Obama has turned America into Islam’s universal enforcer
As I’ve said before, Obama keeps throwing so many things at us at once, and so many unprecedented and radical and appalling things, that it’s not possible to catch even a fraction of them immediately and understand their significance. Thus over the last few days, I’ve kept noticing new things about his Cairo speech, but missing others, and then noticing them too, often due to readers’ bringing them out. This morning Howard Sutherland sent an e-mail which began:
“I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”Two days ago, in “The first caliph of the West?”, we discussed the significance of Obama’s amazing statement that it’s his responsibility to fight negative stereotypes of Islam. But I had not zeroed in on the phrase, “wherever they appear.” As soon as I did so just now, I was reminded of George W. Bush’s 2005 Inaugural:
We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands…. Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self government…. Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation’s security, and the calling of our time…. It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in the world.Thus for Bush, any tyranny anywhere, any lack of liberty anywhere, is an immediate threat to our nation’s liberty and security, and therefore it becomes the President’s urgent constitutional responsibility to end tyranny everywhere.
Obama, like Bush, also claims a universal mandate, except that Obama’s universal mandate is not to end tyranny everywhere, so as to protect American liberty and security; Obama’s mandate is to end negative stereotypes of Islam everywhere, so as to protect Islam.
In my 2007 article, “The Hyper-Bushians,” I pointed out how Mark Steyn and other neocons fully endorsed Bush’s message of forcefully pushing democracy everywhere:
[W]hat I’ve described as the Hyper-Bushian position—democratization, plus real action backing it up—remains the neoconservatives’ fundamental ideological and rhetorical stance…. Given their basic suppositions about the world, the neocons have no choice but to be Hyper-Bushians. As Steyn writes in his book, there are only three possible Western responses to Islam: to submit to it, to destroy it, or to reform it; and since the first two are out of the question, that leaves only the third, reform; and since our very survival depends on Islam being reformed, we cannot leave the reform up to the Muslims, but must take steps ourselves to assure that it takes place.So, because the Bushians rejected Separationism out of hand, and since they also didn’t want to surrender to Islam, that left them with only one policy option: intrusive universal democratization, or Hyper-Bushianism. But there’s a further corollary to this. If you reject Separationism, and if you also reject Hyper-Bushianism (as Obama, of course, does), that leaves you with only one policy option: accommodation and surrender to Islam. By defining the responsibility of the President of the United States as “fighting against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear,” which means nothing less than punishing and silencing truthful criticism of Islam, wherever it appears, Obama has defined the United States of America as an agent of the Islamic agenda to Islamize the world.
Here is Howard Sutherland’s e-mail.
“I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”
Mark A. writes:
Ahh…but if liberalism ruins our society (and the ruin is almost complete), who will do the “enforcing?” My friends in the military tell me *all* of the good people have left, are leaving, or are planning to leave. I have heard it is becoming infested with gang bangers, welfare moms, and street trash. A friend in the Navy told me the minute you turn your head from your possessions on a Navy ship, whatever is valuable and unlocked will be stolen by your fellow “heroes.” Good luck, defending Islam, Mr. Obama. You will need itLA replies:
Good point. When I say that Obama has turned America into Islam’s enforcer, I mean that is his policy, not that he will be able to carry it out, just as spreading democracy was Bush’s policy, but, other than in the two countries we occupied and nursed, he was not able to carry it out. But the attempt to carry it out can be damaging enough.Paul T. writes:
Alternative interpretation of “I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”LA replies:
Yes, you may be right. Except, if any non-Muslim country sought to defend itself from Islam, Obama is clearly telling us that he would side with the Muslims and against that country.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at June 08, 2009 12:00 PM | Send