Islamic Cartoons

This is one of the phoniest issues that I have ever seen. These cartoons were published in September of 2005 and are just now getting protested.

If you want to know the truth just follow the money to see who is financing the �brute squads� terrorizing embassies and burning flags. Syria has already been fingered as a major backer of these attackers. I’m sure Sandi Arabic and Iran are also kicking-in a few Rupees to stir things-up.

The cartoons can be views at HumanEventsOnline

I agree that supporters of the Global War on Terror are using the cartoons to make the natives restless; but this is the same type of tactics that these repressive governments have used for years to blame Israel for all their self-inflicted ills. To wait five months to mount a campaign against the newspapers that published these cartoons is proof that this is a staged event.

These protests also serve to silence what few moderate Muslims there are in the region.

These protests are really a preemptive step to unify the region to raise the stakes to the point that Israel and/or the United States will loose their backbone and not attack the nuclear program in Iran because such an attack could escalate into a regional war. From this perspective, the events that are unfolding now are a brilliant political move. Truly, the chessmasters are putting their pawns in play.

Of all the cartoons, the one above is my favorite.

It does bring to mind one question that I have never heard explained and that is what are the women who blow-up innocent men, women and children supposed to get from Allah in the next life?

The Other War on Terror

Far from Afghanistan and Iraq, Saudi Arabia is funding armies of radical Mohammedans that are trying to overthrow the governments of countries such as Nigeria and Sudan. They are systematically burning villages and murdering their inhabitants. Those that survive these raids end up either as refugees or slaves.

The raiders are using guns, machetes, spears and explosives and anything else they can purchase to spread their terror. They purposely torture many before killing them.

Similar atrocities are occurring frequently in Indonesia and occasionally in the Philippines.

However, in parts of Africa this has gotten to the point where there are clearly defined territories controlled by the radical Muslims. In an effort to stem the tide of bloodshed and terror, Christians that live in these countries have begun to fight back, not with bullets but with Bibles. They have decided to evangelize the followers of Islam by literally loving those that persecute them. The famous saying of Tertullian “The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church” is as true now as it was in the early Church.

Africa is emerging as the center of Christianity in the 21st Century and also its primary battlefront. This struggle must succeed. It appears to be Africa that is destined to re-evangelize Western Europe and other once Christian nations.

It is interesting that the hope and future of both Protestant and Catholic branches of the Christian Church is anchored in Africa.

Saudi Arabia has committed hundreds of millions of dollars to eradicate Christianity and establish nations that adhere to Sharia Law. We must begin to fight back by praying for our brothers in Africa and sending support to those committed to spreading Christianity in the region.

Just as a point of reference, it costs about two thousand dollars per year to support one African as a fulltime missionary.

I trust that you will join me in supporting this battlefront of the Global War on Terror.

A Prayer in Time of Terrorism

I was sent this e-mail September 11, 2001

Grant, O God, that in this time of national testing, thy people may know thy presence and obey thy Will: that with integrity and courage we may accomplish all that which thou would have us to do, and to endure that which thou would ask us to bear;

Pour out, O merciful Lord, thy aid and comfort to all who those who at this time are visited with tragedy and bereavement; and prosper with thy continual blessing all those those who administer the healing gifts to the injured and those who labor to devise protection against fanatical terrorist attacks.

Grant, O Lord, the execution of righteous judgment against those responsible for this evil, that justice might be done in this world and in the life to come..

Finally, O Lord, we pray that thou would convert and turn the hearts of our enemies, who by the hardening of their hearts, know not what evil they do.

This we ask through Him who both healed and hallowed suffering, thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Rev James Payne, Houston, TX

Meet Cindy Sheehan

Cindy Sheehan is camping out in front of the President’s property in Crawford Texas as part of a publicity stunt to accuse George Bush of killing her son in Iraq.

Cindy Sheehan has a home on the internet that you can visit. Here you will find George Bush called every name that a flaming Leftist can throw at someone.

I surveyed her writings and her view of the Global War on Terrorism. Her views seem to dovetail nicely with Michael Moore. It is no surprise that she is associated with

She always calls the President “George” not President or Mr. Bush or anything showing respect for the office or the man himself.

Cindy Sheehan seems to view Iraq as a peaceful and idyllic place prior to the arrival of the American military. In her essay, Where Do I Live?, she describes the Iraqi portion of the War on Terrorism as the “destruction of an innocent country” in an “unjust, immoral, and illegal war” where American soldiers are “killing and maiming tens of thousands of innocent people.”

Cindy Sheehan explains her son’s Stories from the Front as that of a young man that joined the Army in May of 2000. She gives no indication of his schooling or specialty in the armed services. He—like all young men—had hopes and dreams about what his experience would be like during his enlistment. If Mrs. Sheehan’s description is accurate, her son did not quite know what military life is really like. His expectations may not have been realistic.

(All enlistment contracts are eight years. Depending on the contract, the time of active and reserve duty is split. Most contracts are either two or four years of active duty. The active duty portion of the contract is usually based on the specialty that the recruit wishes to pursue. Sheehan is unclear about the details of her son’s contract.)

9-11 changed things; suddenly, her son couldn’t do all the things that his recruiter had promised. Duh!

After Casey enlisted he knew I was upset. He told me, “Mom, you don’t have to worry, Sgt. (I forget his name) told me that since I scored so high on the ASVAB (military competency) test, I will never see combat, even if there is a war. I will only be in a support role.” I can still hear his voice saying those exact words to me. Those words chilled me to the bone then, and have haunted me since 9/11. First of all, because I thought Casey would be sent to fight terrorists (and “terrorists”) wherever they might be, and I could see George and his warmongering band of neocons rushing us into a crazy invasion of Iraq.


In her essay, Still Not Worth It, she recounts her appearance on Larry King to comment on her view of President Bush’s nationally televised speech on June 28th, 2005 about the Iraq War. In this essay, she describes President Bush is “vacuous man giving his hollow speech “ She suggests that the President “could have always replaced the word “terrorists” with the phrase: “my moronic and callous foreign policies.”

“People have characterized the speech-lite in many ways, but if I had to pick a few words to describe it, I would say: “Hypocritical, manipulative, condescending, meaningless drivel.””

During Larry King, Senator John Warner spoke favorable of our presence in Iraq. Sheehan described Warner’s support this way, “he fell in lockstep behind his Führer.”

Sheehan describes her appearance on Larry King as:

I finally got on to speak for my 82 seconds (all the time Larry King Live could spare for the peace message) about how this war is a catastrophe and how we should bring the troops home and quit forcing the Iraqi people to pay for our government’s hubris and quit forcing innocent children to suffer so we can allegedly fight terrorism somewhere besides America. How absolutely racist and immoral is it to take America’s battles to another land and make an entire country pay for the crimes of others? To me, this is blatant genocide. How dare we export our brand of flag-waving death and devastation to a people who have been through so much already? It wasn’t bad enough that our sanctions killed tens of thousands of Iraqis before we even started an active aggression against them. Now we have to create confusion, chaos, and disorder there. How dare our president and Congress, and we Americans, allow this to continue?

Her view of trying to bring democracy to Iraq is illustrative of her mindset. She laments the evil that will be unleashed on the world if “George’s endless war … is allowed to continue spreading the cancer of imperialism in the Middle-East” She also unloaded her venom on John McCain. (Remember that she also met with him when she met with President Bush last year.) Commenting on Senate John McCain who was a Vietnam POW for seven years,

He hasn’t had a loved one killed in this enormous tragedy of a war, nor does he have a loved one in harm’s way. It has not affected him personally one bit. What skin is it off McCain’s nose if our troops remain for a highly unlikely rosy outcome at the cost of thousands of more lives?

Cindy is worried about America. In her essay, Where Do I Live?, she wants to know what you will do “When, God forbid, the jack-booted thugs come pounding on their door some midnight?” Sorry Cindy but Waco was when the other party was in power.

Eric Hogue asks about the Sheehan children.

In The Sounds of Hope, there is a poem by her daughter Carley. The poem reads in part
Have you ever heard the sound of taps played at your brother’s grave?
They say he died so the flag will continue to wave,
But I believe he died because they had oil to save.
Have you ever heard the sound of taps played at your brother’s grave?

Fatwa: PR Band-Aid for Silent Community

A group of North American Islamic clerics and organizations have finally issued a Fatwa that purports to condemn terrorism.

Eric Hogue is among many that have vocalized the questions that many of us have asked for years. Among these questions is: Why now? What does this really mean? Are they for real or just providing some positive public relations? Is this enough to satisfy you of the sincerity of the Islamic community?

Hearing the discussion on his program this morning caused a flurry of thoughts to race through my head. My first reaction was to recall many recent terror attacks in the West.
• On 9-11 did they condemn the terror? No
• Did they condemn the shoe bomber and other foiled terror plots? No
• When our troops in Iraq were attacked by suicide bombers was the terror condemned? No
• When Western civilian contractors in the Middle East were beheaded did they condemn terror? No
• When the Spanish commuter trains were bombed, did the respond? No
• When the same resorts in Egypt were bombed on two occasions killing vacationing European and Israeli tourists, did they condemn terror? No
• When the trains in London were bombed did they condemn terror? No
• When a lone US Congressman suggested that if we were nuked that an attack on Muslim holy sites should be an option, did they respond? YES

My conclusion is that either these clerics finally figured out that they have been tone deaf for four years and it has resulted in deep seated distrust of their people because they have been perpetuating extremism by their silence or the Congressman has advocated playing by their rules and got their attention.

Either way, a press release is too little, too late. These folks need to police their own if they want to stem the growing distrust that non-Muslims have for Islam. They need to backup this Fatwa with action. Turn in terrorists before they attack. Condemn every act of terror from here on out, yes, even those acts committed against Israel. If they are not with us, they are against us.

I have heard several parsing of the actual text of the Fatwa. I find little comfort in the wording because clearly it allows for killing in some unnamed circumstances. “Whoever kills a person [unjustly]…”

What is just v unjust killing? Are non-believers of Islam covered by this or only other Moslems? How is “all people” defined? Is there a universal understanding or is everyone left to decide that for themselves?

I’ve been around enough theologians to know that each word was approved and no more specific than it had to be to get signers to the declaration. Unfortunately, there is enough room in this Fatwa to drive a Humvee through it without getting a scratch.

Many of the signatories of this proclamation have had ties to terror groups in the past. Are they finally seeing the light or feeling the heat? Or worse yet, are they covering their clerical butts because they know another attack is in the works in the US and they need plausible deniability?

I’m sorry fellas but you will have to backup your nice Fatwa with lots of action. As long as terrorists have aid and comfort from your community, you have not done your part. When the extremists are afraid and outcasts among your people then I will believe your polite words.

Nuke Mecca?

US. Rep Tom Tancred  has touched off a firestorm of controversy by commenting that in response to a nuclear attack on the United States, a military response to such an attack might include bombing Moslem holy sites such as Mecca.

Hugh Hewitt spent most of his show on July 18th trying to defend pluralism and verbally spank the Congressman for his remarks. Many former military members called Hewitt’s show defending the idea that all options must be on the table including nuking Mecca. I think Hewitt was surprised that so many would agree with the Congressman. Hewitt tried to dismiss the Congressman as a fruitcake that should apologize as soon as possible.

While Mecca would not be at the top of my targeting list, I think that we learned that it is a bad idea to publicly rule out any type of target. As soon as we announced that mosques in Iraq were off limits to American soldiers and should be protected, guess where all the terrorists congregated? Had we then destroyed the buildings, perhaps it would have been a good tactic. However, more Americans died due to these politically correct limitations on the war.

I think the President was right when he said that you are either with us or with the terrorists. I just hope Iran and Syria get visited by some of the more elite members on Uncle Sam’s payroll.

Hewitt discounts the assertion that the Global War on Terror is a religious war. I believe that it has been since the Beirut barracks bombing. It just took us two decades to take it seriously. We may not be at war with all of Islam but we are at war with a denomination within the Islamic world. The people at war with the West are the true believers. Those that believe their scripture is the word of their god and take it literally are the ones we are fighting.

In the West, if I believe that the Bible is true and should be taken literally I am a good Christian. Why is this normative for me but if I follow Islam, and believe the same things about Koran, then I am a terrorist. It seems to me that destroying the West is the true form of Islam, and the type that George Bush hopes that the Islamic World will adopt is a heretical form. This isn’t the view being popularized today but based on its history; I think it is a more realistic view of Islamic history.

It is clear that the God of Christianity is incompatible with Allah. People like Hewitt will take pluralism over orthodoxy. Pluralism is just a temporary cease fire until one side gains an advantage over the other. The political consensus in the West is just a new version of Roman theology. In ancient times, you could believe in any god as long as you declare that Caesar is Lord. Now, in America you can have any god as long as the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court is Lord. This was never the intent of the Founders. Freedom of religion as found in the First Amendment was intended to allow for a variety of Christian sects not equality of all faiths or freedom from religion. Both are distortions of original intent.

Forcing a pluralistic template upon the Mohammedans of the world will not succeed. 9-11 was the modern equivalent of the barbarians sacking Roman in the declining years of the Empire. Will our leaders get a spine or repeat history? I think we have yet to properly identify our enemy and have the will to deal with them.

American Hiroshima

Joe Farah, the man behind, posted a very disturbing article titled “Al-Qaida nukes already in U.S.” The article makes many profound assertions about the next attack on American soil.

According to captured al-Qaida leaders and documents, the plan is called the “American Hiroshima” and involves the multiple detonation of nuclear weapons already smuggled into the U.S. over the Mexican border …

I read the article twice yesterday, once at lunch and the second time last night to my wife. Her reaction and mine was how can this be? Farah’s article is part fact, part Tom Clancy and part Mission Impossible. But we must ask ourselves are his assertions true?

Unfortunately, there are no sources sighted to backup many of his assumed facts.

Farah claims that “Al-Qaida has obtained at least 40 nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union – including suitcase nukes, nuclear mines, artillery shells and even some missile warheads.” He goes on to assert that several nuclear weapons have already been smuggled into the United States.

This article then begins to morph into a long form advertisement for a forthcoming book about this very subject. This begs the question of whether this is a factual article or an advertisement dressed-up as a news item. Finally, the article then shifts to advocating better border security and the Minuteman Project.

I have spent enough time on his website to wonder aloud if Mr. Farah will be the publisher of the book that he plugged in this article. He uses his book sales to subsidize the support staff of his website. At the very least, I’m sure that this book will be among those offered to readers of his website.

The fact that the book plugged in this article will probably end-up for sale on this website forces me to question if this is journalism or profiteering.

As for the claims made in the article, I’m sure we can agree that Al-Qaida wishes they had nukes. However, I’m in the camp that believes that if they had them they would use them.