus” and I came up empty. The same for President Obama.
Running a similar search using “Prophet” and “Mohammed” one would almost think that “Prophet” was Mohammed’s first name.
In point of fact, acknowledging Mohammed as a Prophet is an element of the Shahada, or the Islamic creed, “there is no god but allah and Mohammed is his prophet.”
It’s kind of a big deal that the United States government, the US press corps, and pretty much every American refers to Mohammed as “the prophet” since a sincere recitation of the Shahada is all that is necessary to convert to Islam.
Once one acknowledges Mohammed as a prophet, one indirectly acknowledges allah as God, and in so doing, justifies the radical Islamic view that America is already subject to the penalties of sharia law.
President Obama referred to the United States on the eve of his Cairo speech as the “world’s most Islamic country” a statement deemed so egregiously false that even the pro-Obama factcheck.org said at the time, “strained the facts mightily.”
As many times as the US government, media and citizenry have effectively been reciting the shahada maybe we just weren’t deciphering the code properly.
Maybe Obama was simply confirming America’s submission to Islam in a language indecipherable to ignorant infidels and aimed at the Muslim world?
Just in case the indirect recitation of the shahada wasn’t enough, the White House and State Department made a videotaped submission to Islamic law which was then distributed throughout Pakistan.
The video shows Obama speaking from the podium, as Hillary stood by his side;
“Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification for this type of senseless violence. None.”
The carefully parsed statement sounded reasonable and fair, and then it was Hillary’s turn.
“Let me state very clearly, and I hope it is obvious, that the United States government had absolutely nothing to do with this video. We absolutely reject its content and message. America’s commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation.”
Again, taken by itself, the statement sounded very diplomatic and reasonable. But somehow, when packaged together into a public service advertisement to run on Pakistani TV at US taxpayer expense, it came across as a groveling, pathetic and embarrassing statement of submission, rather than one of tolerance.
In any case, this is from the Reuters account of Pakistan’s Day of Love ceremonies:
Protesters took to the streets of the Pakistani city of Peshawar, an old frontier town on the main road to Afghanistan, and torched two cinemas and clashed with riot police who tried to disperse them with teargas.
At least five protesters were hurt, a doctor at the city’s main hospital said. The ARY television station said an employee had been killed.
Near the capital, Islamabad, protesters set fire to a motorway toll booth. The previous day, about 1,000 stone-throwing protesters clashed with police as they tried to force their way to the U.S. embassy.
The government shut down mobile phone services in more than a dozen cities as part of security arrangements ahead of protests expected on Friday.
The U.S. embassy in Pakistan has been running television advertisements, one featuring Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, saying the government had nothing to do with the film.
So, what was the rioting about, again?
“Woe unto them! for they have fled from me: destruction unto them! because they have transgressed against me: though I have redeemed them, yet they have spoken lies against me.” (Hosea 7:13)
After a week of blaming some obscure movie that nobody would ever have heard about if the White House and State Department hadn’t mentioned it in every public statement at every level of government, the White House admitted that the whole uprising was pre-planned and that it had advance warning.
It was a pre-planned terrorist attack that occurred on the anniversary of September 11 for which the government was totally unprepared despite advance warning, and so to protect the image of the President as a strong foreign policy guy who courageously backed the Muslim Brotherhood and the Arab Spring, the White House made the movie the issue.
Which was fine with the Muslim Brotherhood, who were looking for something to rally the masses of demonstrators around.
So after ten days of international publicity and countless condemnations of what was (until then) an obscure, unheard of Youtube video, we’ve got imams across the Muslim world preaching “death to America” because an Egyptian guy made a movie in California that they have been told offends Islam.
Ummmm, who told them that? Allow me to repeat the quote from the Reuters account:
“The U.S. embassy in Pakistan has been running television advertisements, one featuring Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, saying the government had nothing to do with the film.”
Here’s the problem. The attacks weren’t sparked by this stupid movie. But now that movie is what is sustaining them, providing common ground for jihadists and so-called moderates to come together. And as usual, when you bring extremists together with moderates, you end up with all extremists.
The rioting and mayhem and death and destruction across the Muslim world is sustained by our serial apologies for being who we are in the face of unjustifiable demands that we repudiate our own values and adopt those of another culture.
America isn’t a Muslim country and owes no greater respect to the dignity of Islam than it does to the dignity of Christianity. Both Obama and Clinton made a big deal out of America’s religious tolerance as if it had somehow been violated.
American religious tolerance means tolerating those that disagree with a religion — it turns the idea of tolerance upside-down to interpret it as forcing others to accept your view, which is PRECISELY what is being demanded here.
Congress shall make no law establishing religion, says the First Amendment. There is no exemption for Islam, and neither can there be laws requiring Americans to respect one religion above another, or to respect any religion at all.
That is what religious tolerance means — all religions are tolerated, as long as they tend to their own knitting. There is no guarantee that one’s religion will be respected or revered. Only tolerated.
What IS guaranteed is the right of someone else NOT to respect or revere someone’s religion. The Constitution makes absolutely no allowance for censorship and any restrictions on a person’s ability to speak out against religion in general or a specific religion violates both the Establishment Clause and the Free Speech clauses of the First Amendment.
Once again, when there were two possible responses, the administration picked the response that did the most damage.
First, by covering up the terrorist attacks by fanning the flames of riot to protect Obama’s re-election chances. And second, by apologizing for the First Amendment, instead of protecting it from violation by the demands of the intolerant in the name of tolerance.
It is so bizarre it doesn’t seem real. Like a bad movie. American free speech is responsible for rioting on the other side of the world because America is intolerant and we`re really, really sorry.
Where is America in Bible prophecy? Heck, I’m not sure it’s still here now.