BHO and Dhimmitude

Barack Hussein Obama promised us he would take a different approach to Islam and the Middle East. That he has certainly done. There is a name for it – it is called dhimmitude. On his recent overseas trip he has made it clear that national self-loathing and grovelling to Islam will now be basic elements of American foreign policy.

There were both words and gestures of dhimmitude on display by Obama. While he was in the UK, Obama would not bow down to anyone in the royal family. Just as well – no American President has ever bowed to royalty before. But while in Europe he was happy to bow down before Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah.

His words were not much better. He told European audiences that the U.S. has been “arrogant, derisive and divisive.” And during a speech to the Turkish Parliament, he said that “We [Americans] do not consider ourselves a Christian nation….” And then to add insult to injury, he said Islam has been a force for good in the world:

“America’s relationship with the Muslim world cannot and will not be based on opposition to al Qaida. We seek broad engagement based upon mutual interests and mutual respect. We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country.”

There you have it: play down any Christian connection with the US, deride the nation itself, and then play up how great Islam has been. This is not only a recipe for disaster; it is a classic example of dhimmitude.

A dhimmi is one who lives as a second-class citizen in Islamic nations. Minority groups living under Islamic rule – especially Jews and Christians – live in a soul-destroying form of subjection and humiliation. They are usually denied basic human rights, must pay the oppressive poll-tax (the jizya) and often live a desperate existence.

Dhimmitude has been amply documented by Egyptian author Bat Ye’or. She has written four major books on the topic. We see plenty of examples of how Christians especially are treated as second-class citizens in Muslim-majority nations.

Not only is there political and social dhimmitude, but there is psychological dhimmitude as well – soon the dhimmi takes on the attitude and mindset of dhimmitude. That is, they begin to look down on themselves, and actually embrace the perspective of their Muslim masters.

That seems to be just what the American President is doing. He wants to minimise or ignore all that is great about the US and its Christian past, and grovel in subservience to an ideology that not only has enslaved entire peoples, but is everywhere known for its violation of basic human rights.

This national self-loathing was expressed in other ways during his first major overseas trip. While at the G20 Summit, he was invited by French President Nicolas Sarkozy to visit the graves at the Normandy beaches. This of course is where the bodies of thousands of U.S. soldiers lie, who had fought for Europe’s freedom in WWII. Obama turned down the invitation, although he was quite happy to visit a mosque in Istanbul during his stay there.

It is one thing to try to be diplomatic, and seek to build bridges to other nations and other worldviews. But it is quite another thing to start off on the wrong foot, playing down American strengths and playing up Islamic weaknesses.

Appeasement is another term for all of this. It did Europe no good whatsoever during the rise of the Nazis, and it will do America and the West no good at all in the face of Islamic expansionism and imperialism. Indeed, try asking Christian dhimmies in Islamic nations just how helpful appeasement and self-loathing is.

Many voices warned that BHO would be bad news for American domestic politics (abortion, homosexuality, etc), and also warned that international relations would suffer as well. We are seeing both happening big time.

Bat Ye’or’s 2005 book Eurabia described the Islamisation of Europe. Melanie Phillip’s 2006 volume, Londonistan chronicled the Islamic take-over of the UK. We now need a similar book to describe how America seems to be slowly but surely heading down the same path.

Perhaps Americastan or Arabica or some such title can be used. Of course others have been trying to sound the alarm. Robert Spencer’s 2008 volume, Stealth Jihad is a very good start to this topic. But with BHO now in office, there will be a whole lot more material that will need to be written up.

The question is, will it be written in English or Arabic?

[773 words]

27 Replies to “BHO and Dhimmitude”

  1. There is also another name for what Obama is doing (not only in this respect, but in a number of other foreign policy matters): treason! In an age where sense prevailed he would have been impeached, driven from office, and put on trial for high treason – and hanged! Of course, that won’t happen because the left’s whole insane outlook, among other things, is hatred towards anything American, an outlook which has become so widespread as to be respectable.

    Another thing: during an interview during his campaign last year, he referred, in an unguarded moment, to “his Muslim faith”. He immediately corrected himself, but the cat was out of the proverbial bag. In a speech in Turkey this past week he also said that he shared a Muslim faith.

    I believe that his conversion to “Christianity” was a sham, and his team last year very cleverly and successfully covered up the Jeremiah Wright connection, and the involvement with Trinity United Church of Christ with its deeply heretical black liberation theology. There is little about the latter that is authentically Christian at all.

    I believe further that Obama is a closet Muslim, and that is why, for instance he wants rapprochement with the Islamic world, and why he won’t go after countries like Iran, and will do all he can to stop countries like Israel from going after Iran.

    Murray Adamthwaite

  2. Thanks Murray

    This is what one African-American pastor, Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, had to say about the President’s remarks:

    “President Obama is mischaracterizing America’s great history as a force for good which is a direct result of our nation’s Judeo-Christian values. It’s disturbing that just days before Easter, Obama would go to a predominantly Muslim nation and deny the truth about our Christian identity.

    “Mr. President, your apology tour will not deter al-Qaeda. You are weakening this country and inviting our enemies to attack. Obama’s comments degrading America sounds like a page out of Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr.’s black liberation theology. It’s now clearly apparent that Obama’s mentors Rev. Wright, Saul Olinsky and other godless American haters have profoundly influenced Mr. Obama’s opinion of this country.

    “It’s troubling that the President is uttering these lies about a nation he has sworn to lead and protect. Barack Obama’s recent remarks coupled with his actions over the past two months leave no doubt that it is he who is arrogant and derisive, not the American people.”

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  3. Have a look at this video Thomas Sowell and a Conflict of Visions. Great insights by one of the leading intellectuals of our day on the importance of realizing that human nature is flawed (biblical Christians would say “fallen”). He particularly lambasts Obama’s surpreme self-belief that he is the world’s saviour.
    Jonathan Sarfati, Brisbane

  4. This is not quite on-topic, but it’s related: just last night I finally got around to watching Media Malpractice, John Ziegler’s documentary on how in 2008 Obama got elected by the media and then on Nov 4 the sheeple obeyed. Some parts of it are quite frightening – you are simply a fool if you take what you see, read and hear from the MSM at face value.

    As for Obama’s Christian ‘faith’, it’s pretty obvious it’s just for political purposes – watch Alan Keyes make him look like a fool (clearly not that difficult) in October 2004.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md2bf9DNVB4

    And Murray is right, it’s unlikely a real Christian (20 years plus in a church, anyway) would ever make that “muslim faith” blunder. Not only that, Obama always looks ill at ease with those kind of questions if he is not reading off a script.

    The name Neville Chamberlain is used with some degree of contempt now (at least, by those who know a little history). Methinks that if the world survives another 5 decades or more, Obama’s name will suffer the same fate, possibly worse. He stands for nothing of value and the consequences of this could be dire for millions. Consider this – within 12 months of Chamberlain saying “I believe it is peace for our time.” Europe was at war.

    BTW, you can order Ziegler’s DVD via the following link. Not quite as well rounded as Expelled (clearly a bit of a rush job because the topic gets old quickly and it obviously required a gargantuan effort in video research) but still something people should avail themselves of. Beware though – you may never watch a MSM news service the same again. Hey, you may never watch a MSM news service again, period.

    http://www.howobamagotelected.com

    Mark Rabich

  5. The Ten Commandments and the Levitical law were given after the Israelites had blown it. They were not given simply to stop the Israelites hurting themselves or out of expediency. The presupposition was. and is, that human nature is desperately wicked: that it is sinful. I should know; I have inside information. The view of Obama is that everyone is a victim, has a right to air their grievances and shake their fist at anyone who attempts to frustrate what they want when they want. Thank you Jonathan for introducing me to Thomas Sowell.

    “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other.”
    John Adams (1735-1826)

    David Skinner, UK

  6. Thanks Mark!
    I have the DVD “Media Malpractice”, obtained through the same website, and though about the American campaign it should be widely distributed. In fact, I plan on having a showing at my home soon for those who are interested.
    Murray Adamthwaite

  7. Just a quick question here…

    Do you believe that the United States has not been arrogant, derisive and divisive in its relationship with the world over the past decade?

    Brendan Berkley

  8. Thanks Brendan

    It has been no more than most other nations, and a lot less than many others. But your question is not all that helpful. It is like me asking if you have stopped beating your wife yet. Of course no nation is perfect, nor fully reflects all that God wants of them, just as no individual does.

    But there seems to be a hidden assumption behind your question: that America under Bush was bad and evil, while America under Obama will be sweetness and light. If that is where you are coming from, then I beg to differ. As I have already documented on this site, there are plenty of things that Obama has done that are far from Christlike.

    Consider just one: his overturning of the Mexico City Policy. Now we can flood developing nations with abortions and contraceptives, whether they want them or not. I find this to be quite “arrogant, derisive and divisive”.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  9. That is so true, and the first money this president spent was exactly to fund “family planning” in third world countries, the same arrogance and divisiveness portrayed along decades by governments of the USA. In Brazil alone thousands of young women as young as 18 were strongly encouraged, brainwashed and convinced to be sterelised in order to avoid having a second child, those financially needed and under educated. How is that for arrogance? Mr Obama chose to apologyse to selected nations. Would you imagine him trying to offer his “family planning” assistance to Saudi Arabia?
    Jaqueline Marwick

  10. The way the right continues to *always* refer to Obama by his full name (for whatever ridiculous reason) when they do no such thing for any other politician is one of the most pathetic things I have seen from any side of politics in my life time.

    My children seem more grown-up.

    Chris Mayer

  11. Thanks, but it is his name Chris. And “always”? I must have mentioned Obama at least a hundred times on this site, and only on a handful of occasions have I used his full name. And it was particularly relevant that I do so here as we were asking why it is Obama seems to want to denigrate Christianity while he elevates Islam. So it is 100% applicable here.

    Also, this article raises the worrying possibility of the US and the West appeasing the Islamists to the point of perhaps one day becoming client states to global sharia hegemony, and all you can do is whinge about a guy’s name. Just who is being immature here?

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  12. Please know that there’s no malice here…I’m going to an Easter service today just like you! And don’t think that just because I argue it, I’m a passionate defender of the issue. I just like to question what people believe on issues I don’t necessarily agree with, so work with me here. 😀

    So you claim that we are arrogant, derisive, and divisive…but it’s okay, because other countries are too? At least we’re not as bad as -those- guys. I don’t see that logic working other places. “There’s human rights violations in our country, but a lot less than many others.” “People starve in our country, but a lot less than many others.” No! We should refuse to accept the fact that women get sold as sex slaves in the US and that people do starve, and we should try to get those numbers down to zero! Why compare with other nations?

    I don’t understand what you mean by asking if I have stopped beating my wife yet. Could you explain this to me more?

    You say that no nation is perfect, but then you just brush that aside and change the subject. I disagree with the Mexico City Policy, and I believe that the President’s views on abortion are erroneous. However, I bet that when President Bush repealed the policy, people could have said the same thing. Abortion is almost always no-win in the political realm.

    But back to the subject at hand. President Obama has done things that are not Christlike. But what is more Christlike than showing humility and reaching out to others? If done right, this doesn’t mean being a pushover (Jesus sure wasn’t), and President Obama needs to be careful with walking that line. But I don’t think that an attempt to show some respect and build some bridges should be met by contempt by Christians. I didn’t vote for the guy, but I’m objective enough to realize that if we can’t see a single thing he does as good, then we’re probably a little too biased. I’m not saying that’s you, because I’m new to your site. But a lot of people are acting this way, and it bothers me. Christians shouldn’t be the bitter ones…we should be the ones who might disagree, but do it in love and in faith that God is sovereign.

    Christ is risen indeed!
    Brendan Berkley, US

  13. Thanks Brendan

    Respectfully, you seem guilty of some mental and moral fuzziness here. My point about nations has to do with biblical realism. We are all fallen, and so are the nations. Having said that, some nations are clearly morally superior to others. Thus I reject the notion of moral equivalence, which is unable to see any moral differences between the US and say, North Korea, or the Sudan, or Cuba.

    I did not say it is OK for various sins to occur in the US. I simply said in a fallen world they will occur. And there is a huge difference between a nation that officially sanctions certain sins (be it slavery in Islamic Sudan) or the regular suppression of human rights for women (in most Islamic majority nations), and nations where such things may happen to occur, but usually illegally and unofficially.

    For example, you mention sex slaves. Which American state approves of this Brendan? Which American law allows it? In some nations it takes place as a matter of course, either with government approval, or at least with a blind eye. I am not aware of any official US policy which either condones or allows such practices.

    In the same way, there is a huge difference between a nation that allows full freedom of religion – such as the US – and a nation where defection from Islam is seen as apostasy and punishable by death. There are plenty of other examples that can be mentioned. Simply put, some nations more closely express biblical ideals than others. But none is perfect, and we cannot and should not expect some utopian perfection either.

    Of course if America does introduce sinful legislation (and we will see heaps more under an Obama government) then Christians must speak up about these things. But it is simply silly and unhelpful to equate a nation like America with its enemies, and fail to see any moral differences at all.

    And your comment “But what is more Christlike than showing humility and reaching out to others?” is unfortunately not all that helpful either. Not only can I think of plenty of biblical virtues which are equally or more so Christlike, but try this thought experiment: would Roosevelt have been doing anyone any good by “showing humility and reaching out to others” if he dialogued with the Nazis?

    I see nothing helpful about Obama playing down America and its Christian past, while seeking to whitewash the crimes of Islam. And I don’t see that as being particularly Christlike either.

    In a fallen world we need moral and political realism. Moral equivalence did not put the Holocaust to an end. American and European firepower did. There is a place for talk and diplomacy, but there is also a place for reality, recognising that some things are worth fighting for, and that one need not be perfect before doing so. The same is true of nations.

    And who exactly is being “bitter” here? How does offering a critique of Obama equate to bitterness? But thanks again for your thoughts, and yes, he is indeed risen.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  14. BTW, as to the wife comment: it is just an old expression which has to do with unhelpful questions: in this case, no matter how you answer it, you come out a loser (either I still beat my wife, or I used to beat my wife). Comprendo?

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  15. As discussed elsewhere on this site, there were churchians in the 1940s who preached exactly the same sort of moral equivalence about Hitler; we shouldn’t be so judgemental because the Allies are not perfect either. Well, so what that Hitler kills Jews and Obama kills unborn babies – we shouldn’t be single issue fanatics no matter what class of humans is deprived of the basic right to life.
    Jonathan Sarfati, Brisbane

  16. What’s Chris Mayer’s beef? Obamov used his full name in his presidential oath, and is quite happy to brag about it to the Arab despots he’s trying to appease. Shame that McLame was so ready to appease the Leftmedia that he pulled punches in his campaign.

    Now Obamov bows to the ruler of a country that exports the worst Islamofascist doctrine, and sentences the victims of gang rape to jail and flogging. America certainly doesn’t do that, but it doesn’t stop the Monarch of Barackingham Palace from trashing his own country.

    Jonathan Sarfati, Brisbane

  17. Brendan, you said:

    “But what is more Christlike than showing humility and reaching out to others? If done right, this doesn’t mean being a pushover (Jesus sure wasn’t),”

    That’s exactly right, but recall that Jesus was anything BUT conciliatory or appeasing with the Pharisees, whom he called “whitewashed tombs”, nor was he conciliatory when it was necessary to cleanse the Temple.

    Could you call “Is it not written: “‘My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations’ ? But you have made it ‘a den of robbers.'” retiring or humble (in the way you infer)?

    And please do not make the mistake of so many non-Christians, by making Matt 5:9 (for individuals) overrule Romans 13:4 (for governments/rulers).

    Mr Obama (like Mr Rudd) in his elected position has a primary duty to defend the nation which he leads. He does not have a mandate to put his nation at risk by adopting foolish policies.

    John Angelico

  18. Murray said (and I notice this issue is being raised a lot on this website and elsewhere with regard to Obama and closer to home, Rudd) he believed Obama’s conversion to Christianity was a sham. If so, then obviously his religious chicanery would be a political ploy to win over the numerous “evangelicals” who voted for him.

    This makes me think of an old piece of advice (as much as it is a shame to quote a fiend like Machiavelli), which Marion Maddox so readily applied to John Howard and the Liberal party, so why should it not be equally considered when examining the Left?

    “A prince, therefore, need not necessarily have all the good qualities I mentioned above, but he should certainly appear to have them…To those seeing and hearing him, he should appear a man of compassion, a man of good faith, a man of integrity, a kind and a religious man. And there is nothing so important as to seem to have this last quality.”

    Yarran Johnston

  19. It seems like Chris Mayers outrage over the full use of Barak Obama’s name, is out of all proportion to its use. His comment that it “is one of the most pathetic things I have seen from any side of politics in my life time” leaves me nonplused, pondering his exact age and wondering what in fact are the other pathetic things he has seen that make them pale into such insignificance compared to recording a persons full name correctly. As an Aussie, I’ve seen plenty of references to Hilliary Rodam Clinton, but it just doesn’t evoke the same angst.

    So amid all the morally outrageous events that have occurred and the pathetic pronouncements that have been made, addressing a person by the own complete name ranks as the most pathetic he’s seen in his whole life time? Amazing!

    I can’t help but think there’s more to this than meets the eye and it’s not the fact that his full name is recorded, so much as the fact of what his full name IS – that is, that it’s an unmistakable Muslim name that is the source of contention. And if that’s the case, why is this so extremely offensive?

    The fact that you mention that “the right continues to *always* refer to Obama by his full name (for whatever ridiculous reason)” – presumably excluding the reason that this IS his name – indicates that you are on the left of the political spectrum, and I can only surmise greatly upended by reference to his Muslim background. But why should you be so offended because people don’t gloss over the obvious but allude to it? Or is it the fact that you voted for him despite the obvious? If that’s the case perhaps you should be kicking yourself rather than the person who points this out. You’re not alone Chris – we’ve all been duped by politicians, but don’t shoot the messenger.

    I’m also greatly offended but not by inferences to the Muslim branch of the religious tree that Obama has come from, but the fact that he returns to this branch and settles on it with such apparent ease, deferring in his actions to others who occupy this branch by, for example, spontaneously bowing deeply to the Saudi King Abdull. Please forgive the truisms but -a rose by any other name still smells the same, and actions speak louder than words.

    I have to agree with Bill. As much as I hoped and prayed that, against all evidence to the contrary, he was other than who I feared he was – the guy at best is a dhimmi and at the worst a covert Muslim/Socialist. It seems it’s the light that has been shone on this fact that is the cause of your complaint. Forgive me Chris if I have misjudged you, I’m just at a loss to know how else to understand your extreme reaction. I’ll still continue to pray and hope against fading hope, he’s not who he increasingly appears to be.

    Michelle Shave

  20. re: Mark Rabich’s link to Obama vs Keyes video.

    Wow. Obama actually gave it away within 10 seconds, when he said “I would ask Christ whether I am going up or down”.

    That sounds very much like an Islamic take on faith there (cause every Christian knows which way they’re going…).

    Tristan Ingle, Sydney

  21. Anyone out there, have you noticed a convergence of the Left and Islam? If so, is it a wonder that BHO is promoting dhimmitude?
    Stan Fishley

  22. We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country.

    How so?

    What an extraordinary statement!

    Louise Le Mottee, Hobart

  23. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other.

    Quite right. Thanks for the quote, David. I do not believe democracies can ever work when there is a serious divide in the nation regarding moral issues, just as we have now throughout the West.

    Nothing but Our Lord Jesus Christ will do. If Australia is not converted to Christ it will be lost.

    Louise Le Mottee, Hobart

  24. “How many in-your-face radical leftist appointments must Obama make before some realize this apparently conciliatory man is indeed a polarizing radical? Let’s just look at the [Harry] Knox appointment [to his Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships]. … Knox is the militant homosexual activist who, just last month, called Pope Benedict XVI and certain Catholic bishops ‘discredited leaders’ for opposing same-sex marriage. He said the Knights of Columbus are ‘foot soldiers of a discredited army of oppression’ because they supported California’s Proposition 8 ballot initiative to amend the state constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman. … Knox also denounced the teachings of the apostle Paul as ‘not true’. ‘Paul’, said Knox, ‘did not have any idea of the kind of love that I feel for a partner when I am partnered. … The straight man, the heterosexual man who got the privilege of writing the book, the educated, rich heterosexual man, Paul … didn’t think it was natural because for him it must not have been.’ When appointed, Knox said the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community ‘will support the president in living up to his promise that government has no place in funding bigotry against any group of people.’ Sounds harmless enough on its face until you understand that Knox and the LGBT community consider the failure to support the judiciary’s thwarting of the people’s democratic will to define marriage as heterosexual in character to be bigotry.” — columnist David Limbaugh
    Jonathan Sarfati, Brisbane

  25. Melanie Phillips, a non-christian Jewish British journalist, laments the Dhimmitude of the Church of England. The Bishop of Rochester, Pakistan-born Michael James Nazir-Ali who has seen Islamofascism first hand, has had to resign for standing up for Christians and warning of the dangers of radical Islam:

    The bishop says he is resigning so that he can work for endangered or beleaguered Christian minorities both abroad and in the UK.

    What a shocking rebuke to the church, that he has to leave his post of influence and authority as a bishop in order to carry out the church’s core duty to defend its own against attack.

    Jonathan Sarfati, Brisbane

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

%d bloggers like this: