Obama – Dividing By Religion, Part Three – Islam

This article addresses seven segments into which President Obama has divided the U.S.  Presented in seven installments, others are on this website but, since this one is “Dividing by Religion” it’s under “Faith” rather than “National”.  The Preface explains why this topic will be addressed in three parts.  This is Part Three.

A Challenge to 2012 Voters – Place National Interests Ahead of Personal Interests

Installment Four – Dividing by Religion, Part Three

Preface: Reading this article may generate various responses. Readers may be amused, annoyed, angered, enraged but none should be confused.  The article isn’t politically correct.  Sacred cows will not be spared.  Oxen will be gored.  Still, thoughtful readers may find challenging questions that – in their heart of hearts – cause them to consider whether they are (1) part of the problem (2) love their country sufficiently to become part of the solution by placing the nation’s interests ahead of personal gain.

It’s well established that one of Obama’s re-election campaign strategies is to divide the electorate into segments loyal to him and thereby conquer Mitt Romney.  Obama’s carefully crafted divisions thus far include: age; economic status; gender, national origin; race; religion; sexual orientation.  Each segment will be addressed with questions and challenges directed to members of that segment.

In writing this installment it was apparent three parts are necessary due to Obama’s blatant attacks on Christian’s religious freedoms and his unqualified support of Islam.  The three parts: (1) Obama’s Attacks on Christianity, Judaism and Israeli national security (2) an American citizen’s excellent refutation of Obama’s claim “Islam has always been a part of American History“ which segues into (3) Obama’s unqualified support of Islam.

Let the record show: Obama chose to divide the electorate by religion.  This installment addresses Obama’s unqualified support of Islam. Reference sources are included for readers to access and decide if Obama – given his record on these important issues – deserves to be re-elected.

Unqualified Support of Islam by Obama and his Cabinet members:

Obama signaled his support of Islam before his election.  In his book, “The Audacity of Hope” Obama said: “I will stand with them (Arab and Pakistani Americans) should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”  (Quote from “The Audacity of Hope” [pg. 261])

In his June 4, 2009 Cairo speech, Obama apologized to Muslims for what he, and they, consider transgressions against them by the U.S.   He also claimed: “I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America’s story”.

That claim was the basis for Part Two of this Installment, “Dividing by Religion” and is accessible on the Patriot Statesman.

Since there are many instances of Obama and his Cabinet members’ unqualified support of Islam, this list is limited to the more egregious:

  • Obama insisted Muslims have the right to build a mosque at “ground zero” of the 9/11 attack.  Obama told an August 13, 2010 “crowd gathered at the White House … to observe the Islamic holy month of Ramadan”:
  • “(Muslims have) the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, (Ground Zero) in accordance with local laws and ordinances,” he said. “This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable.”
  • The president held formal Iftar Dinners at White House celebrating the end of Ramadan each year 2009-2012
  • To be fair, Obama also celebrated Easter each year by continuing the annual Easter Egg Roll dating back to 1878.   President Obama and family – along with religious icon, the Easter Bunny – have made an appearance at each EER starting in 2009.  There’s no mention of the true Easter celebration, Jesus’ resurrection that the prophet, Mohammed, claims didn’t happen.
  • Including Religious exemptions in the ACA that may allow Muslims to opt out of health insurance since Islamic law considers ACA insurance to be “wagering”.
  • Appointing “devout Muslims” to high-level Department of Homeland Security (DHS) positions.  (Do press releases ever mention “Devout” Jews or Christians?)
  • Granting, in Feb. 2011, de facto recognition to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the USA, an organization previously outlawed in Egypt because their 21st century objectives include: Goal: “a worldwide caliphate governed by Islamic law”; Motto: “Allah is our objective.  The prophet is our leader.  Jihad is our way.  Dying in the way of Allah is our greatest hope.”
  • U.S. Representative Bachman (R-MN) repeated her call for the DHS Inspector General to investigate apparent “deep penetration in the halls of our United States government by the Muslim Brotherhood,” Bachmann told the St. Cloud Times, a Minnesota newspaper. “It appears there are individuals who are associated with the Muslim Brotherhood who have positions, very sensitive positions, in our Department of Justice, our Department of Homeland Security, potentially even in the National Intelligence Agency.”
  • As usual, rather than investigating serious charges, misinformed Congresspersons and mainstream media attacked the messenger.
  • The most ridiculous response: accusing Bachman of “McCarthyism”, reaching back nearly 60 years into the Left’s name-calling grab bag with their habit of calling names when they can’t deny serious charges.

The above list could be more extensive but it’s timely to set the stage for a better understanding of Islam within the U.S.

Many Christians, who support Islam, do so as a religious freedom issue without understanding the totality of Islam which is comprised of religion, culture, economic, legal (primarily Sharia law), military and political components. Focusing on only one or two of those components can lead to blind spots concerning others.  I wrote to U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutcheson expressing my concerns about Sharia law.  She replied that I shouldn’t be concerned because “the U.S. Constitution protects us from Sharia”.

However – when the state of Oklahoma enacted legislation to prohibit the introduction of Sharia law into Oklahoma’s legal system – the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) instituted a lawsuit by an Oklahoma Muslim who claimed prohibiting Sharia law would violate his religious freedom.  A federal judge agreed and stayed the legislation.

Also some Christians tell about a co-worker neighbor or friend they claim is a moderate Muslim.  Here’s a valid test: for Christians who view Islam as a peaceful, tolerant religion; ask your “moderate Muslim” three questions.  Do you agree:

(1)  Israel has the right to exist as a separate nation?

(2)  American Christians and Jews should be free to provide U.S. Muslims information about Christianity and Judaism?

(3)  Sharia law should be introduced into the U.S. legal system although it conflicts with the U.S. Constitution?

A truly moderate Muslim will answer: “Yes”, “Yes”, “No”.   Immoderate Muslims will parse terms and words as President Clinton did with “Define ‘is’.”  Immoderate Muslims excel in avoiding and deflecting difficult questions.  That’s not surprising since Sharia law allows Muslims to tell non-believers one thing and fellow Muslims the exact opposite.

CAIR is the most outspoken defender of Islam in the U.S but CAIR was affirmed by the U.S. Justice Department as an American front organization for the terrorist group Hamas.  It was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing trial in American history.   The U.S. Department of Justice started an investigation of the unindicted CAIR officials in 2001.  AG Holder terminated that investigation in 2011.  For a different (than the Obama administration) perspective on AG Holder’s decision, you can read “Did Obama and Holder Scuttle Terror Finance Prosecutions?”

However, ask: “How is it possible for CAIR, an unindicted co-conspirator, to mount legal challenges to supposed ‘religious freedom’ issues”?  You may conclude Holder dismissed the 10-year investigation to give CAIR better legal standing in U.S. courts.

Some Islamic apologists and supporters claim the 9/11/2001 Twin Trade Towers and Pentagon attacks were retaliation for U.S. aggression against Islamic countries but the U.S. wasn’t engaged in hostilities then nor when the Twin Towers were first attacked in 1993.  Those attacks occurred because radical Islamists, then and now, disapprove of U.S. lifestyles and behavior.  To them, the USA is “the great Satan”.

Muslims claim: Islam is the only true religion and Mohammed it only prophet; “Islamic law is perfect, universal and eternal.”  So, it’s necessary to have a basic knowledge of Sharia law.  Following are some facts from “Sharia Law for Non-Muslims” authored by Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam.

Sharia law: Amazon.com: Sharia Law for Non-Muslims … http://www.amazon.com/Sharia-Law-Non-Muslims-Bill- … Amazon.com: Sharia Law for Non-Muslims … http://www.amazon.com/Sharia-Law-Non-Muslims-Bill- … Amazon.com: Sharia Law for Non-Muslims … http://www.amazon.com/Sharia-Law-Non-Muslims-Bill- …

  • defines non-Muslims as “Kafirs” who are inferior to Muslims. (Page 19)
  • is deadly for Kafirs, both female and male.  Sharia allows Kafirs to be: lied to; mocked; plotted against; terrorized and beheaded.  (Pages 18-19)
  • contains no freedoms of religion, press, speech, thought or artistic expression;
  • there is no equality of people; non-Muslims aren’t equal to a Muslim;
  • there are no equal rights for women; women can be beaten;
  • a non-Muslim cannot bear arms.  (Page 3)
  • Muslims believe Sharia law is directly from Allah and must, therefore, prevail over the “man-made” U.S. Constitution.  (Page 3)

Muslims tell Christians and Jews they are “People of the Book” but:

  • Christians – only those who believe Jesus was a man who was a prophet of Allah; there is no Trinity; Jesus was not crucified, not resurrected; that he will return to establish Sharia law.
  • Jews – must believe Mohammed is the last in the line of Jewish prophets.

Otherwise, both are also Kafirs to be treated the same as other Kafirs.  Page 19


(1)    Do you agree that Muslims’ right to religious freedom in the U.S. entitles them to introduce Sharia law into the U.S. legal system although Sharia denies non-Muslim citizens their rights of religion, press and speech?

(2) Will you investigate Islam in its totality rather than believe the propaganda of CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood while they seek to subvert from within? 


  • Check out other Neil Stovall articles on this website, e.g.
    • “Reasons for Opposing President Obama and His Re-election; “Does Obama Deserve a Passing Grade on Foreign Relations?”; “Suggested Presidential Debate Questions for Barack Obama”
    • Read the other two parts of this installments “Dividing by Religion.  Parts One and Two are already posted.
    • Read the other six installments of Obama’s divisions of the electorate.
      • Installments 1, 2, 3 are posted; 5, 6, 7 will follow.
  • Independently of local Muslims, investigate Islam in its totality. Also, learn more about Sharia law and ALAC (American Laws for American Courts).
    • A good beginning source: “Sharia Law for Non-Muslims” by Bill Warner.
    • Unless you can refute the information herein about Islam and Sharia law, challenge your state legislature to introduce ALAC in their next session.

Leave a Reply

Using Gravatars in the comments - get your own and be recognized!

XHTML: These are some of the tags you can use: <a href=""> <b> <blockquote> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>