- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
ANYONE who believes that Barack H Obama is a “Christian” is an utter FOOL and IGNORANT beyond belief
Daily Events Under Feature
Obama’s ‘Christianity’: A Political Tool to Silence Christians
Raymond Ibrahim | Wednesday Apr 15, 2015 9:06 AM
Here in the United States, where Americans are used to hearing their president always invoke Christianity as a way to silence Christians, United Kingdom Prime Minister David Cameron’s recent Easter message was moderately refreshing.
Among other things, Cameron made it a point to say “that we should feel proud to say, ‘This is a Christian country.’ Yes, we’re a nation that embraces, welcomes and accepts all faiths and none, but we are still a Christian country.”
The context of Cameron’s statement, it should be recalled, is a UK with a large, intolerant, and aggressive Muslim populace—a populace that increasingly seeks to treat the UK’s indigenous Christians the way the Islamic world’s indigenous Christians are habitually treated, that is, subjugated, enslaved, raped, and murdered.
In fact, Cameron touched on the phenomenon of Christian persecution in mostly Muslim lands:
We have a duty to speak out about the persecution of Christians around the world too. It is truly shocking that in 2015 there are still Christians being threatened, tortured, even killed because of their faith. From Egypt to Nigeria, Libya to North Korea. Across the Middle East Christians have been hounded out of their homes, forced to flee from village to village; many of them forced to renounce their faith or brutally murdered. To all those brave Christians in Iraq and Syria who practice their faith or shelter others, we will say, “We stand with you.”
While one may argue that Cameron is all talk—after all, the UK’s foreign policies, like America’s, have only exacerbated the plight of Christians in the Middle East—it is still refreshing to hear such honest talk, since here in the U.S., one seldom get even that from President Obama.
Consider what Obama—who is on record saying “we are no longer a Christian nation,” and who never notes the Islamic identity of murderers or the Christian identity of their victims, and who ignored a recent UN session on Christian persecution—had to say about Christians at the Easter Prayer Breakfast: “On Easter, I do reflect on the fact that as a Christian, I am supposed to love. And I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less than loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned.”
This is in keeping with his earlier statements calling on Americans in general Christians in particular to be nonjudgmental and instead to have “humility” and “doubt” themselves. For example, during the National Prayer Breakfast last February, after Obama alluded to the atrocities committed by the Islamic State—which include beheadings, crucifixions, rape, slavery, and immolations—he said:
I believe there are a few principles that can guide us, particularly those of us who profess to believe. And, first, we should start with some basic humility. I believe that the starting point of faith is some doubt—not being so full of yourself and so confident that you are right and that God speaks only to us, and doesn’t speak to others, that God only cares about us and doesn’t care about others, that somehow we alone are in possession of the truth.
Humility, of course, is a well-recognized Christian virtue. It is the exact opposite of pride; a modest if not humble opinion of oneself, one’s shortcomings. But what does that—exercising humility—have to do with our understanding of Islamic violence and terrorism, which was, after all, the topic Obama was discussing immediately before he began pontificating about humility? Are we not to judge and condemn Islamic violence—since we’re apparently no better, as the president made clear when he told Christians to get off their “high horse” and remember the Crusades and Inquisition?
Furthermore, while Christian humility encourages self-doubt, it does not encourage doubt concerning right and wrong, good and evil. The same Christ who advocated humility repeatedly condemned evil behavior, called on people to repent of their sins, and hurled tables in righteous anger.
The point here is that, whenever Obama invokes Christianity and Christian virtues, it is almost always in the context of trying to silence Christians: telling them to “love” more—that is, to never judge or condemn anything, and instead be doormats ever “turning the other cheek”; telling them to remember the historic “crimes” of other Christians—even if they are a thousand years old and no crimes at all—that is, telling Christians not to criticize Islam because they too live in glass houses.
This is the “liberal Christianity” which Obama and others hail, because its chief purpose is to silence Christians from condemning and combatting what are otherwise clear evils. Christians are being persecuted by Muslims all around the world? That’s okay, seems to be Obama’s response; just turn the other cheek—have some more “humility” and “doubt,” show their Muslim persecutors some more “love”—and everything will be set aright.
A Nation of “SHEEP” breeds a Government of “WOLVES”
Make Progressives Live By Their Own Rules
Derek Hunter | Apr 02, 2015
Like most people, I like pizza. I also like bacon on my pizza sometimes.
My old neighborhood in Baltimore had five pizza places in fairly close proximity, but one was better than the others, both in price and taste. So, after a night of adult beverages with friends, we’d inevitably end up in one of them, generally the one most convenient to where we were. Sometimes that was the one with the better pizza.
One time we were in there and my friends and I were in a “pizza with bacon” mood, but there was a problem: This place didn’t have bacon as a topping option.
They hadn’t sold out … that wasn’t the issue. The issue was they didn’t offer bacon at all. The place is owned by people who are Muslim, and they don’t offer pork in any form. Their pepperoni is beef, as is their sausage. They didn’t even offer turkey bacon.
We immediately rallied our friends, wrote up protest signs, called the mayor and media, screamed slogans about how my right to the pizza we wanted the way we wanted was being trampled, and filed suit against the place with the help of the ACLU.
Of course we did nothing of the sort. We ordered one with other toppings, and the next time we were out and had a hankering for pizza with bacon, we went to one of the other places.
It’s not a perfect analogy, but it’s close to what should happen when a gay couple walks into a florist, bakery or whatever owned by a devoutly religious person whose beliefs don’t permit them to provide a service for a gay wedding.
Normal people, gay or straight, would hear the objection, probably would be upset, and would leave thinking, “Glad we found that out now because I don’t want to give my money to someone who doesn’t want to serve me.” But we aren’t dealing with normal people here; we’re dealing with activists.
Activists on the progressive left have no decency; they have only an agenda. If they have to trample the rights of others, particularly Christians, all the better.
It would be one thing if there were only one place from which to get a cake or flowers, but there are dozens. That doesn’t matter to activist progressives – that ANY exist that do not conform to their will is too many. So we end up where we are today.
The state of Indiana is under attack from progressives not because of its Religious Freedom Restoration Act, but because the governor is a Republican considering a run for president. If it were the principle, this uninformed army would be protesting in every state with a RFRA and non-stop in Washington demanding the federal version be repealed. They aren’t, and that’s not by accident.
Selective outrage, generally fake and drummed up with the help of ignorant and willing participants in the media, is the hallmark of the left.
You can have binders full of women’s resumes and be mocked as a monster and a misogynist. Or, if you’re part of the progressive tribe, you can drop your pants and demand favors, get those favors from an intern, or rape a woman and it’s all good.
To hell with that!
Rationalizing with the left is like negotiating with terrorists. You can’t do it. They both have the same objective – your destruction. It’s about time conservatives start treating them the way they treat everyone else.
It’s all or nothing with ISIS, Al Qaeda and the progressive left; stray from their orthodoxy and you have to be destroyed. Time to return the favor.
Don’t waste your time arguing with them. You’ll find more logical consistency and honesty in an old shoe than you will an activist progressive. But the mindless minions, those who sign petitions and think they’re saving the world or post the dumb memes on Facebook about evil Republicans … they are getable.
No, you won’t be able to educate them to come around to logic – if 18+ years of life hasn’t instilled them with common sense, it simply isn’t getting into their heads. But they are Pavlovian in their reactions, and that you can use.
Comedy Central announced its choice to replace Jon Stewart on The Daily Show – a guy named Trevor Noah. No one knew who he was when it was announced, but he’s supposedly some sort of comedian. More than that, though, he’s someone with a long track record of posting racist, sexist, anti-Semitic “jokes” online.
This isn’t just Fox News talking. It’s leftists. It’s Slate. It’s The Washington Post. It’s almost every progressive outlet. He’s made “fat chick” jokes. He’s made “racially insensitive” jokes. He’s made a lot of anti-Jewish jokes. Comedians, even unfunny ones like Noah, used to be able to do that, but not anymore.
The progressive hyper-sensitive mass of ignoramuses conditioned to take offense at a shift in the breeze can’t turn it off. Pavlov’s dogs never got past the sound of a bell, and these monsters can’t let perceived slights slide even when their masters want them to. Exploit that. Exploit the hell out of it.
These progressive zombies have protested speakers on college campuses who agree with them because they didn’t agree with them strongly enough or on every single point. They are ready to be outraged at things. Many of them seem to need the outrage.
Find stories about Mr. Noah. Post them on your and your progressive friends’ Facebook pages. Tweet them. Retweet them. Comment on them. Keep that fire burning in them. Call for Noah’s firing.
Noah may be a nice man (you’d think he’d have to have something going for him because “funny” ain’t it), but he’s a progressive, and progressives will eat their own if they aren’t pure enough. And, most importantly, the politics of absolutism and personal destruction for anyone who strays from the thought plantation and breaks from progressive orthodoxy is the left’s monster – turn it on them.
And engage in it yourselves. Demand Comedy Central fire Trevor Noah. I know it’s not our nature, but our nature isn’t winning the war.
These are the liberal progressives’ rules, and they’ve been goose-stepping to them against conservatives unchallenged for too long. Make them live by them too.
Progressive love to impose their will on the American people, but rarely do they live by those rules. Al Gore lectures on the problems with your carbon footprint, then hops on his private jet to fly to his enormous mansion. Noah isn’t Gore, but you have to start somewhere. And start we must if we’re ever going to get the fascism to stop.
A Nation of “SHEEP” breeds a Government of “WOLVES”
The Atlantic Claims – Armed Law-Abiding Citizens Undercut The Rule Of Law
Posted on April 1, 2015
By AWR Hawkins
The Atlantic Claims – Armed Law-Abiding Citizens Undercut The Rule Of Law AmmoLand Gun News
Washington DC – -(Ammoland.com)- On April 1 2015 The Atlantic published a column claiming armed law-abiding citizens undercut the rule and put police officers in greater danger.
The Atlantic tried to substantiate these claims by suggesting guns outside the home, via concealed and/or open carry, actually lead to “social consequences” where “citizens must…fear their armed neighbors.” This, in turn, lowers the threshold for acceptable insults–filling citizens with worry that if they say the wrong thing in the worst way their armed neighbors will simply open fire.
Moreover, The Atlantic says this tension is heightened when Stand Your Ground laws are passed in addition concealed or open carry laws. Once this happens, you have to ask what you’re going to do “if you become a target for would-be George Zimmermans?”
The Atlantic then turns to the NRA’s argument that Americans’ safety is ultimately the responsibility of each individual American. The publication mocks the NRA’s contention that we live in a dangerous world where “the government can’t–or won’t–protect you,” by suggesting the police really do arrive pretty fast–relatively speaking–once you dial 911.
They try to back this up claiming “police arrived on the Aurora movie theater 90 seconds after being called.”
Question for The Atlantic: How many unarmed people can a gunman kill in 90 seconds? We ask this because there is no question about the movie-goers being unarmed. Their specific theater was chosen as a target by James Holmes because the owners of that theater barred concealed carry permit holders from carrying guns on the premises.
The Atlantic also tries to show the alleged foolishness of the NRA’s push for personal responsibility by claiming police arrived at Sandy Hook Elementary on December 14, 2012, “within three minutes of the first police radio broadcast of the attack.”
Question for The Atlantic: How many unarmed people can a gunman kill in three minutes?
Whether we are dealing with 90 seconds or three minutes, the answer is the same–the gunman who faces unarmed people can kill as many people as he wants to kill.
He ultimately stops only when confronted by law enforcement or when he stops himself with his last bullet.
Either way, if armed citizens firing back can cut the 90 seconds into 20 seconds, how many lives does that save?
Even if they only cut the 90 seconds into 45 seconds, how many lives does that save?
Aren’t those lives worth it?
As we recently saw in a Philadelphia barbershop, an armed law-abiding citizen can catch a gunman in the midst of an attempted mass shooting and stop him in his tracks with a bullet to his chest before anyone is injured. This doesn’t violate the rule of law, it upholds it.
Read more: http://www.ammoland.com/2015/04/the-atlantic-claims-law-abiding-citizens-undercut-the-rule-of-law/#ixzz3W9Y9Lwhv
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook
A Nation of “SHEEP” breeds a Government of “WOLVES”
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has a history of calling people rapists without any proof. If she hears a rape accusation, she assumes it’s true. She skips niceties like “allegedly.” The way she sees it: If the accused isn’t guilty, why does he stand accused? Due process is for ladies only.
She’s not about to stop now, even after the UVA gang-rape case has been revealed as an utter hoax. Joseph Spector, Journal News:
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who is pushing for stronger laws against rapes on college campuses, today warned against people criticizing the woman at the center of a University of Virginia sexual assault case…
“Victim blaming or shining the spotlight on her for coming forward is not the right approach,” Gillibrand said on “The Capitol Pressroom,” a public radio show in Albany. “In fact, what we have to focus on is how do we keep these campuses safe? How do we have better trained personnel on campuses so they can tell a survivor what her options are and so they can have all the facts?”
Gillibrand said it would be wrong for some to call on the female student in the UVA scandal to face criminal charges.
“I think it’s inappropriate,” she said.
Punishing false accusations of rape would only discourage actual rape victims from stepping forward, you see. We must protect women, even if they’re lying. They’re victims because they say so, and we must not be swayed by mere evidence to the contrary.
Those frat bros probably had it coming anyway. If you think those guys are innocent until proven guilty, you hate women. Go ahead, deny it. That just serves as further proof of your misogyny, misogynist.