Obama’s admiration for Islam is not due to naivety it is his belief and if not stopped Obama will bring America to her knees.
Did He ever encounter a terrorist organization other than one named Al Qaeda with which, for political purposes, He failed to empathize?
(Updated. — DM)
President Obama and other members of His administration hold Israel to be an oppressor of Palestinian Muslims and hence bad and Palestinians to be oppressed Muslims and therefore good. On the same basis, the Muslim Brotherhood is held to be good, Egypt bad.
Boko Haram has been much in the news lately because it kidnapped substantially more than two hundred girls from a school in Nigeria.
The clear Islamic connection has been downplayed, when mentioned at all. So have the facts that the girls were Christians attending a Christian school.
Unless taken from their captors by force, a potentially dangerous exercise, the girls will either be sold into slavery (and/or worse) or held as hostages pending Nigeria’s release of captured Boko Haram terrorists.
How about Islamic honor killings?
Do they bother President Obama? He has shown great affinity for
Tea Party Islamic terrorists other than those named Al Qaeda. Major Hasan, of Fort Hood fame, was initially claimed simply to have engaged in workplace violence (he still is) to avoid offending other adherents to the Religion of Peace. President Obama and other members of His administration hold Israel to be an oppressor of Palestinian Muslims and hence bad and Palestinians to be oppressed Muslims and therefore good. On the same basis, the Muslim Brotherhood is held to be good, Egypt bad.
According to an article titled Boko Haram and the failure of obama’s counter-terrorism strategy,
The heart of the problem is that President Barack Obama and many of his top counter-terrorism advisers see Islamic extremism from the leftist perspective of social movement theory.
. . . .
[T]errorism becomes “a mode of contention,” and terrorists are not to blame for their violence; “exogenous contingencies” are at fault. Sources in the Koran, Islamic jurisprudence, or even contemporary calls to jihad are not to blame; state policy is. Dr. Mohammed M. Hafez, an associate professor at the Naval Postgraduate School who also influenced U.S. policy, echoes this perspective in his book Why Muslims Rebel: [Emphasis added.]
Muslims rebel because of an ill-fated combination of institutional exclusion, on the one hand, and on the other, reactive and indiscriminate repression that threatens the organizational resources and personal lives of Islamists. Exclusionary and repressive political environments force Islamists to undergo a near universal process of radicalization.
Radical Islamists, therefore, bear no personal responsibility for their acts of terrorism or disruption. Rather, they are forced by a political environment that excludes or represses them to undergo an inevitable process of radicalization.
For the Obama administration, Islamist extremism (except for Al Qaeda) is not a categorical evil which stands opposed to America’s good; it is, rather, an extreme expression—among a range of expressions—of protest against legitimate grievances. Islamic radicals such as Boko Haram are not responsible for their actions; they are forced to radicalism by their circumstances. And it definitely has nothing whatsoever to do with Islam, not even a distorted version of Islam. [Emphasis added.] Read more…
_If you comment we reserve the right to use your comment in/as a post