being an american is about more than where you were born, its about our culture, our way of life, a mindset. you either got it or you dont.

25 Sep

Loves America, will protect it and its values at all cost.

not so much…..

groveling, bowing, apologizing to destructive savage backwards people for our way of life is
un-american, leaves us less safe and does NOT appease those who hate us.

the definition of slander under sharia law. It is quite clear, slander means spreading news about someone that he does not wish to be known. it does not mean telling a lie about some one. the islamic mindset will be to hear one thing from obamas speach, the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet. and now they know they have been given the green light by a groveling obama.

from infidel bloggers aliance comes this~~

The Future Must Belong To Those Who Would Slander The Prophet of Islam, If They Damn Well Feel Like It


Fuck you, Barack Obama, you fucking traitorous pussy.

Try standing up for the US Constitution, are you promised you would do in your Oath of Office.

President Obama: The Future Must Not Belong to Those Who Slander the Prophet of Islam

President Barack Obama addressed the United Nations General Assembly this morning and claimed the future must not belong to those who target Coptic Christians in Egypt, those who bully women, the corrupt few who steal a country’s resources, and those who slander the prophet of Islam.
The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied. Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims, and Shiite pilgrims. It is time to heed the words of Gandhi: “Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.”

Go read the whole thing.

There is so much to criticize in what Barack Obama said.

For starters let’s point out, it would be hard to slander Mohammed the dog of a man, because his own “holy” scriptures, the Koran and the Hadith, proclaimed that he had sex with children, called for the murder of Jews, the rape of women, the taking of women as the spoils of war, as well as the murder of gays, apostates, and other uncooperative Infidels.

What lower thing could I say about such a man?

He was a scum, rife through with evil, malice, filth, perversion, and mental illness.

And, he is the “prophet of Islam”.

I agree with Bare Naked Islam on this:

I consider that statement a death threat to me and all anti-Islam bloggers, authors, and activists by the President of the United States.

UPDATE – I want you to think about something here.

Barack Obama could have used the word “insult”, he could have used the word “denigrate”, or he could have used the words like “lie about,”  “denounce”, or “indict”.

But Barack Obama chose to use the word SLANDER.


Here is the legal definition of the word Slander:

Oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit. Damages (payoff for worth) for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malicious intent, since such damages are usually difficult to specify and harder to prove. Some statements such as an untrue accusation of having committed a crime, having a loathsome disease, or being unable to perform one’s occupation are treated as slander per se since the harm and malice are obvious, and therefore usually result in general and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Words spoken over the air on television or radio are treated as libel (written defamation) and not slander on the theory that broadcasting reaches a large audience as much if not more than printed publications.

Barack Obama is a Lawyer, right? We can assume he chooses his words, especially when he dips into his grab bag of legal jargon, with intent.

One must wonder, maybe even assume, that if Barack Obama used a word Slander, it is a loaded gun pointed at people who would criticize Islam.

Barack Obama may want to change the law. He may want to pursue an agreement whereby the United States is bound by an international law against blasphemy. We need to take this seriously.

This is a threat to Freedom of Speech.

The man must be removed from office.
midnight rider throwing his convoluted thinking in:

I don’t know if Obama intended the word “slander” or not. He has certainly shown a propensity to not always choose his words carefully. Or perhaps he appears not to choose his words carefully when in fact he does and therefor directs or, more appropriately, misdirects the conversation over here so we ignore something going on over there.

Regardless, he likely did not write this speech himself. Far too busy golfing and gladhanding it on The View, grabbing Whoopi’s butt in the Green Room and Joy’s tits in the toilet. But whoever did was careful in the phrasing and very possibly why Pastorius and others have not seen any other outrage over this.

In the same paragraph where slander and Islam are used the caution is also given to not desecrate Christ or deny the Holocaust, thereby seeming to compare and equate them. “Oh” say those not thinking it through “he’s saying we should show the same respect to all religions”

But he’s not, is he? Desecrate has no legal ramification, nor does deny. Nor destroy. But slander (and libel) most certainly does. And that word alone could be enough to incite muslims against those who would commit an “illegal” (slander) act against them and their prophet.

If he didn’t know it or realize it Obama certainly should have. He has the Harvard Law degree, after all. If he did know it then it is an open legal threat, possibly a way of paving support for a U.N. move to outlaw slander against Mohammed and Islam, as Morsi has called on them to do.

But more importantly, as President of the United States, he should not have waded into something like this to begin with. First Amendment against establishing a religion and all that AND protecting free speech. And if he doesn’t believe it is a religious issue (then why is he speaking out) but a secular one well, then, all bets should be off, shouldn’t they?

Leave a comment

Posted by on September 25, 2012 in Uncategorized


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: