U.S. Policy Defending Sharia, Not American Citizens

U.S. Sec. of State Hilliary Clinton with Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi (Photo: U.S. State Dept.)

U.S. Sec. of State Hilliary Clinton with Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi (Photo: U.S. State Dept.)

by Clare M. Lopez

America’s involvement in the global jihad against Western civilization—on the side of the jihadis—is accelerating. Instead of standing firm as leader of the free world and defender of inalienable human rights, U.S. policy is shifting demonstrably to the defense of those who systematically deny such rights to their own people and seek to suppress them everywhere.

Since 2009, U.S. foreign policy has backed Al-Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood power plays in Libya, Egypt and now Syria, too. The U.S. Department of State is working closely with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), whose top objective is the criminalization of the criticism of Islam.

U.S. troops in Afghanistan are subject to suicidal Rules of Engagement (ROEs) drafted in deference to Islamic law by commanders desperate to appease Islamic sensibilities. At home, the White House cultivates relationships with CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations)/HAMAS and Muslim Brotherhood leadership figures and associates. Instructors, trainers and any curriculum that would describe accurately the link between Islamic doctrine, law, and scripture and Islamic terrorism have been methodically purged from U.S. government, intelligence and law enforcement classrooms.

And now, an American citizen, a pastor, has just been sentenced to death in absentia by an Egyptian state security court for his alleged involvement in promoting an obscure online film called “The Innocence of Muslims.” Egyptian Judge Saif al Nasr Soliman handed down the death penalty on charges of “insulting the Islamic religion” on November 28, 2012 for Florida Christian pastor Terry Jones and seven expatriate Egyptian Coptic Christians who are reported to have helped produce and promote the video.

The low-budget film was made in the U.S. and accurately, if crudely, depicts some of the less admirable episodes from the Sirat Rasul Allah (biography of the Muslim prophet Mohammed). Orchestrated demonstrations broke out across the Muslim world in September, 2012 involving thousands of angry people who’d never seen the film and probably had no access to the Internet anyway (where the film’s 14-minute trailer had been posted for over two months at that point).

Instead of taking the opportunity to explain the U.S.’s commitment to First Amendment free speech rights, the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were quick to disclaim any responsibility for the video and attempted to assuage Islamic feelings by sending out a stream of Twitter apologies (that were later deleted):


We condemn the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims— US Embassy Cairo (@USEmbassyCairo) September 11, 2012

11 Sep 12

Worse yet, the September 11, 2012 Ansar al-Shariah assault on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens, his staffer Sean Smith, and two former Navy SEAL CIA security contractors, was deceitfully used by the Obama administration for weeks afterwards as an excuse to promote a narrative in perfect sync with the OIC and aimed at curbing American free speech rights.

Indeed, as if on cue, OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu (whom Secretary of State Clinton had welcomed to Washington, D.C. in December 2011 for closed door talks) called on for a “global ban on offending the character” of Mohammed on September 29, 2012 at the United Nations (UN).

Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood president Morsi, the U.S.’s new man in Cairo, likewise used the occasion of his first address to the UN to launch an attack on free speech, avowing that insults against Mohammed and Islam “are unacceptable” and adding that, “We reject this. We cannot accept it,” and “We will not allow anyone to do this by word or deed.”

Unfortunately in this, Morsi was only echoing the words of his sponsor, U.S. President Barack Obama, who spoke at the UN the day before and, after a perfunctory nod in the general direction of America’s foundational principles on free speech, let the world know that he really didn’t believe in it all that very much and in fact, felt a lot closer to the Islamic doctrine on slander than to the First Amendment.

After making no fewer than six deliberately misleading references to the Internet film narrative as the cause of the Benghazi base attack, he declared that, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” In a deferential bow to Morsi’s warning two days after the Benghazi attack that the prophet Mohammed “is a red line nobody can touch,” Obama was openly responding to Morsi’s reported request that he “take dissuasive measures against those trying to demolish relations with the U.S.”

While the death sentences against the film team were pronounced in absentia by an Egyptian sharia-compliant court, given the direction Obama, Clinton, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, Ambassador Susan Rice and a good part of the U.S. government seem to be leaning—empowering the forces of Islamic jihad and sharia abroad and embracing them at home—the guarantee of free speech enshrined in the U.S. Constitution begins to seem a little less ironclad than it did before.

As of this writing, there’s been not a peep of condemnation from a one of them for Egypt’s blatant act of aggression against a U.S. citizen and seven other Christians who fled sharia in Egypt and thought they’d found a safehaven in the West. The alleged producer of the film, an Egyptian Coptic expatriate who has used the name Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, was ostentatiously arrested on September 27, 2012, just as Hillary Clinton had promised to Charles Woods (the father of CIA contractor Tyrone Woods slain in the Benghazi attack) and subsequently sentenced to one year in jail, supposedly on probation violation charges. Sharia regimes like Egypt’s know how that works.

It is time to ask, “What exactly is official U.S. policy on jihad, sharia and the Islamic Awakening?” President Obama is now on record with two intelligence findings (one for the Libyan opposition and one for the Syrian opposition) that have committed the resources of the U.S. government to fighters whose ranks were known to be dominated by jihadis affiliated with Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood seeking to replace regional strong men with Islamic rule. The Benghazi base is reported to have been the command and control hub for U.S. efforts to remake the map of the Middle East in favor of the forces of sharia.

Open backing for Mohammed Morsi has not been balanced by so much as a hint of U.S. criticism for his dictatorial power grab in Egypt, undisguised support for the Muslim Brotherhood’s Gazan off-shoot HAMAS and its naked aggression against Israel, or failure to condemn the Egyptian judge’s death sentence against an American citizen.

In the absence of a clear White House policy statement that the liberty-crushing mandate of Islamic jihad and sharia are a clear and present danger to American national security, accompanied by a new National Security Strategy document that lays forth the plan to confront and defeat all who promote such ideology, it must be concluded that the current policy of the U.S. government is to empower and enrich the jihadist enemy. The American citizen is on his own.