Obama: "Taqiyya" and "Kitman" you can believe in.

Submitted by Polarik (United States), Sep 14, 2008 at 13:33

Last week, Barack Hussein Obama finally consented to appear on Bill O'Reilly's, "The No Spin Zone," the most popular talk show on Fox News. Bill O'Reilly has mellowed quite a bit from his early days of confrontational and controversial banter with his guests. Such was the case with his interview with Obama.

As questions about his Muslim roots still linger, Obama made something very clear about his take on the threat of Islamic terrorists

Obama said,

"Al Qaeda, the Taliban, a whole host of networks that are bent on attacking America who have a distorted ideology, who have perverted the faith of Islam. And so we have to go after them."

Throughout his campaign (and even back when he gave the keynote speech at the 2004 DNC), OBama has created a "terrorist" straw man by talking only about Al Qaeda and the Taliban: two groups that are predominantly Sunni Muslims. The far greater threat to the entire world, and not just America, are the much larger, and more widespread, networks of Shi'ite Muslim terrorists.

In Islam, there are two practices that permit Muslims to commit what is known as "taqiyya" and "kitman" or "holy hypocrisy" first developed by Sh'ite Muslims over 1,400 years ago. Today, although both are practiced by Sunnis and Shia alike, it's their use by Shi'ites that presents the greatest threat to counter-terrorism and political discourse.

When Iranian President Ahmadinejad says that it's developing nuclear reactors for energy, and not for nuclear weapons, that's taqiyya and kitman, rolled up in one sentence.

Taqiyya is using deception to keep one's true beliefs or convictions a secret. It is like saying one thing, but thinking or doing another.

Kitman is a parallel concept to taqiyya, in that it emphasizes hiding one's true intentions, particularly the bad ones.

Both of these are not isolated tenets of Islam, but are essential religious obligations if, by using them, they are intended to protect a fellow Muslim in danger -- even if that danger is minimal or even hypothetical in nature.

It is the reason why Leftists believe that terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah are the oppressed and that Israel's Defense Force, who try to prevent terrorism, are seen as the oppressors. It's why they think like Obama's pastor, Rev. Wright, who said that America had 9/11 coming.It's why they accept everything, at face value, what our enemies say about us.

And, it's why their Candidate for President and his Campaign can get away with saying that every truth we know about Obama is a smear. It's why Obama is not really flip-flopping on the issues, he's simply using taqiyya. It's why Obama sounds so empty to us, but sounds so inspiring to Leftists.

It's why Obama can get away with removing his flag pin and stop saying the Pledge of Allegiance after 9/11.

It's why Obama said, in his book and in his keynote address to the 2004 DNC, "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction." A statement that led his supporters to believe that America discriminate against Muslims in its war against Islamic terror.

It's why Obama and his Campaign are trying so hard to hide his Muslim past from the public, and to deny that Obama was ever a Muslim. That's "taqiyya."

Taqiyya is all about outwitting your enemy, through obfuscation, deception, diversion, and empty rhetoric.

Who else, but Obama, is trying so hard to erase any record of his past?

Who else, but Obama, is saying that he showed his real birth certificate to the public, when he has actually refused to do so? Who showed a bogus forgery instead of a current birth certificate? Who else, but OBama supporters and Leftists, tried to discredit those who claimed and demonstrated that it was a forgery? Endless demands for "proof that it was forgery" is nothing but another form of taqiyya common to Islamists, and also Leftists who continue to demand proof without knowing what that proof should be.

Who else, but Obama's henchmen, are doing all they can to squelch any criticism of Obama, a blatant violation of Freedom of Speech?

What ideology does that remind you of?

Flashback to Bill O'Reilly's interview with Barack Hussein Obama. When Obama said that "Al Qaeda, the Taliban, a whole host of networks that are bent on attacking America who have a distorted ideology, who have perverted the faith of Islam. And so we have to go after them, Obama was stating exactly what every other fervent apologist for Islamic terror would say. Always blame it on someone (or something) else.

In a web article I read called, "Taqiyya and kitman: The role of Deception in Islamic terrorism," the unknown Australian author says that the "Islam has been hijacked" excuse is a diversionary theme used in conventional media and political reference to deflect attention from any empirical and historical examination of the doctrinal, political and religious continuity of Islamic terrorism. (http://www.ci-ce-ct.com/)

Now you know why Obama made that reference to terrorists "who have a distorted ideology, who have perverted the faith of Islam," in his interview with O'Reilly.

That, my friends is Obama's taking taqiyaa straight out of the Islamic terrorist playbook.

In the interview, Obama refused to say that the surge had worked. What he did do was to credit other factors, such as the uprising of Sunni Arab sheiks and their followers against Al Qaeda.

Again, with the reference to Sunni's?

Do you remember when Obama took a jab at McCain for saying that Al Qaeda were Shia instead of Sunni? Obama retorted, "Well, at least I know the difference between Shia and Sunni!"

Yes, but will America know the difference, too? Will those who want to elect Obama ever know the difference between truth and taqiyya?

We haven't got much time left to convince them.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".