The Arab media reported that Obama’s Libyan Ambassador Christopher Stevens was gang-raped and his body put on display after heathen Muslims murdered him. With the apparent exception of Obama, who claims the embassy attack was just a spontaneous incident and Hillary Clinton, who has been glaringly absent thus far, America is angered and appalled at the Muslim barbarism.
As barbaric and reprehensible as the behavior of those Muslims was, my observation is that they were simply behaving in kind with their depraved so-called prophet. The admin for the website Logan’s Warning, detailed Mohammad’s crazed debauchery in a December 6, 2011 article titled “Mohammad – The Poisoned Mind of Prophet Pervert Penetrates America.”
The article meticulously details what those willing to tell the truth about Islam have argued pursuant to the historical record: “Even after marrying a child [i.e., a six-year old who was still playing with dolls and with whom he had sex with starting when she was nine-years old], and marrying his daughter-in-law, Prophet Pervert was still not satisfied. So in his attempt to fulfill his sexual addiction he raped sex slaves. His insane perversions are not yet finished. Not only did Mohammad ok the rape of sex slaves, he also encouraged his cronies to impregnate them.”
There is documented historical evidence he allowed and some argue even encouraged sodomy. So with those historical perversions in mind, why should we be surprised at the brutal rape and sodomizing before and perhaps even after Stevens’ murder?
Kyle Rogers of Examiner.com reported that: “According to leading Arab media outlets” Stevens’ murder was more horrible than reported by U.S. media. “The Arab media reports that Stevens was beaten, gang raped, killed, and then his body was publicly displayed in a manner similar to Gaddafi.” Does that sound like a kind, warm-spirited religion to you?
I understand that what I point out is sickeningly grotesque but I’m only sharing the truth about these caricatures of human life. Islam attempts to hide behind a phony piety but in fact it is nothing more than a Erebusic cult based upon the teachings of a mad-man.
Which brings me to this question. Why are appeasers like Obama and Clinton so quick to apologize to Muslims? Did America or the Axis powers apologize to the Nazis for condemning the dictates of their evil? Were the Nazi faithful looked upon differently than Hitler or his generals? Are Nazis readily accepted as respected and admired even today? Have Muslims apologized to us or other nations who have suffered unprovoked loss of life by the hands of Islamists?
Are the Ku Klux Klan and Aryan supremacist groups viewed as religious groups with rogue members who misinterpret the truth of what they are about? Applying the apologetic-logic that Obama and Hillary were so quick to display, should we also apologize to the KKK, supremacist groups and Nazis–and allow them the benefit of claiming they murdered Jews, blacks, and Catholics because said groups insulted them? Bill Clinton’s deep and abiding concern for the Marxist terror group FALN which led to his pardoning their members for their terrorist crimes, notwithstanding.
Why is it that Muslims are the only group that sanctions terror and believes any insult, real or perceived of their lecherous, deviant, so-called prophet is an excuse for murder and mayhem? And while that question is being pondered answer me this.
There is a twist here that also needs investigative consideration. The Examiner.com has reported that “Hillary Clinton has been spending U.S. taxpayers dollars to fund homosexual pride events in foreign countries. Her actions have prompted backlashes against the U.S. in Italy, Russia, Pakistan, and other nations. Last year, Barack Obama made it official U.S. policy to fund homosexual rights groups overseas with U.S. tax-dollars.” (SEE: Obama Orders US State Department To Fund Homosexual Groups Overseas; Kyle Rogers; 12/6/11)
The Examiner.com also reports that: “Friends of Christopher Stevens in Chicago say he was [homosexual]. A member of the Serbian team based in Chicago told HillBuzz.org that the State Department knowingly sent a [homosexual] man to be ambassador of Libya. HillBuzz.org reports ‘in Chicago’s diplomatic circles at least there is no doubt that Chris Stevens was [homosexual].'” (NOTE: The Examiner.com employed the assignation “gay.” But utilizing “gay” as an assignation for homosexual is antithetical to my linguistic belief system, ergo, my usage of the correct assignation homosexual) (SEE: http://www.examiner.com/article/did-hillary-clinton-send-gay-ambassador-to-libya-as-intentional-provocation)
The question that begs an answer is why are Obama and Clinton so committed to forcing homosexuality on the world, especially in areas of the world that supposedly condemn the practice? Which brings me back to the question I asked yesterday which is: “Why is the Obama administration denying the embassy attack was a planned attack?”
There is more here than meets the eye. I have my suspicions as to the answers to the questions I’m asking, and if I’m right, Obama and Clinton are worse than anything we could have remotely suspected.