Being dead because your government let you down should entitle you to more than a perfunctory nod to patriotism and an all-out campaign to not offend the Muslims whose fringe elements killed you. President Obama substituted his usual appeasement policy pronouncement for the ultimatum America should be sending in response to the murders of our people in Benghazi:
We will never stop working for the dignity and freedom that every person deserves, whatever their creed, whatever their faith.¹
Was Mr. Obama implying that his quest for dignity and freedom also applies to Americans? If so, why would he participate in broadcasting spots on Pakistani television featuring two of our most visible figures, America’s president and secretary of state, condemning the newest hair trigger for violence by Muslims? The offending video excuses nothing and the administration is slowly fessing up that it is a red herring and not the reason for the attacks in Libya.
The president talks about the “essence of American leadership,”² but the idea of having a leader in the White House has become alien to Americans inured to the absolute failure of leadership at home and abroad. The truth is that every person does not deserve dignity and freedom, most of all repeat offenders who represent a religion we tiptoe around for fear of causing offense that incites wanton violence and killing and worsens foreign relationships that are often more problematic than they are worth. Failure of leadership is defined by a president who can eulogize those killed in Libya in one breath and talk about dignity and freedom for all in the next. It is a mouthpiece like our secretary of state, who refers to Islam as a great religion when that great religion poses an unrelenting threat and has cost us untold billions to keep its violence at bay.
When the president took it upon himself to intervene in Libya in 2011, he talked about “the hard work of protecting our own people, as well as millions around the globe.”³ He told us that:
I believe that this movement of change cannot be turned back, and that we must stand alongside those who believe in the same core principles that have guided us through many storms: our opposition to violence directed at one’s own people; our support for a set of universal rights, including the freedom for people to express themselves and choose their leaders; our support for governments that are ultimately responsive to the aspirations of the people.4
No matter what we do to depose dictators that pose a threat to their citizens, our appeasement policy will not protect Americans abroad from Islam or put a stop to Iran’s quest to add a nuclear weapon to the arsenal of Middle Eastern Muslims. As for the aspirations of the people in the Middle East, we can only base our beliefs on their actions.
Iran found the web a little too worldwide for its tastes and is concentrating on developing its own, private version of the internet, but media outlets across the world carry news of our apologetic non-response to events in Libya and across the Middle East. Appeasement policy is the hallmark of the Obama presidency and the world knows it. We have broadcast to Muslims worldwide that no matter what happens our response will be muted, well considered, and delivered with our heads bowed out of respect for their great religion.
Is it possible we have a Muslim sympathizer for a President? Obama exhibits all the characteristics of being a Muslim. He certainly is anti American, always apologizing or making excuses to the world.
The appeasement policy of President Obama indicates he has little concern about what is going on in the Muslim world. He seems sympathetic and certainly doesn’t want to offend them. One of our ambassadors and three other Americans were murdered by Muslims and Obama comes up only with excuses for what took place. We should all be concerned about the president’s relationship to the Muslims and the path he is leading us down.