I’m NOT A Liberal

I have to chuckle at how badly people can take something you say and mangle it beyond recognition. I recently had occasion to be a “victim” of misunderstanding on a recent post I wrote as a guest-blogger on another site. I wouldn’t have even written this post, perhaps, except an article that I wrote for Eagle Rising got over 13,000 shares on Facebook. And so, it seemed perhaps I should take some of the comments into consideration here and respond.

I’m NOT a liberal, no matter what they say…

The post basically was an opinion piece, stating that Donald Trump is saying some things that the public connects with, and that we really do need to consider some of his points – especially when it comes to things like immigration and border security.

Besides, for all his failings, Trump’s stunning popularity is not merely because of his “showman” personality. He is popular because he is saying what a lot of people on the street believe is true. He is saying what the career politicians seem reluctant to say, and what the media seems to avoid like the plague (perhaps, because much of the senior staff in the media are married to staffers or are former staffers themselves). People are tired of the constant race-baiting from the current administration – the double-standards about white-on-black crime vs. black-on-white crime and the like. People are tired of the constant pandering to special interest groups. Yes, I do believe this is it.

And I might have to go so far as to say I agree with Trump when he says we should build a wall.

I often say it’s everybody’s lot in life to be misunderstood once in a while. And I suppose, if I think about it, maybe the misunderstanding is partly my fault. But if people were paying attention to what I actually said, they would have realized that some of the accusations they made were kind of baseless. But once someone calls me a liberal, they’ve hit below the belt. So let’s clear this up once and for all:

I’m NOT A Liberal

This isn’t so much about defending myself or clearing my name as it is a concern that some stupid comments were made, and I’d hate to think that people can get away with not thinking clearly. Some of these comments betray either a lack of clear thinking or a short attention span (or both). And I like the idea of thinking CLEARLY. Check my web site and you’ll see that thinking CLEARLY is what that is all about.

The article was about Donald Trump’s stance on building a wall along the Mexican border. Now, I don’t REALLY think the U.S. should build a wall, necessarily. Not a REAL wall. The idea is good in theory; but there are tunnels, too. And a wall would be so blasted expensive. The POINT is that the southern border needs to be a lot less porous. And I think THAT is a great idea to implement. And not even for the illegal Mexicans coming in so much as for the radicals that are coming across the border every day and night. THEY have plans to harm us. That is a bad thing. In case you were not aware of a recent interview between Greta Van Susteren and Representative Duncan Hunter, it went like this:

Van Susteren: Hold on. Stop for one second.

Hunter: They are going to be bombing American cities coming across from Mexico.

Van Susteren: Let me ask a question. You say that they are coming in the southern border, which changes all the dynamics Do you have any information that they are coming in through the southern border now?

Hunter: Yes.

Van Susteren: Tell me what you know.

Hunter: At least ten ISIS fighters have been caught coming across the border in Texas.

Van Susteren: How do you know that?

Hunter: Because I’ve asked the border patrol, Greta.

Van Susteren: And the border patrol just let’s ISIS members come across the border?

Hunter: No. They caught them at the border. Therefore, we know that ISIS is coming across the border. If they catch five or ten of them, you know that there are going to be dozens more that did not get caught by the border patrol. That’s how you know. That’s where we are at risk here, is from ISIS and radical Islamists coming across the border. Once again, they don’t have a navy, air force, nuclear weapons. The only way that Americans are going to be harmed by radical Islam — Chairman Dempsey said the same thing. He said that’s where the major threat is here, that’s how these guys are going to infiltrate through America and harm Americans. 

Ya know, most of the stuff that the politicians promise when they’re debating is stuff I seriously can’t see they have power to enforce. The fact is, though, that one thing the president has is the ability to affect the frame and the tone of the debate. And we sure do need to be talking about this. These people are not a “J V” team.

I’M NOT A LIBERAL. REALLY. For the record, let me state my positions on a few key points. And after that, if you STILL want to insist I’m a liberal because you MISUNDERSTOOD what I said, you’re still entitled to be wrong; but you’ll have to live with that.


I’M PRO-LIFE: the woman’s right to choose ends with the baby’s right to live. Period. Look, I realize there are (relatively rare) cases of rape and incest; but two wrongs don’t make a right. And we, as a society, have probably fallen down badly when it comes to making a place for these little ones when they show up, and showing love, support and compassion for the mothers who carry them to term. But killing them is not the answer. For the record, I will say that I think abortion done for the profit of the clinic is one of the biggest abuses of women going, all in the name of “helping” them. It just exchanges one problem for another.

I’M PRO-2ND AMENDMENT: I don’t pack a pistol, and don’t have any intent to do so. In fact, where I live, it’s illegal right now anyway. But I’m thinking about how the idea is appealing with all of the nonsense that the government is pulling lately. Look. I realize that letting everyone carry one is letting the criminals have them too. But they have them anyway. (I know, I know, it’s a weak argument… maybe. But access to arms doesn’t translate into crime by itself. Lawlessness does. If you have a lawless society because of an unrealistic sense of entitlement, THAT might be the biggest contributor to the gun violence problem. And THAT is taken care of as a byproduct of a good spiritual revival.) Guns are hard to come by in Mexico; they are easily obtained in Switzerland, and nobody gets hurt. And the 2nd amendment is to protect people from an overreaching GOVERNMENT. You’ve got an overreaching government NOW.

I’M PRO-REPBULICAN: Jeez, Louise, when I said I was an “undecided voter,” it DIDN’T mean that I was torn about whether, given an opportunity, I would vote REPUBLICAN or DEMOCRAP. FOR CRYIN’ OUT LOUD. In the context, the remark was about not knowing whether Trump or Cruz would ultimately be the better candidate to DEFEAT Hillary. The WHOLE POINT is that either one is a whole lot better than HILLARY. My concern was about which one could do it. (Read the article again, if you missed that, ok? For your own good.)

By the way, on the Trump vs Cruz gig, you have the added benefit with Trump that he’s already said if he’s elected, he will prosecute Hillary. That’s gotta be worth something right there.

I’M PRO BORDER SECURITY: NO deals on illegals, ESPECIALLY until AFTER you secure the border. THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE ARTICLE. It WASN’T about building an actual, physical wall. (It might be a great idea, but somebody’s gotta PAY for the stupid thing, right?) Look, Trump said we’ve got to slow the flow through the border until we know what’s going on. And Cruz is saying we need to increase police patrols and police presence in these neighbourhoods. They’re BOTH getting flack from the bleeding hearts. And they’re both RIGHT. PROFILING isn’t always a bad thing (unless you’re a liberal).

I don’t know that I would normally write an article like this one, except that it will be a handy reference point for future posts when I need to explain my positions on things.

And like I said, in case you missed it, I’m not a liberal. Hope I cleared that up.

Read More
Gene Demby race reporter

If Ben Carson Likes Trump, Is He Racist?

(A guest post by “The Average White Guy”)

Being the average white guy that I am, you can imagine the flood of sweet emotions that flowed from my belly this afternoon as I heard a story on NPR‘s “All Things Considered,” which was about a study that explores “the links between politics and racial bias.”

The description of the story says,

A new study looks at the link between racial bias and the Tea Party. Researchers found that people who looked at images of Barack Obama that were edited to make his skin look darker were more likely to express support for the Tea Party.”

Now I’m not going to be so stupid as to suggest that there are no white people who hate president Obama because he is black. Believe me, I’ve met a few of them myself. But it is so aggravating to be told by Gene Demby that the reason I myself hate Obama is because he is a black man.

Gene Demby, You Don’t Know Me.

You strike me in your reports as one of those black guys who sees a racist under every bush; you seem to come across sometimes as a guy who easily stereotypes whites based on preconceptions that seem to have nothing to do with the way I think or with the beliefs I hold.

I don’t hate Obama because of the color of his skin. It stuns me how many black people seem to want to reduce every issue down to the single issue of how it affects black people, how whites treat black people, who whites see themselves as white people. Says Mr. Demby,

We’ve done a few stories on whiteness in our current political moment. Whiteness is a thing that is becoming explicit in people’s understanding of themselves as white. So it sort of makes sense that here’s this guy who’s the president of the United States. He’s incredibly prominent.

For the first time in the history of the country, he is not a white person. He’s sort of the avatar of this demographic change. And so he animates and activates a lot of anxieties around whiteness becoming explicit.

I will admit I have a strong dislike for the man. But it’s not because he is black. It’s because of what he is doing to the country. I’m not sure why, but based on your frequent racial biases, I would bet that you might find that hard to believe. That’s ok. I have a similar disdain for Hillary Clinton, and it’s not because she is female. But you’ll probably want to try to sell that story to everyone else. I could expect you actually believe this to be the case. I feel sorry for you if you believe that, though. And let me ask you a question:

Did You Vote For Obama Because He Is Black?

I am stunned at the number of black people who insist that I would vote against Obama because he is black; but when I ask if they voted for him because he is black, they insist it is not because of his color, but because of his policies. It’s funny how in their minds, blacks can vote objectively but white people can’t. Is that racist thinking?

Mr. Demby, Have You Ever Heard Of Alan Keyes?

You look like a youngster to me, Mr. Demby. So maybe you were too young to be aware of a time when a guy named Alan Keyes wanted to run for president back in 1996 and 2000. It was back in the days of Bill Clinton. I wanted Keyes in so bad, compared to the white guy, Bill Clinton. I really did. Does that surprise you?

Let Me Make A List For Your Response

Let me make a list of some guys I think would make outstanding presidents, and any of whom I would vote for in a heartbeat – over Obama, Clinton, McCain, Bush (senior OR junior) and even over Trump (especially over Trump).


Alan Keyes. Ben Carson. Tim Scott. Thomas Sowell. Colonel Allen B West. Clarence Thomas.

Should I go on? Or do you begin to see a pattern here? It’s not an exhaustive list. I could add Trey Gowdy, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and a host of others. But that would confuse the issue. Please don’t miss the point of the list.

I know you’re “color-blind” in your thinking. You’re black, after all. And we all know that blacks can’t be racist. But did you notice the list? Notice what they all share in common?

They’re all CONSERVATIVE. Did you notice that?

Oh yeah. They’re all… Never mind. You can figure this out. I will even give you a picture.


There are a LOT of black people in the Tea Party. Maybe you missed that; maybe, like Jesse Jackson, you don’t really think “they’re black enough.” The relatively low proportional content of blacks in the Tea Party doesn’t mean they’re racist. It means blacks don’t always agree with their policies. But they’re not going to change their policies to make blacks feel “welcome.” They want to get ALL people – black, white and green – to understand that conservatism is the only way to save the country from slipping into a moral abyss.

EVERYONE is welcome at the Tea Party – if they agree with their ideology and vision for the country – one nation, UNDER GOD, with liberty and justice for ALL.

But while I toss out names, let me throw another at to you.

Ever Heard Of Booker T. Washington?

Booker Taliaferro Washington was an American Author and an advisor to several American presidents in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. He was a republican. (Yes, Virginia. There have been black republicans before.)

Booker T has an amazing quote that testifies greatly against the Black Lives Matter movement and other members of the “black grievance industry” like Hillary Clinton, Jesse Jackson and the reverend Al Sharpton. Booker once said…

There is a class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs – partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.

Now if a white guy were to say that, you might have a race war on your hands these days. But Booker T has a pass on this one because he is “one of you.” Or maybe he isn’t. Maybe, as Jesse Jackson said about Obama before he was elected, “he’s not black enough.”

Are You A Racist, Mr. Demby?

It seems the likes of Jesse and Al seem to think you’re not really a black man unless you think like them – as if you have exclusive claim to a special “underclass” title; and any black man or woman who doesn’t agree with you is a sellout – an uncle Tom.

Is that you? Do you recognize that I even exist? A white guy who, like Martin Luther King Jr., longs for a day when

people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. (M L King)

But from my side, we are constantly dogged in the conversation by the fact that in situations like Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, where the only scars on George were on his face and the back of his head, and the only scars on Trayvon were on his knuckles, we have a president who decides to bring in the whole weight of the federal justice department and to use it as a soapbox for giving his lectures about how Trayvon could be his son.

This president is the most racially divisive president to fill the White House in the last 50 years. Do you have any sense of how many federal cases have been made over perceived “white on black” injustice, immediately dragging in the full weight of the justice department for federal investigations? How many “black on white” crimes have gotten the same treatment?

You have the privilege of living at a time where we have a black president, a black attorney general and a justice department headed up by a person of african-American descent. And yet, you insist that it ain’t over until it’s over. Sorry, but you still want to take every issue that Trump raises and every issue that resonates with me and squeeze it through your very flat and one-dimensional sausage-grinder, spitting out little “racist cakes” at the other end of the line that don’t look like me at all. They look like your prejudiced concept of what “every white man” thinks.

But it’s not me.

Illegal aliens in the economy are enough of a drain to pull the whole country down. It has nothing to do with color. It has to do with economics. While you might want to think this country is big enough to welcome everyone from everyone and let them all partake at the trough that is public assistance, the grim reality is that the system cannot afford it. It’s NOT about race. It’s about not overloading the lifeboat to the point where we all drown. But all you see is color.

And while you might not think much of religion (I don’t profess to know if you have any strong religious beliefs or not) there are many of us who recognize that it’s NOT hard to figure out the motives of the shooter in Orlando. He TOLD US what his motives were for shooting up gays in a night club were. He said he was doing it in the name of ISIS and in the name of ALLAH. HE was acting on his firmly held radical Islamic beliefs. If you want to pick up the narrative that it wasn’t that,  and that it must have been something else, and that this kind of behavior doesn’t represent “true Islam,” then we are worlds apart on why we want controls and better screening of the Muslims entering this country.

But it’s not because I’m racist. And you don’t  know me.

Put your thinly disguised racial prejudices aside and please try to see that maybe, just maybe, it’s about ideology.

And get to know me.

Read More
Islam and Special Interest Groups

Islam, Special Interests, And The End-Run Around The Church

I wouldn’t say that it’s a partnership, to be sure. At their core beliefs, if these groups (the groups like gay rights groups, black lives matter, etc. and hardline believers Islam) were to compare notes, the former groups would be killed by the latter group if the tables were turned and the same players were suddenly transported to pretty much any middle-eastern culture – Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, etc., etc..


But for some reason, in the modern West, gay rights groups often seem to be willing to form emotional ties to those in the Muslim community, standing up for them as “oppressed minorities,” and seemingly simply because they seem to feel oppressed themselves; and in that frame of mind, perhaps they find a sensitivity and/or feel a need to identify with other groups who are “oppressed.” And it seems there is no end in some places (for some of the Muslim belief) of complaints about being spoken badly of and not able to practice their religion as freely as they would like, or to not be spoken badly about.

It seems to be an odd phenomenon that also occurs between blacks in the “black lives matter” groups and the black panthers. When the protests were going on in Baltimore, there were some strange alliances between the “black lives matter” protesters and black panther/Muslim groups.

There doesn’t seem to be any kinship between these different groups except that you have groups (blacks, gays) who feel oppressed and other groups (Muslims – not all of them, for sure, but some) who will will capitalize on that feeling, giving a false sense of “we identify with your struggle” in order to gain their trust and draw them in to strategic alliances of sorts – in protests, demanding of the silencing of the Judeo-Christian voice which still remains in the culture.

Special Interests, Gay Rights Groups And Islam

The frightening thing that most in the “black lives matter” and gay rights groups don’t see is how this is the type is that some (SOME – NOT all) in the Muslim way of thinking may well have intentions of allowing these gay rights groups and “black lives matter” types do their dirty work for them – by allowing these special-interest groups to do the marching, the protesting and the heavy lifting of getting laws entrenched to silence the Judeo-Christian conscience that remains in our society, so that once this is done, the laws can be changed to make speaking out against their beliefs “hate speech” and therefore doing so will be a hate crime. There is a house resolution before congress about this:

Muslims are 1% of the population and sharia is already being enforced on the American people. Speak out now and prepare to take action or, as history has proven, your children and theirs will be the victims of Islamic supremacy and they will have to fight the physical war to defeat Islam. It’s clear which side the current U.S. government is on, and it’s not yours. via The Rule of Reason ::  Weblog of the Center for the Advancement of Capitalism

Stephen Coughlin alerted me to a House Resolution introduced on December 17th,H.Res.569, “Condemning violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States.114th Congress (2015-2016).” As of this writing, the country remains clueless about this development.

Brigette Gabriel, a Lebanese-born Christian speaks openly about this type of thing happening historically in her native Lebanon, though it was much more violent and insidious. She speaks of how Lebanon was a peaceful country and culture where the government was a secular one; and yet, certain radical-leaning Muslims worked their way into places of influence in civil and federal government until they hit a critical mass; and then, within weeks,  they were coming down, hard and heavy on the general population – killing people in the streets, demanding they convert to Islam or die, slicing pregnant women’s bellies open in the streets and killing their babies in front of them, all supposedly “in the name of spreading Islam.”

In her book, “Because They Hate,” she discusses some brutal methods used by the PLO to terrify and intimidate Christians to bring Islamic conversions:

They started massacring the Christians in city after city. The Western media seldom reported these horrific events. Most of the press was located in West Beirut, controlled by the PLO and Muslims. One of the most ghastly acts was the massacre in the Christian city of Damour, where thousands of Christians were slaughtered like sheep. The combined forces of the PLO and the Muslims would enter a bomb shelter and see a mother and a father hiding with a little baby. They would tie one leg of the baby to the mother and one leg to the father and pull the parents apart, splitting the child in half.

A close friend of mine became mentally disturbed after they made her slaughter her own son in a chair. They tied her to a chair, tied a knife to her hand, and, holding her hand, forced her to cut her own sixteen-year old son’s throat. After killing him they raped her two daughters in front of her. They would urinate and defecate on the altars of churches using the pages of the Bible as toilet paper before shooting and destroying the church. Americans just don’t realize the viciousness of the militant Islamic fundamentalist. They refuse to see it even when they look today at video footage of churches being burned in Iraq or different parts of the world or synagogues being destroyed in Gaza.


I do not hate Muslims. And for the record, I will be among the first to say that I perceive the great majority of Muslims (I do believe, even in the Middle East) believe it is wrong to kill people simply because we have a different ideology. I think many people who embrace Islam do so with an ache in their hearts for how badly they believe that people with an ISIS mentality misunderstand and misapply the Quran to support what these more moderate Muslims believe to be pure evil. (And if you’re a moderate Muslim in a country that is infiltrated by a critical mass of people in ISIS, you’re going to keep your mouth shut just to survive. Who could blame any of them for that?)

Here in the west, especially, there seem to be a number – a large, significant number – of Muslims who see the need to not entrench sharia law in our legal repertoire. They are what I (and many who are students of Islam) believe to be what would be called the more “moderate” flavor of Islam. I believe these people are kind, compassionate, hospitable and are as interested as we are – we, meaning Evangelical Christians – in allowing people to live freely according to their own beliefs, without compulsion.

But if you look at Germany in the 1930’s, and what Hitler did there, you’ll see that it didn’t take much of a percentage of the population who was radical, combined with a critical mass of the population who stayed silent for mere self-preservation for that evil to thrive and flourish to the point where they were able to kill over 6 million Jews – not to mention all the persecution of gypsies, some Christian/Catholic people and others in the mix.


For the record, I want to be clear that if Jesus commands us to love even our enemies, then how much more should we strive to love those who might oppose Him if it is only out of ignorance and because of what they have been wrongly taught.

There are two different incidents in the scriptures where Jesus spoke about a similar topic, and if you aren’t careful to understand the context, then from an outsider’s point of view, you might be inclined to see them almost as contradictory statements.

There was the time Jesus said, “he who is not for me is against me.” (Matt. 12:30)

There was also the time Jesus said, “he who is not against me is for me.” (Mark 9:40)

Perhaps some of the processing we need to do as the body of Christ regarding how we interact with our Muslim neighbors is in discerning the difference between “he who is not for me” and “he who is not against me.” Rick Warren has tried to bridge this gap in working toward common goals with Muslims who are trying to bring peace to rule, and he has been hammered mercilessly by some in the evangelical church. This is embarrassing. I’ve written about this elsewhere, and you need to be aware of what he did and didn’t say, in light of all his false accusers who make him out to be “the antichrist.”

We need to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves (Matt. 10:16). We also need to shine like lights in the midst of a wicked and perverse generation. And there may come a time where we shine the brightest even as we lay down our lives for the sake of the gospel.

If we do, we should always remember that Jesus, who died for us and rose again, who is seated at the right hand of the father, stood up in tribute to Stephen as he entered into glory to be with Jesus (Acts 7:56).

But our hearts should be right as we witness, whether in life or in death, always aware that even Saul killed some in ignorance, thinking he was serving God in the process. But eventually, after sewing the blood of the martyrs, which is the seed of the church, God converted him. He went on to plant churches, write two thirds of the new testament and eventually lay his own life down for the sake of the gospel.

Never forget that these people, who may well persecute you someday, might well be the very ones that God will want to use you to draw to the saviour.

Jesus loves these dear people – all of them – the gays, the “black lives matter” folks, the Muslims. We cannot afford to despise any of them, though we disagree with them about who our saviour is and about how they must live to please him.

So be sure always to be “on your knees in your heart,” knowing that it is being in that posture before God where you become the most effective in showing anyone who Jesus truly is.

Read More
What Kind Of Refugees Are We Bringing In

What Kind Of Muslims Are We Importing Into The West, Anyway?

There has been a massive migration, of late, of Muslims into countries in the west; particularly now, in large part, because of the crisis of war-torn Syria. In 2010, Europe had a Muslim population of about 13 million people. Now, according to Pew Research, it’s over 20 million. There is a similar phenomenon of an increased number of Muslims living in Australia, the United States and Canada, and in Canada particularly, because of immigration.

Muslim Immigration Is Rapidly Changing The Cultural Complexion Of The West

There are currently about 3 million or so Muslims living in the United States, which is almost 1% of the U. S. population. So far, President Obama has not been able to increase the number of Syrian refugees substantially, in spite of his promises to do “America’s part” in assisting with relocation of these refugees. But he is trying. Canada has immigrated almost 30,000 Syrian refugees since November of 2015. This is a staggering number in terms of the overall population of Canada, running currently around 35 million people.

It is interesting to see that people seem to be rather divided on whether or not this is a good idea. Some people are terrified that we are importing radical Islamic wolves in refugee’s clothing. Others think this is pure Islamophobia – the thought is that the fear of Muslims is totally baseless and irrational.

Radical Islam in the US

Not every Muslim is “radical.” But then, not every Muslim is exactly peaceful by Western standards, either.

Getting a grasp on how they think as a people-group (as compared to the average thinking of the population here in the West) is something worth thinking about. Because if the trends of migration to the West continue, they will have more and more of an influence in our culture – for better or for worse. And looking at Europe as the canary in the coal mine, this change could be swift and deadly, if the paranoid among us are correct and we do nothing to stop it.


In a video from The Clarion Project entitled, “By The Numbers – The Untold Story Of Muslim Opinions And Demographics,” the narrator, Raheel Raza (a Sunni Muslim) makes the point that the actual percentage of the Muslim population involved in fighting for ISIS is very small. But when you start to poll the world population of Muslims by percentages, it becomes a glaring issue that about 1/3 of them feel that women should be killed for adultery and that the punishment for apostasy (leaving the Islamic faith) should be death. That is scary.

In the video, she says that a vast number of them hold to beliefs and practices that will seem radical to us in the west. As Raheel Raza says, they hold views about women, homosexuals and apostates that are very troubling:

In 2013, Pew Research released a comprehensive study based on interviews with thousands of Muslims in 29 countries. It reported that in countries like Afghanistan, Egypt and Jordan, the vast majority of Muslims surveyed (between 79 to 86 percent) believe that those who leave the Muslim faith should be executed.

Now, let me ask you. Do you know anyone who has left their faith? Do you think that is a crime, let alone think it is a crime worthy of the death sentence? If you look at an overall slice of the Muslim population, you’ll see that about 27% of them think death is the appropriate punishment for apsotasy. As Raheel says,

Did you know that thirty-nine percent of all muslims in the country surveyed believe that honor killings can be a justifiable punishment for a woman who has had pre- or extra-marital sex? Do you think that’s a radical belief? That radical belief is held by over 345 million Muslims.

These studies paint a picture of an Islamic world that is increasingly out of step with the modern world when it comes to support for terrorism and jihad. So, if you are willing to accept even the possibility that these numbers are anywhere near accurate, you need to ask yourself a question:


You see, many people haven’t really given this serious and responsible consideration. And the reason is because they don’t really understand Islam; nor do they understand the mandate that Muslims have. A good and faithful Muslim has an obligation to proselytize for Islam. And the most faithful among them are going to have the strongest interest in proselytizing for Islam – making a concerted effort to bring everyone into submission to Allah.

This mandate they have is to spread Islam into all the world: they are to take territory and bring everyone into submission to Allah. So, if this is the case, why would anyone have this silly notion that the most faithful among them are going to stay in Syria and the middle east and only the most liberal among them are going to come to the west?

I’ve written before about how this distinction between “true” and “radical” Islam is, in many ways, a sideshow. It distracts from a central issue: both the peaceful and the radical Muslim get their beliefs from the same book; both believe they are doing what God has told them to do because it is in the Quran. In fact, the radical Muslim has far more theological fire-power on his side in terms of strict Islamic scholarship and examples from Mohammed’s contemporaries than does the peaceful Muslim.

Raheel says further, regarding the statistics:

For young Muslims aged 18 to 29 in Western countries, forty-two percent of French Muslims, thirty-five percent of British muslims and twenty-six percent of American muslims believe suicide bombings against non-muslims can be justified. This is the next generation of Muslims speaking. A majority of Muslim surveyed – fifty-three percent – said they want Sharia or Islamic law to be the law of the land. In Muslim-majority countries, of those who said they want Sharia to be the law of the land, over fifty two percent said they support cutting off of hands.

Do you think that’s a radical belief that 51-percent say they’re in favor of stoning spouses if they’re unfaithful, which equals 289 million people?

Worldwide, there are hundreds of millions of Muslims who believe sharia should be the law of the land; over half of the young Muslims already in the West believe that suicide bombings are not such a bad thing. And tens of millions (at least) of young Muslims who are in the same age group as these young refugees from Syria are looking for opportunities to emigrate to the West to spread their sharia and their radical faith throughout the free world. And then, think about this:

For many radicals bent on conquest for Islam, being a “refugee” is a convenient ticket to a land ripe for proselytizing.

This is not simply an idea in the heads of a few paranoid folk hiding in the basements of their churches, waiting for Jesus to come. Newsweek had an article describing this very phenomenon. As the article says,

In the Paris attacks, only four of the 198 refugees who arrived on Leros on a certain day were terrorists. That is just 2 percent, but that 2 percent killed 130 people.

How many have to die before we wake up and understand the nature of the problem?

As a Christian, I understand the love of Jesus and that this love that Jesus has shown me compels me to reach out to the lost. But if I’m witnessing to a criminal, I’m able to do so while he is in the confines of a prison and his situation known, his containment sure so that he does not have a good chance of killing my wife and kids. Letting these people into the country without proper screening to see if they have criminal intent is stupid.

Love is patient and kind. But love is not a doormat for letting criminals run rampant among us, unchecked and unleashed to wreck havoc on innocent people.

Let us use our heads to inform people of the real dangers here. It’s all well and good to show love to people; but you can’t love people if they kill you.

(Last updated by The Cognitive Man, 2016-07-31)
Read More

Implausible Denial About Islam

I remember when the Oklahoma beheading incident took place, back in September of 2014. At the time, I, like many others, was posting things on FaceBook as they came across my newsfeed about this incident. Many people reacted to it with horror. Many more reacted with disbelief. Some thought it was a hoax.

This surprised me a little. After all, FaceBook has a tendency to filter your friends list down to people somewhat predisposed to thinking like you. Obviously it doesn’t always do that; but birds of a feather, ya know. I’ve had a lot of people “unfriend me” over the years and a whole bunch block me, too. I kind of figured by that point the ones that were left thought a lot like I did about this stuff. So, I was surprised at the reaction and the number of people who told me they thought it was “nothing.” Many insisted it must have been an isolated incident, and CERTAINLY not related to Islam, like they were spinning it on the TV to be something it really wasn’t – maybe for ratings, or who know what other reason.

Now, I remember one friend on Facebook reacting to it by saying it was “part of the conspiracy to brainwash us and make us afraid.” But I’ve since found out that he is one of a large handful of “facebook friends” I have who also believes in a flat earth; so, in retrospect, I shouldn’t have been so surprised that he reacted to this the way he did. It seems to me that anyone who believes the earth is flat (especially his flavor of this concept) is not the best at deductive reasoning. I love him dearly, nonetheless. But he just wasn’t buying into it, regardless of the news reports out of Oklahoma.

Some People Think Nothing Is As The Media Tells Us

He thinks the whole world is different than the way it is presented to us by “the powers that be.” He thinks we are bombarded consistently by a narrative from the media about the way things are in the world that is designed to distract us from reality. (Not an EXACT quote, but close enough to say it’s the EXACT IDEA he introduced to the conversation.) And there are people who think it’s a hoax; and that this, like everything else, is a zionist conspiracy to lie to people and manipulate them. (There is no end to stupid, it seems….)

Ironically, I agree with him. I just see a much different reality and a much different narrative presented by the media to mask that reality than he does.

For the record, I don’t believe in a flat earth. And I don’t think that everything promoted on the media is done by people bent on keeping us slaves to buying more stuff. There are too many differences of opinion about various things and too many competing interests for it to be controlled that tightly.

But I do believe media people have predispositions (like everyone else) that can’t help but “filter” what they promote as newsworthy and what they downplay or ignore, simply because they fail to connect the dots the same way I do. And since the media seems to be ruled by liberals, and since liberals tend to want to silence the opposition because it’s the easiest way to quench ideas that disagree with them, they tend to lean the same way on a lot of things. They just don’t let anybody else into the club to play the game, if they can help it.

They mostly leaned the same way on this one, also.

But seeing it as a spin to say that the government hyped this to justify the war on ISIS seems totally opposite to the way the government usually spins things on the “radical Islam” issue. My observation is that they seem to go out of their way to say that it’s not Islam; that Islam is a “religion of peace.”

And quite frankly, I’m on a bit of a mission here to convince people that the government and law enforcement spin was wrong, and they you to see it my way. Because, I’m right. (I’m entitled to an opinion like everyone else, right?)

I still maintain that I was right about the Oklahoma beheader. He was not just a whack-job going off in an incident of workplace violence. It was violence in the workplace. But it wasn’t just a guy who who was mad as hell and just couldn’t take it anymore.
The guy who beheaded the woman at work was a devout Muslim convert. And he was not a lone wolf; at least, not ideologically, anyway.

And I can already hear the backlash oozing in my direction, both from the liberals who may by chance read this article and the well-meaning and more peaceful Muslims who believe Islam is truly and only a “religion of peace.”

It’s not. It’s a religion of conquest as much as a religion of peace. You can spin it and spiritualize it all you want to say jihad is about the internal struggle with your sin nature or something. But Mohammed’s direct associates continued a campaign of killing and mayhem after he died. And they were doing what they were doing because they believed the prophet had THAT as his intention. As much as Christians look to the early disciples who spent three years with Jesus to be the best reference point for understanding who Jesus was and what his message was, it is fair to look to Mohammed’s followers for the same understanding of what THEY thought Mohammed’s message was all about.

Please here me. I understand there are moderate Muslims out there who read the Quran in a way that they feel is both consistent and peaceful. (See, for instance, this link: They would see it as a religion of peace, unless war is justified. And while I would say to them that I see the bulk of Islamic scholarship disagreeing with them that Islam is a religion of “live and let live, each and everyone equals,” I commend them for “finding” this message in the Quran. I don’t see it; but I’m not from that background and I will defer to their better judgement. They, in the end, answer to almighty God for how they live, and if they truly want for us all to live in peace, I stand with them in that desire.

So, since peaceful Muslims are Muslim and I am not, I would let them have their say on the issue. I wouldn’t want them telling me what Christianity is all about, and not letting me respond; unless, of course, they can show me from the bible where they get their points. If they did and I saw it necessary to agree with them that they interpreted the bible properly and I did not, I would do well to admit that they had it right and I had it wrong. And I should do that, even if they don’t believe my book.

We all need to bow our knee to truth, no matter how it comes to us or by whom it comes.

But I’ve also said it before, and I will stand by the statement: these ISIS fighters find THEIR message in the same Quran; they find a different message in the book than does the peaceful Muslim. And they do not find that message in the book because they believe it LESS; they find it there because they read it carefully, earnestly and with a dedicated effort to follow what they believe it says. I would dare say that the radical Muslim often has a higher level of belief in the integrity of the Quran than many moderate Muslims who pick a message of peace out of the book, disregarding the gnarly bits they don’t like.

As I’ve also said before, calling ISIS radical Islam is, in my opinion, like calling the Pope a radical Catholic. That’s the point. They do what they do BECAUSE they feel that the Quran TELLS them to do what they do.

I Wish The Oklahoma Beheader Was A Lone Wolf

But ideologically speaking, the facts never seemed to support that position for anybody but the people who WANTED that to be the case. There have been enough of these, with the same patterns, the same knee-jerk reactions of the media to try to drive a false dichotomy between the actions of these people and “the religion of peace.”

What about the Nidal Hasan, the psychiatrist in the army who shot up a bunch of soldiers at Fort Hood in 2009? What about the guy in Ottawa who shot and killed the soldier guarding the tomb of the unknown soldier? What about the guy who ran down the two soldiers in Quebec? What about the couple in California who killed all the people in the community center?

If Only They Could Be Lone Wolves. But There Are SO MANY That It’s Hard To Picture Them As ALONE.

People WANT the Oklahoma guy to be a lone wolf, the Ottawa guy another lone wolf, the California folks another couple of lone wolves; they want them to be people who don’t believe in true Islam; they want these to be workplace violence issues, or mental health issues, or disenfranchised maniacs who are deceived about the message of the Quran and “wrongly read a peaceful book” as inciting violence.

In short, they WANT it to be something – ANYTHING – that will allow them to be able to hide in their bubble and be able to feel safe by rationalizing that this is NOT something that could affect them. In the end, I believe this rationalization about Islam as always being a religion of peace and the idea that every TRUE Muslim is a peaceful Muslim is a desire to be able to feel safe and comfortable – to not have to recognize the size and scope of a problem gaining on us like a velociraptor in the rear view mirror on a casual Sunday drive through Jurassic Park.

You identify wolves as a species when you can see enough of them to identify that they have a set of identifiable characteristics.

If it’s workplace violence, then it must have been some altercation between them. I can handle that because I don’t deal with any crazies in my workplace. That lady might have died, but he was crazy. So the head being lopped off was due to craziness, not Islam. So, because I don’t know any crazies where I work, and Islam is a religion of peace, I’m still safe. It “couldn’t” happen to me.

If it’s a terrorist attack, that’s usually in a crazy place like the Middle East. THEY have crazy people. (Keep in mind they’re muslim nations, but STILL… that’s over THERE.) Yeah, these “lone wolf” attacks in the US are “crazies,” too. But they’re so rare. They’re “lone wolves.” I’m still good.

Nothing to worry about. Yet.

So We Just Hold Our Breath And Hope It Goes Away.

The fact is that even if these people are “lone wolves” in the sense that none of them ever got direct marching orders from ISIS, they are all singing from the same song sheet. They all march to the beat of the same jihadic drummer in their heads. The common thread here is that they all believe what they believe because they believe that it is in the Quran and they are required to follow that book; and THAT book, RIGHT NOW, is telling them in our country, we are the infidel and we need to convert or die.

And until we get past the mentality that says we need to think of all the peaceful Muslims as the REAL Muslims and the radical Muslims as the “NOT REAL Muslims,” we are never going to be able to embrace the true problem here.

I love Muslim people.

I really do. I know some, and the ones I know, as far as I know, want peace. They want to co-exist. They are warm people. They are passionate about what they believe, but want PEACE. They hate ISIS and what it is doing, corrupting what they believe is a peaceful book, when it is rightly interpreted.

But seeing the real problem – this real problem that ISIS believes the same book, but interprets it differently – is the first step in fixing the problem. We need to focus on getting this message out until people stop believing what they WANT to believe about it, and start to acknowledge the depth and breadth of the problem.

Because the ones who see the “radical” message in the book are already acting in faith and religious fervor with an eye on the end-game. And we haven’t even learned what the rules are. We need to learn fast – and learn on our knees – how to love like Jesus loved so they can see the difference between the true and the false, or we are going to get creamed before we even get in the game.

(Last updated 2016-07-09 by The Cognitive Man)
Read More
True Islam radical Isalm

True Vs Radical Islam – The Wrong Distinction

There are few things that confound Evangelical Christians like the love affair the world seems to have with the idea of embracing Islam as a religion of peace. Muslim sympathizers abound; and it seems so often, when there is something outrageous that happens abroad or even on our own soil, we are told it has nothing to do with Islam; after all, Islam is a “religion of peace.”

You’re Only Allowed To Say “Islam” If You Can Tie Them To ISIS

The San Bernadino shooters seemed to be a notable exception in the media. Once the FBI found what they believed were attributable influences on the shooters’ ideologies by ISIS, then they were able to speak freely of the shooters as Islamic; the difference, as far as it seems to pan out in typical fashion in the media, is that once they identified the ISIS connection, they were able to refer to them as radical Muslims, distinguishing them from “normal” Muslims (which would be all the other Muslims – those of the “religion of peace”).

Read More