This Is Me--2019 A to Z Theme

My A to Z Theme for 2022 was My Vinyl Record Collection. For the 2023 Challenge I'll be doing something similar with my home book collection. Lots of book stuff from A to Z

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Does Trump's Muslim Ban Make Sense?

Please vote on my current Battle of the Bands if you have not yet done so.  Then continue with today's post if you dare...

Wailing Wall, Jerusalem, by Gustav Bauernfeind...
Wailing Wall, Jerusalem, by Gustav Bauernfeind (19th century). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Warning:  This Post Gets Extreme!

       The post that follows is a continuation of Is Donald Trump Islamophobic?--visit that post for the full set-up for my current post.  However to briefly summarize, I would maintain that nothing that Donald Trump said during his campaign would deem him to be Islamophobic in any way and that furthermore the term "Islamophobia" is an absurd derogatory label that the left and others assign to those who disagree with Islam.

        Also I would like to emphatically state that in no way do I condone any mistreatment of Muslims or their property for what they believe.  They are free to believe as they wish.  By the same token, I and others are free to have and state our opinions about Islam.

        As promised in my previous post of my President Trump Acclimation Series I am going to explain why I believe that one of the most brilliant things that I think Donald Trump said during his campaign for president was “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on,” 

Why Brilliant?

        Most Americans know little to nothing about Islam.  In fact it seems apparent that most of the non-Islam world knows much about this religion and they seem more than willing to accept great numbers of Muslim "refugees" into their countries with the expectation that they will all assimilate just fine into their cultures.  Many in fact do and tend to live side by side without too many problems--on the surface of things that is.

         Most Muslims living in the United States present little threat, but they are also very much a minority.  In areas where their numbers are higher the problems sometimes become greater.   The Council on Arab-Islamic Relations has become a somewhat radicalized advocate for Muslims making demands on communities, employers, schools, and other places to provide more accommodations for them rather than assimilating.  Okay, I can understand this to some extent, but that is a beginning of something that could have more ominous future repercussions.  

         Much on this is well documented and can be found quickly through internet searches. Since I want to keep this post as short as I can I won't offer specific examples here, but perhaps in some future posts I can delve more deeply into the issues.  However I will make reference to the numerous problems that have arisen in Europe with the rising numbers of Muslim immigrants.   You've undoubtedly heard accounts in France, Germany, Belgium, Sweden, and many other countries.  The clash of cultures has become an issue of great concern throughout the world.  Why?

There is a History

         The root of the problem is within the belief system.   After the appearance of the Muhammadan belief in the seventh century, the movement spread quickly and often by violent conquest and forced conversions.  A stated objective of the followers of Islam early on included a conquest and conversion of Europe.  Through the Moorish invasion they were successful to some extent until Europeans regained control.  The Crusades were a campaign to wrest control of the Holy Lands from the Islamic conquerors.   There has been an ugly history between Christian and Muslim nations for centuries.

        Many Americans are not aware that the first international conflict that confronted the newly founded United States was with Islamic terrorists in the Barbary Wars from 1801 to 1815.   You may know this not as a war, but as attacks by the Barbary pirates.   These were not pirates like we typically think of, but they were Islamist aggressors who attacked our merchant vessels, enslaving sailors, forcing them into conversion to Islam, or killing them.  The line in the "Marine Hymn" that references "to the shores of Tripoli" is in regard to that particular conflict.

         Our country has had various confrontations with Islamic aggressors over the the centuries, but it has reached the most serious proportions in recent decades.  The United States has spent trillions of dollars fighting in Islamic countries and I think the issue that Donald Trump's question raises is why are we doing this?   Oil?  Our national security?  Building democracies?   What the hell is going on and why do we insist on interfering?

          Islamic extremists have become a threat to the United States and other countries, but haven't we brought a lot of this on ourselves by our interventions?   The biggest threat from Islamic terrorist groups is probably to Muslims.   There is so much disagreement and infighting among them that it's probably very unwise to get involved.   Perhaps they need to sort this out among themselves and then the rest of the world needs to decide where things go after that. 

          Even certain reformers within Islam such as Egypt's President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi have said that Islam has an internal problem.    The United States nor any other non-Muslim country has little business in deciding the affairs of the Islamic nations unless those nations are a direct threat to us.  Right now with Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and so many other hotbeds of contention we see Sunnis and Shiites fighting for control.  We shouldn't be arming any of them or taking sides if we are not Muslim.   Syria's Assad is an Alawite whose government has protected Christians and yet our government wants to oust him from the presidency even though there had been a relatively stable government there for years.

         Let's face it, the Middle East is a mess and much of the world where Islam is in control is of a questionable nature in context with the rest of the world.   With all of the Muslim nations that are available, why should Muslim refugees want to go to the non-Muslim nations?  Once again this becomes part of the "what the hell is going on" question.

        When you get down to the heart of it all, Islam and Christianity and probably any other belief system are incompatible.   Islam and Christianity are in direct opposition to each other when you delve into the beliefs of the two.  To a Muslim, any one who isn't a believer of Islam is an infidel, lesser than they and deserving of death if they will not convert or subject to special taxes or other punitive measures.  This may not be something that is necessarily made much of when they are in the minority, but nevertheless it is at the very core of the belief.

          If one is a follower of Jesus Christ and adheres to the words that Jesus spoke then there is, in the end, no tolerance for Islam since Jesus is the only way to the Father.  The Christian should love the Muslim with hopes to reach them with the truth of the Gospel, but can a true Christian accept the Koran and its teaching?  

           The common solution is to live and let live.  Don't talk about it or if we do talk about it then accept each other's beliefs in some way--whichever way works.   But in reality, if one is a true believer, does any way but One Way work?   That is a problem that cultures living together must confront and ultimately can they?

           If a Holy War such as what the groups like ISIS are striving to achieve actually came to pass, then would it be wise to have large numbers of non-western-conformed Muslims among us?   Even Muslims who have been raised in our country: What happens when they become radicalized?   Islam is planting a seed that can sprout with a vengeance when nurtured with extremist teaching.  We've seen it happen.

A Call to Figure It All Out

          Hatred is not a good solution.  But realistic thinking has to come into play.  We must become better informed and discuss these issues among those with whom we agree as well as those on the other side.  The governments of Muslim nations need to understand what divides them and what unites them as well as what divides and unites all of us.   One world government and one world religion is an ominous solution that might be proposed by some and we must beware.  This will likely be coming soon and what do you think that would entail?

          Donald Trump's simplistic call to figure out "what the hell is going on" is in reality very complex when taken in view of the world and all of its systems of beliefs.  Of course we may be seeing that "Holy War" coming sooner than many of us have hoped for if Trump's plan to move the United States embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.   From a historical perspective I agree with this move. Bibically speaking I think it's an outstanding move since I am 100% pro-Israel.  And right there I'm in dire opposition with many Muslims.   If we do have a Holy War then we should not be harboring great numbers of Muslim refugees in the United States, Canada, Europe, Russia, or any other non-Muslim country.

          Perhaps my thinking is going to an apocalyptic extreme, but as a Christian I believe what I believe.  It's there in the Bible (and not in the Koran or to my knowledge any other Islamic text).  You can read it for yourself.  Or you can dispute it as nonsense, fantasy, myth, or whatever.   However I will leave you with this to think about:   The situation with Israel and Jerusalem was foretold three thousand years ago.  A prophecy that old should hold some credence even for those who don't believe it.   I guess we'll see and the way things are shaping up we may be seeing soon.

          Do you think the prophecies about the Jews, Israel, and Jerusalem are more than coincidence?   Why do you think Muhammad based his belief system on the same story as recounted by the Judeo-Christian tradition?   Do you think it would make more sense for the Muslim refugees to relocate in other Muslim countries if safe zone cannot be established in the countries from where they are coming?


  1. Lee,
    I did not read your first article concerning Donald Trump, but let me say this article touches upon many of my concerns. I happen to be living in Germany at the moment, and the problems that have occurred since hundreds of thousands of refugees from Islamic countries have entered is enormous and Germany doesn't have it under control. The German people woke up when there was a terrorist attack in Berlin right before Christmas. It still hurts because I love this country, and I love Europe.
    I don't think Trump hates muslims. I don't think Trump hates Islam. I believe he is asking why are we interfering in a war which is intercultural among Muslims themselves. Why are we putting ourselves in danger? I have never understood that from the outgoing administration in the United States. I have never understood why suddenly we stop investigating issues from the depth of truth instead of the depth of manipulation, because many western politicians are blind and are being manipulated.
    I too am one hundred percent pro Israel. I don't understand why Israel has to give back the land they fairly took over after they were attacked in the war of 1967 and the war of 1973. Israel didn't start those wars. The Arabs did. Now, they are demanding Israel give back what they gained. I don't think so. The one world government will come. There is no preventing it but when it comes we are nearing the end of life as we know it, and Jesus will be returning soon.
    Let me say finally these are my opinions which I stated, and I believe everyone has the right to exercise his or her opinion without being labeled a racist or a right wing conservative. Since when has being conservative become a poison. It is time we looked at how things really are. By the way, Germany and France's government have nothing good to say about the new President-elect and the upcoming government. It shows how blind they are. No one the German people are moving away from the parties who are supposed to lead them and moving into unhealthy directions.
    Shalom aleichem,

    1. Pat, your comment being the first comment is so encouraging to me as this was a post that was difficult for me knowing the potential backlash that could come from it. If every comment to follow was a vehement rebuttal to what I've said then at least I would have your comment to come back to in order to uplift me. Thank you for the affirmation that I am not alone in my belief. We are in a minority, but we are not alone.


  2. As I am not one into politic's here or anywhere else I do think your post is most interesting to read as to what can and is happening in the world, I have followed your past post which much interest.


    1. Yvonne, the issues here, though having political connections, go much deeper and they bring up serious questions that we all need to address on an individual level: What do I believe and what am I going to do about it in my own life? This will likely become more clear as the months or years progress, but for many it will be too late when the writing is on the wall--or in the sky in a manner of speaking.


  3. I just scanned your post, Lee, and want to read it more thoroughly when I have time.
    Keep trying to figure it out, as we all should.
    Three things jumped out at me:
    1) The focus of the media on this threat is mostly concentrated on Arabs and the Middle East. It is a concern what's going on with the different factions fighting there and you're right that we need to stay out of that mess. ISIS springs from this chaos.
    2. The largest population of Muslims come from Asia and, like Christianity, have evolved from violence of the Crusades mentality.
    3. "Let's face it, the Middle East is a mess and much of the world where Islam is in control is of a questionable nature in context with the rest of the world." The Middle East is a huge place and most parts are not a mess. I visited there and my son lives in the UAE. The media (which you've pointed out as an inflammatory problem) narrowly focuses on the threatening things to increase fear and ratings. I witnessed Christian churches and mosques side by side and Christmas was very much recognized and respected. Human nature and hate reside in every religion.
    There are political agendas (and fundamentalist religious agendas) that would like to bring about war in all this. It's up to those who, while recognizing the real threats we have here, believe in diplomacy and restraint to work on finding the ways to move things forward without blowing us all up.

    1. MLQ, most of the predominately Muslim countries are not the mess that those directly in the Mideast are, but still some of the reports that come from parts of North Africa, Indonesia, and others raise concern. A recent report from the Center for Studies on New Religions says that Christians are the most persecuted religious group in the word and mostly from Islamic extremists. The narrative is attempted that Muslim nations are very tolerant and yet you'll find relatively few Christians living in those nations and those who are do so in an uneasy state of "peace".

      It is important to bring a discussion into the open for all the world, but honesty and openness must be a part of that discussion.


    2. Lee .............. and the Founding Fathers, in their wisdom inspired by the divine, rejected state religion and freedom to worship according to our individual beliefs. <3

      I believe that Jesus (and his message in the New Testament) is the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies. The kingdom of God is within.

      I agree with honesty and openness, and appreciate your sincerity. <3

    3. That should read ~ "the Founding Fathers, in their wisdom inspired by the divine, rejected state religion and embraced the freedom to worship according to our individual beliefs.

    4. MLQ, the religious statement by the Founding Fathers was primarily in response to the situations in Europe that led to many of the groups emigrating to the New World such as the oppressive nature of the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church. My interpretation of their words is that there would not be any official state church or one denomination dictating rule for all. My guess is that they were not taking in too much serious consideration Muslim rule in their new nation since the founders were influenced most by a Christian background and there was no serious threat of Islamic incursion onto the North American continent. But this is my speculation which logically I think would make sense.

      I think the Founding Fathers had great perceptiveness about the future of things to come and yet were working within the framework of things they knew. Undoubtedly Jefferson saw things in this way, but as a brilliant man within whom reason prevailed, after the attacks on U.S. ships by the Muslims of North Africa, he studied the Koran in order to understand better--or in Trump's words, "find out what the hell is going on."

      The goal of Islam--i.e. conquest and conversion--is not compatible with the doctrines of the Founding Fathers and must be recognized as such. Muslims who come to live in the U.S. should understand this and must accept this in order to live compatibly with us. If they don't, then we are harboring an enemy who is waiting to take advantage of our weaknesses in order to uprise into the posture of conquering whatever nation they have hidden in dormancy. Free to worship in their way perhaps, but not free to take our freedoms in order to fulfill the stated mission of their faith.


    5. Well said. I read this book that I bought at the gift shop at Monticello. Jefferson was an amazing person and I respect his vision. I believe that Muslims were here in America even back then. I agree about those here understanding and respecting where their limits lie.
      BTW ..... I'm not getting notifications when you reply. Is that because I'm on WordPress and you're on Google Blog?
      Mary Lou

    6. MLQ, the Zacks book is outstanding--I reviewed it on Amazon many years ago and you can find that review here:

      I'm not sure what to tell you about your notifications. Do you think you have a correct email address? Or maybe the notifications are going into a spam folder? Hard to say about some of those quirks between the blogging platforms.


  4. If people kept their mind open to the possibility "I might be wrong" a lot of this nonsense would be avoided. But nope, all have to be right, my way or highway.

    That is one thing anyone outside the US has always said, "why can't they mind their own business?" Unless directly affecting national security or something like that, the US and any other country shouldn't be involved. But oh no there are "weapons of mass destruction," which was a bunch of BS, but something everyone conveniently has forgotten about.

    As for the big bad NWO, that's already in place. The rich elite rule everything no matter how much people try to deny it. I don't think we'll ever see a one world government officially in our lifetime. The only way one religion will rule as if they go back to the older days of believe or die until only one remains.

    As for prophecies, pfffft, look and you shall find. I can make up some vague prophecy and in 1000 years you could find something to relate it to. Why? Because its vague enough to fit in and you are looking for it. Same as the whole Mayan thing, nonsense.

    1. Pat, I don't think we are quite to the point of being under NWO rule, but definitely we are under a powerful influence by the elite and mighty. We may be closer to one world government than you think.

      Totally disagree on the prophecies as in regard to those in the Old Testament of the Bible. Study them and you will see some uncanny mentions including places that are too specific to be mere vague coincidence. It's there if you study it deeply and closely enough.


  5. Lee:
    You make some very fair points.

    There's an episode of Star Trek Voyager where the crew take onboard a growing group of what appear to be refugees and before they know it, the refugees are taking over the ship.

    Proselytising is found among both Christians and Muslims, and the Muslim agenda - if there is one at all - would be pretty clear. Every practising Muslim wants a caliphate. The same as every Christian recognises the one true and apostolic God, and would prefer to see the rights of certain groups undermined. Non-Muslims shouldn't have a special status in any country.
    I have flirted with a Christian girl who warned me - although she seemed to enjoy flirting back - "Just remember I am anointed". Christians can be sort of funny and chauvinistic (as in more pro-Christian than inclusive) too.

    You yourself state your bias against homosexuality as sinful - and I want to comment on that post too.

    I'd argue firstly that Asia Minor and Turkey were actually centers of tolerance around the time of the Crusades - the Ottomans did a quite solid job of integration.
    Look at Saladdin and Richard the Lionheart, two leaders at war during the Crusades - Richard demanded when he had run out of supplies that Saladdin recognise as a good Muslim that he ought to prevent the Europeans from starving. So Saladdin sent supplies to the enemy.
    I have read the start of the Koran and non-believers are complete pieces of filth, okay? But there are similar passages in Christian Scripture. There are hardliners in every religion too.
    We meaning the West, okay?
    I would argue that we've been interfering in this area since before the World Wars - right?
    The British had an empire that comprised, in part, millions of Muslims.
    Bush made a hatchet job of Iraq - ISIS is the current result. Rumsfeld was arming Saddam during the Reagan era - and Shia Iran are enemies of the West? Plus SELLING them arms through Iran Contra. And Iraq? Even during the Clinton era, the neo-conservatives were promoting a possible Arab spring.
    Just before that we had Charlie Wilson's war over there in Afghanistan, arming the mujahadeen against the Russians. The Taliban and Al-Quaeda were the result.

    So we (the West) carve up territories willy-nilly, arm them, bomb the bejeebers out of them, refuse them medicine through sanctions, knock out their utilities, shoot them at roadblocks, and torture terror suspects - a few of whom are innocent.
    Maybe they'd get their house sorted out if we didn't stop bombing them. Trump made the point recently about "safe zones"? The safest zones are in Europe and the US.

    I read that Obama's reluctance over Syria - abetted by similar reluctance from Europe, which your hooty-snooty John Kerry :-) recently blamed on the UK's David Cameron - was also down to his fear of having a legacy like Bush. But it was a conservative agenda that created the current mess, and I don't think a conservative administration will resolve it. Trump is NOT a conventional conservative, and his advocacy for a safe zone sounds solid. But I do feel the party he is now a part of should take onboard their own cluster of past mistakes in the Middle East, and come up with more Christian solutions than a Muslim ban - or even its suggestion. I could go off on any number of tangents but I will leave off there.

    1. Richard, I do believe any further mingling of Christian and Muslim communities attempting to live side by side should be discouraged. The so called "tolerance" of Muslim rule as you allude to, I believe is a myth perpetuated by Islamists and continued by leftists of the West who wish to discredit any positive opinion of Christianity. I do agree however that the interests of Western expansionists have been misguided in their interventions in the Muslim predominant countries. Conflict will come soon enough at the behest of those who are directed my Islamic doctrine, but we in the West should not stir the pot of their homeland nor should we make it easier for the conquest they would like to see happen.


    2. Just acknowledging your response here, Lee, for which I thank you. I'll just add a few disjointed points.

      My argument about Islam is similar to my argument about Christianity. I've looked up the stats and there are 22% Catholics and 1% Muslims in the US population. Nobody has suggested for at least half a century that the Vatican is somehow dictating US social or foreign policy any more or less than any other denomination of Christianity, although I remember John Paul 2 beseeching Bill Clinton to intervene in Bosnia.
      The Muslims I know, as I say, are very decent people.
      In Ireland and the UK, those who've applied for asylum (of whatever faith or nationality) are denied the right to work until they have been fully processed and their status as residents confirmed. They are on a tiny stipend, given a room and they have to watch their kids to make sure they're safe on the way to the communal bathroom. And unless they can source other accommodations, they are stuck there - sometimes for years.
      America has done a far better job at integration, recognising the rights and dignity of refugees in a way that we really need to work on in Europe. And now Trump is setting up regressive camps on a par with what they have in Sardinia and mainland Europe - and that's mainly just for the Latins coming in from the southern border! There could be negative consequences for that stuff and I don't think it helps things.

      The point was made a few years ago that the Spanish ETA and the Irish IRA had caused substantially more "terror" in Europe than ISIS and Al Qaeda. I stress that this pre-dates the Paris attacks so I'm unsure if statistically it's still the case.

      But if the few dissidents who remain in Northern Ireland shot a policeman, it's on page 3. If a Muslim does it, it's a screaming Page 1 hate crime headline. I just think our media's often complicit in doing what the terrorists want. I think we *are* stirring the pot - in media over-reaction, in NOT being welcoming, and any number of ways. I found Bush's fear-whipping tone, and Trump's today, very worrying. It seems to me very Orwellian and propagandist. The Dems seem very calm-headed and cool by comparison. I would sleep better knowing I was waking up to calm and collected than "terror, terror, terror." And yes, there have been further attacks on US soil. These would happen anyway, and Obama killed Osama. :-) There's been no figurehead since him with the same name recognition.

    3. Richard, you present a very interesting perspective in regard to what is page 1 reporting and the cool headedness of Democrats. I get very different perspective in our mainstream media. Muslim terror and much black crime seems to be hidden from our view while a white cop shooting a black man (usually engaged in some criminal behavior) or a reported attack on a Muslim (often disproven later but that part not reported) will get sensational coverage.

      I'm not sure what you are referencing about the "regressive camps" for the Latinos. That's a new one to me and sounds like sensationalist misinformation reported by your media.

      I don't question the niceness of Muslims as people--I've tried to make that clear all along. My point is that Islam plants a seed of violent Jihad in the adherents of the faith and this message can often be found on the internet and is reportedly preached by certain radical imams. There is a dormant danger that exists in the heart of Islam. If the 1% eventually becomes 15% or 20%, then what might we be looking at? We see the impact of Islam within many Islamic countries right now with factional infighting and attacks on Christians or others (where they exist in those countries). I'm just suggesting that there is a very real potential of conflagrating a Jihadist spirit within the true believers as well as within those with some kind of bad heart feeling toward those around them. It can happen with any groups or individuals, but I think there is a concerted effort in some quarters of Islam to act upon these darker objectives.


    4. Sorry, Lee, I'm only on here sporadically but there's been talk of how these camps will be a boon to the private prison industry in the south-west. That link here just shows what the plans are.
      That's a correction from snopes about them - but there have been pieces written about how standards are far lower at privately-run facilities relative to their publically-run counterparts. It'll expand the prison system again like they did under Bill Clinton's administration. :-) Have you read any of Dilbert creator and Trump supporter Scott Adams's blog?
      It's another interesting take.

  6. A lot of strong, thought out comments here. Only thing I can really add is that I think we will find a lot of Trumps' "simplistic statements" will end up having a surprising depth to them.

    1. CW, so much doctrine of the past has been obfuscated by confusing rhetoric which leads to the deception of the people. Simply stated objectives are far better than lies disguised as something they are not. I think we are seeing more and more of the depth of what Trump has said and as the time goes on the positive results will be revealed.


    2. From what I've read of analysis lately, Lee, liberals are using words like "prison camps" (when they are detention centers, same as they always were - and I used the same term myself having read a number of pieces), and a "purge" at the State Department to describe some of Trump's executive orders. These are clearly loaded terms with echoes of totalitarianism.
      I want to suggest that Trump is playing a more nuanced game than many are suggesting, and many of his objectives are not simply stated. And if they are, he is anticipating a response before revising decisions he probably already made. He is not plain-speaking as such. He is constantly testing the waters - in effect conducting polls to see how people feel when he says it was the largest inauguration audience (when chances are high it wasn't). Similarly, the blanket Muslim ban from seven countries has been modified following opposition to accommodate those with visas. He has put through an order there that many find to be offensive - he has pushed the opposition so far back that if he gives them a little ground, it appears to be a mini-victory to them, or less worse than the previous stance he held. But the fact is, he could have put a bar on people from every Muslim majority country in the world if he had chosen to. If he had waited for this ban to go to the courts, I imagine he would have probably had to revise to allow visa-holders back in anyway.
      But it's of great concern to me that he does this stuff - we could suggest he's messing with everyone. Alternate facts? I mean, come on. It's like Ms Conway is saying "I'm just gonna hoist this one up the flagpole and see what happens."
      Trump's administration is lowering the standards of public discourse in a way that we really haven't seen before.
      Again, Scott Adams of Dilbert fame discusses this stuff from a pro-Trump standpoint. Again, I recommend you check it out. I think he's both right in his analysis and wrong in his support. :-)

    3. Richard, what you describe sounds more like the tactics used by left and in the halls of academia. It's difficult to understand much of what is said by talking heads without a deeper analysis of what they are saying.

      Trump and his spokespeople make perfect sense to me and I think to most of his supporters. Maybe those on the different sides of the argument are speaking different languages of expressing ideas. And then there's the issues of perspective--how we perceive and process what we hear. If I already know I don't particularly like or agree with someone, anything they say will be processed through my own filter of perception. That's probably one of our biggest problems with communication between disagreeing sides.


  7. The world is a dangerous place indeed.

    1. Sheena-kay, dangerous and filled with deceit. It's time to confront these things.


  8. Lee, I have the mindset, Let me do my thing and leave me a long and you do the same. You'd think anyone with an ounce of common sense would adopted this philosophy but it's evident many do not. Christianity is the come as I am, knock and the door shall be open, there is room at the feet of Jesus for all, religion that speaks love. The Muslim faith is about control. You convert or die which is completely the opposite teachings of Christ. Jesus tells us to leave in peace if our faith is not welcomed by the hearts of others. It's not us whose rejected but Him.

    It would be wonderful if Christians and Muslims could co-exist together but the truth is our belief system is different. Remember the Muslim faith controls and when you radicalized a person they carry their faith to an extent that destroys. We know in war the best way to defeat the enemy is within and these radicals see western countries as the enemy. They move in and appear to integrate but instead use our own system to tear us down and if allowed our Judeo-Christian will disappear.

    I believe anyone who comes to the United States seeking citizenship to be of the mindset to co-exist with all people regardless of religious beliefs. However, if Muslims cannot live peacefully beside non-Muslims then they need to live in another country tailoring to their religion.

    Trump understands the dangers and like you I don't think he's an Islamophobic nor does he hate these people. His concern is for the American people. There are good people in all religions but it seems there are more than a few bad apples in the Muslim movement.

    I hope the Trump administration gets a handle on this before the US turns into another Germany or France with their horrific refugee problems. We seen some of the destruction already and I believe this along so many others is why Americans voted the way they did on Nov. 8th.

    I don't know if I addressed all of your questions but I will close by saying I do believe in Biblical prophesy. Nothing happens by chance. God has a precise plan. Our time isn't the same as His. The Bible says, "A day with the Lord is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day."

    Thanks for continuing your series. You said you will keep posting until people stop wagging the tongues but I just don't see that happening. I hope you're prepared for the long haul! :) Have a good day and God bless, my friend!

    1. Cathy, when faiths conflict then conflict in inevitable. The tongues of people with evil intentions, not matter how well-intentioned they might seem, will never be totally silenced until the truth and purity of God's justice through Jesus Christ has pervaded the world in its entirety.


  9. It's true that many, if not most, Americans do not understand the implications of a large influx of people who cannot or will not assimilate and who likely will demand the host country conform to the immigrants' beliefs, faith, and laws. The only reason I have a clue is because of a comparative religions course I took many years ago in college and the reading I've done since then. The topic fascinates me, especially because it stirs up so much rancor. This is something the whole nation should be talking about, if only the hysterical folks shouting "rascist" would be quiet long enough for the rest of the nation to speak about their concerns. Will we ever be able to have a dialogue?

    1. Patricia, the common sense of those who cry "tolerance!" most loudly is absurdity when put to the test of reason and historical precedent.


  10. I'm hesitant to take issue with part of your well-reasoned argument. Finding out about the Muslim faith is not hard.

    For instance, I watched a very informative lecture recently about the roots of the Muslim crisis by a UK historian. One of the key points that he made is that the majority of the world's Muslims belong to the same sect, Sunni, and the largest minority to the other group. Shia. Countries like Iran are Shia, while Saudi Arabia is Sunni. Some of that information is found in this article:

    Like any religion, both sects have extremists that are rejected by their fellow believers - most terrorist victims are Muslim. Al-Quaeda and ISIL are both jihadist sects that defy the Sunni majority, and all other Muslim mainstream sects.

    I grew up in the UK where we had our own home-grown terrorists in Northern Ireland - but they were Catholics and Protestants. A little research shows that there are other Christian terrorists - can I add the KKK?:

    Note that it is more accurate to say ISIL (or Daesh) as the name ISIS was a media abbreviation that spread until we all lapped the name up. ISIS is actually an Egyptian goddess that would have been offended by the misuse as are Egyptology experts, and history-buffs like me.

  11. Islam and Christianity are in direct opposition to each other. But at least they both have enough followers that neither religion has vanished in the last two thousand years. I don't actually agree with the definition of most of the words being used in reference to refugees. Yeah, I've got problems... the dictionary is at a direct opposition with the values and knowledge I was raised on.

    But basically it seems like some place has a whole bunch of people they want to give bio-terrorist blankets to, but that didn't work, so they got the people to leave their land, but that wasn't enough, and now these people have to be relocated elsewhere but that someplace they are from isn't doing reservations so people either leave, die, or join the very cause that put them in the situation.
    Wait... nooooo... that can't be right... That just sounds like history...

    Okay, but all these people from those areas, they must have all the same cultures and practice the same beliefs in the same way... wait, hang on, which people was I talking about again?

    Pretty sure my own line has been waiting for 500 some years for the "right thing" to come to pass. Frankly, short of space alien intervention, I don't think this world is ever going to see peace, equality, or tolerance again. It's worth fighting for. It's worth dying for. But I don't think there is an adult human on Earth that has what it takes to achieve that in the next four years. Any adult human at all.
    Maybe Kevin Smith.
    Okay, I'm kidding.
    Then again, Dogma made some excellent points.

    1. Dogma WAS a great movie, and I agree with your assessment - Islam and Christianity are both Abrahamic - as is Judaism, right?
      I think Lee's beliefs mean his support for Israel is stronger than if he didn't have his faith to inform his view.
      What I am hoping for now is that Trump will do SOME good, shaking up the world economy, providing more for industry, and start paying blue collar workers their due which they haven't seen in a couple of decades with high-skilled factory and assembly line jobs. But it's clear too that there's gonna be a greater gap in inequality - the billionaires are still going to get richer, and those on the lowest rung are going to get squeezed.

  12. I really enjoyed reading this, although many of your regular readers might not have. I believe that we all must be willing to question the common rhetoric; most of what we hear is people just spouting the the current party line or fake news. The real story is buried under a dirt pile of propaganda designed to make us feel guilty if we do not adhere to the (usually) left or (occasionally) right but (always) elitist viewpoint.

    The following short video by Ben Shapiro is a MUST-watch for everyone... particularly those skeptical of what you are saying. It is just a guy talking and showing graphs on a screen behind him, so it is not visually objectionable (no ISIS beheading videos, etc.). But it quickly explains the number of Muslims living in different countries and the alarming ways in which their views (measured scientifically by surveying them) differ from those of western civilization. Spoken gently and with a light sense of humor... but scary and essential info.

    Ben Shapiro Youtube link

    1. Sorry!! I linked the wrong video. It is this one:

  13. It seems to me that religion is the oldest and most effective way of justifying man's inhumanity to man. Or, more precisely the way the most powerful behave inhumanely to their fellow men and women.
    Israel claims a historical 'right' to the land that until 1948 was the British Colony of Palestine. That 'right' is one that could equally well be claimed by Native Americans to the 'occupied territories' we call USA and Canada. There are many more groups - grouped by religion or ethnicity or 'cultural heritage' - that could make similar claims. If we all ended up building 'settlements' in our historical homelands regardless of the 'rights' of the present occupants ... well, the conflagration of biblical prophecy would look like a minor punch up by comparison.
    At the end of the day, whatever the excuses offered via the medium of religion, all these conflicts are about resources - territory on which to build homes and grow food, fuel and water. In the future it will be the latter, water, that will replace oil as the most fought over asset.

  14. I'm trying to catch up on your clearly described what believe with whats going on with the muslims. I often asked what we were doing in the middle east fighting their battles. We have too many battles inside the US. Awesome post!

    1. Lisa, thank you for reading and leaving your thoughts on this important issue.


  15. Ken, judging from the way the Sunday news analysis shows covered the story I'm not sure that any of them really read the Order. But then again those shows seem to just misreport things and distort a great bit of reality. I think they mostly just talk to be talking, but the administration spokespeople do a pretty good job with the comebacks. Too bad the media folks don't pay attention more closely.



Go ahead and say something. Don't be afraid to speak your mind.
I normally try to respond to all comments in the comment section so please remember to check the "Email follow-up comments" box if you want to participate in the comment conversation.

For Battle of the Bands voting the "Anonymous" commenting option has been made available though this version is the least preferred. If voting using "anonymous" please include in your comment your name (first only is okay) and city you are voting from and the reason you chose the artist you did.

If you know me and want to comment but don't want to do it here, then you can send me an email @ jacksonlee51 at aol dot com.