Thursday, November 20, 2014


Why do Muslim extremists continue to behead people with impunity? Why do Palestinians continue to celebrate terrorist acts?

The answer is easier than you think.

They keep doing it because it works. When ISIS executed American aid worker Peter Kassig, President Obama took the occasion to show off his Islamophilia, his reverential respect for Islam.

Asked yesterday why Palestinians continue to engage in murderous acts of terror Prof. Alan Dershowitz explained that their actions have cowed much of the Western world… to the point where more and more Europeans and Americans favor giving Palestinians whatever they want.

When Palestinians attack Israel the American Secretary of State and other Western leaders conspicuously call for Israeli restraint.

When terrorism is rewarded, it is likely to continue.

Mona Charen has shown that Obama manifested his Islamophilia in his official statement about the recent murder of Peter Kassig.

First, the White House statement:

Today we offer our prayers and condolences to the parents and family of Abdul-Rahman Kassig, also known to us as Peter.  We cannot begin to imagine their anguish at this painful time.

Abdul-Rahman was taken from us in an act of pure evil by a terrorist group that the world rightly associates with inhumanity.  Like Jim Foley and Steven Sotloff before him, his life and deeds stand in stark contrast to everything that ISIL represents.  While ISIL revels in the slaughter of innocents, including Muslims, and is bent only on sowing death and destruction, Abdul-Rahman was a humanitarian who worked to save the lives of Syrians injured and dispossessed by the Syrian conflict.  While ISIL exploits the tragedy in Syria to advance their own selfish aims, Abdul-Rahman was so moved by the anguish and suffering of Syrian civilians that he traveled to Lebanon to work in a hospital treating refugees.  Later, he established an aid group, SERA, to provide assistance to Syrian refugees and displaced persons in Lebanon and Syria.  These were the selfless acts of an individual who cared deeply about the plight of the Syrian people.  

ISIL's actions represent no faith, least of all the Muslim faith which Abdul-Rahman adopted as his own.  Today we grieve together, yet we also recall that the indomitable spirit of goodness and perseverance that burned so brightly in Abdul-Rahman Kassig, and which binds humanity together, ultimately is the light that will prevail over the darkness of ISIL.

What’s wrong with this statement?

A great deal.

First, Charen points out, Peter Kassig converted to Islam when faced with a death threat. He did not voluntarily embrace the Muslim faith. When Obama insists on using Kassig’s Muslim name he is effectively affirming the legitimacy of the conversion.

She explains:

Peter Kassig converted to Islam and took the name Abdul-Rahman, but only in captivity. President Obama’s insistence upon using his Islamic name reflects his continuing belief that by denying Islamic extremism, he can promote peace….

When someone converts at the point of a sword, in hopes of saving his life, is that “adopting the Muslim faith as his own”? Whom is Mr. Obama respecting by using the Islamic name — Kassig, or his executioners?

Note well: Obama’s use of the Islamic name is a gesture of respect for Kassig’s executioners!

Even more appalling is Obama’s insistence that ISIL’s actions represent no faith, and certainly not the Muslim faith.

Who is he trying to fool?

Charen replies:

But Mr. Obama is still at pains to protect the good name of Islam. He condemns the barbarism of the Islamic State and other terrorists, but feels the need to quickly add that their crimes “represent no faith, least of all” Islam.

Throughout the Muslim world, extremism is in full bloom. Only a minority of Sunni extremists travel under the name al-Qaeda. Others are called al-Nusra (Syria) and AQIM (North Africa) and ISIS (Syria and Iraq) and Wahhabi (Saudi Arabia) and Boko Haram (Nigeria) and Abu Sayyaf (Philippines) and Taliban (Afghanistan and Pakistan) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (Pakistan) and al-Fatah (Palestinian territories) and Hamas (Gaza). The Shia extremists include the Islamic Republic of Iran, Hezbollah (Lebanon), and the Madhi Army of Iraq.

Why does Obama feel compelled to protect the good name of Islam? Surely, that good name and the reputation of people who profess the Muslim faith has been sullied by the actions of multiple Islamist terrorist groups.

If Muslims want to restore their good name they will need to destroy the terrorists in their midst.

Obama’s servile profession of respect for Islam denies reality and tells the terrorists that their actions have not compromised the reputation of Islam. Their actions seem to have terrorized him to the point where he can only show respect for the terrorists’ faith.

Islamophilia is the other face of Islamophobia… the latter meaning, fear of Islam.

Charen is right to say that Obama is in denial. She might have added that the Islamic State will continue to do what it does because its actions have caused world leaders to show greater and great respect for the religion it represents.

It isn’t just that ISIS and Palestinian terrorists have barely paid a price for the horrors they have unleashed on the world. They have been rewarded for it.


Dennis said...

One cannot deal with or provide a solution to any problem or issue if one refuses to define the problem or issue. Reminds one of "see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil." This is the very attitude that allows evil to exist. The failure to recognize the difference between a king snake and a coral snake will get you killed. . Too bad the Obama administration lacks the capacity to see and define differences.

Anonymous said...

Libya and Syria would be stable if US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia hadn't fomented trouble by sending aid to crazy radicals.

Every nation has its share of lunatics. They are kept under lid usually. But when foreign powers arm and give cover to such crazies, all hell breaks loose.

Suppose a great foreign power gave tons of arms and air cover to groups like the KKK and the Black Panthers in the US. We'd have mayhem here too.

Indeed, consider how things got worse in Ferguson because the federal government and NY media backed the street thugs.

Sam L. said...

Anon,. yes, they'd be stable...dictatorships. And they might be a little better off. A little.

I figure Obama's channeling his inner multi-culti leftist hate-America side on Kassig.

The Dark Lord said...

Islam is a cult of violence ... it was founded by a violent war lord and only grew by the sword ... sure, there are some nice parts in the Koran but never forget who started it and how ...

even today its a cult mainly for men, everyone one else is second class (women and girls)

Dennis said...

To say that Libya and Syria would be stable if others would stay out of the ME is to misunderstand the tribal nature of the ME countries. They have NEVER been stable for any length of time. The Sunnis dislike the Shias. The Shias dislike the Alawites. The Alawites dislike the Sunnis. The Kurds dislike the aforementioned tribes. All of them dislike the Jews. Add in the Turks and one begins to understand why peace will never happen. I know I have missed some tribal affiliations here that add to the "mix."
I am not sure how anyone can watch the utter distain for life exhibited by ISIL and other factions, and come away blaming the US and Israel for the inherent dysfunctional problems of the ME.
Sadly, we have to live in a world that contains all kinds of snakes and telling the differences between the ones that will kill one and the one's that won't is difficult.
If Obama had of allowed us to develop our resources with a eye towards taking the time to develop alternative sources, which we have no idea off the viable alternatives, we could have disengaged and stop funding terrorism.
Trying to disrupt the life cycle of resource development by having the federal government select winners and losers only leave all of us as losers.
One has to be kidding themselves to not understand that large amount of money is invested in this country to keep us from energy independence, support race and sex agitators, and generally distort the culture of this country. Who is to say that the arms utilized in this country by the Black panthers and other gang oriented groups is not paid for by outside sources? To ignore the facts is to commit an "Obamaism" of failure to define the problem fully.