Thursday, September 27, 2012

Pastors and Politicians are Deathly Silent…

…about our self-imposed double standard of tolerance of Islam.

Many have describe Islam as ‘the religion of peace’  while a few of us express the truth about Islam. 

Result:  Millions of Muslims feel insulted, riot and kill while many of us feel embarrassed by our “free speech.”  Example:  The 14-minute “trailer” that incited the Muslim world to riot and kill in 20 Islamic nations.  Or the cartoon of Muhammad that prompted Muslim riots and killing.

Millions of Muslims are taught to hate Christians and Jews and actively promote their killing: 

Result:  Christians are silent while violent persecution and killing of Christians and Jews by faithful Muslims is virtually ignored. Examples in this video:

Islamic-inspired persecutions of Christians rampant across the Middle East

We burn our troop’s Bibles in Afghanistan to avoid offending Muslims.

We condemn Americans who burn the Qur’an or produce a video about Muhammad.  At the same time we all but ignore the burning of Christian churches and killing of Christians and Jews throughout the Middle East and North Africa.

We are warned to be quiet about the truth of Islam by both radical and so-called “moderate” Muslims –and by most in the media and many in our churches.  We are all walking on eggshells, intimidated into silence, as if the truth is the new hate speech.

What is the worse insult: Telling someone their beliefs are evil, or actually killing them?  Islamic orthodoxy motivates their followers to kill.

We have been intimidated into tolerance and silence and many of us have become fearful.  Few are speaking out against this outrage.

Our churches and our politicians are silent.  Our churches don’t want to offend anyone or do anything that might threaten their tax exempt status.  Politicians are silent because they fear being called bigots or Islamophobes.

First, stop calling the problem “radical” Islam or  “radical Islamists”!  The problem is the orthodox Islamic ideology that promotes the hatred and killing of Jews and Christians as being next to Godliness – literally.

The problem is the church’s failure to tell the truth about Islam and the truth of its threat to our freedom of religion and expression.  Some church leaders are ignorant of the Islamic threat, true.  But others know and remain silent.

The problem is our collective failure to appreciate the faith and freedoms we have.

The problem is our belief that any and every ideology, no matter how vile, is worthy of respect and protection.  No!  They are not.  Speak the truth!

What you can do.

Learn and understand fundamentalist Islam, its beliefs and practices.

End your silence.  Accept your God-given duty to speak out in your churches parishes, and synagogues.  Be an influence for good, for freedom, for your faith.  Protect the things we say we hold dear.

Our inappropriate silence, our uncharacteristic fears, our excessive tolerance, and our self-imposed ignorance are contributing to our annihilation.

Saturday, September 22, 2012

The Arab Nightmare

…and you call this the Arab Spring?

While there have been references to “spring” pertaining to a variety of uprisings throughout history, our latest usage of the term originated in an article in Foreign Policy Magazine written by Marc Lynch titled “Obama’s Arab Spring?” in January 2011.

Obama’s Arab Spring, indeed. The naiveté by the left  toward Islam and the Arab “spring” surpasses all human understanding.  It has been well understood by those of us paying attention that Islam and the left are in close alliance. Strange bedfellows?  Not really.  They share mutual top down, authoritarian goals and lust for power as described in Pamela Geller’s great book “Stop the Islamization of America” and Andrew McCarthy’s groundbreaking “The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America.”

What else should be expected in the midst of a region where Islam is rediscovering its fascist supremacist fanatical roots and 99% of the population is Muslim? As the Prime Minister of Turkey recently stated, “Democracy is like a bus – you get on and get off.” Democracy was used by Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt for a few months until the Muslim masses yearning to breathe Islam voted in the Muslim Brotherhood. That’s where they got off of the democratic “bus.” Syria is likely to avoid the bus altogether and revert straight to the Brotherhood. Why bother with formalities?

For those of who are as naive as our Director of National Intelligence James Clapper who claimed that the Brotherhood is “largely secular”, here is the bad news: The Brotherhood is the largest Sunni movement in the Arab world (yes, Islamic, not secular) and its’ mission is to re-establish the Caliphate and promote the Sharia in nations it dominates. Translated, this means that a half dozen or more Arab Spring nations will become little Afghanistans where Islam will spawn and motivate thousands upon thousands who hate the west to do all in their power to “eliminate and destroy the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands ... so that ... God's religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other religions." The Brotherhood will energize the ant hill.

US foreign policy under Barack Obama has advanced the death of the West by aiding and abetting the conquest of secular governments by Islamists who have vowed to annihilate both the little Satan, Israel, and the big Satan, the United States. Given Obama’s lifelong influences and stated desires, any other outcome would be highly unlikely.

Friday, September 21, 2012

What if the message of the Muslim “trailer” is true?

The 14-minute video (trailer) about Muhammad that stirred the ire of the Muslim masses across the Islamic world has been condemned by most officials and media of the US.  Why?  Because it was poorly done?  N0.  Because it exposed the truth about the life of Muhammad?  No.  Because Muslims were insulted?  Apparently.   So, in the mind of the Muslim, whether or not something is true, if a Muslim declares he is insulted or offended by it, it should not be allowed.  If you are insulted by the truth of something, the truth should not be allowed.

In the case of this “trailer”, 90% of the content has been found to be in perfect accord with the Qur’an and Hadith.  In this case, Muslims have declared insult even though the content of the trailer is substantially true.

But here is the strange thing:  In the midst of all the media and public official condemnation and outcry of the movie, not one peep was heard about the substance of the movie, the fact the substance is true.  Our condemnation of the video is made out of laziness and ignorance.  Laziness because the media and public officials did not even bother to understand whether the video content was true or not.  And ignorant, because they refuse to face the facts about Islam, even when the evidence is all around.

The link below is to a lecture by Egyptian Christian Islamic expert Usama Dakdok.  He takes an hour to go point by point through the 14-minute video and compares it to the Islamic texts.  His analysis clearly demonstrates that the substance of the portrayal of Muhammad in the trailer  accurately reflects Islam and the life of Muhammad.  Click on the image under the heading “Revealing the Truth Behind the Mohammad Movie”.  The video does not play on the Chrome browser.

Here is what may be the reason for the psychotic Muslim reaction to this video:  Islamic tradition demands that the image of Muhammad shall not be graphically depicted either to the infidel or to fellow Muslims.  The movie is seen in the strange thinking of the Muslim mind  as similar to the insult perceived from the Muhammad cartoons of several years ago. 

Should that require that the truth of Muhammad shall not be shown?  Should that restrict the manner in which the truth is portrayed?  Of course not.  One of the reasons much of the West remains ignorant of Islam is because of thousands of other tantrums from Muslims which have occurred through the last few decades.  We have conditioned ourselves to condescend to their tantrums.  We are being manipulated and controlled by Muslims with the tantrum throwing  mentality of 3-year olds.

Coexist stickers directed to wrong crowd…

Have you noticed the occasional “coexist” bumper stickers on the back end of cars?  Have you noticed that such stickers are likely to be right next to one of these:

That’s right, the “coexist” message goes hand in hand with Obama’s message of unlimited tolerance toward the intolerant.

Of the seven world religions and world views depicted, which one is different from all others in one key area, especially?

Right!  Islam.  In what key area?  Tolerance.  Or rather, intolerance.  Islam’s orthodox doctrine as chronicled in the three major Islamic “holy books” demands intolerance toward the kafir, the infidel, aka the non-Muslim, and the apostate Muslim.  The characterization of “apostate” Muslim is used quite broadly to include the belief or behavior of any Muslim who does not abide by the strict Muhammadan orthodox doctrines, including the practice of intolerance toward non-Muslims (except, of course, when it is necessary to deceive the infidel to further Islam – the practice of the taqiyya doctrine.)

But in their use of the vaunted “coexist” mantra, the leftists pretend that Islam is like any other religion, embracing all, loving all, yadayada.  They are a combination of ignorant of Islam, ignorant of the other faiths, and indifferent toward any moral or religious principles or doctrine.

These individuals aim their message at the wrong audience.  It is not those who understand Islam that this message should be directed.  It is to the Muslims.  But here is the rub.  The non-Muslims react to this message by feeling guilty for not coexisting, and cowering at the inference that we are not willing to coexist and accept everyone as equally willing to coexist.  The Muslims, on the other hand, love the demand to coexist being directed toward the kafir and infidel.  Their agenda of intolerance and supremacism can continue unabated and undiscovered.

One of our few leaders who recognize this cognitive dissonance is Alan West who nailed it with one of my favorite quotes:

“When tolerance becomes a one way street it leads to cultural suicide.”

Sunday, September 16, 2012

Gradual awakening to the truths of Islam…

We weren’t born knowing the true nature of Islam.  It has been a slow, gradual revelation for most of us, a slow unveiling, like the dimmer switch slowly, slowly turned to lighten a dark room.  It has taken many of us a decade or longer to acknowledge that Islam is radical; that there is no “moderate” Islam.  And that the so-called “moderate” Muslims are often much less moderate than we are led to believe.  Most do not yet understand this.  Many do.

Robert Spencer, Bill Warner, Bat Ye’or, Pamela Geller, Mark Durie, Chris Logan, and many others came to this realization several years ago.

Our understanding of Islam is a journey.  This journey, for each of us, is worth telling.  Why?  Because it humanizes who we are.  That we were not born being bigots and Islamophobes, nor are we now.  We are among those who bothered to learn the truth of Islam over years.

Elsa Schieder, who has a PhD in psychology, sociology, and literary studies, has not only taken this journey herself, but is putting together a video series about the journey many of today’s Paul Reveres have taken to arrive at the truth of Islam.  HERE is her website.  Sign up to see the results of her work and reflect on your own journey toward the truth.

My journey toward the truth of Islam began on 9-11.  Up till then, all news stories were a blur of Middle East this, and Iraq that, and terrorists the other.  Terrorism, hatred, intimidation, supremacism and vile behavior was rarely if ever associated with Islam in the news or in my mind.  In retrospect, the media had already scrubbed Islam from their vocabulary of news reporting, even before 9-11.  The day after 9-11, President Bush even declared “Islam is a religion of peace.”  To mimic Michelle Obama’s line, I think that was my first time in my adult life I was really exposed to the essence of “cognitive dissonance.”

In the weeks following 9-11 I thirsted for an understanding of Islam.  One of the few books available in the local bookstores on the topic was by Karen Armstrong.  I read, I pondered, I shook my head while my inner red light was flashing.  (I spent 3 years in the Intelligence Service of our military where I educated my “red light”, aka “crap detector.”)  Years later I learned that Karen was and remains a consummate dhimmi Muslim apologist who provides only the peaceful Meccan side of Islam’s duality.

A few months after 9-11 a contest was announced.  The folks responsible for rebuilding ground zero sought entries for design themes for the site.   Still remaining in my relative Kum-bey-Yah stage of understanding Islam, I submitted a proposal for an Epcot like multi-religion visitor center promoting understanding and peace among and between all the world’s great faiths.  In retrospect, I am amazed at the absurd thinking ignorance can generate.

A year or two after 9-11 I was on a car trip to Virginia from Florida.  Along the way a radio station remained strong enough for me to hear the entire interview of Brigitte Gabrielle speaking on her experience in Lebanon during the Islamic takeover.  From that time forward, I sought out those who had personal experience with Islam and who have devoted their lives to the study of Islam from a western or Christian perspective.

Robert Spencer was an early source of truth and influence.  He appeared a bit more reserved in his opinions in 2003-04 than he is today.  But some pointed emailed questions to him produced unequivocal responses.

Over the next several years, after reading dozens of books, listening to dozens of interviews, surfing hundreds of web sites, communicating with dozens of Islamic experts, and listening to hundreds of news stories of acts Islamic terror, I have acquired my current understanding of Islam.

Here is the progression of my understanding:

Pre-9-11:  Islam?  Is that a religion?

9-11:  Muslims.  Is that related to Islam?  What’s going on?   Why does the Islamic world cheer this atrocity?

First month after 9-11:  There sure are a lot of conflicting opinions about Islam.

First year after 9-11:  There is more to this Islam thing than most people are willing to admit.  But experts say that Islam cannot be pigeon-holed .  There are numerous sects of Islam.  Most are peaceful.

2003-2005:  There is a radical* Islam and a moderate** Islam;  there are radical Muslims and moderate Muslims.  It’s good that it is estimated that only 10% of Muslims are “radical” with the great majority being “moderate.”  But gee, that means there are still, let’s see, 10% of 1.5 billion – hmmm, 150,000,000 radical Muslims.

2006-2007:  I’m beginning to understand that the heart of Islam is based on the life of Muhammad, that Muhammad’s life is to be emulated by the faithful Muslim.   Muhammad did what?  He participated in and promoted what?  Based on Islam being based on the life and teaching of Muhammad, there was no choice but that Islam could be nothing but a radical religion.  There is no “moderate” Islam.  I began to question why ACT for America insists that only “radical” Islam is the problem.  But I still insisted that the majority of Muslims are moderate because, like Christians, there are cultural Muslims and non-devout Muslims who don’t really follow Islam.  This period is when I first learned of the alliance between Islam and the left (progressives, Communists, and Fascists – yes, Fascism is just another repressive dictatorial system)

2008-2009:  Islam is radical.  And it is more of a political ideology than a religion because most of the Islamic Trilogy pertains to how the Kafir ought to be treated and coerced.  Muslims promote a political agenda that is coercive and subversive - tantamount to sedition.  There are not as many “moderate” Muslims as I first thought.  Why did so many Muslims in my former home town of Fort Lauderdale turn out to demonstrate and protest against American action in the Middle East?  I was inspired by  Allen West’s warning of “when tolerance becomes a one way street it leads to cultural suicide.”

2010-2011:  Islam is a fascist political ideology veiled in supremacist religious fervor.  Those who suggest otherwise are part of the problem.  Many Muslims in the US who were initially thought to be “moderate” turn out to be promoters of terror or supporters of terror groups.    I posed the question about Zudhi Jasser:  Is he representative of the consummate “moderate” Muslim?

2012:  Not only is Islam radical, but it is impossible to distinguish a “moderate” Muslim from a “radical” Muslim.  I thought not more than 10% of the worlds 1.5 billion Muslims could be classified as radical.  Now I believe it is the greater majority.  Zudhi Jasser,  does NOT represent the consummate “moderate”  Muslim.  He portrays himself as a devout “moderate” Muslim (an oxymoron) while he claims to represent the “real” Islam when in fact he is considered an apostate in just about every Mosque in the US.

Where is your understanding of Islam and of Muslims on the above chronological continuum?  Do you have a solid basis for what you believe, beyond the fact that you knew a very nice Muslim, or saw apostate Zudhi Jasser on TV saying that he represents the true “moderate Islam.”

My understanding of Islam and Muslims is still evolving.  High on my list of understanding and concern is the fact that our nation’s failure to understand and forthrightly acknowledge what Islam is is a greater danger to our national security and freedoms than Islam itself.


* Radical:  By this term is meant extreme in the sense of contrary to the norm based on Judeo-Christian morality and custom.  Typically associated with irrational,  intolerant, provocative, and violent teachings or behavior.  However, once the ideology or allegiance is understood, the modifier ‘radical’ is no longer necessary.  ‘Radical Islam’ becomes ‘Islam is radical.’  ‘Radical Muslim’ becomes ‘Muslim is radical.’

** Moderate:  By this term is meant ‘reasonable’; consistent with Judeo-Christian morality and custom.  Typically associated with an ideology or people who act rationally and peaceably.  This term is associated with the aspect of Islam that is not currently in an aggressive stage and Muslims who are playing the role of  ‘good neighbor/good friend’.

Friday, September 14, 2012

The battle of free speech vs. political correctness…

…and our nation’s gross ignorance of Islam
Let’s hear the outrage toward the continuing unforgivably poor handling by our government and media concerning events in North Africa and the Middle East over the last several days.

There are four central issues at play in the recent events:
  • Incompetence of the Obama Administration
  • Free speech
  • Political correctness
  • The nature of Islam
Incompetence of the Obama administration in the Egyptian and Libyan 9-11 debacles is undeniable.  Hillary and her State Department are guilty of nonfeasance and malfeasance for not identifying and preparing for the obvious on 9-11.   Intelligence received 48 hours before 9-11 was was deemed “non-actionable” and ignored.  Are you freakin’ kidding me?  It is inexcusable that our embassies in unstable Islamic dominated nations remained vulnerable during this period.  Hillary and the Obama administration must be held accountable.  But they are seeking every scapegoat they can find.

Free speech was exercised by a California Coptic Christian from Egypt who was fed up and sickened by the persecutions of fellow Copts in Egypt at the hands of Muslims exercising their hatred of Christians.  Some media claim he is an unsavory character with a criminal record. (HERE is more about him.) Nonetheless, he exercised his free speech using the best method he knew to reveal the true nature of Islam that is terrorizing his fellow Christians.  He used the medium of a movie.   While the movie was poorly executed, its message about Muhammad, the basis of Islamic worship, intolerance, and violence, was generally accurate.  Now many in government and, ironically, the media, are calling for a suppression of free speech on Face Book, YouTube, and other new media that threaten their government-pandering old school media empires.

Political correctness, which avoids the truth of Islam, was in full bloom as exercised by Hillary Clinton, the State Department, the President, and most of the media, to blame free speech first so the Muslims in Libya and Egypt and the rest of the Muslim world would not be offended.  These media and government “leaders” are blinded by their political correctness, by their “don’t offend” priority, even if the truth must be squelched.  They all but threw free speech under the bus.  Three days after the initial psychotic behavior by Egyptian and Libyan Muslims, Hillary is still citing the “outrageous” movie as the cause of the rioting and killing.  The legitimate exercise of free speech is her scape goat for her own incompetence in office.

Ms. Clinton, in all the due respect I am capable of mustering, you are a damned fool.  You are personally accountable and responsible for the deaths of the men who were denied the protections that the man on the street in America knew they should have had.  Political correctness and pandering to the Islamists are central to our failures to mitigate the Islamic plague.

Islam promotes reactionary, psychotic behavior.  Whether this emotional defect is a consequence of the inbreeding condoned in Islamic doctrine, or due to the brainwashing resulting from the repetition of five daily prayers and indoctrination in hatred of the “infidel” by Islamic leaders, I do not know.  It is probably a combination of these factors unique to Islam.  These behaviors are in fact based on the example of the life of Muhammad.  The message of the movie attempted to reveal the corrupt life of Muhammad that motivates these Islamic bastards to do the evil they do.  The most likely reason why most Middle East and North African Islamic nations remain in near stone age conditions is their psychotic reaction to any criticism from the stone age Muhammadan mindset.

Bill Warner, an expert on the truth of Islamic doctrine, wrote an eye-opener titled “You Can Never Awaken a Man Who Is Pretending to be Asleep.”  Read it.  He corrects the apologists by reminding us that the rioters represent main-line Islam, despite the excuses the defenders of Islam attempt to promote.  Warner observes that,
[our leaders] “have refused to learn a single thing about Islamic doctrine and history since 9/11.  But, cheer up! When the dhimmis write about the beauty of Islam and how the Kafirs are wrong, read the comments.  You will find that the common man knows far, far more about Islam than the experts.  The higher you go, the less they know.”
In support of free speech, I would love to see an outpouring of anti-Islamic sentiment in letters to the editor, to our political leaders, to the State Department, to embassies of the US as well as those of Islamic nations, and all over the internet.  I would love to see the establishment of a “make a movie about Muhammad day” where all who possess any kind of video camera create a 5, 10, or 15 minute video, in whatever creative form they deem most captivating, of the life of Muhammad and post these on YouTube or whatever other video platforms are still available to free speech.

In commemoration of this time of threatened suppression of free speech, I am posting Ann Barnhardt’s ground-breaking video expressing her outrage of Islamic doctrine that pollutes the earth and exercising her right to do so.
Here is the one with the Arabic translation…
Here is the original…

For those of you who might cringe at my [stupidity][audacity][bigotry] [Islamophobia][insensitivity](pick one or more) in reposting these videos, you are part of our problem.  We should all engage in our own forms of outrage at our free speech being used as the scapegoat for our own government’s ignorance of Islam and incompetence in running our foreign policy.

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Hillary’s latest misguided act of appeasement

Our confused and misguided Secretary of State has reasserted her apology to the psychotic Muslims in North Africa. 

She  ignores the need for extra security prudent at our Embassies and Consulate Offices on the anniversary of 9-11 in unstable Islamic countries.

She insists on condemning the message of a movie that allegedly triggered the violent psychosis rather than condemning the Islamic intolerance of the truth.  See it HERE.

Here is my message for Hillary:

Hillary.  You love appeasement, don't you.  You  prefer ignoring the facts about Islam and its radical, supremacist political ideology based on the corrupt life of their "prophet Muhammad" so that you can appease.  You prefer to denigrate the truth of an amateur movie depicting Muhammad's life than to hurt the feelings of those who have vowed to destroy the infidel, the little Satan, Israel, and the big Satan, the United States.  Hillary, you are a greater danger to the national security of the United States than any movie is.  Your actions and inaction make it plain you are an unqualified, manipulated boob.

Obama’s administration is so off the mark on so many aspects of our foreign policy it could serve as full time blog fodder.

His apologies for America in the Middle East during his first month in office.

His snubbing of Netanyahu on multiple occasions.

His snubbing our allies on multiple occasions.

His desire and actions to assure that the Muslim Brotherhood control the Middle East.  This interview from last year nails it…

His failure to protect American Embassies and Consulates on the anniversary of  9-11.  What the hell was he thinking there.

And finally, the reaffirmation that his administration ignores the evils, treachery, and psychotic behavior of Muslim exemplars of Muhammad in the Middle East.  Obama and his minions prefer to denigrate those who reveal the truth of Islam rather than to risk insult to Muslim activists.  God help us.

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Why Churches remain ignorant of Islam…

Bill Warner, the publisher of Political, recently wrote a piece called “The Silence of the Pulpits.”  Read it.  It explains why Islam has our leaders mesmerized – why ignorance of the truth of Islam is so pervasive in our society, government, schools, and churches.

In working with a local pastor to give a presentation to a local group on the subject of “Why 95% of our churches are oblivious to the Islamic threat”, I brainstormed a number of reasons for this suicidal situation.  Here are most of the reasons.  You may be able to think of others.  In some respects the reasons depend on the denomination and the part of the country the church is located in.

Here they are – why 95% of the churches either support or are silent on Islam:

    • Fear of losing 501 c (3) status:  Most churches don’t want to instigate complaining parishioners to initiate an IRS investigation.  In fact, churches can do much, much more than they do with regard to “perceived” politics, and not violate their tax status at all.
    • Perception of what is “political” and “off limits”:   Churches have given up way to much of their religious responsibilities and moral high ground to the alleged “no go zone” of politics.  They have forgetten that just about every aspect of politics deals directly or indirectly with some aspect of morality and Christian principles.  Jesus certainly did not avoid “politics.”  In fact, that is what got him killed.  Ahaa.  Do we have thousands of pastors fearful of death?  Hardly.  They are zillions of miles from that possibility.
    • Fear of offending parishioners:  This is a significant reason for silence, especially in churches whose highest value is vested in the “church growth movement.”  Numbers are everything.  Orthodox Christian doctrine is offensive to a lot of people, especially in the face of our perverted culture.  Remain silent about the truth.  Do not judge.  Do not offend.
    • Liberal theology:  Homosexuality, gay marriage, out of wedlock cohabitation, drug induced behaviors are all generally mainstream today.  Most mainline churches not only tolerate but promote that culture.  They have turned centuries of Biblical interpretation on its head to capitulate to the demands of the culture.  Part of this is the cult of “nice” where we are called “bigot” if we do not tolerate every other religion, behavior, and morality; if we don’t turn the other cheek; if we judge; if we struggle to consider devil worshippers or Islamists “brothers”, if we try to defend our faith, or if we deny that Allah is the same as God the Father.
    • Fear of loss of revenue:  This is a motivator in the cult of “nice” and of not offending with the truth.
    • Denominational hierarchical mandates:  Most mainline denominations have a national church hierarchy:  Bishops in Catholic and Episcopal Churches, Synods, Presbyteries, etc. in other churches.   These entities  embrace top down liturgies and topical boundaries for the local churches in their denominations.  The larger the organization, the more authoritarian and the more liberal they seem to become.  They seem incapable of adapting to the changing needs of the culture or in transgressing their ecumenical priorities.
    • Ecumenicalism:  Denominations try to find commonality with other denomination.  They try to reverse centuries of church splits.  While well meaning, they often carry their wishful thinking to extremes.  Mainline denominations have ecumenical policies and outreach to Muslims, not to convert them, but to “coexist” and find common ground.  The “A Common Word Between You and Us” movement is an example of the ignorant gullibility of Christian denominations.  The truth conflicts with these efforts.
    • Ignorance of Islam:  All of the above keep the churches neutralized from ever initiating an understanding of the truth of Islam.  The denominational leaders, the priests, the pastors, the church leaders, and the parishioners remain ignorant of the truth of Islam.  So how can churches adjust and react?  They don’t.  They ignore.
    • Ultra narrow view of the mission of the Church:  Many churches believe their only purpose on earth is conversion of people to Christ.  Every other teaching of scripture such as Christian growth, discipleship, morality, and being salt and light in the culture is off limits – simply ignored.
    • Lack of faith/belief in their own religion:  Liberalism in Christianity and Judaism has brought about indifference and lack of faith.  Lacking faith, any ideology becomes as worthy of respect as any other.  That is how Islam can become “respected.”  It doesn’t matter that it is also intolerant, supremacist, fascist, and militant.  Hey, its just another religion.  We need to respect it.
    • Prosperity and self-indulgence:  We are a fat and happy culture.  We lack for nothing.  We are immersed in our movies, music, technology, sports, cruises, and entertainment.  If our jobs don’t provide, government provides.  Where is the need for God?  Or the church?  Churches have become an extension of our feel good, lack for nothing culture.  If too much “God” or “Jesus” is inserted into church, the folks become uneasy and may be turned off, because, really, there is no need for such things.  Interest in spiritual or religious matters is toward the very bottom of our priority lists. Concern with any distinctions between Islam and Christianity is also right there near the bottom of the list.

These are not merely the reasons why churches ignore the threat of Islam.  They are also the reasons why churches ignore the teaching and preaching of Christianity. 

Can you add additional reasons to this list?   And how about the solutions.  Can the list of possible solutions be a lot longer than the list of reasons for our failures?

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

US Embassy in Cairo tells us to shut up…

Muslim hoards in Cairo, Egypt, climbed the wall of the US Embassy there and replaced the American Flag with the Muslim Salafist* flag.  Yessiree, these are Obama’s boys.  News story HERE.

You will not believe what the response was from our Cairo Embassy.  Here it is::

“The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.” [bold italics for emphasis]

Here is the entire message from the US Embassy web site as linked to Diana West’s website.

I had to gasp and sputter a few moments before I could conjure up the words to describe my feelings about this ghastly statement.  I read this to my wife who couldn’t believe it wasn’t a hoax.

So, while the US is denying the truth of Islam and their vile, intolerant, supremacist, leftist ideology, they tell the rest of us to shut the hell up about Islam – so we don’t “hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.”  It will be a cold day in hell when that happens.

Our misguided federal government fails to accept the fact that Islam is not as much a “religion” as it is a fascist political ideology cloaked in religious fervor.

Unfortunately, too many Islamic awareness organizations and supposed allies of the truth like FOX News and National ACT for America still continue to demand that only “radical” Islam is the problem instead of the entire Islamic mindset.  They blindly add the modifyer “radical” in front of Islam, as if all other forms of Islam are acceptable and benign.  They are deceived and spreading deception.

And for our own government to tell us to shut the hell up with the truth is inexplicable and unacceptable.  Those who suggest such rubbish are either brainwashed themselves or have submitted themselves to Islamic threats and intimidation.  By the way, if you don’t know, our federal government is heavily endowed with Muslims and other defenders and promoters of Islam – most appointees of Obama.


*Salafists are a branch of Islam that spawns militant Islamic groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda.

Unlike Peal Harbor, the cause of 9-11 is still out there, unaddressed…

With Pearl Harbor, we eliminated the threat.  It took **serious** bombing, it took internment camps, it took the united will of the American people and our elected officials.

After 9-11, where not our military, but our civilians were murdered, we have a fraction of the resolve to eliminate the cause of that attack as we did in 1941.  Yes, we’ve had an 11 year war in Afghanistan and 10 in Iraq.  I am proud of all those who served and continue to do so.  But we haven’t had the courage to identify the enemy.  I believe those military actions were and continue to be political measures designed to appear to be “doing something.”  But what, really, have they accomplished?  What?

Yes, we’ve tightened up “homeland security.”  As a result, many of our OWN freedoms have been curtailed.  We still cater to Muslim demands and insensibilities.  We not only avoid identifying the enemy. We avoid “offending” the enemy.

We continue to fail to identify the root cause:  Those who believe and practice the Islamic ideology.  Islam is the new “protected class” instead of the known and declared enemy that it should be.  Very weird.

No, the threat is NOT a “religion.”  Islam is a political ideology couched in religious fervor, every bit a political threat as Nazism or Communism, both Islam’s allies.

We don’t want to offend the Muslims.  See what the US Embassy in Cairo Egypt had to say HERE.  Sure, there were those who didn’t want to offend the Japanese and and Nazi’s back in ‘42.  But common sense prevailed. 

Today, the enemy is still out there.  Not just “out there”, but in our halls of government, hand picked by the Commander in Chief of our Armed forces.  Our Generals have been trained and selected to “respect” the Islamic ideology that killed on 9-11.  Our Embassies are pandering dhimmis.

Of course we hear  that the 9-11 atrocities were carried out by a “perversion of Islam.”  An act of a few radicals, extremists. No it wasn’t! That is misguided BS.   It was part of a world wide orthodox Islamic resurgence to bring the infidel to its knees.  And we don’t yet admit it.

The cause of 9-11 is still out there.  And we are paralyzed from doing anything about it because the Islamists and their sympathizers have infiltrated our government, our military, our media and our educational systems.  We have been bought off by Saudi Arabia and their Islamic and Communist allies.

Pray for the resolve we possessed following Pearl Harbor.  Pray that we will understand and know our enemy and do the right thing to act on that knowledge.

The cause of 9-11 is still out there, unaddressed.

I agree with Ann Barnhardt:



What constitutes Justice? Nothing less than the total extermination of the islamic political cult from the face of the earth.

Nothing. Less.

Sunday, September 09, 2012

Rampant denial that “Islam” is the problem…

Before Fort Hood there was Little Rock.  You remember the so-called “work place violence” of Muslim Major Hassan who shouted Allahu Akbar as he shot at dozens and killed 12 US servicemen and women at Fort Hood, Texas.  You may not remember  the so-called “drive by shooting” of two US soldiers standing in front of a recruiting station in Little Rock, Arkansas, by a “home grown” terrorist after his intense indoctrination by Muslims in a Tennessee mosque and in Yemen.

Here is what these, and the dozens of less successful attempts at terror of the last few years in the US have in common:

1) They were all carried out by individuals who were indoctrinated in the ideology and practice of orthodox Islam (those who embrace the whole doctrine of Islam) for the express purpose of vindicating and furthering Islam.  They were all premeditated acts of hate in accordance with Islamic tradition and in the name of Islam.  Their actions were typical of orthodox Islamic practice for centuries as ingrained in Muslim thought in mosques throughout the United States, north Africa, and the Middle East.

2) Our nation’s leaders, from Congress, the the highest levels of our military, to the FBI, State Department, Homeland Security, the Attorney General, the President and most of the media deny these acts have anything to do with Islam.  The closest a small minority of these leaders can come to “the truth” is that such acts might have something to do with ‘radical Islam’ for fear of offending those who might be of the “moderate Islamic” persuasion.

News flash!!!  There is no “moderate Islam.”  There is Islam and there is Zudhi Jasser’s “apostate” Islam – the fantasy Islam that virtually every mosque in the United States shuns.  

Tonight I viewed the documentary “Losing Our Sons”, a painful account of denial by our nation’s leaders and media that orthodox Islam is the root of the terror problem that our nation is spending hundreds of billions defending against.  We are destined to lose this fight because we have not identified the enemy:  the Islamic ideology.  It follows that if we don’t know our enemy, we are wasting lives, billions of dollars, and jeopardizing our nation’s future.

Here are two video links to interviews about this documentary.  The first is an interview by Stakelbeck on Terror.  The second is a panel on Hannity’s show.

Yes, many will see “Losing Our Sons” as a touching story of two dad’s who share the grief of lost sons as viewed from the opposite sides of the same “drive by shooting.”  I see it as a stunning indictment of our nation’s leaders blind and ignorant fear of offending Muslims.  Islam has become a sacred cow in this country.   Our leaders have chosen the wrong course.  Here is the hierarchy of misdirected policies concerning those shouting Allahu Akbar as they carry out their terror attacks:

Public relations position #1:  Deny that Islam or jihad or terror have anything to do with Muslims shouting Allahu Akbar as they attempt to blow up or shoot their targets.  Expunge all meaningful terms from all government training manuals and policy documents dealing with terror acts committed by Muslims.  This is the favorite of the Obama administration.

Public relations position #2:  Deny that Jihad has anything to do with Islam.  This is a recently stated belief of Mitt Romney.

Public relations position #3:  Deny that Islamic supremacism and terror have anything to do with Islam; it is only “radical” Islam that is the problem.  This position presupposes that “radical Islam” is a perversion of Islam.  It is not.  It also presupposes that “non-radical” or “moderate” Islam is not a threat.  It is.  This position denies the fact that the root cause of terror attacks is informed and motivated by historic Muhammadan orthodox Islam, not “radical Islam.”  This is the position of many who wish to warn us about Islam but who, out of an abundance of political correctness and half truths, limit their warning to “radical Islam.” The leadership of ACT for America have taken this position.

Even in this documentary, “radical Islam” was named as the problem 20 or 30 times.  “Orthodox” Islam was mentioned once.  That is misleading and does not inform of the truth.  Islam is the problem.

You know what “radical” Islam really is?   It is Zudhi Jasser’s Islam, the Islam that requires the spiritualizing or dismissal of half the Islamic texts for one to be able to unhypocritically say the things Jasser says. His is a radical view.   That just might be why Jasser is considered an apostate in virtually every mosque in the US.  But our media loves him because he provides a “hope”, however false and misleading, that Islam is really OK.  It is only those pesky “radicals” we have to keep our eye on.  This is so misleading, it avoids the truth, and avoids dealing with the threat we face.

Thursday, September 06, 2012

We need the truth of Islam without name calling…

Here is a post from a Muslim on the far left Blog site, Think Progress quoting an individual in the audience at a St. Louis ACT for America Chapter meeting.

They point out one over the top comment made at an ACT meeting and attribute that comment to ACT.  That is WRONG and transparently misrepresentative of ACT for America.

ACT’s leaders bend over backwards; they  go out of their way to the point of ignoring the evils of Islam to be non-offensive to those it claims are moderate Muslims.

Here is the Think Progress quote:

MUSLIMS COMPARED TO COCKROACHES AT ST. LOUIS ACT! FOR AMERICA EVENT | St. Louis Post-Dispatch’s Tim Townsend attended an anti-Muslim event hosted by ACT! for America this week where he witnessed the following remark. “They’re everywhere,” one woman in the audience whispered to her friend. “They’re like cockroaches.” Townsend concludes, “Unfortunately for American Muslims, we are about to enter a presidential election year, during which groups like ACT! for America and the Clarion Fund have historically spread anti-Islam messages that promote fear of ‘the other.’” As we explained in Fear, Inc., the hate group ACT!, founded by Islamophobe Brigitte Gabriel, has a budget of nearly $1 million and comprises over 550 chapters and 170,000 members worldwide.

Obviously such disparaging remarks will discredit our cause.  This comment reminds me of a note I received from a representative of a St. Louis Chapter of ACT  through a third party warning me that I might be sued by ACT for summarizing my understanding of ACT policy I gleaned from a phone call I had with an ACT leader.

The above Think Progress rant and the “cockroaches” comment from an overzealous advocate trying to express himself is much more of a problem for ACT than I am.  My comments about ACT are aimed at promoting greater forthrightness about the truth of Islam.  Disparaging remarks about Muslims are the equivalent of shouting obscenities.

It is a narrow line we have to walk between excessively catering to Muslim sensitivities and being excessively mean-spirited in addressing Muslim behavior.  The truth of the evils of Islamic ideology must not be hidden under a bushel of political correctness.  Neither should the seriousness of our challenge be diminished with ill-conceived disparaging remarks.

Wednesday, September 05, 2012

ACT Counting on a miracle…

A friend of mine sent my previous blog about ACT’s priority of not offending Muslims to Kelly Cook, the National Field Director of ACT for America, for his comment.  Kelly responded to our Chapter Leader in the email below.

Hi V----,

Give me a call regarding this issue.  There are so many misunderstandings below [in previous blog gm] in G-----‘s piece.  I’m sure he’s well meaning, but he needs to realize that we appreciate all who want to win this war.  Usama Dakdok, however, issued us an ultimatum.  That’s wrong and I called him on it.  [Conflicting statements about the “ultimattum” were personally received from both parties. gm]

Please give me a call:  850-xxx-xxxx, Ext 2

G----- is welcome to join us if you would like.

As we grow into a million member network, those wanting to weigh in on strategy are welcome to do so.  Believe me, we’ve chewed and digested this particular issue over and over again and we won’t be throwing brave moderate Muslims under the bus to line up with some misguided individual’s narrative of how all Muslims must be.

Whether those who detract from our positions do so or not is irrelevant, but I will always respect anyone trying to make a difference to win.  We need to make this point in our chapters.  100% agreement is not required, but a mutual respect is.  This will keep a healthy dynamic within your chapter, rather than one that could potentially split it.


Kelly Cook
National Field Director


Here is my emailed reply to Kelly:

Dear Kelly:

Thank you for copying me on your email response to V----.

First, I need to commend V---- and her local Chapter to you.  She is doing a fantastic job.  You should know that the members of the Chapter she has formed are of one mind concerning Islam.  We all share the same understanding of Islam as I summarized in my blog. 

V---- has hosted numerous experts on Islam and the Middle East at our meetings.  They’ve included a Christian raised in Egypt who translated the Qur’an, a former Muslim turned Christian from Pakistan who speaks to churches around the country, a homeland security consultant who trains with The Mossad of Israel, and a PhD from a local university who specializes in communicating the Islamic threat to whoever will listen, among others.  All of these expert speakers, a decade of my own research, and the actions and statements of Muslims around the world have informed the understanding of Islam that I expressed in my “misguided” blog comments. 

Our meetings are attended by Christians, Jews, and secularists.  Local pastors often give the invocation at the start of our meetings – and amazingly, no one is offended.  We have ongoing interaction with the many conservative groups in our area.  And we are all united in our understanding of Islam.  No one has been offended either by the frank and truthful speakers we’ve had or by my frank and truthful “blog.”  You, on behalf of ACT, are the only one who has expressed that my blog contains “so many misunderstandings.”  I hate to say it, but it is as though I got a reaction from Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf himself.  That may sound offensive to you (or maybe not), but that is what I and many others perceive from ACT.

In that regard, it would be very helpful to me and others here if you would be so kind to elaborate on your statement that “there are so many misunderstandings…in Gerald’s piece.” Please explain the points of that blog that you take issue with and your reasons why.  It is apparent from your emailed comments (e.g. “misguided individual’s narrative of how all Muslims must be”) that you did not read my comments very closely or that you, yourself, lack a clear understanding of the motives and methods of the Islamic leaders who are influencing you.

I thought I understood why ACT National is doing things the way you are doing them.  I gave the organization the benefit of the doubt that your methods were designed to reach the politically motivated, influential, and naive people with your warning about “radical Islam.”  I understood that you cannot reach them [by providing them gm] with the entire truth of Islam all at once.  You believe the entire truth all at once may repel some from accepting any truth you have to impart. 

You believe the distinction between “Islam” and “radical Islam” helps our cause.  To the contrary, that is a half truth that leads people to believe that “non-radical” Islam is A OK.  You give the distinct impression that non-radical Islam is indeed “a religion of peace” as George Bush notoriously and ignorantly declared the day after 9-11.  That message most definitely HURTS our cause - that is, if you believe “our cause” is to reveal the “whole truth” of the Islamic threat.  Note that in my blog  I took care to distinguish between Islam and Muslim (which you may have missed) and the distinction between “radical”, “moderate”, and “apostate” Muslim.

But now, your most recent comments raise questions not just about your methods, but your understanding.  I am not sure you understand Islam all that well.  Indeed, it does appear that ACT National has staked out the “middle” position.  And this “middle position” is not as you portray it:  It is not between the “ignorant Islamophobic bigots” (as you infer of me) on one hand, and the “rabid pro-Islamic Jihadists” on the other.”  No, not that at all.  ACT’s position appears to be between those who promote “the whole truth of Islam” (which you reject) and the “Islamic radicals.” Your “middle ground” is indistinguishable from the message of Islamic apologists (who you defend).  Here is what your position appears to be in a nutshell:  “Islam = good”  “Radical Islam = not good.  Regretfully this is the equivalent to Nazi = good; radical Nazi = not good.  Back in the day you would likely promote the idea that the majority who declared themselves “Nazi” were great folks and meant no one harm.  It is only the “radicals” who are a problem.  Islam’s history is 1,400 years longer and has a “god” motivating its followers to do the things you attribute only to the “radicals.”

The folks we interact with in our part of the nation are apparently more receptive to and somewhat more evolved in their understanding of the whole truth of Islam than either ACT National or the politicians your National organization is attempting to reach.  Unfortunately, your chosen methods of reaching them dilute and confuse the truth.  In the short run you may gain some influential supporters who “get it” regarding your narrow definition of “radical Islam.”  That is picking the low hanging fruit – a no brainer.  In the long run you will have accomplished NOTHING to educate the nation about the underlying threat of historic, orthodox Islam and the many forms it takes.



Shortly after sending this email, Kelly, our local Chapter leader, and I participated in a conference call.  In that conversation, Kelly explained ACT’s purpose in distinguishing “radical Islam” from “Islam.”  The reasons he gave were amazing to me.  Here is my 2nd email back to him making my best attempt at summarizing my understanding of the reasons for ACT’s strategy.


Thank you for speaking on the phone with Vella and me. And for listening.

The “new thing” I learned from our conversation today about your preferred method of addressing the Islamic threat is this:

You see your strategy as keeping a hope for “a miracle” alive.  You believe in the possibility of a miracle that the five ‘rebel’, “moderate” Muslims you referred to in our conversation will turn the tide of the teaching of thousands of Imams and Islamic leaders, a millennium of orthodox Islamic doctrine, and the Islamic-inspired culture of 100’s of millions, into a truly peace loving ideology compatible with and appreciative of western values.  As funny as this sounds, I’m not laughing.

You further believe that in order to safeguard the possibility of that miracle coming true, you are willing to lead your followers to believe that the vast majority of Muslims don’t really understand or practice the Islamic “faith” (ideology).  To keep the possibility of your miracle alive, you have adopted a further strategy of doing all in your power to not offend the vast majority of cultural Muslims with the truth of Islam – a twist on the apparently outmoded “the truth shall make you free” admonition of their competing faith.  The truth about the Islamic ideology is sacrificed for two purposes:  1) So the “vast majority” of cultural Muslims will not be offended, and 2) So that ACT does not appear radical to those incapable of hearing the truth about Islam.  Only those Muslims who show themselves to be “radical” are worthy of your critique.  The Islamic ideology itself is off limits to anyone’s criticism, lest they be labeled “misguided.”

It is not news to me that many “moderate” Muslims appear to be cultural Muslims only.  You seem to hold great stock in the so-called “moderate majority” being totally ignorant of Islamic ideology and thus totally benign.  There are three problems with that view.  1) Experience has shown that there are many who were thought to be “moderate” by our government or media but had shown themselves to be anything but. 2) Experience with cultural identity demonstrates that it is highly likely that even Muslims who are not devout practitioners of Islam will follow their devout Muslim compatriots who adhere to the orthodox Islamic doctrine that is anything BUT benign.  And 3) The widely practiced Islamic doctrine of deception to promote Islam in a foreign culture cloaks the true devoutness of untold numbers of Muslims. 

One other oddity of the “don’t offend the cultural Muslim” strategy is this.  If you believe that the great majority of people who call themselves “Muslim” are benign, why are you so hell-bent on withholding the truth about Islam from them so they won’t be offended?  That makes absolutely no sense to me.   And if we sincerely do not wish the few rebel, apostate Muslims to be “thrown under the bus”, we should do all we can to discourage them from identifying with the Islamic ideology altogether.  That is a support-worthy strategy.  Why pretend that “Islam” is A OK, when it isn’t?

Well, to sum up, I hope you also learned something from your conversation with us this afternoon – something to offset your belief that we only have “a misguided individual narrative” concerning “all Muslims.”

I continue to look forward to your point by point corrections of the “so many misunderstandings” contained in my blog.


ACT is counting on the highly improbable.  Kelly is counting on a handful of US Muslims viewed as apostates by virtually the entire Muslim Ummah to transform Islam into something it never was and which is disparaged by virtually all Islamic scholars in the world today.  He accedes to the strategy of making way for “a miracle” of world wide Islamic transformation by refusing to offend (with the truth of Islam) the overwhelming majority of Muslims (as he sees it) who are Muslim in name only or otherwise indifferent to the Islamic ideology. 

Result:  The truth of Islam is being denied to accommodate a wish for a miracle.  That is indeed a risky strategy, akin to befriending Middle East Muslim Brotherhood leaders in the hope that they will change.  That is “hope and change” dhimmi style.

Saturday, September 01, 2012

ACT: Stifle Christians and Jews; but just don’t offend Muslims

Many of us choose to shade the truth to avoid offending with the whole truth.  In some matters, that little lie has little consequence, as when the husband is asked by his wife, “do I look good in this dress?” 

On other occasions the lie has much greater consequence.

One such example is the ongoing lie of the national “radical Islam” awareness organization, ACT for America, in denying that Islam, not just “radical” Islam, is evil and a threat – a threat to our form of government, our freedoms, and the practice of our faith.

At the same time, ACT for America has a policy that requires local ACT Chapter meetings to be “non-sectarian.”  What does this mean?  It means that a Christian like Usama Dakdok who travels around the nation contrasting the good of Christianity with the evil of Islam is blacklisted by ACT National from being invited to ACT Chapter meetings.

So, as I understand ACT, we are to stifle the views of our own religion at the same time we are required to lie about the evils of Islam – pretend the “moderate” version is OK.

Nuts” to that!

Here is what I have to say about ACT’s bass-ackward, self-defeating policy:

ACT for America Misrepresents Islam

“Radical” is a word ACT for America consistently uses before the word “Islam” in all of their literature and press releases. They do this to avoid criticizing Islam as if there is a non-radical version. This reflects ACT’s policy that the only aspect of Islam worthy of concern in the United States is “radical Islam.” They are critical of anyone who expresses otherwise. Their use of the term “radical Islam” infers that there is a form of Islam that is not radical, that is in fact “moderate”, worthy of respect, and of no concern to our form of government, our freedoms or our peace. ACT is purposely deceitful in hiding the true nature of orthodox Islam. Why? They do not want to offend their support base. They have bought into the lie that “truth is the new hate speech.” They believe most Americans cannot accept the truth of Islam – the truth that Islam is NOT like all other major world religions.

Here are several definitions that distinguish the various terms that describe Islam and Muslims:

Islam: The ideology based on the life and teachings of Muhammad and his followers as recorded in the Islamic Trilogy and interpreted and practiced by Muslim leaders through the centuries.

Study the life of Muhammad and his immediate followers to learn the true nature of Islam which is anything but moderate, benign, and peace loving. Orthodox Islam has a long history of deceit, intolerance, supremacism, and conquest and a moral code starkly different from the West’s Judeo-Christian ethic.

ACT, the media, and politicians mistakenly divide Islam into two subcategories and define them thusly:

Radical Islam: A violent, unreasonable aberration of Islam. 

In fact, “radical” Islam is as “Islam”, plain ol’ “Islam” is defined above. ACT does not accept that “radical” Islam and “Islam” are one in the same. ACT believes that there is a “moderate, benign and peaceful” Islam.

Moderate, benign or peaceful Islam:  The acceptable Islamic ideology, distinct from “radical” Islam.

In fact, “moderate” Islam is a temporary portrayal of Islam awaiting opportunity to express its innate supremacism, intolerance and coercive, terrorist ideology and methods. By distinguishing “radical” Islam from “Islam”, ACT believes there exists a “moderate” Islam. That is wishful thinking - a fantasy – and dangerous.

Muslim: One who identifies with and/or practices the ideology of Islam.

ACT, the media, and politicians also mistakenly divide Muslims into two groups: Radical and moderate. Experience has proven that this is a misinformed distinction. “Moderate” and “apostate” Muslims need to be considered in the light of the teachings of Muhammad (Islamic ideology) as well as their actions.

Radical Muslim: One who identifies himself as a “Muslim” and who is noticed as actively engaging in the practice of the Islamic ideology.

The criterion of being “noticed” in this definition is important. Many infidels, such as ACT leadership, fail to notice that the activities of the perceived “moderate Muslim” are in fact following the pattern of orthodox Islam. Consequently such “moderates” are “radical.”

Moderate Muslim: One who identifies himself as a “Muslim” who is not noticed as actively engaging in the practice of the Islamic ideology but who does not deny the orthodox teachings of Islam. One who is not currently or overtly engaged in violence, the advocacy of violence, or the advocacy of imposing Islam on the population. ACT often does not notice that the so-called “moderates” are in fact doing what orthodox Muslims do.

There is also a chance that “moderate” Muslims are practicing taqiyya by hiding their true identity and intentions, which is a common teaching and practice promoted by Islam. Most Muslims who were publicly portrayed as being “moderate” have subsequently demonstrated they are not moderate. The concept of a “moderate” Muslim is misleading and dangerous. It mischaracterizes and minimizes the true nature of the Muslim threat to our society. The term should definitely NOT be used to describe the predominant Muslim mindset.

Here is a third category:

Apostate Muslim: One who identifies himself as a “Muslim” but who denies the orthodox teachings of Islam. Such individuals are not respected in the Mosques of the US and the World. Zudhi Jasser falls into this category. ACT leaders and most politicians mistakenly believe that apostate Muslims comprise the typical Muslim in the US. No, they do not. They are a tiny minority of Muslim and are disrespected by the Muslim community and in virtually every Mosque in the US. There is also a chance that apostate Muslims are practicing taqiyya by hiding their true identity and intentions, which is a common teaching and practice promoted by Islam.

The above definitions of terms about Islam and Muslims reflects the truth of Islam while ACT presents politically distorted lies so as not to offend the most ignorant among us.

ACT Suppresses other faiths while giving Islam a free pass

While ACT acts to suppress the truth about Islam, they also have a local Chapter policy that prohibits presentations that do not “align with our non-sectarian policy for chapter meetings.” In other words, Islam cannot be contrasted with the faith of the presenters or the attendees at the meetings. Something as basic as contrasting the Allah of Islam to “God the Father” of Christianity or the “God of Israel” is frowned upon.

Here is a quote from an email from ACT National to local Chapters warning them about speakers who might prefer their own religion over Islam:

There is another factor to consider. Mr. Dakdok’s presentation does not align with our non-sectarian policy for chapter meetings. While we respect his love for Christianity, a chapter meeting is not the place for this message. We are non-sectarian because we want anyone to be able to feel comfortable addressing radical Islam, whether Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Budhist, atheist, etc. (Refer to chapter manual for more details.)

This prohibition is wrong. ACT ought to welcome speakers of EVERY FAITH to contrast with Islam. ACT should welcome Jews, Hindus, Shintos, Sikhs, Buddhists, Mormons, Catholics - all of them - to contrast their religions with Islam. As a Christian, I would love to hear a good presentation by Jews expounding on their faith in contrast to Islam.

ACT is acting the role of the consummate dhimmi; yes, and even an apologist for Islam: Promoting the lie about "moderate" Islam's "goodness" while prohibiting the expression of other faiths. If national ACT leaders clamped down on faith expression, members and local leaders should disavow ACT and form separate Islamic awareness groups who feel free to reveal the truth and are not controlled by top down political correctness, intimidation, and blacklisting.