President Obama’s Double Standards When Muslims Murder Non-Muslims

April 25, 2013 6:52 pm 1 comment

Does President Obama have a different standard when Muslims murder and main non-Muslims in the USA?

The tragic murder of three people and wounding of 180 others, many grievously by two Muslim brothers with the 19-year old brother surviving his older brother has echoes of the 11/05/2009 Fort Hood massacre by U.S. Army major Nidal Hasan that caused 42 casualties,13 killed, 29 wounded.

In both cases, President Obama warned against “a rush to judgment”. Most recently: “That’s why we take care not to rush to judgment – not about motivations of individuals, certainly not about entire groups of people.”

A significant difference, concerning the Boston bombing: Obama said “the FBI was investigating the twin bombings as a terrorist act”.  He also admitted: “Anytime bombs are used to target innocent civilians, it is an act of terrorism.” Obama never mentioned terrorism in connection with the Fort Hood massacre.

Although Major Hasan shouted “God is great!” in Arabic as he opened fire on unarmed military personnel at Fort Hood and despite presentations to other military psychiatrists wherein the Major justified Muslims killing non-Muslims – after Obama, as Commander in Chief of U.S. Armed Forces, visited Fort Hood and spoke to military personnel and their families – news media reported “motivation for the attack was unknown”.  Eventually, the DOD categorized the Major’s rampage – “the deadliest attack on a U.S. military base (13 killed, 29 wounded)” – as “workplace violence”.

It was also reported – about “the 19-year-old: who is accused of helping carry out the attack that killed three people and wounded 180 others, many of them critically, near the finish line of Monday’s race.” – “No motive has been revealed for Monday’s attack.”

Earlier this year, a military judge set Maj. Nidal Hasan’s court-martial for May 29, 2013 at the Texas Army post.  After about four weeks of jury selection, testimony is expected to begin July 1.  If the trial starts on schedule, it will be slightly more than three and one-half years since the major’s murderous rampage.

So, if the Boston terrorist is afforded the same legal protections – albeit in civilian rather than military court – and numerous trial delays as has the murderous major, his trial might begin by October 2016.  Obviously, when President Obama calls for “no rush to judgment” for murderous Muslims, his call is heeded in spades.

It’s appears Obama views Muslims murdering non-Muslims, even on U.S. soil, as a lesser crime wherein the perpetrators’ civil and legal rights take precedent over their victims and survivors rights to justice.  One might reasonably expect a U.S. President, who is Commander in Chief of U.S. Armed Forces, to want speedy justice for victims and survivors of the Fort Hood attack.

Now, it’s time to refute the President’s recent statement about not rushing to judgment: “That’s why we take care not to rush to judgment – not about motivations of individuals, certainly not about entire groups of people.”

By looking back at two situations, it’s obvious neither Obama nor supporters follow his high-minded advice.  In the first situation the President himself rushed to judgment. In the other, Obama failed to warn about rushing to judgment and allowed civil rights groups and mainstream media to convict an alleged killer in the court of public opinion.  In both cases, the victims were blacks; their alleged attackers were not black.

In July 2009, “President Obama said that police in Cambridge, Massachusetts, ‘acted stupidly’ in arresting a prominent black Harvard professor … after a confrontation at the man’s home.”

Regardless of any subsequent actions to ameliorate his hasty statement, Obama clearly rushed to judgment about one policeman’s motivations as well as the mental acuity of Cambridge police.

When Trayvon Martin was killed February 26, 2012, did Obama warn against a rush to judgment against George Zimmerman?  Did he warn against pre-judging motivations of Zimmerman or local police?  If he did, his warnings were unheeded by civil rights activists and mainstream media who virtually lynched Zimmerman in the court of human opinion.

Eventually, a trial lawyer called for facts to decide the trial’s outcome. Mark NeJame, “a CNN contributor who has practiced law, mainly as a criminal defense attorney, for more than 30 years” wrote: “Although Trayvon Martin’s killing is a tragedy at the highest level, his death and the prosecution of George Zimmerman symbolize so much more.  The issues they raise belong in the public discourse, but should not influence or cloud the facts or outcome of the case.”

Finally, consider a “what if” regarding the Boston Marathon bombers.  What if – instead of two Muslim brothers allegedly killing three and wounding 180 others, some grievously – the two brothers were Anglo and Christian originally from Mississippi but Boston residents for about 10 years?

Mainstream media restrained by the same Political Correctness – that prevented the U.S. Military and FBI from acting upon Major Hasan’s radical statements and PowerPoint presentations to other military psychiatrists – have refrained from labeling the alleged perpetrators as “militant Muslims” or “radical Islamists’.

However, in our what if scenario, the Anglo brothers would be pilloried as “domestic militia”, “fundamentalist Christians”, “white supremacists”, “members of a vast right wing conspiracy” and “domestic terrorists whose objective was to destroy the venerable Boston Marathon”.  The Justice Department would try the case in federal court in order to seek the death penalty.  Liberals would call for the bombings to be classified as hate crimes so penalties could be doubled.

Liberals and their media counterparts may complain the “what if” scenario impugns their journalistic integrity.  But, if they have a scintilla of honest analytical reason remaining, they will admit a simple what if understates the delight and fervor with which they would attack the youthful, transplanted Mississippians if they were the actual culprits.

1 Comment

  • Wow, interesting take on two very incendiary incidents in our nation.
    Labeling individuals to certain groups serves the purpose of inflaming passions from either the left or right. Muslims, in of of themselves, do not kill people, but people of the Muslim faith will kill innocents for whatever twisted purpose they adhere too. Individuals hiding behind the label of Fundamental Christens or some far right goons do the same thing; different labels, same stupidity!!!
    I have read about the Army’s decision to classify the Fort Hood act as “domestic violence” and find the decision to be exactly what the Army always does, try to stop monetary claims being made against the Army. It is done over and over again with our veterans. There is a movement by the victims to have that particularly disgusting “domestic violence” label changed to that of Terrorism so that they can be able to receive greater compensation (as they well deserve)for this despicable act of blood vengeance. Because the act was done by an individual who professes to be Muslim and uses the “killing of Muslims” as the excuse for this murderess act should not indict all people of the Muslim faith. The same can be said for the “lone wolf” killers of the Boston Marathon.
    I think what the President wants this nation to do is not judge the label of the individual, but the individual themselves.
    I find the argument that there is a delay for Muslims in our judicial system wrong. It took a year or two to prosecute Timothy McVeigh. Terrorism is terrorism, weather it be from inside our own population, or influences by foreign maggots.
    We are a country of “due process” and it is a rock solid foundation of our democracy. No matter the act, people have a right to their day in court, and the minuet we start messing with “due process” is the minuet we lose our freedoms and our Democracy.

Leave a Reply


Other News

  • Christian Persecution World Russia Declares ‘Holy War’ On Islamic State

    Russia Declares ‘Holy War’ On Islamic State

    The Orthodox Christian Church, which is reclaiming its traditional role in post-Soviet Russia, has just described its government’s fight against the Islamic State and other jihadi groups in Syria as a “holy war.”

    According to Vsevolod Chaplin, head of the Church’s Public Affairs Department,

    The fight with terrorism is a holy battle and today our country is perhaps the most active force in the world fighting it. The Russian Federation has made a responsible decision on the use of armed forces to defend the People of Syria from the sorrows caused by the arbitrariness of terrorists. Christians are suffering in the region with the kidnapping of clerics and the destruction of churches. Muslims are suffering no less.

    This is not a pretext to justify intervention in Syria.

    Read more →
  • 2nd Amendment Faith Oregon Shooting – When Tragedy Happens Let’s Focus On The Cause And Not The Tools Used

    Oregon Shooting – When Tragedy Happens Let’s Focus On The Cause And Not The Tools Used

    While the blood was still dripping from those martyrs who, in front of an evil man armed with a gun, asked them if they were Christians and those strong in the faith said they were. He shot them in the head. While those who were lost or weak said nothing he spared their lives and shot them in their legs.

    Barrack Hussein Obama angrily ran to the cameras to use this opportunity to say that guns being in the hands of the law-abiding Americans is the problem, and we need to restrict the 2nd amendment to spare the lives of “we the people.”

    This is nuts; guns do not kill people, people kill people! You can test this fact in your own home right now. (Do not worry no one will get hurt).

    Read more →
  • 2nd Amendment Faith Gun Free Zones Are Killing Zones

    Gun Free Zones Are Killing Zones

    How did you feel when you heard of the shootings in Oregon this week? Was the first thing that came to your mind the thought that if we only had stricter gun control legislation, this kind of tragedy could have been prevented?

    If you listened to idiotic liberals, like President Barack “Insane” Obama, you might believe that. It is my contention that liberalism is a mental disorder based on the rejection of God and His principles, and extreme irresponsibility.

    Read more →
  • National Where’s the Beef, in Republican candidates, in 2015?

    Where’s the Beef, in Republican candidates, in 2015?

    What type of Republican Leader do you want in 2015?

    As we look at elections coming up quickly in 2015, as well as the very important 2016 election cycle, what type of “Republican” leaders do you want to shape the future of your county and country?

    Do you ever wonder why it is that the current crop of Republicans are not declaring, at every media interview, “These ills have been brought to you by the Democrat Party!” when speaking of Obamacare, the hordes of immigrants being allowed to destroy our country, the Iranian nuclear treaty, the “Black Lives Matter” racial division rhetoric, the attack on the defense of marriage, the 94 million Americans not currently in the work force,

    Read more →
  • National Child protection services Sentences Baby To Death ON 9/11/2015

    Child protection services Sentences Baby To Death ON 9/11/2015

    Child protection services should be self-explanatory based on the simplicity of its name. But they are doing exactly opposite of their name in many places. Wynne, Arkansas is one such place.

    A baby has been sentenced to death and will be executed on Friday, September 11, 2015 and Arkansas Department of HUMAN SERVICES (DHS) – Division of Children and Family Services- Central Office will facilitate the delivery of the baby’s 10-year-old to the abortion clinic.

    On August 29, 2015 20-year-old Justin Smith was arrested and charged with three counts of rape and one count of endangering the welfare of a minor. His “alleged” victim is a 10-year-old.

    Read more →