Obama: “The future must not belong to those who would slander the prophet of Islam”

By 23 Comments 2,138 views

hebdo attack

Remember those words? Barack Obama uttered them in September of 2012 while he was apologizing for the video that his administration claimed was the cause of the Benghazi attacks.

Someone took those words to heart.

At least twelve people have been killed in an attack on the building in which reside the offices of the magazine Charlie Hebdo, which frequently publishes satire of Islam.

CBS News’ Elaine Cobbe reports that, according to witnesses, two armed and masked men walked into the headquarters of the Charlie Hebdo magazine and opened fire in the entrance hallway, killing people as they saw them.

They were after those behind the magazine:

Paris prosecutor’s spokeswoman Agnes Thibault-Lecuivre confirmed 12 people were killed. Among the dead were two men who went by the pen names: Charb — the editor and a cartoonist as well — and the cartoonist Cabu, Thibault-Lecuivre confirmed.

Two police officers were also among the dead, including one assigned as Charb’s bodyguard after prior death threats against him, a police official told The Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation.

Charlie Hebdo resisted past threats:

Charlie Hebdo’s office was firebombed in 2011 after publishing a cartoon depicting an image of the Prophet Muhammed. Any depiction of the prophet is forbidden by Islam.

Ignoring the attack and the threat of further violence, Charlie Hebdo published more Muhammad pictures the following year.

AFP reports that the gunmen shouted: “We have avenged the prophet.”

“The motive here is absolutely clear; trying to shut down a media organization that lampooned the Prophet Mohammad,” CBS News security consultant and former CIA deputy chief Mike Morell told “CBS This Morning co-host Charlie Rose. “What we have to figure out here is the perpetrators and whether they were self-radicalized or whether they were individuals who fought in Syria and Iraq and came back, or whether they were actually directed by ISIS or al Qaeda.”

Some think we’re next:

Morrell added a warning that law enforcement and intelligence agencies would need to “worry about copycat attacks, not only in France but in the rest of the world, and I would even say in the broader world to include the United States.”

Here are the gunmen defending the prophet by executing a policeman as he begged for his life:

The White House was reluctant to call this terrorism at first.

The gunmen were armed with AK-47’s, which is odd since military style weapons are outlawed in France.

A car bomb has reportedly gone off outside a synagogue near Paris. I bet those are illegal in France as well.

One might argue that these gunmen took some inspiration from the words of Barack Obama. This is your future under Islam.

Charlie Hebdo’s office was firebombed in 2011 after publishing a cartoon depicting an image of the Prophet Muhammed. Any depiction of the prophet is forbidden by Islam.

I’m tired of being told to understand that it’s only “a few.” I’m tired of thinking we all have to live in fear of offending someone of a certain religion but not others. I’m tired of having to take my shoes off at airports. I’m tired of being subject to the same scrutiny as bad people. I’m tired of the absence of profiling. This is what liberalism gets you.

Aren’t you comfortable knowing that Obama declared that the war on terror is over? And don’t forget when our President says

“The future must not belong to those who would slander the prophet of Islam”

Or else.

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

23 Responses to “Obama: “The future must not belong to those who would slander the prophet of Islam””

  1. 1


    Yet there are rumors that Christians create and send out “death squads” when God is mocked…

    It used to be people and Government had “common sense” and a vision of Reality…they called things as we/they saw them…danger was danger…then Political Correctness was forced upon us…

    There was a “reason” Immigration into the United States was once elimated for 40 years.

    Have we learned nothing from September 11, 2001?

    Are we so naive to believe the see “same” people are not living among us?? It is just a matter of time, once again, for America.

  2. 2


    Well muslims still really believe in their holy book. Most christianists just pick and choose from the Bible. Of course there are those christianists who still DO believe in the Bible and act accordingly Nigerian christians kill at least 100 witches a year many of whom are witch children and who cause misfortunes such as traffic accidents and bad weather.
    Faith as a good christianist knows that “ye shall not suffer a witch to live” Exodus 22:21 –
    A quick google will show that most people who die from violence are African christians killed by other African christians

  3. 3


    Doctor J that was only part of the quote, the full sentence is “The future must not belong to those who target Coptic Christians in Egypt – it must be claimed by those in Tahrir Square who chanted “Muslims, Christians, we are one.”
    It is almost like you were trying to mislead us, at the least you should have placed multiple periods afterthe wordIslam. Werent you taught that in one of those elite schools where you studied?

  4. 6


    poor floppy! You got fooled again.

    Your youtube snippet ignores three paragraphs before it …. why is that?

    Perhaps you may not have the time to read more than one sentence at a time, but when you do, you will discover that actually you would be agreeing work Obama. … the actual Obama, not the edited one.

  5. 7



    The entire quote:

    “The future must not belong to those who target Coptic Christians in Egypt — it must be claimed by those in Tahrir Square who chanted, “Muslims, Christians, we are one.” The future must not belong to those who bully women — it must be shaped by girls who go to school, and those who stand for a world where our daughters can live their dreams just like our sons.

    The future must not belong to those corrupt few who steal a country’s resources — it must be won by the students and entrepreneurs, the workers and business owners who seek a broader prosperity for all people. Those are the women and men that America stands with; theirs is the vision we will support.

    The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied.”

    Ironic, isn’t it, that that came from the same UN speech where Obama condemned an obscure youtube video for the attack in Benghazi? But then, as Obama complained about those who see images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, he didn’t mind ordering the desecration of the Crucifix when in April 2009, the White House had Georgetown University, a Roman Catholic institution, cover the Cross and the ‘IHS’ monogram of Jesus Christ before Obama’s speech there.

  6. 9


    So now the subject is being changed to desecrating a cross by covering it during a news conference lol.

    You poor thing! When I was in the Roman Catholic Seminary, we learned quite a bit about what desecration was and was not. Covering the crucifix during a secular event is the opposite of desecration: it is proper.

    So even the attempt to change the subject shows what is really going on here: you don’t like Obama, which is your right, so you are inventing reasons to do so, which is silly.

    Please, proceed.

  7. 10



    Covering the crucifix during a secular event is the opposite of desecration: it is proper.

    Actually, it is not proper. Nor was it proper for the White House to demand that the crucifix be covered. Obama never asked that the crucifixes be covered in any of the protestant churches he spoke at. And it wasn’t at a news conference, you moron. It was at a scheduled speech at Georgetown University.

    Now, about you being in a seminary. More like a sanatorium. Not calling you a liar but truthfulness is not the forte of you liberals.

  8. 12


    @retire05 says: //*Actually, it is not proper*//

    ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! OK, I’m sorry, you’re the expert on Roman Catholicism. LOL.

    And yet you say Obama didn’t desecrate Protestant Churches, only a Roman Catholic church. OK I guess that means Obama is one of those Christians that thinks Popery is heretical or something. Hey maybe so – there’s a lot of that about.

    But thank you for making a distinction between a “news conference” and a “speech”. It’s the meaningless distinctions like that which go to show what you are doing – changing the subject from the simple fact that OP is based on deliberately lying about what Obama said.

    Please proceed.

  9. 13


    Oh and if anyone really, really thinks that Georgetown is at all relevant to a massacre in Paris … I don’t, but haters gotta hate … factcheck makes it quite clear there was no desecration. It was a hall, not a church – a hall is not a sacred area – there is no altar stone with saint’s relic – and no sacred object was damaged.

    “This mini-controversy bubbled up shortly after President Obama gave a speech on the economy on April 14 in Georgetown University’s Gaston Hall. Numerous media outlets reported on it, all of them saying virtually the same thing. But we’re still getting several queries from readers about it.

    The monogram “IHS” – a symbol for Jesus – that appeared behind the podium where Obama spoke at Georgetown was covered up with a piece of black-painted plywood. This led to speculation that the White House had asked that all religious imagery in the hall be covered or removed, as our reader notes. But Georgetown University and the White House have said this was not a case of any kind of religious cover-up.

    CNSNews.com (Cybercast News Service, which says it aims to counter a liberal bias in the media) was one of the first to cover the story, and it reported that Julie Green Bataille, associate vice president for communications at the university, said that all university signs were covered to accommodate a presidential backdrop:

    Georgetown University spokeswoman Julie Green Bataille: In coordinating the logistical arrangements for yesterday’s event, Georgetown honored the White House staff’s request to cover all of the Georgetown University signage and symbols behind Gaston Hall stage.

    The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they’ve done for other policy speeches. Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn’t high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context.

    Bataille’s statement has been repeated in other news accounts. A White House spokesman also told news organizations following the story that the only motivation behind the request was to create a presidential image for TV.

    “Decisions made about the backdrop for the speech were made to have a consistent background of American flags, which is standard for many presidential events. Any suggestions to the contrary are simply false,” spokesman Shin Inouye told ABC News, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times.

    CNSNews.com noted that while the “IHS” behind the president’s podium wasn’t visible, “the letters ‘IHS’ are posted elsewhere around the hall approximately 26 times” and that Obama mentioned Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount in his remarks. There are also religious paintings visible high above Obama’s head in MSNBC’s video of the speech.

    – Lori Robertson

    Iovino, Jim. “Jesus Missing From Obama’s Georgetown Speech.” NBC Washington. 17 Apr 2009.
    Duin, Julia. “Obama at Georgetown: The mystery of the missing sign.” Washington Times. 15 Apr 2009.
    Mora, Edwin. “Georgetown Says It Covered Over Name of Jesus to Comply with White House Request.” CNSNews.com. 15 Apr 2009.
    Wan, William. “Obama and a Georgetown Cover-Up.” Washingtonpost.com. 16 Apr 2009.
    Silva, Mark. “Obama at Georgetown: No Jesuit seal.” Los Angeles Times. 16 Apr 2009.
    Travers, Karen. “WH: No Religious Cover-up at Georgetown.” ABC News. 16 Apr 2009.”


  10. 14



    A White House spokesman also told news organizations following the story that the only motivation behind the request was to create a presidential image for TV.

    Oh, right, because Heaven forbid the Lightbringer (Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.) had to compete with an image of a crucified Christ as he was trying so hard to look “presidential” for the millions of fools that would even waste the time it took to watch him on TV. Funny, as he was appearing in black churches, spinning his lies and solidifying their vote, he didn’t seem to mind sharing the church with the crucified Christ. Guess his standards for Catholics is a bit different. After all, Obama doesn’t seem to consider the Little Sisters of the Poor Catholic enough to exempt them from his heinous ACA rules on abortion producing drugs.

    Factcheck.org? Really? Odd that you would rely on the Annenberg bunch, you know, the same Annenberg that funded William Ayers and Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.’s little group in Chicago.

    Are you bucking for the position of FA’s resident clown?

  11. 15


    retiree 05 knows that the choices that his fellow citizens make deserve no respect He (like the Paris killers) alone is qualified to judge the behavior of others
    Intolerance and lack of respect runs deep and wide.
    As does stupidity, Barrack Huessin Obama was paid by the Catholic church in Chicago when he was a community organizer.

  12. 16


    FrontPage did the same thing Dr J chopping up Obama’s quote just like you did. Such disrespect for the POTUS during wartime can only embolden our enemies
    Before Pearl harbor the right wing conservatives (of both parties) hated Roosevelt but as soon as the war started they
    became the loyal opposition. Since Obama has become POTUS thye radical right has hurt the country by not supporting our wartime leader
    Wann aact like a bitch? save it for later

  13. 17


    @Retire05 – and still you can’t connect your ranting against Obama at Georgetown to the Paris terrorism.

    But to play your game a little more: a “hall” is not a “church”. You can’t “desecrate” a “hall”. So your entire line of argument is silly. I appreciate that you are completely ignorant of Christian practice, but do try to keep up eh?

    Next – the Little Sisters. What the heck do they have to do with Paris – other than that you hate Obama.

    And that you hate Obama is just not very interesting. I am bored. You are wasting my time. Mission accomplished, I guess.

  14. 19



    Hey, fool……………..where did I even mention Paris?

    Drink too much of that Obama kool aid tonight?

    But to play your game a little more: a “hall” is not a “church”. You can’t “desecrate” a “hall”.

    It was not the “hall” that was desecrated, it was the crucifix of Christ that was desecrated, by the poseur in the Oval Office.

  15. 20



    And yet you say Obama didn’t desecrate Protestant Churches, only a Roman Catholic church

    Where did I say Obama desecrated a Roman Catholic Church? Hearing voices in your head that makes you think people said things they didn’t? Seems to be a chronic ailment with you leftists.

  16. 23


    There will come a time when the cravenness of the left in kowtowing to the demands of the satanic deathcult of islam will result in said cowards getting what they deserve. The magnitude of confused, oppositional concepts the typical leftist apologist for islam must juggle to straightfacedly claim “islam is a religion of peace” is staggering.

    Western faux news spewers (Blitzer, Amanpour, etc) uttering comments that lay blame to Charlie Hesbo cartoonists for offending muslims as “over the line” in drawing cartoons expressing mockery of a man theorized to have been an illiterate, mentally ill pedophile whose followers cannot get along with any other religion in the world – such creatures should be held in absolute contempt.

    I agree with the columnist who said that western newspapers, if they had any courage, would publish all the Charlie Hesbo anti-Muslim cartoons on the front page. Islam deserves absolutely no respect whatsoever until the so-called “moderate” muslims completely destroy all their jihadist ilk. They won’t, because islam is a cult based on lies, subjugation, desecration and deceit.

    No other “religion” – other than marxism – teaches followers to lie to non-believers in order to get advantage over them. No other “religion” considers it a woman’s fault for being raped, unless she has four non-related male witnesses to the rape who testify in a shariah court that she resisted her rapist(s). No other “religion” explicitly states that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man, as shariah law states. No other “religion” teaches that those who die while fighting non-believers will have 72 virgins as a reward in the afterlife. The sheer hypocrisy of the left in ignoring/whitewashing the clearly defined humiliation of women inherent in islam, while fomenting a phony “rape culture” in the US, defies description.

    Islam is not peaceful, and “allah” is not God. The words Christ spoke, “By their fruits shall ye know them” are quite profound.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *