Erick Erickson: In his speech to the United Nations General Assembly today the President of the United States declared that the future does not belong to practicing Christians. Already, the media and the left are in full denial, probably based on their general lack of understanding of theology. This would have been a gaffe had Mitt Romney said it. But with Barack Obama, he’s just speaking bold truths. His bold truth declares that the future does not belong to practicing Christians.
The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied. Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims, and Shiite pilgrims. It is time to heed the words of Gandhi: “Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.” Together, we must work towards a world where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies, and that is the vision we will support.
Now, that’s the full paragraph so no one can claim I took him out of context.
But consider this.
It is an orthodox Christian belief that Mohammed is not a prophet. Actual Christians, as opposed to many of the supposed Christians put up by the mainstream media, believe that Christ is the only way to salvation. Believing that is slandering Mohammed. That’s just a fact. If you don’t believe me, you go into the MIddle East and proclaim Christ is the way, the truth, and the life and see what happens to your life.
I just watched the video (on the Glenn Beck show) of B. Hussein Obama saying these words. To reprise a phrase from the Clinton years, let’s parse them a bit differently that does Erick Erickson (above).
Erickson makes a great point that Christianity is per se slandering “the prophet of Islam.” Yet B. Hussein Obama declares that: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” Given that in this speech he effectively dismissed the YouTube video / movie that allegedly gave inspired the latest round of Muslim peace, err, self-expression, he certainly doesn’t believe that the video-makers or their ilk will in any plausible way own the future. So, upon reflection, isn’t a more plausible interpretation that B. Hussein Obama is giving a “dog whistle” to the Islamic world, saying that he supports an eventual (global) Islamic Caliphate?
B. Hussein Obama’s following sentence, that begins with “Yet to be credible …” Isn’t a plausible explanation of this is another “dog whistle” telling the Islamists that for tactical reasons they should pretend to be tolerant and respectful, to be more subtle as they pursue Islamic hegemony, so as to fool the useful idiots and willfully blind political correctobots in the West? NOTE that he didn’t say anything like “the future must neither belong to those who slander the image of Christ …” etc.