You don't have to look for ISIS to find a war against Christian

Its not necessary to search for ISIS, Boko Haram, atheist North Korea or Al Qaida to find a war against Christianity.  Just turn on your television, open your local newspaper, or spend a couple days sitting through public school classes with your kids.  Disparaging, belittling and insulting Christianity and Christians has become not only acceptable in the United States, it is now considered an admirable  course of action.  What makes this development all the more pathetic is that the citizens of the United States continue to be Christian by a substantial majority.  According to a July 2015 ABC News poll, 83 percent of Americans identify as Christian.  I chose the ABC poll result, but other polls available in the media offer similar results.  Why does a nation of Christians basically sit back and watch as the younger generations show no understanding of life and teachings of Jesus Christ, except as something to mock and disrespect?  I realize that there exist many exceptions to this trend.  Many Christian Churches continue to offer young adherents the opportunity to proselytize both within the United States and overseas.  But more and more we read stories of these young people being refused entry into business estsblishments and secondsry school grounds.  The targeting of Mormons, who we all recognize as they politely make their way in ties and on bicycles, has caused the Church to reconsider its intended destinations for outreach.  Its not difficult finding episodes of Christians being descriminated against and Christianity being insulted, but is it really all that bad?

I started noticing the trend a few tears ago.  The ACLU had succeeded in forcing another municipality in some midwestern state, to remove a nativity scene from its holiday display.  Christmas was a surprisngly easy target, as Christmas trees became Holiday trees and Christmas break at school became Winter break.  When approached, the municipal leaders all repeated the same comment: because of the separation of Church and State, it is uncomstitutional to mention anything religious on government property.   And for those who didn't abide by this perspective, the ACLU was ready with deep pockets to take things to court.  Frankly, most folks just didn't want to fuss with it; we'd dealt with these latter-day hippie types before, and they usually end up just going away.

That has not been the case.  The political left in the United States, with the complicit support of the Democratic Party, have turned this issue into one which they claim has caused untold damage to religious minorities and must be addressed immediately.  Not surprisingly, no one was required to back up this argument with proof.  That is the current state of affairs in our great nation these days: those on the left no longer have the obligation to support their argument with anything other than accusations of bigotry and racism.  For those who are interested, the numbers of immigrant applications to the United States who claim to be in search of religious freedom are not declining.  People want to emigrate to the United States because we protect a person's right to practise the religion of their choice.  Atheists, Hindus, Muslims, Jews and Buddhists are not injured by a community expression of the majority's traditional celebration of the birth of our savior.  When I have been in traditionally Islamic or Hindu nations, I was not offended or injured in any way by public displays of religious expression.  Most people in the United States agree with my point of view; so why does the situation seem to become more absurd every day?

This last Monday, on everyone's fsvorite daytime show, "The View", panelist Michelle Collins (who?), when discussing the recent National Enquirer claim that Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz had cheated on his wife at least five times, described Cruz as living by a "crazy moral code".  It was obvious that Collins was referring to Cruz being a Christian.  Collins was relishing the idea that another "Christian hypocrite" (my quotations) had been caught cheating, even though Collins herself considers the Christian code of morality to be "crazy", regardless.  Normally, televised daytime talk-shows wouldn't touch the Enquirer with a ten-foot pole.  But the media, which has gladly become the sword of this anti-Christian effort, loves any message that claims to show evidence of prominent Christians being hypocritical.  The problem is, even the National Enquirer realizes their story is false, which they are quick to declare at the beginning of the piece.  They are smart enough to play the game and not have to face a lawsuit.  The Enquirer announced the accustations on page one, as if the case was aleeady closed, then reiterated that the story was simply something provided to the Enquirer by a Trump supporter.  The glee with which this Collins person commented on the accusations of infidelity by Cruz, is something we see all the time in our press and media.  Non-Christians who behave immorally are given a pass, because, of course, they don't pretend to be ethical.  Its the hypocritical Christians that must be outed!

Forgive me for getting in the weeds just a bit, but it can be occasionally necessary.  Its past time that the Christian community in this great nation stop applogizing for itself.  The pioneers who suffered untold hardships building this country, many times were obliged to survive rough times on Faith alone.  During the dark years of slavery, many suffering Americans relied on Faith in Jesus and His love, to make it from one day to the next.  The people who built this country did not shy away from their Christian Faith, as is evidenced by its inclusion in our National Anthem, our Constitution, our songs, school books  and our literature.  It is only in the last half-century that Academia in the United States has allowed itself to become the lightening rod for the anti-Christian movement.  Do not misunderstand; a healthy application of the principle of "separation of church and state" is essential in our Republic.  But we have allowed this battle-cry to move us away from the truths by which we arrived at this particular place in time.  I am a Christian, and I am a better man for it.  I make no apologies for my Faith, and I will speak up when I see history being rewritten and the will of the majority of this country ignored.  I can only hope that I'm not alone in my sentiments.

True to form, Charlie Hebdo spits on us.

Link: French magazine Charlie Hebdo launches broadside at all religions.

On January 7, 2015, the offices of French left-wing satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo were attacked by a group of Muslim Extremists, who succeeded in killing eleven employees and injuring eleven more.  Following this insane act of evil, the free world, from Tokyo to Valparaiso, raised the banner, "je suis Charlie" (I am Charlie), to send the message that we too were deeply wounded by this event.  Over the next few weeks, the message kept growing, with "je suis Charlie" dominating social media.  We embraced the people of Charlie Hebdo, and reminded them, that not everyone in the world is driven to propagate violence and fear through the use of mass murder.  In the past, Charlie Hebdo, being a virulently atheist publication, had occasionally dumped all religions into one bucket.  In the year since January 7, 2015, I can't identify even one instance of Christians planning, attacking and murdering persons of another religion.  Surely the staff at Charlie Hebdo watches the news and stays up-to-date on current affairs.  I expected a bit of change regarding the "lumping" of Christians into the same grouping as ISIS, Al-Qaida, and Boko Haram.  I should have known better.

The latest edition of Charlie Hebdo (with an image of God on the cover, carrying an AK-47), again dumps Christians and Islamic terrorists into the same pot.  Interestingly enough, Charlie Hebdo was unable to write a feature on ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Al Nusra, and Boko Haram alongside its Christian counterparts, BECAUSE THERE ARE NO CHRISTIAN COUNTERPARTS to these fanatical Islamic groups.  According to Charlie Hebdo, Christians are just as responsible for Islamic terrorism as are ISIS and Al-Qaeda, just because they are not clever enough to be atheists, I assume.  When was the last time an extremist Christian group committed an act of terror in Europe?  When was the last time that a Christian group attempted to deprive someone of their free will?  Charlie Hebdo will probably dig up old horror stories from the past, hoping to strike that sensitive Christian vein of guilt, but this time, I don't think they will reap their desired result.

By choosing to mark the anniversary last year's attacks with a nasty, elitist, ignorant rant about all religions, Charlie Hebdo has actually done us a favor.  The magazine's fortunes had jumped dramatically immediately followed the incident, but in the last six months, the numbers have fallen back down to respectable, but no longer outstanding figures.  I think the people of France are tired of the old, creaky, reactionary, elitist message of the left, and will move to unite under the banner of defending the Republic.  The last time I checked, the French Republic was at war with Islamic terror, not Christianity.  Hebdo's numbers will continue to fall until the only place you see it anymore is in litter boxes and lining the cages of canaries.  I pray that nothing remotely similar to January 7, 2015, happens to Charlie Hebdo again, but if it does, I can tell you that this is one American whose response will be "je suis chretien" (I am a Christian). 

Apologist in Chief

Link: Obama's United Nations Address


I'm sure, somewhere down the road, I will regret the title I chose for this post.  I don't like being confrontational.  I had my share of confrontation in the first forty-eight years, thank you.  As I've said previously, I started this blog as a means of introducing my book to persons interested in national security and intelligence.  Not surprisingly, I have fallen in love with this method of expression and communication, and fully intend to build this blog into something meaningful.  This experience has reminded me that the majority (certainly not all) of persons interested in intelligence collection are conservative.  Frankly put, its no challenge to find someone in the blogoshere who is ready to criticize the Obama Administration and the Democratic Party.  It has been my intention from the beginning to steer clear of politics, and in most instances I believe I have been successful.  But lately, reality has hit me squarely in jaw.  I enjoy writing about issues that don't have a political angle, and I endeavor to avoid politics with a partisan vein.  But I will not ignore this Administration's policies on immigration or any other subject that directly impacts national security.

How is it that President Obama continues to find ways to surprise me? Yesterday, I commented that the Administration might be playing politics with national security.  In fact, I considered the idea that President Obama was conducting an air campaign against Islamic State (IS) targets in Syria in an effort to appear "presidential" just prior to a major national election.  But today President Obama addressed the United Nations and reverted back to his "America is bad".  Judge and Jury Obama declared to the world's representatives that the incident in Ferguson, Missouri was an American "failure".  He also pointed out the continuation of "our own racial and ethnic tensions".  First and foremost, the President of the United States should not be airing our "laundry" in front of tin-horn dictators, thugs, Marxists and psychopaths.  Why was it necessary to mention the events in Ferguson?  Because Obama continues to believe that the United States has not expressed enough contrition and remorse for our supposed worldwide "exploitation".  President Obama was raised in a family of avowed Marxists and America-haters; its no surprise that he detests our legacy.  It took some time for me to reach this point.  I've heard all the conspiracy theories about birth certificates, etc., but I didn't actually believe that President Obama had disdain for his own country until the last few years.  Dinesh, my apologies for not seeing the truth sooner.

During the address President Obama could not resist his trademark "Islam is wonderful and lovely and peaceful and full of butterflies and unicorns" comments.  Women are beheaded in Saudi Arabia and locked up like criminals. In 2004, just outside of al-Kut, Iraq, my colleague Mike and I watched a man beat a group of Shia women with a switch "just because they were women".  Mr. President, if Islam is a religion of "peace", prove it by attempting to build a Christian Church ANYWHERE in Afghanistan, or Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia (I'm sure someone is going to point out that some Churches already exist in these countries.  The key word in my sentence is "build").  Another one of those odd "Obama paradoxes" has me a bit flummoxed.  Obama has spoken on more than one occasion about the need to address homophobia in the United States, and he did us all a favor by ending the "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the military.  So let me get this straight: in the United States we need marriage equality and to fight the homophobia and bigotry that still exists in our society.  But Islamic countries, whose laws are DIRECTLY predicated on the teachings of the Quran, and who consider homosexuality to be punishable by death, are "peace loving".  Huh?

The prevailing Muslim authority in Nigeria is directly linked to Boko Haram, the group who randomly kidnaps children.  In Algeria, a French tourist was beheaded today by an Algerian-based jihadi group with ties to the IS.  Saudi Arabian women are denied just about every right you can imagine.  We could take a country-by-country tour and I could provide lots of unpleasant stories.  The truth is, I don't believe that the average Muslim person wants to kill anyone, but we must recognize that the issue of international terrorism in this generation is rooted in Islamic countries.  What is an Islamic country?  For my purposes, an Islamic nation is one whose laws are directly derived from the Quran.  I do not refer to Turkey as an Islamic country, even though the population is over ninety percent Muslim.  Turkey's constitution is centered on the secular tradition enshrined by Kemal Ataturk.  What point is President Obama trying to make when he reminds us repeatedly that "Islam is a peaceful religion"?  What exactly does that phrase mean?

The first time I attempted to read the Quran I did not make much progress.  The book does not follow any chronological path, at least none that I could follow.  I picked it up again about ten years ago, and managed to finish the book.  Last year, guided by a Muslim friend (who kindly picked out an acceptable English translation), I read the Quran for a third time.  Its very similar to the Christian Bible in that it has of stories of remarkable characters, astounding events, and useful lessons.  The Quran, again, like the Bible, speaks of sin, punishment, and forgiveness.  The real difference between the Bible and the Quran, is that in today's world, the Quran is being used to exhort people to violence.  This development should not come as a surprise to us Christians, because its exactly what we did a few centuries ago.

For six years we have observed our President approach every international issue from the position of "offending party".  I'm more than over this approach.  No doubt in our history, the United States has been involved in some less-than-proud moments.  At the same time, young Americans have bled in battlefields far and wide, in defense of someone else's freedom.  I am proud to be an American.  My father served in Korea and Vietnam and returned with three purple hearts to show for his commitment.  Whatever it is that bothers President Obama so much that he has spent six years apologizing for America, I say its time to GET OVER IT.  In our short history we have introduced the concept of human rights and liberty to a world that had grown accustomed to servitude.  We have serious domestic issues to address, as does Germany, Malaysia, Laos, Rwanda, Wales, Estonia, and on and on and on.  Its part of the evolution of a society.  Our domestic issues have no business on the international stage.