If zebras had pink stripes, they would resemble President Obama's "red lines" on Syria.
Obama's policy has communicated the following incoherent and spineless message: "In Libya we intervened to support liberty and prevent a bloodbath: Muammar Gaddafi threatened to hunt down his enemies, 'house by house, alley by alley.' Oh, is that what Basher Assad has been doing in Syria? Well, we can't intervene there because it's too risky. True, our isolationism could mean that the post-Assad Syria will -- as either a failed or Islamist state -- become Al Queda's next headquarters, but surely that can't be as bad as US intervention. Oh, are Syrians being slaughtered by the masses? Well, maybe intervention is justified on humanitarian grounds, but only if Assad uses chemical weapons. Tens of thousands killed by Assad's mortars, guns, tanks, scud missiles, and warplanes don't suffice. Oh, did the intelligence agencies of our allies (Britain, France, and Israel) conclude that Assad used chemical weapons? Well, we still need the international community to confirm these findings with a thorough investigation."
As he backtracked on the issue last week, Obama said, "We don't know how [the chemical weapons] were used, when they were used, who used them." White House officials have conceded that better information is obtainable only if the Syrian government allows international inspectors on the ground. But the notion of any cooperation from the Syrian regime is absurd in light of prior international efforts merely "to monitor" (much less inspect) anything in Syria. The Arab League observer mission, which started at the end of December 2011 and totaled 166 monitors, lasted about two months before security threats compelled its termination. Another toothless effort, the United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria established in 2012 (pursuant to UN Security Council Resolution 2043), involved about 300 unarmed military observers who also had to leave after two months because of safety concerns. more >>
Following reports that the Pentagon has been planning on court martialing soldiers for religious proselytization, the Department of Defense has clarified that only those forcing their beliefs on others will be punished.
"Service members can share their faith (evangelize), but must not force unwanted, intrusive attempts to convert others of any faith or no faith to one's beliefs (proselytization)," a Department of Defense spokesperson told the Alliance Defending Freedom on Thursday.
ADF had filed a Freedom of Information Act request on Wednesday seeking clarification over the issue, after concerns arose that evangelical members of the military might be targeted for sharing their faith with others. more >>
While publications like the Daily Beast and Mother Jones and networks like NPR are exposing the scandal of – gasp – Evangelical adoptions, perhaps they should cover a different religious scandal. Thanks to Jim Geraghty's must-read Morning Jolt e-mail (subscribe if you haven't — it's consistently my favorite read of the day), I ran across this chart from The Economist detailing Muslim attitudes towards Sharia law and apostasy:
Read it and weep. In Egypt, for example, more than 70 percent of the public supports Sharia law, and almost 90 percent of those individuals also support executing those who leave Islam. I feel comfortable saying this is a problem, a much, much greater problem than any alleged American "Islamophobia," and if we turn away from these statistics and believe the fault for continued jihadist bloodshed lies primarily within us — or is primarily the fault of Israel — then we are truly willfully blind.
To be clear, I do not share this chart as evidence of the nature of "true Islam." Unlike our recent presidents, I don't claim to understand the religion so deeply as to pontificate on its true nature. In fact, this chart shows considerable diversity of views (if only Egypt were like Kazakhstan), and I know many Muslims who not only are marvelous people but have provided indispensable help in the war against jihadist terror. Instead, I defy anyone to read this and argue that there aren't deep cultural problems — tied directly to religious belief — in vast and important swathes of the Muslim world. more >>
The Pentagon has hired a Jewish activist who has been outspoken in his opposition to conservative Christianity to serve as a consultant and develop new policies on religious tolerance.
Mikey Weinstein, founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, has spoken out against a number of conservative Christian groups, calling them "Fundamentalist Christian Monsters."
MRFF, which says its primary goal is to advocate for the separation of church and state, has said that most of its members are Christian. Weinstein, however, has decried what he calls "virulent religious oppression" coming from conservative groups, comparing them to "bigots" from the Deep South during the civil rights era. more >>
President Obama's new "religious tolerance" consultant to the Pentagon, Mikey Weinstein, wants Christian military service members who openly talk about their faith in uniform to be charged with treason, which is a crime punishable by death according to military law.
By employing his consulting services, and as Commander-in-Chief, President Obama is effectively endorsing Weinstein's recently voiced and written views such as: "Today, we face incredibly well-funded gangs of fundamentalist Christian monsters who terrorize their fellow Americans by forcing their weaponized [sic] and twisted version of Christianity upon their helpless subordinates in our nation's armed forces."
Weinstein's inflamed word picture helps the rest of us understand what the world looks like to those who live with their eyes wide shut and sort of sounds like that old cereal commercial… except this time Mikey doesn't like it – Christianity, that is, so no one else should. And Mikey's giving the rest of us an object lesson in intolerance by showing us what liberal secularists are about: "It's our way, or we shut you down." In this case, Obama's anti-Christian hit man, Weinstein, proposes that honorable men and women in the military who speak about their faith should be charged with a crime worthy of capital punishment. Smells like bull to me. more >>
Religious liberty groups have grave concerns after they learned the Pentagon is vetting its guide on religious tolerance with a group that compared Christian evangelism to "rape" and advocated that military personnel who proselytize should be court martialed.
The Military Religious Freedom Foundation is calling on the Air Force to enforce a regulation that they believe calls for the court martial of any service member caught proselytizing.
President Mikey Weinstein and others from his organization met privately with Pentagon officials on April 23. He said U.S. troops who proselytize are guilty of sedition and treason and should be punished – by the hundreds if necessary – to stave off what he called a "tidal wave of fundamentalists." more >>