At this time of the year, I want to wish all my Christian friends and supporters the best of hope and peace during this Holy Day season and may you all have a happy and joyous Christmas season. I want all of you to think about what will really have consequences for Christians in the many future Holy seasons to come.
Read the following article to see what is the coming in the new year for many Christian communities whose only sin was being Christian and in Islamic countries.
Christianity 'close to extinction' in Middle East - Telegraph.
All of Christianity and its leaders have been telling you to be good in charity and be good to your fellow man. This is all a good thing, a very good thing. Christmas Holy season does call for charity upon the Christian flock.
But, the tough charity is the one that has risks and many times negative consequences to the charity giver. That is the charity promoting and protecting the existence of Christianity and free Christians in the lands of its origin, the Middle East. If that fight is lost, how well does anyone really believe Christianity will survive? Without a living history, which is what is being destroyed by Muslims, no religion can survive on "purified air" or "luft" as the Germans would refer to it.
It is now time for all G-d fearing people to make a stand against the end of Middle Eastern Christianity by Muslims so that they too can have a Merry Christmas for centuries.
Posted on December 25, 2012 at 03:00 PM in Anti-Religion, Christians, Current Affairs, End of America, Islamacism, Islamic Terrorism, Middle East, Obama and Middle East, Religion | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Tags: Africa, Blackfriars Oxford, Christian, Christianity, Christmas, Christmas and holiday season, Germans, Islam, Islamism, List of Muslim-majority countries, Merry Christmas, Middle East, Muslim, Religion and Spirituality
| | | | | | |
The pro-Islam stand of America's Secretary of State cannot be just an accident that all of sudden happened. This is especially true with her anti-Christian retoric. Who wrote this for Hillary Clinton? Her aide Huma Abadin?
Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann is right. This needs investigating and further questioning. Are these "new" ideas of Secretary Clinton? And if so, why? Why is Clinton finding that this is an opportune time to beat up on Christianity? Anyone who things that in this attack the Muslim Brotherhood does not "reside" is being naive or blind or both.
Tags: anti-Christian, Christian, Clinton, Huma Abadin, Michelle Bachmann, Muslim Brotherhood, pro-Islam, Secretary of State
| | | | | | |
Congresswoman Bachmann is attacked for asking questions about Muslim Brotherhood at the heart of American National power -- Huma Abadin as the number one aid to Hillary Clinton, America's Secretary of State.
Allegations on Clinton ... JPost - Jewish World - Jewish Features.
In the article above, who is doing the attacking: old line Jewish organizations who still believe that Islam is just a run of the mill religion -- the religion of peace. That is just factually not the case. As America and many other countries have found out, Islam is at the center of all attacks on the West and the modern world.
What Congresswoman Bachmann brought up should be lauded, not attacked under the umbrella of political correctness. The same attacks that are being made on Bachmann today, the political correctness and Islam is a peaceful religion, got us 9/11. How can Bachmann be criticized? Have we really learned nothing from our past 12 years of negative experiences.
There is every reason for Jews to question Clinton and support Congresswoman Bachmann? Who has consistently supported Israel? Not Clinton -- as First Lady she embraced the PLO and Arafat. As Secretary of State, she has pushed Israel and its leaders impolitely more than even Obama himself has. Why would anyone think that somehow Huma Abadin is beyond reproach?
Abadin's whole family is part of the Muslim Brotherhood. Is it not a fair question to ask: how has she distanced herself from them? If she has. Anyone else who would have done what she has, including marrying a Jew, would have had a death fatwa issued against them at least once. Why not her? It would only have happened if she is of value to the Muslim Brotherhood where she is -- and she is of value to them. Congresswoman Bachmann only asked the question of how much value. That this is deserving of investigation.
The mainstream Jewish organizations are so afraid of being considered as being politically incorrect that they are willing, maybe unconciously, to risk the Jewish State for their belongingness.
The simple question for Huma Abadin is what is you Islamic affiliation? If there are any, which tenants do you accept? For most Muslims in the world the tenants would include Islamic anti-Jewishness and anti-Americanism. How is she different when her whole family support these very tenants? Why, Senator McCain, is this question not allowed?
Posted on August 07, 2012 at 08:27 AM in Christians, Current Affairs, End of America, Islamacism, Islamic Terrorism, Jews, Middle East, Obama and Middle East, Religion | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Tags: Bachmann, Clinton, fatwa, Huma Abadin, Islam, Israel, McCain, Muslim Brotherhood, PLO
| | | | | | |
The culture wars are alive and well. In spite of reams of articles and books attempting to argue otherwise, reality creeps in to show us how divided as a nation we remain. The newness of this culture war is reflected by a complete divide between those who accept the values of America and those who do not. Recent studies have further shown that as students graduate from high school there acceptance of the First Amendment and tolerance is extremely low. What is threatening to our national values is that these same students, interviewed after completion of college, further reduce their tolerance in their support of free speech and freedom of conscience.
Yesterday was Chick-fil-A appreciation day. Throughout the United States hundred of thousands of supporters came out to support the argument against gay marriage rights of the CEO of Chick-fil-A. What he essentially said is that there is no place in America for marriage between the same gender. It is an oxymoron. This cultural division is not only reflected in this singular event; but also in all the opinion polls. In addition, wherever it has been voted on, the majority of Americans have rejected "gay marriage." What is important to understand is that Chick-fil-A's CEO and the majority of Americans reject marriage between people of the same gender; but, most of them DO NOT reject the extension of civil rights to gays.
BUT, what if the CEO of Chick-fil-A was a practicing Muslim? First, he would have to agree with everything that the Christian CEO of Chick-fil-A said about "gay marriage" as being an affront to G-d. But in Islam it is more than that. To be an affront to G-d is a blasphemy that requires the punishment of death. For Islam, under Sharia Law, the only answer to being gay is death. The issue of "gay marriage" does not even arise in Islam because it lacks any basis in reality. You cannot have a religious acceptance of what does not exist.
For Muslims, the solution to the problem of "gayness" is the end of any civil rights, i.e. First Amendment rights, to those tainted individuals. Christians can say, in the worst case, "hate the sin; but, love the sinner." There is not comparable concept in Islam. In Islam, as is practiced by law in ALL Islamic countries, to be gay is to be dead, either by law or by family -- the religion does not care. This is a far cry from debating the issue of how is marriage to be defined.
The sole "evil" that Chick-fil-A is accused of is not having a gay acceptable definition of marriage. Chick-fil-A's understanding of marriage is supported by over half of all Americans -- nothing strange about it. But, all Muslim CEO's belief must be that gays must be eradicated. (From a theological point of view, there is probably some difference about how gays would be treated if one is a Muslim gay or an infidel gay.) Nonetheless, the perspective of a Muslim CEO concerning gays remains death or castration.
The Shariah Law of Islam is not the central point. The significance is the selective treatment by politicians in the United States of Christians as opposed to Muslims. This hypocrisy is illustrated remarkably well by the mayors of Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, etc. The liberal Democrats continues their hypocritical rejection of all things Christian and a love affair with all things Muslim.
If one is going to have an issue with what a Christian head of a corporation believes and makes known publicly, then there is no basis whatsoever for allowing any business to be carried on by a Muslim who has any religious belief and practices. When the Mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, said "the values of Chick-fil-A's CEO are not Chicago's values," what does he say about all the Muslims running businesses and corporations in Chicago whose religion calls and demands the denial of all civil rights to gays? Are these Chicago's values? To be consistent, the Mayors and the Democratic Party needs to reject all practicing Muslims. Or alternatively, have Muslims give up Sharia Law as being inherently un-American.
The liberal Democrats love affair with Islam will continue to America's detriment. Christianity will continue to be denied and demonized by these same liberals. The fight for factual honesty and the end of hypocrisy must be joined and fought by all who believe in the legitimacy of the First Amendment to the American Constitution.
Tags: Chicago, Chick-Fil-A, Chief executive officer, Christian, culture war, Democratic Party, First Amendment, free speech, gay marriage, intolerance, Islam, Mayor of Chicago, Muslim, tolerance, United States
| | | | | | |
Frontpage magazine and Jamie Glasov did a wonderful job of interviewing me and getting out the issues that "got me here." You can read about this in the following link:
I have to say that the only issue that needs to be further understood is that I, and honestly some others, have been fighting this battle for over 19 years on campus. If you are not a Muslim, but religious, if you are pro-Israel, if you are right of center politically, you will constantly be harrassed, intimidated, and demonized on almost all of our universities.
What is sad is that most of this is being done with our own tax dollars.
This is what the people of America need to understand very, very quickly. The Muslims and their liberal allies are attacking religion, not Islam of course, and undermining the First Amendment, using your money. All state institutions need to immediately audit their state universities for their usage of funds and their rules and regulations that permit Muslims to undermine the First Amendment and replace it with their version of Sharia Law.
How is this done? Very simply -- in Islam being "offended" is a legal term. You are not allowed to "offend" Islam or Mohammad. It is punishable in a variety of ways up to and including execution. In the United States, offending someone is a badge of honor especially at a university. To paraphrase a man who knows much about higher education and the First Amendment, Adam Kissel of FIRE, if you, a student, are not being offended once a week, someone is cheating you out of an education.
That is the fight I have to finish.
Posted on May 22, 2012 at 07:10 AM in Academia, Anti-Religion, Christians, End of America, First Amendment, Higher Education, Islamacism, Islamic Terrorism, Jews, Purdue University, Religion | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Tags: academic, citizens, Eisenstein, First Amendment, freedom of speech, Frontpage, Indiana, Islam, Jamie Glasov, liberalism, Muslims, offending, Purdue, Sharia Law, taxes, universities
| | | | | | |
Muslim "peace" is what most of Islam is about. One is fooling themselves to consider Islam just another religious perspective. That could only be justified if one considers that the Incas are also just another religious perspective and that their activities (human sacrifices) are also protected. The exception to Islam being considered a religion, constitutionally, is the requirement that America commit suicide. There is no requirement in the Constitution that America self-destroy. If any other citizens would have had members of their community commit what Muslims have in the name of Mohammed and Islam, that community would have begged for forgiveness long ago. It is the height of arrogance and fraud that Muslims. as a world wide community, have not. All apology is theirs, not the Country which they hit on 9/11.
Ten Reasons Why Islam is NOT a Religion of Peace.
Ever since my attack by Purdue University and its PC police began, central to their argument has been a "recording" of my lecture. Specifically what I supposedly "meant" on those tapes. I will now try to explain these to those who still believe in the freedom of speech in the United States.
One, these tapes are completely anonymous. I do not know who taped them, when they taped them, or how many "hands" it has been through. It is obvious that they have been edited. That is obvious by the "perfect" eight minute "edited" sections. Some of what is on these tapes has clearly been "doctored" or "tampered". Each lecture, from the class from which these tapes are alleged to have come from, was for 2 1/2 to 3 hours. (By the way, there were 15 weeks, so that is 45 hours of lectures in total.) Thus, what is heard is 8 minutes from either one lecture that was over 2 hours in length or multiple lectures each of which were over two hours in length. To use an art term, there is no provenance for these recordings. They are of no use as evidence (or even as a good example.) All of this would be true of any "recordings" that would "pop-up." Why not one from ten years ago, or five, or 20 etc. etc. etc.?
Two, Not a single student from the class that these tapes were alleged to be from has ever filed a complaint. They had 120 days into the summer to file a complaint with the Department Head, the Dean, or with the Chancellor. Nothing, not a word, not an issue, until I came under attack this fall when it all of a sudden "surfaces." Thus, no student who was actually in the class had any issue with my lectures. That is the official and true record of events.
Three, Some of the arguments that are presented come from the specific books I used in the class and addressed the topic of the class. The best that I can tell, it is claimed that these came from a class entitiled: Introduction to Jewish Studies. One may not like the arguments that were being made by these books, but they are legitimate subjects of debate. Two of the books that I used were: The Israel Test by George Gilder and Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism by Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin. The first book argues that the root cause of modern anti-Semitism is envy of the Jew, be it in Israel or in other countries. The second book makes the case that the Jewish condition is unique in relationship to all other groups.
Four. In continuation of two and three above, some quotes are simply taken out of context and are plain wrong. Without knowing the books I used and the context within which some of this material was presented, one cannot possibly determine whether a statement is unacceptable or acceptable. Not being in class, one cannot make judgements about what one has no idea about. Live lectures have a physical interaction in them for meaning that cannot be captured on audio tape. That is definitely lost in a doctored clip. Clearly, those very students who were actually in the class and heard my lectures firsthand, did not have any objections.
Tags: antisemitism, class, free-speech, harassment, investigation, Islam, Jewish, Jews, Maurice Eisenstein, Muslims, Purdue, recordings, tapes
| | | | | | |
This is the cease and desisit letter from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education to Purdue. There has been no answer from the Purdue Administrators, yet.
A woman has filed a complaint with federal authorities over how her elderly mother was treated at Northwest Florida Regional Airport last weekend.
This should finally speak to the fact that what is necessary is religious, ethnic, and racial profiling. This will be the only way to get to the terrorists. Know who you are dealing with first. It is not the "adult diaper" that is the threat, it is the nature of the person and their associates that matters.
Why is it that Americans cannot understand than when a 90 year old Muslim women with adult diapers is going on a plane with her 5 young adult male Muslim relatives it is a problem to be checked. A 90+ year old lady from Dustin, Florida who is probably Christian IS NOT A PROBLEM.
That is why the TSA has can never prevent terrorism in the sky. Only make the rest of America suffer. Focus on the terrorist; not he means. There are infinite number of means; but, only a finite number of terrorist profiles.