I think those who are upset about Obama snubbing France in the Paris march against terrorism—although they are right to be angry—are missing an important point: Obama’s refusal to send an appropriate representative to the march is more than just a slap in the face to a long-time ally, it is one more example of this president’s Muslim leanings. Barack Obama would rather insult the people of France than anger his would-be friends in the Muslim world. Of course the furor over the “Paris Snub” occurred because President Obama not only failed to represent the United States in the recent march against terrorism in Paris, but also failed to send a prominent member of his administration. Frankly, the cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo have shown more courage and class than America’s president in standing up to terrorists.

Bowing to the angry demands of American voters—including embarrassed members of his own party—the hapless president finally sent John Kerry to France to mend fences, but sending the Secretary of State a week after the march was over did nothing to sooth frayed feelings. This was akin to having Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. show up in Selma only after the marches and beatings were over. What people across the globe, including terrorist leaders, saw was that other countries throughout the world were properly represented but the U.S. was not. For example, German Chancellor Angela Merkel represented her country and Benjamin Netanyahu represented Israel, but President Obama—the supposed leader of the free world—could not be bothered to attend himself or even send his vice-president or secretary of state. Without saying a word, Barack Obama sent a message to the world that Muslim terrorists could not miss.

In Barack Obama’s defense, the Paris march against terrorism conflicted with some ball games he wanted to watch on television. Perhaps if he had not had such important things as a golf match pending, ball games to watch, or a nap to catch up on, Obama might have put forth more effort. But a president must have his priorities. By now we know what President Obama’s priorities are: lowering his golf handicap, vacations in Hawaii, and sucking up to Muslim leaders. Terrorism is still not on his list in spite of all the terrorist attacks that have occurred during his presidency, as well as all of those that have been prevented by alert military and police officials who, in spite of Obama’s denials, understand that we are at war against global terrorists.

The point of the march in Paris was to demonstrate that the civilized nations of the world are united in their opposition to the cowardly acts of violence and mayhem that are the calling card of Muslim terrorists. But when the United States was represented by no one above the rank of Ambassador, this message was diluted if not completely undermined. Freedom loving people throughout the world—including many of the president’s supporters in the United States—are understandably incensed that Obama would allow such a slight against a long-standing ally. But those who are concerned about the snub to France are missing an even more important aspect of Obama’s slight. Terrorists around the world, however, are not missing this aspect of it. They view President Obama’s absence and America’s under-representation in Paris as dismissive acts. To them his absence said, “This is no big deal—it’s not important.” When Obama shows terrorists that he is not concerned about their dastardly acts he is giving them tacit license to commit more such acts.

Terrorists are like anyone else with an agenda. They will push and push until someone says “no more” and takes a hard stand to stop them. Showing terrorists worldwide that the free nations of the world are united in taking a stand against them was the purpose of the march in Paris. But President America’s conspicuous absence from the march sent signals to terrorist groups that the unity needed to stop them does not exist. Frankly, the free world cannot even hope to stop terrorist violence without the support, assistance, and leadership of the United States. An AWOL American president showed terrorist groups conclusively that the necessary leadership does not exist and will not exist during Obama’s time in the White House. President Obama also showed anyone who is paying attention what many—including this author—have suspected for a long time: Barack Obama is a closet Muslim more in tune with America’s enemies than the citizens of the nation he was elected to lead.

Not content to just snub France, President Obama provided even more conclusive evidence of his Muslim leanings when before the smoke had even cleared from the attacks in Paris he announced the release of more terrorists from Guantanamo. The egregious nature of his actions sent a powerful message to terrorists worldwide: Keep up the good work—I am with you. Innocent people continue to be brutally slaughtered by terrorists worldwide, yet Barack Obama refuses to admit that we are at war with militant Muslims. Many Americans find his reticence to use the term “Muslim terrorist” or “radical Islam” difficult to understand. I don’t. You wouldn’t expect the Pope to criticize Catholicism. The explanation for Obama’s apparent Muslim leanings is simple: he is a Muslim.