We reported here on Islamist Muslim cleric when he was invited to a meeting with members of the Obama administration national security council. Bayyah’s exploits are well known in the proper circles — such as his backing of a 2004 fatwa that advocated violent resistance against Americans fighting in Iraq. So it was probably overlooked by many when he was personally mentioned and praised in Barack Hussein Obama’s UN General Assembly speech on Wednesday.
As reported by the Washington Free Beacon, “President Barack Obama favorably quoted and praised on Wednesday in his speech before the United Nations a controversial Muslim cleric whose organization has reportedly endorsed the terror group Hamas and supported a fatwa condoning the murder of U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Obama in his remarks offered praise to controversial cleric Sheikh Abdallah Bin Bayyah and referred to him as a moderate Muslim leader who can help combat the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant’s (ISIL or ISIS) radical ideology.”
Is this the new normal of the Obama administration to categorize “moderate” islamists as praiseworthy just because they tend not to publicly behead people? Sheik Bayyah’s rhetoric is just as dangerous and truly controversial. It seems that Obama is so strenuously seeking to defend Islam that he is willing to embrace Hamas, Hezbollah, and other islamist groups.
“This is not the first time that the Obama administration has extoled Bin Bayyah, who also has served as the vice president of a Muslim scholars group founded by a radical Muslim Brotherhood leader who has called “for the death of Jews and Americans,” according to Fox News and other reports. The State Department’s Counterterrorism Bureau (CT) was forced to issue multiple apologies earlier this year after the Washington Free Beacon reported on its promotion of Bin Bayyah on Twitter.”
So why would Obama blatantly advocate and promote Bin Bayyah on the great stage of the UN General Assembly knowing this — or did he not know, or did he just disregard what is known is his narcissistic belligerence?
The Beacon reports, “on Wednesday before the UN Obama stated, “The ideology of ISIL or al Qaeda or Boko Haram will wilt and die if it is consistently exposed, confronted, and refuted in the light of day, according to a White House transcript of his remarks. Look at the new Forum for Promoting Peace in Muslim Societies—Sheikh bin Bayyah described its purpose: ‘We must declare war on war, so the outcome will be peace upon peace,’” Obama said, quoting the controversial cleric.”
I call taquiyya on that. As well, why would Obama stand before the UN and us here in America declaring that Islam teaches peace? I can provide just a few examples from history to refute that assertion.
What is going on with Obama and this administration? Why would he try to make a comparative assessment between ISIS and Ferguson, Missouri? Here we are stepping up security awareness in America — specifically New York and New Jersey — after Obama has said al-Qaida is decimated and on the run, Iraq is stable, ISIS is a “JV” team, and there’s no “imminent threat” to our homeland.
Osama bin Laden is dead, “What difference at this point does it make” — bin Laden’s death was a good thing but not the seminal end to the war against Islamo-fascism and jihadism. However, Osama’s death by heroic US Navy SEAL Team VI members ended up just being a campaign slogan. The last thing we need to do is embrace some controversial Islamic cleric.
As reported by the Beacon, “Patrick Poole, a reporter and terrorism analyst who has long tracked Bin Bayyah, expressed shock that the Obama administration would endorse the cleric on the world stage. “It is simply amazing that just a few months ago the State Department had to publicly apologize for tweeting out it’s support for Bin Bayyah, only to have Barack Obama go before the leaders of the entire world and publicly endorse Bin Bayyah’s efforts,” Poole said. “It seems that nothing can stop this administration’s determination to rehabilitate Bin Bayyah’s image, transforming him from the Islamic cleric who issued the fatwa to kill Americans in Iraq and calling for the death of Jews to the de facto White House Islamic mufti,” he said. This type of mentality has contributed to the administration’s foreign policy failures in the region,” Poole said.”
America does not need a Grand Mufti or a National Imam – so where are those secular humanists complaining about a Muslim cleric meeting in the White House on national security matters? Yep, crickets again, as always with the ever hypocritical progressive socialist Left. America certainly does not need a president heaping accolades on a man who once called for the death of our men and women in uniform.
One word: unconscionable.