Obama Administration's War on Persecuted Christians
by Raymond Ibrahim
Special to IPT News
August 2, 2012
The Obama administration's support for its Islamist allies means a lack of U.S. support for their enemies or, more properly, victims—the Christian and other non-Muslim minorities of the Muslim world. Consider the many recent proofs:
According to Pete Winn of CNS:
The U.S. State Department removed the sections covering religious freedom from the Country Reports on Human Rights that it released on May 24, three months past the statutory deadline Congress set for the release of these reports. The new human rights reports—purged of the sections that discuss the status of religious freedom in each of the countries covered—are also the human rights reports that include the period that covered the Arab Spring and its aftermath. Thus, the reports do not provide in-depth coverage of what has happened to Christians and other religious minorities in predominantly Muslim countries in the Middle East that saw the rise of revolutionary movements in 2011 in which Islamist forces played an instrumental role. For the first time ever, the State Department simply eliminated the section of religious freedom in its reports covering 2011… (emphasis added).
The CNS report goes on to quote several U.S. officials questioning the motives of the Obama administration. Former U.S. diplomat Thomas Farr said that he has "observed during the three-and-a-half years of the Obama administration that the issue of religious freedom has been distinctly downplayed." Leonard Leo, former chairman of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, said "to have pulled religious freedom out of it [the report] means that fewer people will obtain information," so that "you don't have the whole picture."
It's not the first time the administration has suppressed knowledge concerning the suffering of religious minorities under Islam. Earlier it suppressed knowledge concerning Islam itself (see here for a surreal example of the effects of such censorship).
In "Obama Overlooks Christian Persecution," James Walsh gives more examples of State Department indifference "regarding the New Years' murders of Coptic Christians in Egypt and the ravaging of a cathedral," including how the State Department "refused to list Egypt as 'a country of particular concern,' even as Christians and others were being murdered, churches destroyed, and girls kidnapped and forced to convert to Islam. "
And the evidence keeps mounting. Legislation to create a special envoy for religious minorities in the Near East and South Central Asia—legislation that, in the words of the Washington Post, "passed the House by a huge margin," has been stalled by Sen. James Webb, D-Va.:
In a letter sent to Webb Wednesday night, Rep. Frank Wolf [R-Va, who introduced the envoy bill] said he "cannot understand why" the hold had been placed on a bill that might help Coptic Christians and other groups "who face daily persecution, hardship, violence, instability and even death."
Yet the ultimate source of opposition is the State Department. The Post continues:
Webb spokesman Will Jenkins explained the hold by saying that "after considering the legislation, Senator Webb asked the State Department for its analysis." In a position paper issued in response, State Department officials said "we oppose the bill as it infringes on the Secretary's [Hillary Clinton's] flexibility to make appropriate staffing decisions," and suggested the duties of Wolf's proposed envoy would overlap with several existing positions. "The new special envoy position is unnecessary, duplicative, and likely counterproductive," the State Department said (emphasis added).
But as Wolf explained in his letter: "If I believed that religious minorities, especially in these strategic regions, were getting the attention warranted at the State Department, I would cease in pressing for passage of this legislation. Sadly, that is far from being the case. We must act now…. Time is running out."
Much of this was discussed during Coptic Solidarity's third annual conference in Washington D.C. last month, which I participated in, and which featured many politicians and lawmakers—including the U.K.'s Lord Alton, Senator Roy Blunt, Congressman Trent Franks, Congressman Joseph Pitts, and Frank Wolf himself. As Coptic Solidarity's summary report puts it, "All policy makers voiced strong support to the Copts…. Some policy makers raised concerns about the current U.S. Administration's overtures towards religious extremists."
There was little doubt among the speakers that, while Webb is the front man, Hillary Clinton—who was named often—is ultimately behind the opposition to the bill. (Videos of all speakers can be accessed here; for information on the envoy bill and how to contact Webb's office, click here).
Even those invited to speak about matters outside of Egypt, such as Nigerian lawyer and activist Emmanuel Ogebe, wondered at Obama's position that the ongoing massacres of Christians have nothing to do with religion. After describing the sheer carnage of thousands of Christians at the hands of Muslim militants, lamented that Obama's response was to pressure the Nigerian president to make more concessions, including by creating more mosques (the very places that "radicalize" Muslims against infidel Christians).
Indeed, while the administration vocally condemned vandal attacks on mosques in the West Bank (where no Muslims died), it had nothing to say when Islamic terrorists bombed Nigerian churches on Easter Sunday, killing some 50 Christians and wounding hundreds. And when the Egyptian military indiscriminately massacred dozens of unarmed Christians for protesting the nonstop attacks on their churches, all the White House could say is, "Now is a time for restraint on all sides"—as if Egypt's beleaguered Christian minority needs to "restrain" itself against the nation's military, a military that intentionally ran armored vehicles over them at Maspero.
In light of all this, naturally the Obama administration, in the guise of the State Department, would oppose a bill to create an envoy who will only expose more religious persecution that the administration will have to suppress or obfuscate?
Bottom line: In its attempts to empower its Islamist allies, the current U.S. administration has taken up their cause by waging a war of silence on their despised enemies—the Christians and other minorities of the Islamic world.
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
Reader comments on this item
Nov 23, 2012 00:29
And uh.. what would you expect to happen in the end times?
obama's silence has precedents
Submitted by michael, Aug 19, 2012 10:04
While the media has talked about the holocaust deniers at great length, it has been curiously silent in discussing the impact of Islam on non-Muslims. This silence is not new. Once the Armenian, Assyrian Christian, Nestorian Christian and Pontic and Thracian Greek genocides were complete, Europe slipped back into a stupor, and forgot that Turkish ascendancy had only been ended by the Balkan War of 1912. The genocides, pogroms and slavery of the past 550 years was ignored.
Part of this bias was due to the anti-Catholic hostility of the English ruling class, which could not accept the role of the Papacy in defending Europe for 500 years. To continue their enslavement of the Irish Catholics, they had to deny that Catholic Europe had contributed to civilization and their freedoms.
For the French, the issue was somewhat different. Challenging the Hapsburg ascendancy, they were willing to permit Turkish depredations into southern and eastern Europe and salved their conscience with military advances into the Spanish Netherlands and the Rhineland and a few euphemisms about the Christians of Lebanon.
The French and Communist revolutions changed the circumstances only for the worse, as malign neglect was replaced by an actual hostility to Christianity. Why, if you were killing priests and defiling churches at home, would you then want to defend Christianity in foreign lands.
And then there was the devils bargain of sacrificing one's morality for a soupcon of power. The British and the French supported the Turks against the Russians in order to deny the Russians any access to the Mediterranean. The deaths of Christians in the Balkans and elsewhere was incidental to this process and an acceptable price for others to bear.
Today, the process continues. The anti-Christian elites, who hate Christianity because it imposes a moral code that challenges their egotism, pride and avarice seek to impose a moral system that is man based, and which blows in the wind like thistledown, subject to the vagaries of the moment.. The circumstances of this new moral order are different, however, in that now the elites are willing to sacrifice their own citizens even as they ignore the plight of Christians worldwide. Betrayal has come full circle.