Well, it appears that President Obama has decided to designate August of each year as “International Muslim Awareness Month.” And his reasoning is as shocking as ever.
“The Muslim community around the world deserves our full acceptance, respect, apologies and most important, our awareness,” Obama told reporters during his announcement. “The world has done horrible things to the Muslim people since the beginning of time. Americans have killed millions of Muslims overseas since the September 11 attacks. They are not all bad, in fact, most of them are good, hard-working folks just like yourself, living day to day, trying to survive and for that they need to be celebrated. So from now on, the world will know the month of August to be a month of celebration for the Muslim community, the Sunnah and the amazing teaching of the Quran.”
While the Muslim community is pleased about the other day, others are frustrated with yet another biased action from the president.
“An ‘International Muslim Awareness Month’ is definitely a step in the right direction,” said Khald Matei, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party. “Praise Allah.”
“Currently, as it stands, obtaining a Visa or Green Card for a Muslim person is very difficult,” Obama told reports. “There are too many unnecessary background checks in place and I plan to fix that.”
What do you think? Is Obama taking his pro-Muslim movement too far in light of recent events?
Sex slavery is a religious right in Islam. Kidnapping and enslaving girls as sex slaves is sanctioned by the Qur’an in multiple places — not one of the Muslim groups’ condemnations of the abductions addresses that or explains how it is a misunderstanding of Islam. Neither do their clueless leftist apologists. –
This is all according to Islamic law (sharia).
“Prosperous are the believers who in their prayers are humble and from idle talk turn away
and at almsgiving are active and guard their private parts save from their wives and what their right hands own then being not blameworthy.” (Quran 23:1-6)
Those whom their “right hands own” (Quran 4:3, 4:24, 33:50) are slaves, and inextricable from the concept of Islamic slavery as a whole is the concept of sex slavery, which is rooted in Islam’s devaluation of the lives of non-Muslims. The Quran stipulates that a man may take four wives as well as hold slave girls as sex slaves. These women are captured in wartime and are considered the spoils of war. Islam avoids the appearance of impropriety, declaring that the taking of these sex slaves does not constitute adultery if the women are already married, for their marriages are ended at the moment of their capture. A manual of Islamic law directs: “When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman”s previous marriage is immediately annulled” (Reliance of the Traveller, (9.13).
In several videos, posted on the Internet during July and August, British Islamist Mizanur Rahman (a.k.a. Abu Baraa) came out in defense of the Islamic State. According to Abu Baraa, non-Muslims would benefit from the jizya poll tax, to be paid once they live under the Caliphate. The possession of slave girls would also be permissible, he said.
Obama has been getting slammed for prematurely ending the war in Iraq, for no other reason than to score political points, only to see all of the work that our troops have done there collapse and for terrorists to move in. Now he’s desperately trying to convince everyone that he never said he ended the war in Iraq. Uh, OK, Barack. You sure about that?
In 2008, then candidate Obama promised to end the war in Iraq. In 2010, President Obama did just that, precipitously pulling all U.S. troops out of Iraq, despite warnings against such action, and despite the Iraqi Army being far from ready to stand on their own.
During the 2012 election, Obama repeatedly, ad nauseam, reminded everyone who would listen that he personally had ended the war in Iraq, proud that he had fulfilled his campaign promise.
Of course, now that the Islamic State has arisen to fill the vacuum left when our troops pulled out, and the country has descended into a brutally violent mess, Obama is attempting to rewrite history, claiming leaving Iraq was “not my decision,” and blaming the entire mess on Bush, as he has a tendency to do.
Everything is always Bush’s fault with Obama, even a decision that Obama made long after Bush was out of office. 2016 just can’t get here fast enough.
American soldiers discovered more than 4,990 chemical munitions in Iraq, according to Iraqi and US officials and previously classified intelligence documents, which may now be in the hands of Islamic State militants.
For much of the duration of the Iraq War, which saw US soldiers open a military invasion against the Ba’athist country in March 2003 amid tremendous international outcry, US forces “repeatedly encountered, and on six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons” leftover from the Iraq-Iran War, reported the New York Times.
The hefty eight-part report, largely based on interviews and highly redacted intelligence documents, said “17 American service members and seven Iraqi police officers…were exposed to nerve or mustard agents” between 2004 and 2011.
The article detailed the harrowing chemical encounters of several servicemen, including Sergeant Duling, who in August 2008 unwittingly led his unit into a munitions pit outside Baghdad.
“This is mustard agent,” he said, after carrying out an examination of the contents of the rusting artillery. “We’ve all been exposed.”
At first blush, it may seem inconceivable that the United States, which had argued for an invasion of Iraq on the grounds that it was harboring weapons of mass destruction (an accusation that the UN weapons inspectors on the ground in Iraq prior to the American invasion/occupation had proven to be incorrect), would want to keep the discovery of WMDs in Iraq under wraps.
One reason for the hush-up, the report suggests, is that the United States was largely responsible for Iraq having chemical weapons in the first place.
“In five of six incidents in which troops were wounded by chemical agents, the munitions appeared to have been designed in the United States, manufactured in Europe and filled in chemical agent production lines built in Iraq by Western companies,” it said.
Many of the casings were M110s, which the United States military had developed decades ago to disperse white phosphorous or mustard gas.
“The United States also exported the shells and the technology behind them,” the Times reported. “When Iraq went arms shopping in the 1980s, it found manufacturers in Italy and Spain willing to deal their copies. By 1988, these two countries alone had sold Iraq 85,000 empty M110-type shells, according to confidential United Nations documents.”
This is where the story begins to get very disturbing.
During the Iraq-Iran War (1980-1988), Baghdad actively sought the development of chemical weapons with the help of a number of Western countries, including the United States, West Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and France, according to internal Iraqi documents.
It is has already been widely documented that at least 50,000 Iranian civilians and soldiers were killed by Iraqi chemical weapons in the course of the war.
As the Times report detailed, many of the chemical weapons incidents were centered around the now largely destroyed Muthanna State Establishment, which was “the center of Iraqi chemical agent production in the 1980s.”
This is especially worrying because since June, that sensitive area has been in the possession of the Islamic State, which recently appeared on the scene in northern Iraq and Syria with public displays of extreme savagery that included the alleged beheading of American and British journalists and aid workers, not to mention Christian babies.
So the question as to how the United States kept the exposure of its troops to chemical weapons contamination in Iraq secret for so long has taken a back seat to the more immediate question as to whether or not the Islamic State has also gained possession of chemical weapons.
On Sunday, former Vice President Dick Cheney predicted that the next attack on the United States would be “far deadlier” than the last one.
“We’re in a very dangerous period,” Cheney, who regularly appears on the US talkshow circuit despite the dismal record of the Bush administration, told the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol in a video interview. “I think it’s more threatening than the period before 9/11.
“I think 9/11 will turn out to be not nearly as bad as the next mass casualty attack against the United States, which, if and when it comes, will be with something far deadlier than airline tickets and box cutters.”
Does Mr. Cheney know something that the American public – much as it has been clueless about the chemical weapons in Iraq – does not yet know about?
That would be a far more disturbing revelation.