A simple, direct interpretation of Obama’s actions

Kenyon H. writes:

The dictator Gadaffy is a strong hand repressing the Muslim uprising that is always bubbling just below the surface in all Muslim Middle Eastern countries. Note how the Iranian mullahs formed an Islamic theocracy after the overthrow of the Shah of Iran. And be sure that Egypt after Mubarak will become a Muslim state led by the Muslim Brotherhood.

So, Obama cannot have Gadaffy killing all of Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood friends in Libya. But to tell America the truth that he wants to go in and protect the Muslim Brotherhood would be too damaging to his image as president.

We do not need to read too much between the lines here. He has peppered his administration with Muslims in high positions in Homeland Security; an “ambassador” to the OIC; an “ambassador” to the Middle East. And, of course, his message is that we will “never be at war with Islam.”

- end of initial entry -

March 25

Randy writes:

Just before I read your post of Kenyon’s analysis, I was observing Hillary speaking on our “next move.” It occurred to me at the time that it is as if she is in charge and assuming the presidential role that Obama should be demonstrating. I thought about much of the mainstream conservatives’ criticism of Obama’s for his lack of leadership or a clear plan.

Then I read Kenyon’s analysis and it all became clear. Obama must stay in the background because he does not want to appear to be a strong leader opposing any one of the factions of Islam. If he supports the rebels, then he will offend the great spiritual advisor, Louis Farrakhan, and that faction of Islam. If he supports Ghadafi, then he will offend much of the rest of the Muslim world by opposing al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Jason writes:

Kenyon H.’s “simple, direct interpretation” of Obama’s actions doesn’t address the issue of whether he thinks Obama is actually a closet Muslim or merely a functional Muslim, i.e., he shares and has similar aims to much of their anti-Western ideology.

LA replies:

As I’ve said before, the question whether Obama is a closet Muslim is not relevant. If Obama is actually a Muslim, there is no way of knowing it and we are never going to know it. So let’s not waste our time thinking about it. What is knowable, and what is really important, is whether Obama is a supporter of Islam and a facilitator of the expansion of its power. If he is, and the facts overwhelmingly show he is (indeed, as I have pointed out, Obama sees himself as a global enforcer of Islamic law), then it doesn’t matter whether he is also actually privately a Muslim. It’s enough to know that he is a supporter and facilitator of Islam, and to oppose him on that basis.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at March 24, 2011 05:45 PM | Send