By: Arlen Williams
Gulag Bound
10/10/2012, 12:05am CT (update, below)
“The most transparent administration,” it was supposed to be. I guess that depends on what the meaning of “transparent” is. Those who have chosen to assess the evidence objectively have seen through Barack Obama’s facade for a long time now.
We have known him to be a born, raised, tutored, mentored, and career managed crypto-Marxist, who has also maintained a deep-seated affinity for Islam, since the days of his training in Muslim school, in Indonesia.
That affinity is now recognized on his ring of devotion to Islam, which also became his wedding ring. Jerome Corsi has the sad story of yet more deceit for this allegedly Christian man, at WND.com.
WND EXCLUSIVE
Obama’s ring: ‘There is no god but Allah’
He’s worn it on his wedding-ring finger since before he met Michelle
NEW YORK – As a student at Harvard Law School, then-bachelor Barack Obama’s practice of wearing a gold band on his wedding-ring finger puzzled his colleagues.
Now, newly published photographs of Obama from the 1980s show that the ring Obama wore on his wedding-ring finger as an unmarried student is the same ring Michelle Robinson put on his finger at the couple’s wedding ceremony in 1992.
Moreover, according to Arabic-language and Islamic experts, the ring Obama has been wearing for more than 30 years is adorned with the first part of the Islamic declaration of faith, the Shahada: “There is no God except Allah.”
The Shahada is the first of the Five Pillars of Islam, expressing the two fundamental beliefs that make a person a Muslim: There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is Allah’s prophet.
Sincere recitation of the Shahada is the sole requirement for becoming a Muslim, as it expresses a person’s rejection of all other gods
Egyptian-born Islamic scholar Mark A. Gabriel, Ph.D., examined photographs of Obama’s ring at WND’s request and concluded that the first half of the Shahada is inscribed on it.
“There can be no doubt….
There are many things one could write here and to which one could link. Along with Noisy Room, Gulag Bound, for instance, was one of the first sites to get the word out, of Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood connections in the White House. We also examined the potential that such liaisons could have been responsible for tipping off the Jihadis who ambushed (and/or bombed) the Chinook helicopter carrying members of SEAL Team Six, after the killing of Osama Bin Laden (if that surprisingly young looking man really was him).
I’ll choose just this one story. Two years ago, during one of the Fan the Fire programs on Patriot’s Heart net-radio, hosted by the Gulag’s CJ in TX and Tallulah Starr, a caller named Usama Dakdok informed us that he phoned Obama’s and Jeremiah Wright’s “Trinity United Church of Christ,” in Chicago, posing as a Muslim. He asked them if the church accepted Muslims as members. He was told it did.
I confess the title of this entry is a rhetorical question.
Contributor: @TallulahStarr
h/t: @PolitiJim
UPDATE
Comment below the video at YouTube.com
It’s simple, really. Snuffleupagus was saying that McCain HADN’T been trying to make hay from the idea that Obama was possibly a crypto Muslim. Then, Obama CONCEDES the point that McCain hadn’t talked about his Muslim faith.
Stephanopoulos stresses the fact that McCain hadn’t called Obama a Muslim. Then Obama says, yeah you’re right, he hadn’t talked about my Muslim faith.
To say he hadn’t talked about his Christian faith would make no sense.
mjt1517 in reply to docakh (Show the comment) 4 days ago
Just as with his Marxism, one can go on and on, presenting evidence of Obama’s semi-hidden, but blatantly obvious affinity for the malignancy of “Subjugation” (translation of “Islam”).
With BHO as with Clinton, the truth is a lie awaiting discovery. But the essential thing to realize about such false people is that they are first false to themselves, then to those around them and to then to perfect strangers. Their world is plastic and malleable where something can be one way in the morning and another way in the afternoon, with equal firmness of conviction. As we are seeing, such people are very dangerous to our safety and prosperity when placed in government.
I would also ask, what should we say about the people who sign on to the lies told be such leaders, and who defend them vigorously? They are also dangerous to us, but in a slightly different way.