Over the weekend, the U.S. Army’s Delta Force, 75th Ranger Regiment and the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment carried out an operation in Syria to assassinate the leader of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and were very successful, getting the terrorist s.o.b. to detonate a suicide vest inside a dead-end tunnel, blowing himself up, alongside three of his children because that’s how much of a psychopath the guy was.
And while this is undoubtedly a great moment for the United States and for President Donald Trump, Leftists and people in the media were quick to either refuse praising Trump for this successful raid (odd, considering they praised Obama to the hills as though he personally went to bin Laden’s hideout and shot him in the head after delivering a one-liner like in the movies) or even try to downplay the killing of Baghdadi as not being such a big deal.
Leftist “journalists” like John Harwood tried to downplay the killing of Baghdadi by saying: “… in the American psyche, Baghdadi was to bin Laden as an ant is to an elephant.” Bin Laden was the leader of al-Qaeda and was known largely because of 9/11, the biggest terror attack in American soil. Just because Baghdadi never accomplished something quite to that scale (thank God), it doesn’t mean he was basically a nobody. The guy had killed thousands in the Middle East, ruining people’s lives by raping women, making children orphans and killed, captured and beheaded hundreds if not thousands of people.
But this insensitive and narcissistic idiot wasn’t alone in trying to downplay the death of Baghdadi. The Washington Post released an article with the title: “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State, dies at 48.”
Calling Baghdadi an “austere religious scholar” is like calling Hitler an “austere Darwinian fanatic” or Stalin an “austere fan of food-sharing methods.” The guy was the literal leader of ISIS, a terrorist organization that has killed thousands of people, and he gets the treatment of a Harvard scholar by the WaPo. Unbelievable.
Then there was soon-to-be-arrested former Obama National Security director James Clapper downplaying the killing of Baghdadi on CNN’s “State of the Union”:
“What is going to be interesting is the extent to which this negatively affects ISIS or does it galvanize ISIS, the remnants of ISIS, which still survive as an ideology and has franchises in other places besides Syria. ISIS is more than just Baghdadi, as important as he was. 14,000 to 18,000 fighters yet remaining and the franchise are branches in other places – notably, Afghanistan where of course we still have forces. ISIS did participate in losing leadership. So they decentralized and groomed people to assume the role. Now, I don’t know that they have anybody [who] would have the symbolic importance of Baghdadi but I don’t think we can say at this point that we can stop worrying about ISIS.”
Of course we can’t because the ideology of ISIS stems from radical Islam. As long as that is around, ISIS and other terrorist groups like it will remain. But killing Baghdadi, the founding leader of ISIS, is a pretty major deal (by the way, in doing research on Baghdadi, I came upon his Wikipedia page and they have him as the former leader of “ISIL”, which is the name given to ISIS by those who do not recognize Israel’s sovereignty, and they say that he was “in office” as leader of ISIS as though he was a civilized politician and not the piece of human excrement that he actually was).
And even though ISIS is still going to be around after Baghdadi, that doesn’t mean it will likely resurface as a powerful group like it once was (under a certain someone’s presidency). Newsweek, who also downplayed Baghdadi’s assassination, reported that while the group may have a new leader in a man called Abdullah Qardash, they also report that they are on their last legs, as while Qardash may have been hand-picked by Baghdadi to lead ISIS upon Baghdadi’s death, that decision was not made by the group as a whole and it may lead to infighting.
And even under the best case scenario for ISIS and the Left, where there is zero infighting and every ISIS officer accepts Qardash and follows him, ISIS has been considered to be reaching its end back in February of 2019, when CBS News reported that the group had lost a lot of ground, being reduced to a little more than a quarter of a square mile in Syria, and that “hundreds” of ISIS fighters and over a thousand civilian tagalongs (meaning families, servants and slaves) had fled the group. ISIS had also been driven out of Iraq in 2017.
So while ISIS is still around and is still a threat to people living near them (and let’s not forget there are also radical Islamic terrorists that are in other places like Europe who perform terrorists acts in the name of ISIS as a form of allegiance to them), they have been on the absolute cusp of defeat for a long time now, with zero signs for any sort of resurgence.
But Clapper wasn’t the only one who still thinks ISIS is still a major threat. Obama’s Joint Chiefs Vice-Chair James Winnefeld expressed concern over the way Baghdadi’s remains were treated, worrying that it would drive more Islamic violence and arguing that: “If you look back at the bin Laden raid, we treated his body with respect that is due under Islam.”
And oh boy do I have a lot to say to this.
First of all, Baghdadi’s remains should’ve been picked up and flushed down the nearest toilet, sort of giving him a burial at sea (not certain exactly how his body was treated). That is the LEAST the newest resident of Hell deserves.
Second of all, does this moron realize that further Islamic violence came after bin Laden’s death anyway? These terrorists couldn’t care less how “respectfully” bin Laden’s body was treated. They found out that American forces killed him and wanted vengeance for it. Similarly, the remaining ISIS terrorists and supporters will also want vengeance for it.
You see, what you have to realize is that these people are not civilized human beings. They are savage dogs who see us being killed by them as justice and us killing them as injustice. They believe they are prophetically-destined to rule the world through Sharia and any who interfere or dissent will be forced to either submit or perish. Their ideology has not evolved in the least since its inception in the 7th century, as evidenced by how much of the Muslim world still works (gays being set on fire or thrown off buildings, blacks being sold in open slave markets, women being sold off for sexual slavery, children being traded for livestock, etc.).
While not every single Muslim is a terrorist, groups like ISIS, al-Qaeda, Hamas and others exist because of their radical interpretation of an already pretty radical ideology. Much of the Muslim world, such as Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, etc., live as though they are still in the 7th century, albeit with major technological advancements at their disposal.
The barbaric violence of the past is still commonplace in the Middle East because of this.
Now, don’t misunderstand, I’m not saying violence is absent everywhere else apart from the Middle East and I’m not saying that Islam is the only source of violence. Chicago is a pretty violent place, as are many places in California and most Democrat-run cities. Violence is also present in Leftist Europe (a lot due to Muslim terrorists, but obviously, not all of it is due to them).
What I am saying is that there will always be violence with regards to Islam because violence is ENGRAINED in Islam. Wives and children being hit by their husbands/fathers is fairly commonplace and disobedience to the paternal figure in the family is grounds for violence up to even death in some cases.
Far from the “religion of peace”, Islam is little more than a death cult. Yes, there are moderates in it, as in any other religion, but most moderates tend to not entirely grasp the concepts and doctrines of Islam. Similar to how moderate “Christians” might defend gay marriage or even come out as gay themselves, they do not fully understand the teachings of Christ and merely interpret them to how they wish it would be. They use eisegesis, meaning putting into the Word of God what is not there, rather than exegesis, meaning taking what is in the Word of God out for learning and teaching. They put into the Word of God the words of Man, which utterly distorts the teaching of the Bible.
And while one might wish to defend Islam to some extent and point out that we call these radical Islamic terrorists “radical”, we do have to remember that the founder of Islam, the “prophet” Muhammad, would raid, capture and kill people with his armies of followers, ordering the murder of dissenters and criticizers of Islam (kind of like how it is now) and telling his soldiers that it was okay to rape the women that they captured, even if they were married, to be sold or traded, or even were prepubescent.
The Quran stands in stark contrast to the Jewish Scriptures and the Bible’s New Testament books. Muhammad taught that it was okay to use violence against dissenters and that his mission was to drive out from the Arabian Peninsula all Jews and Christians.
Violence from ISIS sympathizers and fighters will continue, not because they will grow in strength and numbers (at least, they won’t under Trump), but because that’s simply the nature of the ideology they espouse. They believe they are destined to set up a global caliphate and that violence and aggression will be the best course of action for accomplishing that.
It doesn’t matter if we treat Baghdadi’s body with respect like we did bin Laden or if we put his remains into a cannon and launch it into what remains of ISIS territory – these people will always hate us and wish to cause us harm.
But returning to the overall story of Trump’s accomplishment over Baghdadi and ISIS, I love the fact that these fools would go to such lengths to either try and downplay the significance of this or would outright defend Baghdadi and give him any sort of reverence like the Washington Post did. It goes to show just whose side these people are on and is a great campaign topic for Donald Trump. Of course, there are a lot more examples than the ones I shared with you, but I think you get the idea about who these people are and with whom they choose to side.
“He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury.”
Late at night on the first day of October, 2017, a gunman opened fire from the Madalay Bay hotel in Las Vegas unto concert goers across the street. This evil act is by far the deadliest shooting in U.S. history. And the Left is salivating over the opportunity to attack the 2nd amendment.
But doing so makes absolutely no sense. Granted, that won’t stop the Left from attacking gun rights, but there’s a reason I say it makes no sense.
You see, according to reports, “Video of the attack showed panicked crowds fleeing as sustained rapid gunfire ripped through the area.” Did you catch the important part? Sustained RAPID gunfire. There are people that can shoot very fast, but they are typically very skilled and experienced with weapons to do that. According to the UK Sun, the gunman, Stephen Paddock, “was a retired accountant who flew small planes and had no criminal record, authorities said.”
So a retired accountant who flew small planes seemingly as a hobby couldn’t possibly be skilled enough to fire a semi-automatic weapon so fast that it seems automatic. Paddock very clearly had an automatic weapon at his disposal.
“Over a period of more than a minute at least four separate periods of sustained gunfire, believed to be from a high-powered assault rifle, were heard as hundreds of deadly rounds unleashed into the crowd, which included children.”
So this is very obviously, and according to the UK Sun, a high-powered assault rifle. Assault rifles tend to be fully automatic… oh, and ILLEGAL in the States.
But of course, that fact doesn’t matter to the Left. Hillary Clinton tweeted out: “Our grief isn’t enough. We can and must put politics aside, stand up to the NRA, and work together to try and stop this from happening again.” And: “The crowd fled at the sound of gunshots. Imagine the deaths if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get.”
Oh, how I wish the Left would go after ISIS the same way they go after the NRA. The Left will never accept that radical Islamic terrorists do anything, but if there’s any sort of shooting, it’s automatically the NRA’s fault.
But here’s why attacking the 2nd amendment doesn’t make sense: YOU AREN’T ALLOWED TO OWN AN AUTOMATIC WEAPON IN THIS COUNTRY!
You can own a rifle, provided that it’s semi-automatic and that the magazine doesn’t have too many rounds in it at any one time (dumb as I may believe it to be, but that's the law as it is currently written). And since you can’t legally own an automatic weapon, why attack the 2nd amendment here? The shooter got his hands on an automatic weapon somehow and obviously outside the means of the law. Clearly, nothing stopped him from breaking that particular law. Why would more laws preventing good guys from owning guns be in any way able to stop bad guys with guns?
If someone wants to hurt you, they will. Murder is illegal, and bad people still do it. This guy had no legal means of acquiring his weapon. Not to mention that he had in his possession 30 OTHER WEAPONS TOO!
According to Clark County Sheriff Joseph Lombardo, there were more than 10 rifles in the room where Paddock killed himself. Now, I don’t know what kind of rifles all of them were. But I’m certain that if he could get his hands on ONE automatic assault rifle, it’s entirely possible that he could’ve gotten more as well.
This guy was out on a mission to do some serious damage. I don’t know why he had so many rifles with him, but he clearly intended to destroy lives on that day.
Now, ISIS has claimed responsibility for the attack and the FBI has said that there’s no evidence to suggest that Paddock had any sort of relation with any terrorist organization. The FBI, being the FBI, is not exactly trustworthy to me at this point, if the last 9 months have been anything to go by.
But I do want to see evidence of his relationship with ISIS if there is any. That’s why, at this point in time, I want to call this a “shooting” as opposed to a “terror attack”. He could’ve been a new member of ISIS, and a recent convert, as ISIS claims. Or, he could’ve been a lone wolf with a heart full of evil and hatred. He also could’ve been a socialist nut looking to kill some Republicans at a country music concert.
But, as of yet, we don’t have a motive and I won’t assume anything.
But there is something that irks me about the situation. Like it has been mentioned, Paddock was a retired accountant who flew small planes, seemingly as a hobby. And yet, he was able to kill 58 people, and wound over 500 others. He was able to do that using a fully automatic assault rifle from the 32nd floor of a hotel.
Now, this being a concert, people tend to group together. But the fact that Paddock doesn’t seem to have an awful lot of experience with weapons (he might’ve, but maybe not with automatic weapons) and that he was quite far away from the concert, at least in terms of height, doesn’t quite add up.
There are people that question whether Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK because he wasn’t too skilled with a sniper, but he at least had training with it! No doubt Paddock trained for this attack, but Oswald had VERY professional help to teach him as a member of the U.S. military, and still, people ponder over whether he had the necessary skill to effectively kill JFK.
This guy, however, doesn’t look as though he would have enough experience to do as much damage as he did. Granted, people were grouped up in the concert, he had the necessary view and panic and chaos would lead people to not know what’s going on and where the shots are coming from. But Paddock managed to kill and wound FAR many more people than you’d expect from a former accountant.
Whether he simply got lucky or he had the necessary experience, I don’t know. But it is indicative of someone who may have ties with some sort of militant group. Now, I said I wouldn’t assume he is tied to ISIS, but this isn’t merely an assumption. From what we know and what we can see, it doesn’t look as though Paddock had the right training or experience necessary to pull this off as effectively as he did.
Someone working for ISIS or a militant group, however, is entirely different. They train and they train a lot with any kind of weapon at any range. I wouldn’t be surprised if the FBI is wrong (or simply lying to us) about his ties to ISIS.
The other thing that irks me about it is the fact that the FBI said there’s no evidence of ISIS ties merely 12 hours after the attack. They’ve been investigating Trump for over 9 months, but they still think he colluded with Russia despite the lack of evidence. And now evidence is very important?
ISIS claims responsibility for the attack, but the FBI decides there’s not enough evidence for it, so they dismiss their claim. Could you imagine if O.J. Simpson claimed to killing Nicole Brown, and the judge dismissed it because there’s not enough evidence of it?
Or if Russia admitted to colluding with Trump in the election? I imagine the FBI would immediately go with their claim, even if there was no evidence for it. As I imagine a judge would take OJ’s confession over lacking evidence.
But returning to the main topic, it makes absolutely no sense to attack gun rights. Paddock used an illegal weapon to do what he did. It makes no sense to push for good people to not be able to use weapons over this attack.
In fact, this is the perfect example as to why gun control DOESN’T work. The legality of Paddock’s weapon didn’t matter. He still managed to acquire it somehow. A bad guy wanted a gun, and a bad guy got a gun. If a good guy wanted the same kind of gun, he would be told no by gun stores and would simply purchase a different gun or not get one at all.
Paddock shouldn’t have been able to have that gun, but he still did. Others can’t get a similar weapon, so why punish THEM when no law will ever be able to stop a bad guy from hurting someone?
And don’t tell me “well, we have to try”. No we don’t. Gun control only puts good people in danger. It doesn’t help anyone. It never works. Like socialism, it’s never worked, doesn’t work and never will work. Because bad guys will always manage to get a weapon and do damage to people, no matter what law is passed. And if good people can’t get guns, only bad people and politicians will have guns. And that’s not a world I wanna live in.
“He said to them, ‘But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.’”
On Thursday, MSNBC Host Nicole Wallace defended Antifa for their actions in Charlottesville and referred to them as “good people” who are on “the side of angels”
Now THAT is a whole lot of b.s. right there. You mean to tell me the people who have incited violence in Charlottesville, Boston, Portland and a lot of other cities in the country are “the good guys”? Give me a break. Since when do the good guys attack police? Since when do they attack free speech? Since when do they assault people that have a different view from them?
I don’t remember Superman attacking police in Metropolis just because The Daily Planet said that cops are racist. I don’t remember Batman attacking Police Commissioner Jim Gordon because Batman thinks he’s the leader of the racist cops in Gotham City.
Antifa is the modern-day incarnation of the KKK! They are racist when they claim to be against racism. They are fascists when they claim to be anti-fascists. They are HATEFUL when they claim to be against hate.
I’ve already written another article on Antifa: “Is Antifa Evil Or Just Ignorant?” Notice how neither of the options is “are they the good guys?” OF COURSE THEY’RE NOT THE GOOD GUYS! They attack ANYONE who has a different opinion from them.
Ben Shapiro recently gave a speech at U.C. Berkeley. Knowing Antifa would want to shut down his speech, the college spent $600,000 to hire law enforcement to protect Shapiro and those attending the event. Thankfully, with police allowed to do their job, Antifa was unable to do anything there and the speech went on smoothly. Yes, there were protesters there, but they didn’t get violent. They may have been against Shapiro and what he was saying, but they are ALLOWED to do that. THAT is the free speech that is allowed and welcomed in the country. SHAPIRO’S right to freely speak his mind is the kind Antifa (and the whole Left) doesn’t want.
According to a Daily Wire article written by Ben Shapiro himself: “The students were engaged; the police were finally allowed to do their jobs. Antifa stayed away…” Do you see what happens when police are allowed to do their job to PROTECT FREE SPEECH?! Free speech is allowed and encouraged. What happens when police are not allowed to do their job is what happened in Charlottesville. That one woman didn’t need to die. But police were ordered to stand down and chaos ensued.
Chaos initiated by Antifa. That’s all they are: chaotic, liberal, rage-induced monkeys. For anyone to believe they are any different to the KKK or are on the “side of angels” is horrendously erroneous/ignorant.
Antifa are not the good guys. Not even close. Like I said in the previous article talking about Antifa, “They deceive people into believing evil is good and good is evil.” In that article, “They” were George Soros, Barack Obama and the Democrats of the world. And this certainly includes people on the MSM. By saying that Antifa are good people after seeing all the horrible things they have done is almost the equivalent to saying ISIS are good and just want the world to be a better place.
Ah, but what am I saying? Look who I’m talking about! The MSM DEFEND Muslims every time a terrorist attack happens, separating them from ISIS, when in reality, they simply are ones to not have done anything YET or simply misunderstand what Islam is about.
Reminder: Islam is about IMPOSING SHARIA LAW ON THE WHOLE WORLD BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.
Likewise, to Antifa, it’s about imposing their leftist views on the whole world BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. If they have to punch you in the face, they will. If they have to break your legs, they will. If they have to KILL you, they will.
Antifa is almost as bad as ISIS. The only reason they aren’t JUST as bad is because they don’t go around the world setting up bombs and killing people at random. But don’t misunderstand, Antifa isn’t much better. They want to take away conservatives’ freedom of speech just because they don’t agree with us. They are more than willing to harm us while hiding themselves behind masks (not unlike the KKK and ISIS).
To respond to the insanely misinformed and wrong MSNBC host: no, Antifa are not the “good guys” who are on the “side of angels”. They are the bad guys (just as bad as the KKK) who are on the side of the Left and the Devil. They want chaos and disorder. They want rights to exist only for themselves and everyone else can screw off. They want to be in power and in charge of people. In charge of what people can say and do.
I asked whether Antifa is evil or just ignorant. And I answered that the protesters are simply ignorant while those at the top are the evil ones. Well, maybe not quite. While the ones at the top are, indeed, evil, I fully believe that the protesters themselves are evil too. And I fully believe that they truly think WE are the evil ones. And I fully believe that the protesters are more than capable of evil. It’s a fact, actually. Everything we’ve seen them do is evil!
But what I’m trying to say is that, while there’s clear ignorance coming from those protesters, I don’t believe for a second that any of them is “good”. And I fully believe that all of them are evil. Those who do the things they do to police and people who disagree with them can’t possibly be called “the good guys”. There isn’t a shred of goodness coming from them. Only hatred for everything that isn’t like them.
In essence, Antifa is not just the modern-day KKK, it’s fundamentally the modern-day Nazi Party. Hitler wanted to get rid of everything that wasn’t like “his perfect species” and those who would disagree with him. Antifa wants to get rid of everyone that doesn’t agree with them and isn’t like them.
And this person claims they are good? That’s sickening.
2 Corinthians 11:14
“And no wonder, for Satan himself disguises himself as an angel of light.”
The U.K. has had two terrorist attacks in the span of 2 weeks, and yet, the Left (at least in England) still believes it’s more important to attack Trump than fight terrorism. Donald Trump tweeted: “At least 7 dead and 48 wounded in terror attack and Mayor of London says there is ‘no reason to be alarmed!’” For this tweet, the president has been widely criticized, with British politicians suggesting Trump thought the Mayor was saying there's no reason to be alarmed because of the terror attack. Obviously, this suggestion makes no sense whatsoever, but that's the way these politicians have chosen to attack Trump - as in, Trump must be dumb.
I know I’m not the only one who is distrustful of what politicians in general, not to mention British ones, say, particularly when discussing the subject of terror attacks (and particularly when they’re leftists). The biggest reason (in this case, at least), is that London’s current mayor is MUSLIM TOO! And let’s not forget the fact that, back in 2016, he said that terror attacks are “part and parcel of living in a big city.” Terror attacks are to be expected on occasion in large cities such as New York, London and Paris, but we shouldn’t treat them like they’re no big deal!
And when they do happen, while offering prayers and condolences is important, it's also very important to do something to stop these attacks - and not 'expect' them, as the Muslim London Mayor suggests. With not one single leftist politician being outraged at ISIS for constantly destroying people’s lives, but rather be outraged at a sitting U.S. president.
Penny Mordaunt, a Conservative Party politician in Great Britain tweeted that she stood with the London Mayor for what he said, yet not one tweet denouncing the evil deeds of ISIS. Only campaign tweets and the mandatory “My heart goes out to the victims of...” tweet. Mordaunt is no Margaret Thatcher.
David Lammy, a Labour Party politician in the U.K. tweeted out 7 anti-Trump messages, and the previously stated mandatory tweet of condolence. This guy spent more time attacking Trump for a single tweet than ISIS for the MULTIPLE LIVES THEY HAVE ENDED IN THE NAME OF ALLAH!
And Wes Streeting, another Labour Party politician, sent out 1 tweet bashing Trump, no tweets bashing ISIS, and retweeted multiple tweets from other people ranging from J.K. Rowling to other politicians bashing Trump.
Their country was just attacked by savages within a larger terror group that follows the death cult that is Islam in the span of only two weeks, and yet, they are more worried about what a man over 3000 miles away says about their beloved mayor.
I went to London as a sophomore in high school and I absolutely loved it there. I even wanted to go back one day, but not anymore. I wouldn’t set foot in a land that thinks it’s more important to attack someone that wants to help them than to attack the people that have destroyed and ended the lives of many of their citizens.
Like I said in one of the articles covering the Manchester terror attack: ISIS is one of the Left’s most useful tools. So I shouldn’t be so surprised that leftists in Britain (even though one of them claims to be in the “Conservative” Party) are more concerned with bashing Trump than with attempting to defeat ISIS. Why would they, if ISIS is such a useful tool, as I said in the aforementioned article? I’m truly sorry for the people of England, not just London and Manchester.
Not only have they been attacked multiple times in 2 weeks and have lost many brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers, but they also have leaders that don’t see the threat that is at their doorstep. Actually, let me rephrase that. The threat that is INSIDE THEIR OWN HOME! After all, according to fullfact.org, there were an estimated 123,000 refugees in the U.K. in 2015. And the top 5 nationalities for U.K. asylum seekers were from Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh. 4 of these 5 countries are FROM THE MIDDLE EAST. With Bangladesh being in Asia, bordering India in the east. These people have invaded the U.K., but British politicians refuse to see it that way.
I pray that the people of England wake up to face reality. The reality that their own politicians couldn’t care less about the people’s safety and would rather spend the majority of their time bashing the leader of an entirely different country. I pray that the Lord will open their eyes to the truth, not just to the truth of who their leaders are, but also to the truth that the only being in existence that they can completely trust isn’t any human being, but rather the Lord Himself.
“Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
The Washington Post wrote a story recently on how ISIS might’ve been targeting women in the Manchester terror attack. Shashank Joshi, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute said: ”It’s very well known that misogyny is deeply rooted in the radical Islamist worldview.” Gee, you think? You gotta love the media sometimes when they publish stories such as these that make you go “Oh, really??”. It seems they’ve finally gotten the idea that ISIS just might hate women. And it took an act of terrorism that seemingly targeted girls to realize that.
Joshi continued: “If you go back to early Islamist documents, misogyny and cultural hostility have often been two sides of the same coin… There’s a connection between the targeting of a concert like this (female target audience) and the enslavement of young girls in northern Iraq.” Praise be to the Lord! They’ve finally come on to something here! ISIS hates women! WHO KNEW!? But seriously, folks, how did it take this long and an attack at a concert largely targeting a female audience to figure out ISIS hates women, particularly Western women?
We (conservatives) have been saying all along that ISIS (and Muslim extremists in general) hate everyone that isn’t like them. Had this been a Snoop Dogg or Lil’ Wayne concert, one that targets a black audience, maybe the story would’ve been ISIS is racist and hates black people.
The funny thing is: ISIS is everything the Left claims to hate. The Left claims to hate sexist misogynists, but ISIS is sexist and misogynistic. They own women as sex slaves! It’s not difficult to find stories of women who have escaped from the grasp of ISIS and told their stories of what happened while they were there. The Left claims to hate racism, yet a large majority of the Muslim world still allows slavery. Even though most Muslim countries have banned slavery, they don’t enforce those laws. People are still allowed to own other people. In fact, the Muslim world has a worse history of slavery than the U.S. could’ve ever had!
The largest amount of slaves there ever were in the U.S. at one time was 4.5 million in 1861, and the only reason it got that high was through reproduction, not through import. By contrast, 14 million black slaves were imported into the Middle East starting from the time of the Arab conquest in the 7th century. And slaves were treated far worse in the Middle East than they were here. The mortality rate was insanely high for slaves. According to the Encyclopedia on Islam, “Of the Saharan salt mines, it is said that no slave lived for more than five years.” Not only that, but male slaves were castrated to prevent slave reproduction en masse. And 95% of female slaves’ children were murdered.
Islam has a history full of hatred for women, for black people, for Jews and for Christians. In fact, the Crusades STARTED BECAUSE OF THEM AND THEIR HATRED! And the Washington Post is just now starting to connect some dots? Only now they realize that ISIS doesn’t like women? Why did it take mass murder in a concert targeting a female audience for them to start thinking about it? And perhaps my largest question. Why has the Left refused to seriously go after ISIS knowing that they represent what they believe Trump to be: racist and misogynistic?
I said in my previous article that the Left and ISIS have one common enemy: Christianity. Perhaps there, we’ll find the solution. Christianity offers freedom from oppression. With that, we know that whatever form of authority may be oppressing us, it is nothing in comparison to the Lord. The Left hates the fact that people are afraid of God and not of the government. The Left wishes for people to submit to them and to follow and believe everything they say, no questions asked. ISIS is the exact same way. They want people to be afraid of them and Allah, but most people aren’t.
Let’s be honest here: ISIS (along with the Muslim world) and the Left are on the same side. They may do things differently. They may be trying to accomplish different things, but they are invaluable allies to each other. Actually, let me correct myself. ISIS isn’t an ally of the Left, they are merely a tool. ISIS does what I believe in my heart the Left wants to do: eradicate Christians and Christianity in this world. Much like the KKK was a military arm of the Left in the late 19th century and early 20th century, ISIS is yet another military arm of the Left. The only difference is that the Left can’t directly control ISIS’s actions.
So maybe that’s why the Left has hesitated to strongly fight ISIS. Why would they willingly destroy such a useful tool to them? You see, now? This is one of the reasons I believe the Left to be evil. The Left, as well as ISIS, Al Qaeda, the U.S.S.R., and Nazi Germany are all rooted in evil. But I’ll say this once again, likely not for the final time: in the end, the devil loses. In the end, evil loses. In the end, evil won’t be victorious against the Lord.
“And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, into which the beast and the false prophet had already been thrown. There, they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.”
Earlier this week, there was a terrorist attack at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, England. The terror attack took the lives of 22 people (so far) and have injured 59 others. A day after the attack, ISIS claimed responsibility, saying that a “soldier of the caliphate”(Salman Abedi) placed explosive devices at a gathering of “crusaders”, aka Christians, at the Manchester Arena.
Now, I don’t know how many Christians actually are fans of Ariana Grande, considering her statements on how she feels about America and Americans (saying she hates them back in 2015), but the mere fact that ISIS wasn’t merely trying to kill anyone they could in the name of Allah tells you something. We already know that ISIS hates Christians as much as Hitler hated Jews. Actually, ISIS hates Jews too. It’s an odd choice to target a pop singer’s concert to kill Christians, but the terrorists are ok as long as they cause mass panic and terror. Hence why we call them terrorists.
Prime Minister Theresa May said of the attack that “We struggle to comprehend the warped and twisted mind that sees a room packed with young children not as a scene to cherish but as an opportunity for carnage.” Upon reading that statement, I immediately thought “The only way to not comprehend the ‘warped and twisted mind’ of these people is if you don’t understand one simple principle: Man is evil, and ISIS is a collection of evil people.”
ISIS is comprised of people who follow a religion that teaches its followers to lie to unbelievers and eventually either kill or force unbelievers to follow their religion. And thanks to Obama, they (ISIS) have grown in massive power in the Middle East and are a major threat to the world. Their aim is to submit the entire world to Islam. And they will achieve this goal in one of two ways: force every unbeliever into following this death cult of a religion, or kill everyone who doesn’t believe so that the only people left in the world are those who follow Islam to heart or are too afraid to leave it.
ISIS, like I said in the previous paragraph, are a threat to the whole world. That’s why I couldn’t understand why the Left didn’t want to fight them ardently. Now, I know that ISIS and the Left have a common enemy: Christians. ISIS hates America not because it’s powerful, but because it’s Christian. The Left hates America largely because of the same reason. We managed to get rid of the Left in the White House and a portion of the federal government in general (though, there are still establishment jerks that side with the Left in opposing Trump). Now it’s time that Trump makes good on one of his campaign promises: get rid of ISIS.
Trump voters voted for him for a variety of reasons. Be it because of the wall, or growing jobs, or what have you. But I’m rather certain that the ultimate annihilation of ISIS was a big factor in ensuring Trump would win the election. We all know the threat ISIS poses. Even the Left does, only they want to use it for their own agenda, letting these barbarians do whatever they want. But we sane people want ISIS to be eliminated forever, and we voted for a man who would make sure they were. He just needs to actually do it.
We already have done a number on ISIS from day 1. And we have dropped the Mother of all Bombs on them. But that won’t be nearly enough to ensure their ultimate destruction. These beasts continue to carry out successful acts of terrorism in multiple countries. From our own to Germany, England, France and others. The Left did nothing to try to actually stop or destroy them, but now, the Left is not in power. Now, ISIS faces potential backlash. I don’t know if Trump will order another, bigger strike on ISIS soon, but I know that this country no longer has a president that will simply let go of this. Gone are the days that ISIS is free to do as they please. It’s time to hunt these animals before they kill any more innocent people.
It’s clear that with Trump winning the election, God decided that ISIS’s time on this earth would be cut short. Thank God Almighty that he placed Trump in the White House.
“Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is the purpose of the Lord that will stand.”
On April 13th, 2017, the U.S. military dropped the largest non-nuclear bomb on an ISIS tunnel. The bomb, a GBU-43B weighs 21000 pounds, and by comparison, each of the 59 Tomahawk missiles we dropped in Syria weighed 1000 pounds.
But focusing on the Massive Ordinance Air Blast, or “Mother Of All Bombs”, as is aptly named, was dropped on an ISIS tunnel after a Green Beret was killed in Afghanistan while fighting ISIS.
But what does this mean, particularly for the future of this war? What this means is that the U.S. no longer has a soft president that will allow ISIS to do whatever they want. Perhaps President Trump was trying to send a message to ISIS: Continue messing with the U.S. and we’ll literally drop the biggest bombs on your behind.
After the strike on Syria, people on both sides of the aisle were outraged at Trump’s actions. But now that he’s striking ISIS, I can’t imagine I’ll see any supposed Trump supporter complaining. Particularly since this is one of his campaign promises, to “blow the s—t out of them.”
Of course, there, he was talking about blowing up oil fields controlled by ISIS. But the principle still remains. We are blowing them up just as Trump said he would. And this is just the beginning, and it’s one MASSIVE beginning.
I don’t know Trump’s full plans to deal with ISIS, but clearly dropping the literal largest non-nuclear bombs on their heads is part of that plan. And I like the plan so far. We wouldn’t have gotten that with Obama. We DIDN’T get that with Obama. The bomb had first been tested in 2003. Meaning we’ve had it for well over a DECADE and we hadn’t used it against either Al Qaeda or ISIS. No doubt it’s expensive, but it’s very useful for both destroying ISIS and sending a powerful message.
With Obama, all we got were excuses and lies. Lies such as the one President Obama told on December 6th, 2016. When talking about his ‘accomplishments’ over his 8 years as president, “…We’ve eliminated Syria’s declared chemical weapons program.” He lied to the world that Syria didn’t have chemical weapons. He had access to this “Mother Of All Bombs” and refused to use it.
But this president is far different. This president is actually willing to fight ISIS and punish Syria for the atrocities it committed on its citizens, atrocities that Assad claims didn’t even happen. Much in the same way Muslims claim the Holocaust didn’t happen.
This president isn’t afraid to go up against another nation, or even another super power, in order to do what’s right. That’s not to say that he’s pushing to start World War III. He’ll do what he can to avoid doing that, but he’s not just going to let countries like Syria do that to their own citizens without due punishment. And he’s certainly not going to let ISIS continue on their path of destruction and world domination.
I’ve said in a previous article that ISIS is facing certain doom with this president. And Trump has made sure to let them know that he’s not going to relent against them. This first massive strike against them is just the beginning of the end for ISIS.
It was all a matter of time until Trump attacked ISIS, and it was only a matter of time until God decided enough was enough coming from ISIS. I’ve said this multiple times, and I’ll say it once more here because it’s still applicable: God didn’t want Hillary in the White House just so we could continue seeing the exact same things we were seeing with Obama for another 4 to 8 years. He chose Trump so that Israel no longer was alone in the world and that ISIS would be utterly eliminated. This strike is not just coming from the White House, it’s coming from Heaven. God’s hand had something to do in the elections, partly for this very reason.
So we must be grateful to God that He placed someone who will actually fight evil in this world and not be a part of it.
He has set America on the course of strength once again.
“…but those who hope in the Lord will renew their strength. They will soar on wings like eagles; they will run and not grow weary, they will walk and not be faint.”
The pope said in a speech last Friday that there is no Islamic terror but ‘the ecological crisis is real’. He started out by indicating ‘No people is criminal or drug-trafficking or violent’, in absolute contradiction with Scriptures. Leftist religions teach that people are fundamentally good, but the Bible says we’re fallen men and women and it all started with the fall of Adam. We’re all born sinners. The word of Francis is in direct conflict with the Word of God.
Who would you rather believe?
The pope also indicated that ‘the poor and the poorer peoples are accused of violence yet, without equal opportunities, the different forms of aggression and conflict will find a fertile terrain for growth and will eventually explode.’, which is also in direct conflict with Scriptures. Jesus teaches us to be compassionate and avoid sin. It’s not POVERTY that makes people violent – it’s the LACK OF KNOWLEDGE OF GOD. When you don’t have the Holy Spirit in you, violence is an option. Look at the U.C. Berkeley riots. Look at Planned Parenthood's massacre of the unborn – these are all acts of EVIL.
Murderers are not murders because they kill – they KILL BECAUSE they’re MURDERERS.
Thieves are not thieves because they steal – they STEAL BECAUSE they’re THIEVES.
Much like dark is the absence of light, evil is the absence of GOD in your life.
With Pope Francis’ views on the ‘ecological crisis’ he’s also DENYING GOD.
You see, when you believe in Jesus Christ like I do, you don’t worry too much about ‘ecological crises’. We, true Christians, know that GOD IS IN CONTROL. Nothing is a surprise to Him – not even Islamic terrorism.
If the Pope was really a Christian, he’d know that God's created this universe – Genesis 1:1 reads: ‘In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth’. Everyone who believes in God accepts the Bible as the TRUTH. If the Pope was really a Christian, he would teach you that, since God has created this world, God also controls everything that happens and if He wanted to blow it up tomorrow, He would because He is SOVEREIGN.
But the Bible doesn’t say anywhere that God will blow it up tomorrow. It does describe, in the Book of Revelation, the end of this world – not before He pulls all who believe in Him out of this world up to join Him in heaven. This world will end and Jesus will come back. Before He does, people like this Pope – unbelievers – will go through the period of tribulation and suffer all sorts of atrocities, caused by their unbelieving friends. It’s going to be total chaos. We, Christians, will be SAFE with Jesus Christ. Unbelievers will go through hell…and there won’t be any Christians to help out…
This Pope isn’t in the business of teaching Scriptures. How many times does he mention Jesus in his speeches? How many times has he taught ANY book of the Bible at all? Does he talk about Esther? Does he teach about John? Have you heard him say anything about Daniel? Or Samuel? Or David? Or Matthew? Or the Book of Romans or Revelation?
Of course not.
The pope is in business alright – in the business of expanding socialism….
The Roman Catholic view of the ‘infallibility of the Pope’, developed by corrupt popes in response to Martin Luther’s Reformation movement, was formally adopted in the First Vatican Council of 1869-1870, and it’s the doctrine this Pope is USING to pass his own erroneous views as TRUTH.
Friend, not only does Islamic terrorism exist, but the ‘ecological crisis’ is a fallacy too. This pope is LYING because he has an agenda – a personal, communist, and globalist agenda. This pope is a FALSE PROPHET.
But ALWAYS remember this:
GOD IS IN CONTROL
Whether you believe in God or not is really irrelevant, because God is in control regardless. He knows your thoughts, He knows your desires, He knows we’re sinners – but He is a MERCIFUL God. Without His Grace, there is no way that I would be saved – I’m SO GRATEFUL to Jesus for saving me.
The pope is just another human being – not the ‘holy father’ as he calls himself. He’s not your father – if anything, he’s your brother. We must love him anyway simply because God has created him too. But he’s not infallible. The WORD OF GOD is infallible.
1 Thessalonians 2:13
And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.
Coalition Forces attacked ISIS 31 times on Saturday, January 21st, 2017. Note the date, since that was the Secretary of Defense’s, Gen. James Mattis, first day in office. The attacks were on ISIS tactical units, headquarters, tunnels, fighting positions, vehicles, and oil well heads, according to freebeacon.com. And that attack was just Syria. We also attacked ISIS in Iraq, targeting tactical units, vehicles, weapons, a building and other weapons related objects.
This attack is significant. It’s not the plain fact that we attacked ISIS in a rather large strike in one day. It’s the fact that we did that the day after Trump was inaugurated as President of the United States. That was his and the Secretary of Defense’s first day in office. They clearly mean to show that they mean to get things done from day 1, and that, they did. The larger war on Terror will continue. But ISIS no longer has a friend that plays the professional wrestling-style opposition in the White House. Now, they have people that are majorly pissed off at them and intend to eliminate them from the face of the Earth. The President’s words, not mine.
Not to mention that Trump is looking to enact a temporary ban on people entering the U.S. from terrorist-related nations such as just about any country in the Middle East. Which means that this invasion is set to be stopped, at least in ISIS’s second biggest target.
Trump is serious about fulfilling his campaign promises. He wants to make America safe again and will stop at nothing to get that done. We could be looking at, and likely are looking at, THE ASSURED END OF ISIS. They now find a serious threat in control of the most powerful nation on Earth. Trump had ordered the Pentagon to come up with a strategy to defeat ISIS within 30 of his inauguration via an executive order. And whatever strategy the Pentagon will come up with, Trump will choose the most effective and likely fastest way to eliminate them. He’s not joking about this. Like he isn’t joking about the wall. The Left has been doubtful about Trump accomplishing anything since he first announced his candidacy for president.
The Left thought he was a joke back then. Don’t get me wrong, they still think he’s a joke. But now, he has the power to actually get things done, and that thought terrifies the Left. As it should ISIS.
One time when looking through Facebook a year or so ago, I saw a funny post. It was a picture of Ronald Reagan and the caption read: ‘If I was president, ISIS would be WASWAS.’ As if to say that ISIS would no longer be around if Reagan were still president. And I both laughed and agreed with the post. But that post can now become a fairly accurate reality. It won’t be Reagan that makes ISIS into WASWAS. It will be Trump that does that. I laughed at the post because it highlighted Obama’s incompetence (or unwillingness) in fighting ISIS and his allowing ISIS to grow as much as it has. I agree with the post when it says that Reagan would’ve eliminated ISIS already. But now, we have a president much like Reagan. We have a president that will make absolutely sure that ISIS WILL BE WASWAS in due time.
He’s even fighting the lower judges on this issue. You see, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Court is trying to fight back against the aforementioned executive order to temporarily ban people entering the U.S. from 7 terror-related countries by saying that ‘it’s a ban on Muslims’ or a ‘ban on religious freedom’. Neither of which is true. Yes, this ban affects Muslims coming into the country from those nations, but if it were a ban on Muslims, then ALL Muslim nations, not just Syria, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, and Sudan would be a part of the proposed ban.
But the Left wants to make this about race. Trump’s racist because he wants to keep refugees out. He wants to doom these people because they’re Muslim. Yadda yadda yadda. In reality, as we all know, Trump is trying to keep ISIS from easily entering the U.S. He doesn’t know who or how many of these refugees are members of ISIS, but he’s not gonna wait for an attack to occur, one that will lead to potential massive casualties, to say ‘Oh, that one. That one was in ISIS. Dang, oh well.’ No, he will make sure to make it as impossible as can be for ISIS to effectively carry out attacks on American people.
But in the end, we all know it will go through because the Left doesn’t have the power to stop such an executive order. They can only delay it. Which will lead to them potentially losing more seats (if that’s even possible) in Congress come 2018.
The American people have spoken. They want ISIS gone. They want Muslims extremely vetted. They want immigrants to come in legally and assimilate to the American lifestyle. And they are sick and tired of the Left keeping Washington from actually working, because for the first time in God knows how long, Washington can actually get to work to benefit the American people and not just the elite class. And eradicating ISIS and vetting Muslims coming in from terror-related nations is one of the crucial steps to doing that.
‘No weapon formed against you shall prosper, and every tongue which rises against you in judgment you shall condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, and their righteousness is from me.’
I was at the office last week when out of nowhere one of my colleagues asks me ‘what do you think about what Trump is doing?’ I was really busy, so I didn’t want to go into too much detail but I said I was loving what Trump is doing – from Obamacare to the travel ban. After I told her, since I was so busy, something on the inside was screaming ‘stop right there and don’t say another word ’, I ignored that little voice and I asked her, out of politeness, ‘how about you?’
She goes ‘I don’t know. I don’t like the travel ban. I FEEL like he’s just the president of a portion of the population, but not all of us. I FEEL like he’s running the government only for you’.
I said ‘well, the travel ban is meant to protect YOU from being beheaded while having dinner with your family at your favorite restaurant. So he’s running the government for you too’.
She goes ‘Yeah, well. I don’t know. I FEEL like he made the move too fast. I FEEL like he didn’t give the immigration authorities enough time to prepare’
To which I said ‘you do realize you have to move fast with these things, right? After all, if you tell the world you’ll impose a travel ban on these specific countries in, say, 30 days, chances are we’d be flooded by jihadists within a week’
She goes ‘yeah, well. I know, but I FEEL..'
At that point I was the one who was having lots of unspeakable feelings – particularly I was feeling like smacking her…you know how sometimes these people get on your nerves. But I refrained myself and decided to go the civil route so I interrupted her to say ‘look, if you feel you don’t like what Trump did with this Travel ban, just move’ and went back to running my business…
But here we have, a middle aged ‘snowflake’ (I forgot they existed!), with no real substance to back up why she doesn’t like the travel ban, who decided she doesn’t like it based on how she ‘feels’ and without any observable knowledge of national security or strategy she opens up her mouth to spit out nonsense like that, contributing ZERO to the discussion…while wasting my time, I must add.
Aside from the fact that, later, I felt really bad for almost wanting to smack her, the truth is these people have no education and no inclination to learn to at least not sound like 10 year-olds when discussing big issues like National Security.
What do you do about middle-aged snowflakes? Are they even thoughtful people?
No, they’re not. They’re SLAVES to their own insecurities
There is no way that this woman doesn’t know she sounded naive and ignorant. The fact that she repeated the phrase ‘I don’t know’ multiple times tells me she doesn’t know and she knows she doesn’t know and, worst of all, she’s perfectly OK with her ignorance. She is, in fact, a willing ignorant.
Since they’re aware they’re ignorant, and unwilling to use their brains to learn, they inexorably end up feeling inadequate and, consequently, insecure.
Building people up is the job of all Christians. But you can’t build them up on the basis of ignorance. They have to learn first.
In case a snowflake, middle-aged or otherwise, is reading this, let’s clarify that the travel ban is meant to prevent Jihadists from entering the US. It’s limited to 7 countries because legally that’s as far as Trump can go, assuming the legal dispute currently taking place gets resolved.
Refugees, by definition, are people running for their lives. Christians, Jews, gays are all at risk of getting killed in the Middle East. But, my dear friend…
MUSLIMS ARE NOT REFUGEES
By definition, Muslims are not refugees. Islam rules the Middle East and Muslims’ lives are NOT in danger in that part of the world.
Now, this is important to teach over and over again, because as we know, snowflakes ‘feel’ like there is something wrong with Trump’s executive order. They ‘feel’ like if we let these Muslims in, soon enough, with love and patience and a minimum wage job, they’ll turn into civil people. Which takes me to the next point…
All Muslims want a GLOBAL CALIPHATE where Sharia Law rules
All of them. They’re not civil. They’re BARBARIANS. The Quran teaches them that at one point their Mahdi will come and impose Sharia on the entire world population in what they call a Global Caliphate, where the Mahdi will rule. All Muslims, jihadists or moderate, believe this will happen and WORK TOWARDS the establishment of this Global Caliphate TO OPPRESS US. ALL-OF-THEM ARE WORKING TOWARDS MAKING THIS EVIL DREAM HAPPEN.
In other words, they want to convert you to Islam or kill you if you refuse. Why on earth these snowflakes refuse to use their God-given head to understand this basic self-preservation principle is beyond me.
But you and I are here to help them out. We must preach. We must teach. It’s like with Christianity – some people will get it, and will be saved, and some won’t. With liberals it’s the same – some will understand what’s best for them and come over to our side and some will not. We should be at peace with that as long as we’re doing our best to teach them.
And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."
We bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...