Imagine that the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center have just fallen after having been engulfed in flames for what seemed an eternity. We’ve received word that Islamic terrorists were the perpetrators of these attacks, and they are still out there in the world, alive, thriving, planning another attack, and celebrating on our TV sets. Your spirits are as leveled as the towers.
President Bush arrives on the scene. He borrows a megaphone from a firefighter, climbs atop the rubble, and, his countenance displaying fierce determination, speaks these words into the microphone for all of New York, and with the news cameras pointed at him, all the world, to hear:
“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
A weaker, more cowardly statement has not escaped the lips of a politician in modern American history. But these were the words Obama spoke to a roomful of representatives of other nations, many of them Islamic, at the UN General Assembly last Tuesday.
The world saw Islamists attack the American embassy in Libya just two weeks prior, killing four American diplomats, and Obama’s message to the world: Do not slander Islam.
Is there a soul out there willing to make the case that Barack Obama’s message is anything better than weak and spineless?
First, I take issue with Obama’s use of the word “slander.” Why does our professedly Christian President characterize any nay-saying of Islam as slander? It is only slander if one believes in the thing being slandered. Otherwise it is called mocking, attacking. If an atheist insults Christianity, he is not slandering Christianity. It is only slander when a Christian does it. Likewise, only a Muslim would call the denigration of Islam slander.
Second, why, I would like to ask the President, must we never slander the “prophet”? Why does he lecture us about this, but remain silent over the taxpayer-funded “Piss Christ” currently on display in New York, and over the constant anti-Christian espousal of TV shows like “Family Guy” or of his million-dollar donors, such as Bill Maher? Slander is protected under the First Amendment, but only if we slander Islam’s (your?) prophet must the future not belong to us?
True, Obama also declares in his speech that the future must not belong to those who kill Christians in Egypt or to those who bully women (“bully,” in this case, implying the physical variety), something with which I have no disagreement. But killing and bullying are on a different plane than slander. Slander harms no one and is a constitutionally protected right. Killing and other physical abuses are not. Why should slander be mentioned in this speech at all?
I am by no means a foreign-policy expert. Foreign affairs are not my biggest area of interest. But one thing I do know for certain is that a strong leader does not reprimand his own country while his enemies watch. The only thing Obama accomplished in doing so was to legitimize the violent actions of Islamists by taking their side on the matter of slander towards Islam.
- stupideverybody reblogged this from leftybegone
- awweb likes this
- 2-0-8-3 likes this
- vanfullersublime likes this
- loveyouramerica reblogged this from leftybegone and added:
- honeyscrumptious likes this
- prissynigga likes this
- the-liberty-republican likes this
- elysianmemories likes this
- droffats-hsoj likes this
- redbloodedamerica likes this
- leftybegone posted this