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.

Why Churches remain ignorant of Islam…

Bill Warner, the publisher of Political Islam.com, 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?

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:

UNTIL JUSTICE IS DONE LET THE IRE REMAIN EVERGREEN

POSTED BY ANN BARNHARDT - SEPTEMBER 11, AD 2012 11:16 AM MST

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

Nothing. Less.

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.

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.

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.

Regards,

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.

Sincerely,

____________________

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.

Kelly:

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.

Sincerely,

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.

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.

Personal Responsibility: A distinctly Mormon teaching…

If there was ever a time for a particular minority trait to be brought to the fore in America it is now.  We, as a culture, have sunk to such a low ebb of expecting others to solve our problems, provide our food, take care of our health, find us a job, teach our kids, and guarantee our safety.  And of course, disciplining our kids is now taboo as is any attempt at condemning immorality. 

We expect government to keep on growing so that it can satisfy our ever-increasing expectations and demands of it. 

The proportion of Americans dependent on some sort of government subsidy, welfare, dole, or salary is nearing 50%.  And this does not include those who expect some sort of government service.  Many suggest our nation is near an irreversible “tipping point” where so many are dependent on government that a majority will insist on its continued growth.  Additional revenue for government will be demanded until its coercive taxing power will become as oppressive as any tyrannical power in history.   At the same time, we have a large and growing portion of our population who pay NO taxes whatsoever.

This points to the plague of a dearth of personal responsibility.

Now enter a group of people into the political spotlight whose faith represents a concept that has become increasingly foreign to too many Americans:

Personal responsibility.

One of the first speakers at the Republican National Convention was Mia Love,   the Mayor of Saratoga Springs, Utah, and the Republican Party 2012 nominee in Utah's 4th congressional district.  She is also Mormon and the first black mayor of any Utah city.   Her speech was all about personal responsibility.

Here is a small part of what she said:

“Hope and change is turned into fear and blame. Fear that everybody is going to lose everything and blaming Congress for everything instead of taking responsibility."     

Personal responsibility: A refreshing concept for Americans

And what did she get for her efforts?  Her Wikipedia page was savaged with these comments:

“…dirty worthless whore…house nigger…aunt Tom…”

Next we have Ann Romney, the wife of Mitt, the mother of 5 boys who she most likely raised without the dad being around a whole lot, and the humbling recipient of breast cancer and multiple sclerosis, and her miscarriages.

Her speech emphasized her own sense of personal responsibility as a mom and of moms around the country.  By almost all accounts, her speech received high praise, except from one.

Juan Williams, a FOX commentator critiqued her comments with:

"Ann Romney ... looked to me like a corporate wife.  The stories she told about struggles — eh! It's hard for me to believe. I mean, she's a very rich woman, and I know that, and America knows that."

From Huffington Post: 

There was a distinct pause, and then host Bret Baier said, "Wow, OK." Host Megyn Kelly asked, "What does that mean, 'corporate wife?'"

"It looks like a woman whose husband takes care of her, and she's been very lucky and blessed in this life," Williams replied. "...She did not convince me that, you know what? I understand the truggles of American women in general."

“Is that the same speech you heard, Brit?” Baier asked colleague Brit Hume. “I think that was the single most effective political speech I’ve ever heard given by a political wife,” Hume replied, adding, "I think a lot of women could look at her ... and find her utterly admirable and utterly credible."

According to Juan Williams, personal responsibility and hard work do not matter, do not count, if you are successful as a result of it.  Or perhaps Juan was experiencing a fit of passive aggressive racism or jealousy.  I don’t know.

And of course we have the example of Mit Romney.  He exhibited a huge measure of not only personal responsibility and hard work throughout his life but a spirit and practice of giving and helping as well.

Each of these people exhibit the common trait of assuming and promoting personal responsibility.  And the left, the progressives, and the ignorant mock them all for it.

The other thing each of these practitioners and advocates of personal responsibility have in common is that they are all Mormon.  It is no coincidence that their personal values have so much in common.  Their faith teaches and promotes personal responsibility and self-sufficiency as one of their highest ideals – pretty much on the same plane as “cleanliness is next to Godliness.”  One of the expressions they often use as I recall from the time I spent with Mormons is this:

"For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do."

This verse from Mormon Scripture is central to their concept of grace.  The unique part of it is “…after all we can do.”  The hard work necessary to endure both the hardships of pioneering as well as the severe persecutions they endured created a great emphasis on their “after all we can do” part of the Scripture.

Mormon theology may not be orthodox, but it sure provides some decent lessons for the rest of us.

Too many of us believe we are saved by grace despite doing nothing.  Doing nothing is as bad as in His face blasphemous disobedience.  Doing nothing, expecting Him to save us – no matter what we do or don’t do – is absolute presumptuousness.  If we believe God and His Word, we will be motivated to act on what he is telling us – not just sit back and act helpless.  By their fruits you will know them.

The perverse “social gospel” tells us the opposite.  The modern version tells us screw personal responsibility and personal effort and personal involvement in the lives of others, let’s get the government to do it.  It’s ok to tax the most productive among us a larger part of their income to help “those of us who are less fortunate.”  Yup, it sure is easier than doing it ourselves.

If there was ever a time in American history where we could use a strong dose of leadership that believes in, practices, and promotes personal responsibility, this is the time.  And if such character happens to come from a faith that is outside or orthodoxy, that tells me that orthodoxy has some catching up to do.

Tea Party Questions: Two folks who don’t get it

From the “there IS such a thing as a dumb question” department…

Mat Staver, the Dean of the Liberty University School of Law and  founder of Liberty Counsel, was the guest speaker at the local Tea Party meeting.  Mat‘s specialty is representing the Christian foundation of the United States, and naturally, confirms and promotes the idea that our nation could not long endure without the moral foundation enabled by our Judeo-Christian roots.

Mat gave a great presentation on the road to ruin our anti-American, socialist, Christian-loathing president is leading us down.  After his fine presentation, the floor was opened to questions from the audience.

Out of the dozen or so questions posed, here are the two that likely come from the two most out of touch people in the room (names changed to protect the guilty):

First, the “haven’t you been listening” question from Apos Tate: 

Mat.  Why does religion and Christianity have anything to do with this election?  Shouldn’t we stay focused on jobs and prosperity?

Mat’s answer:  You’re right,Apos, we should maintain that focus.

God’s answer:   No, Apos and Mat.  You are both mistaken.  Your country would not exist except for Me when your founders had the faith to base their new nation’s governing principles on My word.  Mat, you, especially ought to know better than to answer Sam’s question so carelessly.  Your entire organization, and the University you work for, stands for My principles that served as the basis for the founding of your nation.  You need to defend the grace that I shed on your country much more clearly, consistently, and forcefully.   You understand that there are growing numbers of apostates in your country that are disavowing and denying My influence.  As you have declared many times in other forums, I am on the verge of removing My grace from your country because of the lack of concern of the nation’s people, like Apos,  for my commandments.  Godly principles of governance have EVERYTHING to do with this election.  If your people continue on their immoral path, you will have nothing but dishonest crooks and perverts and Satanic Muslims running your country.  So stand up for the truth.  Defend My role in the good fortune your nation has enjoyed.  Make the connection between faith in Me and the goodness of your nation – especially in your politics and elections. 

And second, the “you’ve got things backwards” question from Dhim Mi: 

Mat, aren’t you concerned that there may be a second holocaust where the people of the United States turn on Muslims and murder them en masse?

Mat’s answer:  No, Dhim.  That is not the nature of this country.  Our legal system will not permit it.  But that doesn’t mean we need to ignore the nature of the Islamic threat to us and our way of life.

Yours truly’s answer:  You have got to be kidding, dumb ass.  The way our political leaders and media are so ignorant about Islam, Muslims are more likely to gain control and subjugate our sorry asses before we even wake up from our entertainment-obsessed, drug-induced stupor.  Dhim, are you, too, so ignorant of Islam that you don’t know that they are the ones who will subject you and the rest of us to a holocaust way before we discover what’s going on?  Hey Dhim, look up the word Dhimmi!

Afghan population rife with those who behead dancers…

…from the “we still don’t get it” department

17 Afghans were beheaded at a party – for dancing.  Afghanistan is heavily populated by Muslims who take Muhammad seriously, aka devout, orthodox, practicing Muslims.  These are what our media refer to as “radicals” and “terrorists.”  But in reality, they are merely devout followers of Islam.  Hey, any of you  Christian-bashing atheists out there – DO NOT equate devout Muslims with devout Christians.  Devout Christians typically become monks, are busy in food pantries, rebuilding communities in third world countries or praying all the time.  No no no.  Don’t pull that ignorant bull crap.  You will absolutely show your biased ignorance.

Orthodox Islam is the majority ideology throughout Afghanistan.

Oh, and as an afterthought, not that anyone really cares, 2 more US soldiers were killed by what the media labels a “rogue” Afghan solder.  Rogue?  I really doubt it.  It is "the way they are” coming out of the closet.  Hey, if it is therapeutic for suppressed homosexual behavior to come out of the closet, why not suppressed Muslim behavior?  I suspect most of the Afghan military would like to do the same.

So, let’s take a look at what rights we are defending here.  The folks we are attempting to assist behead their fellow countrymen for dancing.  And the soldiers we are training kill their US trainers – several dozen at this point.  Do you see anything wrong with this picture?  Do you sense any kind of cultural disconnect here?  This huge disconnect between our suppressed military and the absolutely vile Islamic culture is documented in THIS article by Diana West.

Following are the possible solutions to this.  You pick the one you find most inspiring:

- Nuke all of Afghanistan.  This would be effective in the short run, but the US would be condemned for centuries.

- Send in 50,000 shrinks to psychoanalyze the Afghan military and the Taliban – actually, the entire Muslim Afghan population.  The problem with this is most of the shrinks we send in would likely be Muslim sympathizers and join them in massacring our soldiers or would simply urge them to feel good about themselves.

- Implement another surge to show them we really mean business this time.  But this time don’t tell them we’ll pull out in six months.  Keep them there for the 500 years necessary to allow enough time for our reeducation and “nation-building” to take effect.

- Leave Afghanistan immediately, understand and accept the truth of the Muslim mindset and Islamic ideology, and bolster our borders and national security capabilities.

If none of these options appeal to you, let’s hear your suggestions.  Oh, I hear the progressive mantra now:  Embrace diversity, respect everyone, cultural diversity is the answer.  Note that in the 60’s the hippies had to be on drugs to motivate their “flower power” and “all we need is love” beliefs.  Those who embrace diversity and all the rest of the Pollyanna BS are likely on drugs, too.

 

Another demonstration of Islamo-ignorant US policy in Afghanistan

Our military's failure in Afghanistan is a consequence of the ignorance of our nation’s leaders about the true nature and motives of Islam.

Our role in Afghanistan borders on insanity.  We are equiping and training Islamists in this 100% Muslim nation to fight independently of US presence.  Fight what?  Fight whom?  They already know how to fight on their own.  They have already shot dozens of their US military trainers.  The other insanity is we are surprised.

The latest insanity was demonstrated by General John R. Allen who, according to the Associated Press, stated that “while the reasons for the killings are not fully understood…the burden of fasting during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan combined with the summer heat may have prompted more Afghan soldiers and police to turn their guns on their American partners.”

This misguided, excuse-making, Islamo-ignorant General is ignoring the history of Islamic hatred toward the West and concluding that it is the heat and self-imposed hunger that causes them to kill.

This means that we better be on high alert this hot summer for people in the vicinity of Weight Watcher weigh-ins.  Or wary of Mormon missionaries in the steamy south on fast Sundays.

This general has to be awarded the Dumbest Excuse of the Month (DEM) award.  The sad part is 1) He is a US Marine General, 2) He is leading our forces in Afghanistan, 3) He represents US policy and understanding of our enemy in Afghanistan.   How many ways can I state how pathetic and sad and disheartening this stupidity is?

Excellent commentator and author Diana West agrees in THIS essay.  She is right.  He ought to be fired.  Except there is no grown up in this administration to do it.

HERE  is a list of 7 reason why General McChrystal, Allen’s predecessor, should have been fired back in 2009.  Allen is a clone – or is it “clown.”

HERE is the guide that instructs US troops in Afghanistan how to be dhimmis if attacked.  It advises “be polite, respectful and don’t offend.”