Muslims Offer $10,000 To Anyone Who Can Demonstate That The Qur’an Promotes Terrorism: Robert Spencer Wins $10,000

Comedy gold – except for the Qur’an promoting terrorism.

Should I use the money to buy a good used car or take an extended vacation?

March 28, 2016 Robert Spencer 56

Dear Omar Alnatour:

Thank you so very much for offering “anyone $10,000 if they can find me a verse in the Quran that says it’s ok to kill innocent people or to commit acts of terror.” My 1999 Toyota is on its last legs, and your generous gift will enable me to replace it with a modest but fully operational used midsize sedan. Or maybe (since it has been years since I’ve had a break), if I can keep the jalopy going for awhile, I will use your ten grand take a vacation to Paris and Brussels — before it’s too late, you know?

Anyway, here is my entry, which I am confident will win the $10,000 prize. I’ll make sure of that by giving you even more than you asked for: you wanted just a single Qur’anic verse that “says it’s ok to kill innocent people or to commit acts of terror,” I’ll give you more than one of each, just so there is no doubt:

The Qur’an says it’s ok to kill innocent people

“Then, when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way; Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.” (Qur’an 9:5)

The verse says to kill the idolaters – mushrikun – those who worship others besides Allah. Now I don’t know, Mr. Alnatour, if you might think “idolaters” are by virtue of being “idolaters” are not innocent and therefore worth killing, but I’m with Thomas Jefferson: “It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” I don’t think my neighbor to have forfeited his innocence if he prays to gods I don’t recognize, and I hope you don’t, either.

Now I expect that you will say that this Qur’an verse refers not to all idolaters, but only to one very specific group of idolaters, the polytheist Quraysh tribe of Mecca that was making war against Muhammad, and that this verse has no force now that they have been conquered and Islamized, and doesn’t apply to any other idolaters. It would have been nice for Allah to make that clear in the pages of his perfect book, but who am I to question the will of a deity?

What’s more, classic Muslim commentators on this Qur’an verse give no hint that it has long expired. On the contrary, Ibn Juzayy notes that it cancels out peaceful verses; he says that it abrogates “every peace treaty in the Qur’an,” and specifically abrogates the Qur’an’s directive to “set free or ransom” captive unbelievers (47:4). As-Suyuti agrees: “This is an Ayat of the Sword which abrogates pardon, truce and overlooking” — that is, perhaps the overlooking of the pagans’ offenses. The Tafsir al-Jalalayn says that the Muslims must “slay the idolaters wherever you find them, be it during a lawful [period] or a sacred [one], and take them, captive, and confine them, to castles and forts, until they have no choice except death or Islam.” He is offering this as instruction for Muslims in his day; he seems to have no idea that this verse doesn’t apply to them.

Neither does Ibn Kathir. He writes that Muslims should “not wait until you find them. Rather, seek and besiege them in their areas and forts, gather intelligence about them in the various roads and fairways so that what is made wide looks ever smaller to them. This way, they will have no choice, but to die or embrace Islam.” He also doesn’t seem to subscribe to the view that this verse applies only to the pagans of Arabia in Muhammad’s time, and has no further application. He asserts, on the contrary, that “slay the unbelievers wherever you find them” means just that: the unbelievers must be killed “on the earth in general, except for the Sacred Area” — that is, the sacred mosque in Mecca, in accord with Qur’an 2:191

So there you are, Mr. Alnatour: the Qur’an calling for the murder of those who are innocent, except for the crime of being “idolaters” – a “crime” that requires earthly punishment only in the Qur’an.

And there’s more:

“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, of the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (Qur’an 9:29

The “People of the Book” are Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians. The verse doesn’t provide any reason why they should be fought and made to submit to the Muslims except that they are People of the Book and don’t acknowledge Islam. Here again, you might consider them not innocent on that basis, but I hope you don’t, as I’m sure you would agree that people may differ on key questions in good faith.

Ibn Juzayy, however, does believe that the People of the Book should be fought simply because they are not Muslims. He says that this verse is “a command to fight the People of the Book” and explains that they must be fought because of their “denying their belief in Allah because of the words of the Jews, ‘Ezra is the son of Allah” and the words of the Christians, ‘The Messiah is the son of Allah’” (cf. Qur’an 9:30). He adds that Muslims must also fight them “because they consider as lawful carrion, blood, pork, etc.” and because “they do not enter Islam.” 

So the Qur’an says that the People of the Book must be fought because they believe differently from the Muslims. But that is not a crime. These people are innocent.

The Qur’an says it’s ok to commit acts of terror

“We will cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, for that they have associated with Allah that for which He sent down never authority; their lodging shall be the Fire; evil is the lodging of the evildoers.” (Qur’an 3:151)

Now, Mr. Alnatour (may I call you Omar?), I know what you’ll say here: this is Allah saying he will terrorize the unbelievers, not commanding the Muslims to do so. Fair enough, although I can’t help but recall that the Qur’an also says: “Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands” (9:14). So if Allah is punishing the unbelievers by the hands of the believers, might part of that punishment involve casting terror into the hearts of the unbelievers? And that’s what terrorism is all about, right?

And yes, there is still more. “Make ready for them whatever force and strings of horses you can, to strike terror into the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them that you know not; Allah knows them. And whatsoever you expend in the way of Allah shall be repaid you in full; you will not be wronged.” (Qur’an 8:60)

Strike terror into the enemy of Allah and your enemy. Now you no doubt have some explanation for this, Mr. Alnatour, but I wonder how you would explain to a young member of the Islamic State (ISIS) or al-Qaeda that Allah’s command to strike terror into the enemy of Allah doesn’t mean that they should behead, or blow up, or otherwise terrorize unbelievers

So there you have it. Not just one verse, but four, and I have plenty more. You don’t have to pay me $40,000 even though I fulfilled your requirements four times over; I’ll take the $10,000, and thank you very much for your generosity. I must say that I very much enjoyed your article in which you made this offer, “Why Muslims Should Never Have To Apologize for Terrorism,” if it is proper to say that one enjoyed such a lamentable tale as your own. It is lamentable to read about how your wife screams at you and your children hate you for matters beyond your control, and that then on top of that, Infidels have the temerity to want you to do something about Islamic terrorism beyond issuing pro forma condemnations. 

My mind goes back, however, to those who were murdered by Islamic terrorists recently in Brussels, Paris, San Bernardino, and so many other places. I’m sure you would agree that the suffering of their families far exceeds that of Muslims who must suffer Infidels asking them (quite patiently, for over fourteen years now since 9/11) to clean their own house. I do hope that you will think a bit about them, and about your Qur’an. Instead of obfuscating its contents, as you’re writing out my check, you could do us all a favor by starting to ponder some strategies about how to limit the capacity of your holy book to incite murder and bloodshed. In light of my confidence that you will do that, I very much look forward to your next article.

With cordial best wishes from your fellow human being,

Robert Spencer

Advertisements

Brussels Terrorist Attack: “One Man Had Lost Both Legs And There Was A Policeman With A Totally Mangled Leg”

This is sickening and it was totally preventable – three decades ago.

Now, Belgium’s demographic has been irreversibly altered by the influx of Muslims and jihad is not going to go away anytime soon.

Here’s the update:

Victims lay in pools of blood as the smoke cleared to reveal a scene of horror after twin explosions ripped through the main terminal at Brussels Airport, witnesses said.

The blasts smashed the windows of the departure hall and sent ceiling tiles shattering to the floor.

“A man shouted a few words in Arabic and then I heard a huge blast,” airport baggage security officer Alphonse Lyoura, who still had blood on his hands following the explosion, told AFP.

He said there was another explosion about two minutes later.

“I helped at least six or seven wounded people. We took out some bodies that were not moving. It was total panic everywhere,” Mr Lyoura said.

“I saw people lying on the ground covered in blood who were not moving.

“At least six or seven people’s legs were totally crushed. A lot of people lost limbs.

“One man had lost both legs and there was a policeman with a totally mangled leg.”

Witness and Belgian David Crunelle, 36, was at the airport to catch a flight to Japan.

I said hello [to my wife], we took the elevator and in the elevator we heard the first bomb. The second exploded just when we got off. We ran away to an emergency exit.

Witness Jean-Pierre Herman

“An explosion happened in the terminal for the US departures. I think it was American Airlines terminal. Two explosions, [with] like two or three seconds between the two explosions. Everything went dark,” he told 7.30.

“There was a lot of people injured. Instantly, everybody, they started screaming and crying a lot, exiting — the people from the airport and from the airline companies — everybody went out without knowing what to do but it went well.”

Follow the live blog for up to date information on the explosions at Brussels Airport and metro station.

‘I think we are very lucky’

Another witness, Peter Presnell, said his plane landed on the tarmac at Brussels airport just as the explosions went off.

“When we first got here, they advised us that there was an explosion in the terminal and then they subsequently advised that there were two bombs had detonated inside the terminal,” he told the ABC.

“We could see the people being evacuated from the building and plus we could see a little bit of smoke rising above the terminal area as well.”

Another witness, Jean-Pierre Herman, met his wife at the airport, having gone to collect her after her flight arrived from Thailand.

“My wife just arrived,” Mr Herman told AFP.

“I said hello, we took the elevator and in the elevator we heard the first bomb.

“The second exploded just when we got off. We ran away to an emergency exit. I think we are very lucky.”

British journalist Charlotte McDonald-Gibson, who lives in Brussels, said there had been “total confusion” at the airport, where she was having breakfast before a flight.

“Suddenly staff rushed in and said we have to leave,” she said.

“They rushed out and into the main terminal A departures building. Nobody knew what was going on.”

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-22/witnesses-describe-moments-after-brussels-airport-explosions/7268392

Islamic Terrorism In Brussels: Muslims Murder 34, Injure 200+, Blow Up Airport, Nobody Surprised Anymore

Just another day in multicultural Europe.

A string of explosions has rocked Brussels Airport and a city metro station, killing at least 13 people and injuring more than 30 others, prompting Belgium to raise its terror threat to the maximum level.
Key points:

Two blasts hit Brussels Airport, followed by explosion at metro station

At least 13 people dead, all public transport shut down

Follow all the latest developments live

Two explosions hit the international departures lounge at the airport’s Zaventem terminal. It is thought one was set off by a suicide bomber near the American Airlines counter.

A short time later a third blast hit the Maelbeek metro station, near the European Union’s main buildings, just as commuters were making their way to work in rush hour.

The explosions occurred four days after the arrest in Brussels of Salah Abdeslam, the prime surviving suspect in November’s attacks in Paris that killed 130 people.

Follow our live blog for all the latest developments in Brussels.

Brussels’ public transport network was shut down after the blasts and residents were warned to stay inside.

There were chaotic scenes at the airport as passengers fled in panic, with a thick plume of smoke rising from the main terminal building.

The blasts smashed the windows of the departure hall and sent ceiling tiles shattering to the floor.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-22/brussels-airport-rocked-by-two-explosions/7268106

Islamic Terror In Indonesia: As Unexpected As Fish In The Sea

Islamic terrorist attacks happen literally every day in Islamic nations.

In fact, there’s been about 26,000 Islamic terrorist attacks since September 11, 2001 and by far the majority of those have been in Islamic countries.

It’s just one more reason why you don’t want Islam comprising a significant portion of the nation you live in.

Here’s the story:

Five attackers, including two suicide bombers, are dead after a terrorist attack in central Jakarta, Indonesian police say.

A foreign national and a police officer were also believed to have died, taking the death toll to seven, Deputy National Police Chief Budi Gunawan said.

Look back over our live coverage on the blasts in Jakarta

Seven explosions rocked the area, including one at a Starbucks cafe in the city centre, near a cluster of embassies and the United Nations offices.

Authorities said the policeman was killed in a suicide attack on a police booth on the median strip of one of Jakarta’s busiest roads, before shots were fired at bystanders.

Jakarta police said a Canadian was killed in the attack.

Two attackers were killed in a shootout with police, while two others were suicide bombers, Mr Gunawan said.

Jakarta police spokesman Muhammad Iqbal said five police personnel, one foreign civilian and four Indonesian civilians were injured.

He said that the situation was now under control.

Police spokesman Iqbal Kabid said a gunfight between the attackers and police took place in a cinema that is in the same building as a Starbucks cafe.

Bodies were seen lying in the streets as security forces moved in, with reports of gunfire and warnings of snipers in the area.

Police earlier said the blasts were caused by grenades, not bombs.

Todd Elliot, a terrorism expert in Jakarta, said his police sources indicated none of the attacks were suicide bombers, contrary to other reports.

Indonesian President Joko Widodo said the blasts were “acts of terror”.

“Our nation and our people should not be afraid, we will not be defeated by these acts of terror, I hope the public stay calm,” he told MetroTV.

“We all are grieving for the fallen victims of this incident, but we also condemn the act that has disturbed the security and peace and spread terror among our people.”

Police said they believed the attack was inspired by Islamic State and that the attackers were connected to a terror cell that was disrupted just before Christmas.

National intelligence agency chief Sutiyoso said there were no indications Islamic State militants were behind the attack but said “this is definitely terrorism”.

One witness filmed the moment one of the blasts took place, in a car park out the front a commercial building.

Indonesian media reported at least one of the explosions was caused by a suicide bomber.

The ABC’s South-East Asia correspondent Samantha Hawley said armoured trucks, the head of intelligence and bomb squad officers had joined police at the scene of the blasts.

Earlier, officers at the scene told AFP news agency reporters to “get back” because there “is a sniper” on the roof of a building.

What we know:

Several initial blasts struck central Jakarta shortly before 3:00pm AEDT

Bombs were thrown at a popular Starbucks cafe, then a suicide bombing at a police checkpoint

Blasts struck outside the Sarinah shopping centre and the UN’s country office

Shots were fired outside Starbucks as security forces moved in

Police say five suspected attackers are dead, including two suicide bombers

A foreign national and a policeman are also believed to have been killed

Police said the attackers were part of the terror cell from Solo and in communication with Syria

Nobody has claimed responsibility for the attack
Editor-in-chief of the Jakarta Post, Meidyatama Suryodiningrat, said the targeted area was quite popular.

“It’s less than one-and-a-half kilometres to the palace, it’s basically where the centre of government is,” he said.

“Five hundred metres away is the central bank building, you have multiple government buildings, major, major centre of government area.”

Australia’s Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said officials in Indonesia were making enquiries to determine whether Australians had been involved in the attacks.

Ms Bishop said the Australian Government condemned the attacks, and that she had spoken to her Indonesian counterpart and offered any support the country may need to respond to the attacks.

Attorney-General George Brandis issued a statement saying the “Government has offered law enforcement and intelligence assistance to Indonesia” following the attacks.

Australia’s ambassador to Indonesia, Paul Grigson, tweeted: “All Australians should stay clear of these areas, limit their movements and follow the instructions of local authorities.”

Prime Ministers Malcolm Turnbull tweeted: “Australians’ thoughts, prayers and resolute solidarity are with the people of Indonesia as they respond to the terrorist attacks.”

United Nations regional representative Jeremy Douglas, speaking to the ABC from the UN office in Jakarta, said the building was in lockdown.

He said he had been in a car when the first blast went off.

“We got out of the car and we heard a second bomb. Then we heard a third, a fourth, a fifth, a sixth and then gunfire in the street. A lot of gunfire,” he said.

Some other buildings in the area were also evacuated.

Starbucks said all of its stores in Jakarta would remain closed until further notice.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-14/jakarta-bombing-suspected-civilian-terrorists-dead-after-attack/7089218

Hollywood Heroes: Kurt Russell

Every now and then someone in Hollywood (a serious Leftist stronghold) says something worth listening to.

This time it’s Kurt Russell.

In an interview for Hollywood Elsewhere, Russell struck down the grandiose intellectualism of a reporter with simple, blunt facts about the necessity of guns against an enemy bent on killing people.

Here’s the transcript:

 Wells: The Quentin cult, if you will, is, like, 23 years old, starting with Reservoir Dogs…right? Violence as attitude, violence as style, violence as fashion…not dealt with in an earnest, realistic way. The swagger thing.

Russell: Right.

Wells: And I was looking in the N.Y. Times this morning and this guy interviewed several people in the country in the Midwest and West. And with almost everybody out there, he reported, there’s a feeling of anxiety in the culture…when’s the next one

Russell: So how do you connect the dots?

Wells: I think there’s a feeling about shootings and violence right now…I think it’s different in 2015 than it was in the mid ’90s. But Quentin is still playing the same game more or less.

Russell: Well, Quentin does what he does. He’s painting a picture, writing, telling a story…like a filmmaker. But to mix and match reality with fantasy is something I don’t understand but that’s just me. I think we should understand the difference. To mix today’s politics with, in this case, a tale about, uh, a fictional tale about the Civil War…

Wells: I’m not talking about politics. I’m talking about a ground-level, water-table…a feeling in people’s bones. People are genuinely…between Paris and San Bernardino the idea of sudden violence becoming a normal, day-to-day aspect coming from the gun culture and everything else…it’s a different vibe, you know?

Russell: I don’t understand concepts of conversation [about] the gun culture. We’ve lived with guns since, what, the 7th Century or something? I don’t know.

Wells: Well, I think we all know…guns are a trope. Not a trope but a totem, a metaphor that disenfranchised white guys need…it makes them feel good about themselves.

Russell: You can say what you want. I don’t agree with that. It’s not my thing.

Wells: Well, it’s statistically irrefutable.

Russell: If you think gun control is going to change the terrorists’ point of view, I think you’re, like, out of your mind. I think anybody [who says that] is. I think it’s absolutely insane. The problem, the problem that we’re having right now to turn it around…you may think you’ve got me worried about you’re gonna do? Dude, you’re about to find out what I’m gonna do, and that’s gonna worry you a lot more. And that‘s what we need. That will change the concept of gun culture, as you call it, to something [like] reality. Which is, if I’m a hockey team and I’ve got some guy bearing down on me as a goal tender, I’m not concerned about what he’s gonna do — I’m gonna make him concerned about what I’m gonna do…

Wells: I get that.

Russell: To stop him. That‘s when things change. [Tries to steer conversation back to the usual-usual, western genre, what Quentin does, asking the question, themes explored.] So what has that got to do with movies? Nothing! Movies are movies. They’re like a painting, like a song, like a book…he’s doing his Quentin Tarantino world, which I think belongs on film. I don’t think it has anything to do with anything outside of film. The music, the manipulation of the screenplay. So I can’t connect the dots. It really is hard for me to connect the dots.

Wells: Obama’s point was that the guys on the no-fly list, [there] for good reason because of terrorist connections or suspicions…they can get hold of a gun pretty easily.

Russell: They can also make a bomb pretty easily. So what? They can also get knives and stab you. Whaddaya gonna do about that? They can also get cars and run you over. Whaddaya gonna do about that?

Wells: They didn’t kill the people in San Bernardino with cars.

Russell: But they’ve killed others that way, haven’t they? Yeah, yeah. Whaddaya gonna do? Outlaw everything? That isn’t the answer.

Wells: Just put some controls…

Russell: Put some controls? What, so the people, so the people who want to defend themselves can’t?

Wells: No, not so you can’t, just so the idiots can’t get hold of them [so easily], that’s all.

Russell: You really believe they’re not going to? Are you serious about that? What good will that…? Oh my God. You and I just disagree.

Wells: Okay.

Russell: You and I just disagree. I understand that you think you can control the behavior of people that are dead set on taking your way of life away from you. You think you can control that? And there’s only one thing you can do with that. And that’s [to say} ‘No, dude, that’s not gonna happen. That’s just not gonna happen.’

Interestingly, Wells seems to think that because he was calm during the interview, that somehow it translates as a victory for his pompous, postmodernist pop-psychology rhetoric.

Sadly, only someone so sheltered by history’s hard won freedoms could make such an ignorant claim as:

Well, I think we all know…guns are a trope. Not a trope but a totem, a metaphor that disenfranchised white guys need…it makes them feel good about themselves.

But that’s the Left for you.

They see themselves as the source of all reason and that if only everyone is forced into their ideology, the world will become a peaceful utopia.

These types aren’t out fighting in the mud to keep their country safe from the likes of the Nazis, Communists and Muslims but rather coddled up in the universities and ivory towers impressing themselves with philosophies that teach them it’s okay to murder children in the womb because it makes life more convenient. That and spitting on war veterans while sleeping around and doing drugs because “Peace, man!”

It’s also interesting to note Wells’ racism against white people – the only ethnicity it is okay to make grand, sweeping criticisms of.

An apt comparison here is with the approaches of Winston Churchill and Neville Chamberlain in the face of an enemy intent on war. Wells, like Chamberlain, can talk the talk for a season and be favoured but in the end, it will be Russell whose words will be proven accurate, much like Churchill.

Wells thinks his “guns are a trope” sounds very clever but in the end, it sounds much like “peace for our time”.

Useless words spoken by people not in touch with the reality of an enemy who will not stop.

We can expect that Muslim and nihilistic atheist terrorists will continue to kill people and tighter gun laws will prevent more and more innocent victims from being able to defend themselves. 

Then people like Wells can pretend it’s all white, gun owner’s faults that terrorists murder people.

And that Obama isn’t the worst president ever.

Islamic Terrorist Weilding Knife Commemorates Charlie Hebdo Massacre Anniversary By Getting Shot By Police

This year is very likely going to be a bad one for Islamic terrorism in the West.

Here it is:

Paris police have shot dead a knife-wielding man who tried to enter a police station shouting “Allahu Akbar” (God is Great) and who may have been wearing a suicide belt, officials say.

The incident took place just minutes after President Francois Hollande had given a speech to security forces in an another part of Paris to mark the first anniversary of last year’s deadly militant Islamist attacks on the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine in the French capital.

“The man may have been wearing something that could be a suicide belt,” Interior ministry spokesman Pierre-Henry Brandet told BFM TV.

“Whether it was operational or not, it is too early to say.”

A police union source said the belt appeared to be fake.

“The bomb-disposal unit confirmed it was a fake,” the source said.

The man had tried to force entry into the police station in the 18th district of northern Paris, an area that Islamic State had said after even deadlier Paris attacks in November that it had been planning to hit.

“According to our colleagues he wanted to blow himself up,” an official at the Alternative Police union said.

“He shouted Allahu Akbar and had wires protruding from his clothes. That’s why the police officer opened fire.”

Officials said bomb disposal experts were on site.

Journalist Anna Polonyi, who could see the body on the pavement from the window of her flat, posted photos on social media that showed the body with what appeared to be a bomb-disposal robot beside it.

She said that her sister, in the flat with her, saw the incident happen.

She said the police shouted at the man and that he then started running towards them before they shot him.

It’s worth remembering that we in the West are only getting taster-trays of the three course meal that the Middle East eats on a day to day basis.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-07/paris-police-shoot-dead-knife-wielding-man/7075386

Why Everyone Should Oppose Gun Control 

Throughout history, no single group or organisation has murdered more people than governments.

That’s why!

And that’s really all the argument that’s needed when it comes to this issue but here’s an article that spells it out nicely too:

Following the terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, America’s gun control debate is undergoing a metamorphosis.

The case for the Second Amendment has classically been one of protection from a tyrannical government; the Founders knew well the need for such an insurance policy. As the American government became more militarily powerful, however, the arguments shifted to fit the technology. After all, the critics cried, is your rifle going to defend your beloved citizenry from fighter planes and guided missiles?

Now a novel threat has once again shifted the argument, this time in clear favor of the Second Amendment faithful. Rogue agents bent on the death of innocents are striking the West where it hurts—at parties, in cafes, at concerts. These days, we are all targets to some degree.

Would Paris have ended differently if a few fans in the Bataclan had been licensed and allowed to carry? Perhaps. Would the casualty counts in San Bernardino have been lower had someone else at the party been packing? Possibly.

The Crazies Get Guns, But Not Us

Yet in spite of these promising possibilities, and the fact that we are all now prey to some degree to any number of radicalized jihadists in our midst, our government insists that giving up our guns will somehow secure our safety. In fact, the Obama administration is issuing an executive order aimed at restricting the sale of firearms.

Even as there are calls to disarm the police forces we are told will protect us, there are calls to disarm us, as well.

Even as there are calls to disarm the very police forces that we are told will protect us, there are calls to disarm us, as well; just last month the Supreme Court refused to hear a challenge on a Chicago suburb’s ban on semiautomatic weapons. The Left has created a fine boogeyman in the National Rifle Association, even though less than 10 percent of gun owners are members. They have created a boogeygun, too: the semiautomatic rifle, despite the fact that these weapons account for less than 2 percent of all gun deaths.

Of course the real reason many Americans “cling” to their guns (to borrow the president’s language) has far more to do with common sense than any single organization. Like the Founding Fathers, they have seen firsthand the selective agenda of an overgrown government.

They know well that the powers that be in Washington DC have no capable method of controlling arms traffic in a nation of 300 million-plus people and more than 350 million guns. The War on Drugs has failed to prevent tidal waves of narcotics from infiltrating every nook and cranny of these United States. Why should a War on Guns prove any different?

Reality Is An Obstacle for the Left

We were assured that ISIS is contained, yet only days after that assurance the dead both here and across the pond were being buried. We have asked that our borders be secured to protect both our autonomy and our economy, yet in return we have received only empty promises and an influx of millions. Obama has failed to control his own Internal Revenue Service, yet assures us with the confidence of a man under constant armed protection that he can control who will be allowed to own a machine that is capable of killing indiscriminately.

Obama assures us that he can control who will be allowed to own a machine that is capable of killing indiscriminately.

Sorry, but we’ve seen this movie before. After all, weren’t we just recently led to believe that if we liked our doctor, we could keep him? As millions of Americans can attest, that promise, too, went unfulfilled.

It wasn’t so long ago that headlines were filled with a federal operation known as “Fast and Furious,” in which the very same administration that proselytizes regulating a particular class of rifle was caught red-handed supplying Mexican gangsters with those very weapons. Got that, America? You can’t have them, but homicidal narco traffickers can, on your dime.

You see, only in Washington, in a world so removed from the reality millions of Americans face every day, could such a concept actually be given credulity. Sorry, Obama, Pelosi, Boxer, and the rest, but you have no right to strip us of our last line of defense from your incompetence.

Prove You Can Protect Us First

Are we to honestly believe that if a certain class of gun is outlawed that it will forever be removed from the commission of a crime? That the millions of high-powered rifles will just disappear from American streets? That we won’t be sitting ducks the next time some deranged lunatic has a bad day or decides his coworkers are infidels?

The proposed regulations will ensure that the criminal will be better armed than the law-abiding citizen.

Despite many of us being publicly educated, we are smarter than that. The only thing the government’s proposed regulations will ensure is that the criminal will be better armed than the law-abiding citizen—surely a crime against the people if there ever was one.

If the definition of insanity is, as Einstein once quipped, “Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results,” then we would be certifiable to trust the government to effectively regulate firearms of any type, let alone assault rifles.

After all, at the end of the day gun control is a matter of trust: Americans must trust that their government can protect them in an age of anything goes terrorism, and that trust must be earned. Instead, it has been repeatedly violated.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/01/06/the-real-reason-americans-oppose-gun-control/

What Do Islamic Terrorists Really Want?

Sometimes it can be so hard to work out things like this.

It’s like walking in darkness with no sense of direction.

Sure, they tell us what they want but that can’t really be what they want.

Since 9/11, America has been plagued with a media industry churning out counterintuitive “What do the terrorists want” pieces. Sure you might think that the terrorists “want to kill you”. But profound media thinkers who know all about Islam without ever having read the Koran know that what the terrorists really want is for us to kill them. Every time we bombed them, we were just “playing into their hands.
Today the same bad ideas are being brushed off for insipid “What does ISIS want” thinkpieces which conclude that what ISIS wants most is for us to deviate from the media’s favorite progressive policies.

After letting ISIS overrun its half-dozen countries, the same geniuses responsible for the mess began claiming that what ISIS really fears is more of their failed policies. And what it really wants is Republican policies. If you support bombing terrorists or keeping them out of the country, you’re helping ISIS.

According to Obama, ISIS wants us to turn to “tough talk” and begin “abandoning our values” by keeping Syrian Muslim migrants out. After the Oval Office speech was done, the Caliph of ISIS probably threw up his hands and told his fellow terrorists, “It’s no use. This Hussein fellow just won’t talk tough. We’re doomed. Sure we’ll keep on killing Americans, but what good will it do if he won’t talk tough?”

Biden informed Americans that, “It’s clear what ISIL wants. They want to manufacture a clash between civilizations. They want frightened people to think in terms of ‘us versus them.’” Whereas our leaders know better than to think in such terms, unless the “thems” are Republicans in which case it’s okay.

But ISIS doesn’t care whether we think in terms of “us versus them”, because that’s how ISIS already thinks. The clash of civilizations is here. But according to Biden, what ISIS wants us is for us to recognize that reality. And if we refuse to recognize it, our denial will somehow defeat ISIS in an ostrich victory.

The media is full of unofficial progressive ISIS spokesmen eager to tell us “exactly” what the terror group wants. And according to them, it really wants to be beaten, humiliated and hated.

“Trump’s Muslim Ban Is Exactly What ISIS Wants,” shrieks Think Progress. Because if there’s one thing that ISIS really wants, it’s to prevent its terrorists from being able to reach the United States.

ISIS wants a Muslim ban almost as much as Think Progress’ editors want to be dumped in ISIS territory wearing only giant slabs of bacon and cartoons of Mohammed.

Their level of debate is about that of a contrary six-year-old. “Go to bed.” “No, that’s what ISIS wants me to do.” “Eat your breakfast.” “No, ISIS wants me to eat my breakfast. I’ll be playing into its hands.”

“Turning Away Syrian Refugees is Exactly What ISIS Wants,” the Huffington Post suggests. What could ISIS possibly want more than for us to “turn away” 1,300 ISIS supporters?

Maybe being shot in the head by a United States Marine. And, guess what?

According to The Week, “ISIS wants the US to send group troops”. Almost as much as Hitler wanted American tanks in Berlin.

Also ISIS really, really wants to be hated.

 “ISIS Wants You to Hate Muslims”, The Nation declares. “Hating Muslims plays right into the Islamic State’s hands,” echoes the Washington Post. “Want to Help ISIS? Hate a Muslim” adds the Huffington Post.

Conveniently ISIS only seems to want the very things that leftists don’t want. And the possibilities are endless. “Let’s abolish ObamaCare”. “No, that’s what ISIS wants.” “Let’s drop our subscriptions to the Washington Post and The Nation”. “Don’t you understand, that’s what ISIS wants you to do!”

So far ISIS wants to be bombed, shot, kept out of America and Europe. And hated. It probably also doesn’t want to be invited to anyone’s birthday parties and enjoys calls from telemarketers.

This masochistic Islamic State has some serious self-esteem issues. Or maybe it’s the leftists who claim to speak for it who do.

“ISIS wants us to close borders”, someone at Greenville News insists. According to Storypick, “ISIS wants the world to hate them”. From the fever swamps of AlterNet, we learn that “ISIS Wants the Paris Climate Talks to Fail.” According to Haaretz, ISIS wants LePen to win in France. ISIS also probably wants the Patriots to win the Super Bowl and doesn’t think Bruce Jenner is either “stunning” or “beautiful”. 

At the Huffington Post, the lead singer of Switchfoot informs us that he, “Looked up at the ceiling and asked the darkness, “What does ISIS want?”

The Caliph of ISIS however isn’t lying in bed, looking up at the darkness and wondering what the guitarist for an annoying alternative band wants. That’s one reason why he’s winning and we aren’t.

ISIS is vicious, but it isn’t neurotic. Meanwhile the leftists looking into the darkness keep coming up with very specific things that ISIS “exactly” wants from us.

“This vile cartoon portrayal of refugees is just what Isis wants”, a Guardian headline blares.

According to The Independent, “The needless interrogation of a Belgian academic is exactly what Isis wants from us”. That’s an oddly specific wish on the part of ISIS, but who am I to argue with a publication that also offers me Hamas supporter Jeremy Corbyn singing Happy Birthday, an orangutan laughing and “Five words everyone should hear on gun control” from Jennifer Aniston.

(The monkey would probably have a more informed opinion on gun control than Jennifer Aniston.)

The “Belgian academic” turns out to be Montasser Alde’emeh, a “Palestinian” who describes Muslim terrorism against Jews as “legitimate”.

But if we interrogate the sorts of “Belgian academics” who say things like, “According to Islam all conditions for armed resistance have been met”, we’re giving ISIS what it wants.

“Exactly what it wants”.

The only way to frustrate ISIS is to let terrorist sympathizers run free. And then ISIS will have to throw up its hands in defeat and kill another few hundred people.

“Isis wants an insane, medieval race war – and we’ve decided to give them one,” the Guardian declares.

Technically ISIS is the one giving us an “insane, medieval race war”, the same insane medieval race war practiced by Mohammed, but it wouldn’t be the Guardian if it didn’t find a way to blame us for it.

“It’s hard to think of a more poetic metaphor for our utter lack of ideas than spending several years dropping high explosives on to a desert,” a British hipster at the leftist publication complains.

We haven’t come up with any new ideas for winning wars except killing people. Shame on us. Where’s our creativity?

Juan Cole insists at The Nation, “ISIS Wants a Clash of the Civilizations: Let’s Not Give In”. Juan, like Biden, doesn’t seem to realize that it only takes one side to start a war.

It doesn’t matter if we sit in our corner of civilization with our hands folded refusing to fight. That just makes ISIS’ job a lot easier. Killing people who don’t resist is easier than killing those who do.

Unlike Bin Laden, ISIS doesn’t beat around the bush. It tells everyone “exactly” what it wants.

“The attack by the Islamic State in America is only the beginning of our efforts to establish a wiliyah [Islamic territory] in the heart of our enemy.” It calls for an alliance with “left-winged activists” opposed to Israel to “pave the way for the conquest of Rome”.

But this is much too obvious for the media’s “left-winged activists” who obsessively flip around reality until they can prove that the only way to defeat ISIS is by taking in millions of Muslim migrants and refusing to fight ISIS.

Because letting ISIS beat us is exactly what ISIS is afraid of. But beating ISIS is exactly what it wants.

I guess it’s not so hard after all.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261089/what-isis-really-wants-kill-you-daniel-greenfield

Ken Ham’s Response To Barack Obama’s Address

I’ll preface this with the fact that I don’t celebrate Christmas and I think there is much greater wisdom and benefit in remembering and rehearsing the festivals given by God that Jesus himself not only celebrated (along with the apostles and the early church) but fulfilled perfectly to the precise detail and will fulfil future-tense at his coming.

Nonetheless, the church in history made something at least useful out of pagan celebrations and helped to centre Western celebrations around Jesus Christ instead of despicable false gods.

In this way, I am all for an imperfect acknowledgement of Christ’s birth and the recognition that Jesus is God, especially by those who have benefited from the peace and prosperity Christianity established in the Western Hemisphere over the Millenia.

It’s appropriate also that someone like Obama, esteemed by the powerful, should be rebukes by those whom are largely mocked and despised by those same people.

Ken Ham offers the words that our society would do well to heed:

Hi, I’m Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis, the Creation Museum, and the Ark Encounter. Our ministry wants to respond to some of the comments made by the President Sunday night from the White House.
In his address to the American people, the President made statements about the threat of terrorism. Now at the end of his speech, President Obama said,

Let’s not forget that freedom is more powerful than fear; that we have always met challenges—whether war or depression, natural disasters or terrorist attacks—by coming together around our common ideals as one nation, as one people. So long as we stay true to that tradition, I have no doubt America will prevail. Thank you. God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.

First of all, if what he calls “common ideals” are not built on the authority of the Word of God, then the common ideals are just man’s fallible opinions—which, frankly, will mean that America will not prevail. A fallible human being like the President can claim all he wants that America will prevail, but there’s a God in heaven who is in absolute control of the affairs of the nations!

I think of the verse from Daniel chapter 2 and verse 21: “And He changes the times and the seasons; He removes kings and raises up kings; He gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to those who have understanding.”

Sadly, our President, even though he stated last night that he wants God to bless America, will not acknowledge the Creator God of the Bible—in fact, he has done the opposite: actively supported the removal of the one true God from the public arena. His belief in this regard was seen, for instance, in the recent lighting of the national Christmas tree in Washington, DC, when the President began his speech by saying “happy holidays”—twice.

While he may use the word Christmas on occasion, we all know that when the President says “happy holidays,” like in his speech, it’s largely a deliberate way to keep Christ out of Christmas. He has turned Christmas-related events into secular ones, instead of acknowledging the Babe in a manger—the One who came to be our Savior over 2,000 years ago.

Now, Christians should respect the office of the presidency and pray for our elected officials. But when their actions go contrary to the absolute authority of God’s Word, then we should say something.

Also at the Christmas tree lighting, the first lady, along with the Muppet character Miss Piggy, read a story from the children’s book A Visit from St. Nicholas—a story about Santa Claus.

THE PRESIDENT AND THE FIRST LADY HAVE TOLD AMERICANS THAT THE REAL REASON FOR THE SEASON IS TO HAVE A HAPPY HOLIDAY AND ENJOY STORIES ABOUT SANTA.

So the President and the first lady have told Americans that the real reason for the season is to have a happy holiday and enjoy stories about Santa.

At our Christmas Town program at the Creation Museum, we celebrate Christmas in the right way: we reflect on the greatest gift God gave to mankind—the gift of His Son, Jesus—and worship Him. He was the Babe in a manger—the God-man—who came to earth to provide the only way for humans to live forever with their God.

Christmas is a time to celebrate Jesus Christ (as we should do every day of the year) and remember the true account (the historical record) of the birth of a baby. He was the incarnation of the Son of God—the Son of God who took on a fleshly, bodily form.

Second, did God hear President Obama at the end of his speech when he said “God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America”? I suggest God did not. Hear God’s Word from Isaiah chapter 59:

But your iniquities have separated you from your God; and your sins have hidden His face from you, so that He will not hear. For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue has muttered perversity. (verses 2–3)

God’s principles do not change. What he said to the rebellious Israelites, He also says to us today.

Yes, the iniquities of this nation are great. The teaching of the true God, and the reminders of the Christian faith are being removed from this nation—crosses, Nativity scenes, and displays of the Ten Commandments are being taken down from public places. Also, prayer, the Bible, and the teaching of creation have been largely removed from public schools.

Furthermore, the President mocks God’s design for marriage, and endorses a gross sin of gay “marriage” and homosexual behavior. He has endorsed the lie of a false doctrine in regard to marriage.

And the President has helped this nation be “defiled with blood.” He has condoned the murder of millions of children in their mother’s wombs. The same President who said “God bless the United States of America” on Sunday night actually said this in July: “God bless Planned Parenthood.” In other words, he asked God to bless the biggest child-murdering machine in America! Will God ever bless a nation that is so guilty of defiling this land with the shed blood of millions of children?

HOW COULD GOD HEAR THIS PLEA WHEN THE INIQUITIES OF THIS NATION AND THE PRESIDENT ARE SO GREAT?

I humbly suggest that God “will not hear” the President when he asks for God’s blessing on this nation! How could God hear this plea when the iniquities of this nation and the President are so great?

May God have mercy, and may God raise up people to repair the breach in this nation—a breach that has allowed rampant sin and the mocking of God’s Word to permeate the culture.

The prophet Isaiah in chapter 58 declared, “Those from among you shall build the old waste places; you shall raise up the foundations of many generations; and you shall be called the Repairer of the Breach, the Restorer of Streets to Dwell In” (verse 12).

This nation as a whole, and the President in particular, needs to repent before the one true God and return to His Word as the absolute authority in all matters of life and conduct.

The President can talk about the threat of continued terrorism all he wants. But unless this nation deals with gross sin that permeates the culture, I sadly predict that this nation will not see the end of terrible tragedies, like terrorism.

God’s Word in Jeremiah chapter 18 is a reminder to us that He is in total control of the nations, just as a potter controls the clay in his hands. In Jeremiah it says,

Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: “O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter?” says the Lord. “Look, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel! The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.” (verses 5–10)

May God’s people be emboldened to stand for Him in this nation.

https://answersingenesis.org/culture/america/response-to-president/