The problem with ISIS is Islam

I believe one of the greatest deceptions to have hoodwinked the West is the false notion that Islam is a “religion of peace.”  This is difficult to square with reality, particularly when we are inundated with gruesome beheadings, mass executions,  and prisoners being marched to their deaths in Iraq by the brutal savages known as ISIS.


Oftentimes gullible and easily deceived individuals are fooled by things hiding in plain view.  For example, when Muslims wax poetically and seek to make the argument that it is the fault of extremists who are tarnishing the peaceful message of Islam, the more astute among us notice that the hands that hold the severed heads dripping with blood read and believe the same Quran as those that profess Islam is peaceful.

“But they are misinterpreting the Quran,” our peaceful Muslims will argue, “taking it out of context.  The Bible, if interpreted incorrectly, can be used to justify any form of violence in the same way that the Quran is misinterpreted by jihadists.”

The problem with this argument, though it may contain a kernel of truth, is that it is nigh impossible to read the words of Jesus and walk  from Him seeking an infidels head to saw off.

“But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you…”  (Matthew 5:44 KJV)

I’m not sure about you, but I can’t find the slightest encouragement in the above verse that would cause me to want to slit the throat of one of my enemies, carve away at his windpipe, hack away at his spinal cord, and skewer his head on a fencepost.


And why don’t people who delight in beheading people and carrying their heads around, like school kids showing their classmates something that interests them for “show and tell,” ever quote from the Bible for their demonic acts?

No, I have yet to hear one person yelling, “Praise Jesus!” or “Glory to God!” as they grab a handcuffed victim by the jaw and begin separating their heads from their bodies, but I hear many “Alluhu Akbar’s!” in the background when these type of atrocities are committed.  “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.”

I agree with what this Wikipedia article has to say, particularly the quote from atheist Sam Harris:

“The description of Islam as a ‘religion of peace’ has created a great deal of controversy. Neuroscientist and New Atheism writer Sam Harris wrote, ‘The position of the Muslim community in the face of all provocations seems to be: Islam is a religion of peace, and if you say that it isn’t, we will kill you.'”

All this nonsense about trying to differentiate “peaceful Islam” from “extremist Islam” is not helping to solve the growing problem of radical Muslims gaining footholds in the West.

An article from CNN made these points:

“British Prime Minister David Cameron said the ‘root cause’ of the terrorist threat in the United Kingdom is ‘Islamist extremism.’ He said the recent killing of U.S. journalist James Foley is clear evidence that ISIS’s fight in Iraq and Syria ‘is not some foreign conflict thousands of miles from home that we can hope to ignore.'”

Islamist extremism, according to Cameron, is the “root cause” of the terrorist threat in the UK.  I believe this to be a factual statement, but then he stumbles over his own words when the article continues with this:

“A distinction must be made between the religion of Islam and the ‘poisonous’ political ideology of Islamic extremists, he said.”

Here is one of the major stumbling blocks that is keeping the Brits from not only identifying the problem, but developing a strategy to eradicate it: the problem of the proverbial “elephant in the room,” which in this case is refusing to point a guilty finger at the root of the problem:  Islam—the elephant—and the jihadist underpinnings of this barbaric religion that fuses the two together in an indissoluble bond.

There is no distinction between Islam and the “poisonous political ideology of Islamic extremists.”  They are one and the same.  And as far as the argument that can be made for “moderate Muslims,” this is the same thing as “jack Mormons,” or Mormons in name only.


As long as Islam is around, there will always be the door left open for beheadings, child rapes, harsh implementation of Sharia law that calls for hands cut off for crimes such as stealing, discrimination against other religions, treating women like second-class citizens, the rejection of basic human rights such as freedom of worship and freedom of speech, etc.

Islam can exist, but only as a minuscule minority in any country.  To give this beast any power or authority over a populace, any voice in government, is to eventually destroy the fabric of that particular society.








Divorce Destroys

“For I hate divorce,” says the LORD, the God of Israel…” (Malachi 2:16[a])

sad child

At one time I had an idea to start a website with this same title, “Divorce Destroys.”  Why?  I’ve experienced firsthand the destruction that divorce does to a family, especially if children are involved.

Countless books and articles have been written about the horrors of divorce, and yes, even some that tell how wonderful divorce is in certain situations.  But I believe, in general, most of us will agree that divorce is a nasty, brutal business that should never be entered into lightly.

The ones who suffer the greatest are the children who are unwittingly thrown into the maelstrom of bitterness, hate and revenge that are often a part of the divorce process.  I never believed children would become a war pawn of one of the divorcing parents until I saw this grotesque reality being played out before my own eyes.  Children are indeed used as human shields in the battle that often rages between two divorcing parents.

Children can be brainwashed to despise a parent they once loved and cherished, poisoned by the other parent for a variety of reasons.  This does not seem possible, but it is a disturbing reality.

If you are a child of divorce, and you hate one of your parents, you might be a victim of what is known as Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS).  Here is a recent article from the Huffington Post that will help explain this disturbing phenomena.

In general, children naturally love both their parents.  Certainly many children go through stages—particularly in their teenage years—when they go through a short time period where they might feel they hate their parents.   I’m not going to say that this is a normal phase for every teenager, but experience teaches that such a time is not unusual and rarely lasts for a significant amount of time.

There is a quote from an expert in PAS that I have not been able to locate that has made an important impact on my understanding of this harmful form of child abuse:  in a divorce, if a child who at one time loved a parent and who now, for some reason despises one or the other, you can be assured he or she is the product of PAS.

PAS is a subtle but real form of child abuse.  If you are a child from a divorced family, and the divorce was a particularly ugly and bitter one, this is one of the seedbeds for this kind of crime to take root and thrive in.  And make no mistake about it:  PAS is a crime, for there is nothing more natural than for a child to love both their father and mother.  That love can only be extinguished and replaced with bitterness and hate if one parent, called the alienator, has systematically brainwashed the child against the other parent.

This post is only a brief introduction to this growing problem in America.  My hope is that my words can cause awareness of this problem in some child who might be hating one of their parents and never understanding why they harbor such intense negative feelings against them.

Please, do some research on this subject.  The internet is brimming with information on this issue.  That parent you grew to despise is deeply hurting and terribly wounded over the breakdown in your once loving relationship and wants nothing more than to reconcile and show you how much they love you.

But that reconciliation can never happen until you first realize you have been turned against your mom and dad by someone—the other parent—that you thought had your best interests at heart.  You were manipulated, even brainwashed, and you must understand that it happened over a long period of time.  It is not normal to hold such intense feelings of malice toward a parent that you once dearly loved.

I urge you to get some help.  Please.


Michael Brown’s Funeral

I could only stomach a few minutes of Michael Brown’s funeral.  I was not intending to watch one second of it, but the headline on the article drew me in:

“Michael Brown’s funeral highlights his faith.”

Is he is now being remembered as a man of faith, a Christian, an individual who read and honored the Bible, practiced its holy precepts, and lived his life in the same manner as the Lord Jesus did? If we followed Brown around for three days, would we walk from that interaction as if we had been following the Lord Himself?

Honestly, I would be embarrassed—ashamed even—to be a black American if I had the unfortunate position of being in attendance at this funeral.  This thug, a bully, a robber and a thief, who was shot dead because he had tried to perhaps murder a policeman with his bare, huge hands, was being remembered as a hero, a man of faith, an exemplary citizen.

I am not speaking with mere platitudes; we have the video evidence of him robbing the convenience store and grabbing the much smaller store worker by the scruff of his shirt and pushing him into a chip display, minutes before he was shot by Wilson.

We also know that Brown’s accomplice in the crime, Dorian Johnson, also seen in the video, lied when he said that Brown was shot in the back and had his hands raised when Officer Wilson shot him.  Johnson’s false testimony is unmistakably responsible for igniting the fire keg that exploded into the subsequent rioting, looting, shooting and general mayhem that gripped the city of Ferguson night after night.

There is unmistakeable evidence that both Brown and Johnson engaged in criminal acts within moments of Brown’s death.  But this piece of damming evidence, throwing the claim of Brown’s death as being a brutal murder by the hand of a racist, trigger-happy cop on its head, has not dampened the black’s communities zeal for portraying him as a helpless hero/victim.  They are insisting on perpetuating the charade that Brown is a hero.

Brown is being lauded as somewhat of a prophet by his stepmother, Cal Brown. The New York Times wrote this:

 “[She] said that just weeks before he was shot, Mr. Brown had described a dream in which he had seen bloody sheets hanging on a clothes line. ‘He pretty much prophesied his own death and he didn’t even realize it,’ she said, calling him ‘an awesome man’ who wanted to have a family and ‘be a good father.'”

(On a side note, unlike the vast majority of news articles that identify Michael Brown as a “teenager,” Cal Brown correctly identifies him as a “man.”)

We need to add “prophet” to Brown’s growing list of nouns used to describe his exemplary character.

The article continues:

“In addition to numerous readings from the Bible, there were readings from Dr. King and references to significant court cases in black history.”

Now Brown is—unbelievably—grouped in the same category as Martin Luther King, Jr., a man known worldwide for his commitment to non-violence in his pursuit of bringing the black community their long overdue justice.   What an insult to his memory and his pursuit for non-violent justice to have his name dragged into the same category as this criminal thug.

What’s wrong with the black community?  Don’t they see nor understand that continually portraying this criminal as some kind of helpless victim and hero is only enlarging the divide that exists between blacks and whites?  That their responses are causing the white community to become angry at their ridiculous, emotion driven positions?

There is increasing evidence that Brown attacked this officer, with some unconfirmed reports that Wilson was seriously injured with an “orbital blowout fracture.”  Whether or not the extent of his injuries are as severe as reported, the facts that Wilson shot Brown in self defense is mounting.  So much of this story is yet to be told, with the facts needing to be separated from the lies and unsubstantiated reports from the witnesses.

Clearly, there is sufficient evidence for the black community and their leaders (Sharpton in particular) to stop this incessant and unfounded drumbeat that portrays Brown as a hero/victim.  The fact that he was involved in a strong arm robbery minutes before his death is ample evidence that the heated rhetoric calling for “justice” against Wilson should be squelched.

According to the New York Times article quoted above, Sharpton’s fiery rhetoric caused this reaction:

“In an overflow room where mourners watched the service on television across the street from the church, Mr. Sharpton’s remarks riled up the crowd. Some men left the overflow room to the street and began loudly chanting ‘hands up, don’t shoot.’ One woman wildly screamed back, ‘Be quiet. Be quiet. Respect that family…'”

All this happens while people who want to see true justice come into this sad situation sit back and watch these insane scenes occurring in the black community.  If Wilson is guilty of murdering this young man, he should—he must—be tried and convicted; nobody questions this.

But if Wilson acted in self-defense, then virtually everything the black community is saying and doing (looting, rioting, shooting at police, calling Wilson a murderer and treating him as a criminal, falsely painting this incident as motivated by color, etc.) will be found to not only be the product of knee-jerk reactions, but their defense of a criminal; the castigating of an innocent man is a crime in itself, a horrific rush to judgment.

The black community has made an unbelievable blunder in this case.  Each day they uphold Brown as a folk hero only succeeds in further driving the wedge that separates whites from blacks.



Tattoos and the “New” Army

Of course the Army will cave.

Soon, every form of tattoo will be accepted for those who not only wish to be officers, but for any ole’ rank and file member.

Remember, this is part of the “change” promised by Obama; how can the Army—or for that matter any of the Armed Services—discriminate against tattoos after the repeal of “Don’t ask, don’t tell”?

The “new” Army must be inclusive of any and all abnormal and perverse behavior, no matter what kind or degree.  We cannot have anyone’s feelings hurt, because after all, this is the Army and how hypocritical they would be to neglect soldier’s feelings while at the same time protecting the lives of American’s around the globe?

No, sir.  In the new Army, everyone’s proclivities will be accepted.  That facial tattoo that you got after your last drunken tryst in college will no longer be a detriment to being promoted in the new Army.  Here is a picture of your future commanding officer:

Face tattoo

And for those of you who believe that women should fight in combat and be commissioned officers, barking out orders to men, here is what you can expect also:

women facial tattoo

I mean, why not?  Who is the Army to tell anybody what they have to do?  What nerve!  Where do they get off on thinking they can boss people around?  This military arrogance and insensitivity must end, and the sooner the better.

I for one am glad that those proud soldiers who enlisted to serve their country are finally speaking out and demanding their rights to have whatever tattoos they want to have.  For far too long soldiers have served their country in silence, doggedly following orders even if it meant that they had to follow stupid rules.  No more!  Soldiers of America, rise up and be heard!

The article cited above said this:

“Many felt insulted that they were deemed ineligible to be commissioned because of their appearance, especially if their tattoos honored their fellow soldiers killed in combat.”

If there is anything we can’t have in the new Army, it is having the feelings of our soldiers insulted and hurt.  Insuring that the soldier’s feelings never, ever get hurt is job #1 in the armed services.  How can soldiers stick a bayonet in the stomach of the enemy if they feel that their feelings are not being protected by their commanding officers?  It’s about time the military brass is finally coming around to seeing the error of their ways.

So yes, I cast my vote in favor of getting rid of this archaic and hurtful ban against tattoos.  And it will be one glorious day in America when we thousands upon thousands of marching soldiers are parading down the streets of America proudly showing off their tattoos.  What a great example to the youth in America!-

I feel this staff Sargent hit the nail on the head when he said:

“Staff Sgt. Alan Lalonde, who has half-sleeve tattoos on his arms, said in an e-mail to Army Times he wished his service would get with the times.

‘I wish they would see the generation in which we currently live and adjust slightly to take care of the good ones,’ Lalonde said.”

Right on, soldier!  You certainly did not enlist to be told what to do or to follow antiquated rules and traditions.  You did not enlist to be told what to do but to have your feelings listened to and protected.  What does the Army know anyway?  If they won’t listen to a staff Sargent demanding they let him have his tattoo’s, they won’t listen to anybody.  Such insensitivity and backwardness must be rooted out of this institution.

I would gladly—even lovingly—follow this officer into battle.  His creative tattoo’s inspire and motivate me:


(Four star General Mason Adamson was recently promoted after the Army rescinded their ban on tattoo’s.)

“Christian” singer Vicky Beeching “comes out”

Vicky Beeching?  I never heard of her until several days ago when I read about her “coming out” in an article written by Dr. Michael Brown.  Her music and career never blipped on my radar screen.

My lack of interest over her “coming out” was due, in part, because I tired of hearing the endless debate about homosexuals, gay marriage, and the incessant press coverage dedicated to it.  Homosexuals represent 2% of the American population; how is it that we spend so much time on an infinitesimally small percentage of the population, and one with such vile sexual practices?

And, to be honest, I have a stereotype in my mind concerning lesbians: overweight, ugly, butch haircuts, aggressive, loud, rude, etc.  I assumed Ms. Beeching fell into this category.

Imagine my surprise when I saw a picture of her…anything but the stereotype firmly in my mind.  She is very attractive, not disgustingly overweight, does not have a butch haircut, and has that charming English accent that makes you want to sit down and have crumpets and tea with her.  She is not your typical lesbian, in other words.


It is amazing what a good looking person can do to rekindle one’s  interest in a subject that was growing stale.  My interest in homosexuality suddenly peaked a notch or two northward and I decided to read what all the fuss was about.

I watched a video on Beeching where I thought she carried herself well.  She spoke articulately and without the rage and hate so common among lesbians when they talk about Christianity or faith-based subjects.  (Incidentally, this video was posted by Beeching on her Youtube channel.)

But I have learned something about humans:  many are experts in the art of deception, and how we appear in front of a camera is not always the way we actually are.  I wanted to see Ms. Beeching in an unguarded moment, and it did not take me too long until I had my wish, found just a few minutes later in the same video.  Here is where we get a glimpse of her true colors.

The video switches to an interview between Beeching and Christian attorney, writer and pastor, Scott Lively, at 5:06.  One can almost feel the tension building as it progresses.

The fireworks begin at 10:23 where Beeching interrupts Lively while he is describing his viewpoints on temptations.  As a married man, he admits to being attracted to women other than his wife, sparking a heated response from Beeching.  Such interruptions will continue throughout the remainder of the interview.

I am not a psychologist, theologian or trained counselor, but in my studies on lesbianism, there appears to be a high correlation between young female children who turn to same sex attractions who had ongoing conflicts with their fathers growing up.  This often results in these children, as adults, exhibiting the same degree of disrespect toward male authority figures and males in general as observed with Beeching in this interview toward Lively.

At 13:00, Beeching states, “I love the Bible with all my heart; it is my favorite book…” and then goes on to argue with Lively that the passages in her “favorite book” that deal with homosexuality can be interpreted in “different ways.”

But it is only in the last forty years or so that these millennia-old passages of Scripture have been debated; never until recently has there been serious discussion in conservative churches or seminaries that same-sex relationships have been viewed as  anything but abominable in the eyes of God. Such facts are lost on so-called “Christians” like Vicky Beeching.

For example, how much clearer of an example on how God views homosexuality than the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah?  It is astonishing that the nonsensical argument that these twin cities were leveled by fire and brimstone because the inhabitants were inhospitable can be seriously considered—another sign of the biblical and intellectual ignorance galloping across the land today.

Beeching has not only “outed” herself as being a homosexual, but has also aligned herself with the enemies of Christianity who now oppose and stand against the standard of holiness so clearly laid out in Scripture.

Let’s be very clear on this point:  one cannot simultaneously be a practicing homosexual and a Christian; this is an impossibility that has no argument in Scripture:

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.…” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10 NASB)

As disturbing as Beeching’s public rejection of the Bible’s unequivocal stance against same-sex relationships is her militant and outspoken agenda to recruit others into her camp.  Not content to struggle in private with her perverse attractions, she now, in a perfect textbook example, will give “hearty approval to those who practice them” (Romans 1:32 [c]) by becoming, in virtue of her public profile, the latest poster child for the LGBTQ movement.

Nothing Beeching can say or do will ultimately alter the timeless truth of God’s plan for human sexuality and marriage.  What a pity that she has now put herself in the camp of those whom Jesus strongly condemned when He said:

 “It is inevitable that stumbling blocks come, but woe to him through whom they come! “It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea, than that he would cause one of these little ones to stumble.…” (Luke 17:1-2)








Islam: cutting its own throat

The horrific and cowardly beheading of journalist James Wright Foley by ISIS terrorists will accomplish at least two things among Westerners:  an increased hatred and desire for revenge against Islam that perpetrates such crimes against humanity.

The knife-wielding coward with the English accent that beheads Foley has his identity fully hidden behind a black mask.  He murders a handcuffed, helpless civilian and somehow believes that posting this crime on social media is going to endear the world to the cause of Islam and its brutal ideology as it sweeps through Iraq.  Some Islamic hero.

These are the same brave men who saw off little girl’s heads, all in the name of Muhammad and Allah.

For every act of incomprehensible, senseless and cruel brutality that these animals perpetrate against the innocent, with every head they saw off, they also cut the throat of the false lie that Islam is a religion of peace.

It matters not one whit what the top Saudi religious official, the so-called “Grand Mufti” of Saudi Arabia, says against these murdering terrorists:

“Extremist and militant ideas and terrorism which spread decay on earth, destroying human civilization,” said al-Sheikh, “are not in any way part of Islam, but are enemy number one of Islam, and Muslims are their first victims.”

This Grand Mufti’s words fall on deaf ears.  As a matter of fact, they are somewhat hypocritical, coming from the top religious figure in Saudi Arabia whose brutal form of Islam, known as “Wahhabism,” is responsible for some of the cruelest and most extreme abuses perpetrated in the name of religion.

For example, the above quoted article reads:

“While the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is governed, in part, by a strict Islamic school of thought known as Wahhabism, Reuters reports that there are certain differences between Wahhabism and ISIS.

“Although senior Wahhabi clerics endorse execution by beheading for offenses that include apostasy, adultery and sorcery, oppose women driving or working and describe Shi’ites as heretics, they differ from al Qaeda and Islamic State militants in opposing violent revolt,” noted Reuters.”

I would like for the Grand Mufti to explain the difference between sawing off a journalist’s head and sawing off the head of someone who changes their religion.  Where is the crime in either of these cases they would warrant this barbaric punishment?

Perhaps I’m being a bit harsh on the Grand Mufti, speaking before I have gathered all the needed facts.   I’m assuming, perhaps wrongly, that someone who is beheaded in Saudi Arabia for changing their religion has their heads sawn off in the same manner that Foley was: hands tied behind their backs, being forced to kneel on the ground, while the executioner stands behind the “criminal,” grabbing their jaw, and taking a very sharp knife as they begin sawing away on their windpipe.

Maybe it’s done differently in Saudi, like how the French once beheaded their criminals…by guillotine.  One appeals judge even suggested that this form of execution was “probably best.”  If so, then I might have to revise this post and perhaps offer an apology to the Mufti.

But even if the Saudi’s practice a gentler and kinder method of beheading than which ISIS employs, they are still in the dark ages when it comes to “cruel and unusual punishment.”  Read what Wikipedia reports:

“Saudi Arabian authorities beheaded four men in February 2007— Sangeeth Kumara, Victor Corea, Ranjith Silva and Sanath Pushpakumara. These four Sri Lankan workers were convicted in a Saudi Arabian court for an armed robbery committed in October 2004. Their deaths sparked reactions from the international human rights group Amnesty International, which called on the Saudi authorities to abolish the death sentence. The court also ruled that the bodies of the four workers be crucified for public view as an example for others…”

I’m thinking that taking the bodies of beheaded men and crucifying them would fit the description of “cruel and unusual,” but what do I know?  Maybe the Saudi’s crucified them first and then beheaded them, but the Wiki article is not precise on this point.

Do not Muslims understand how bad all this makes Islam to civilized people?  If beheadings and crucifixions are routinely carried out in Saudi Arabia, ground zero for Muhammad and Islam, why do Muslims think that Westerners will have any other idea than that Islam is a brutal, cruel and barbaric religious system?

And let us never forget this timeless picture of ISIS terrorists handing out Qurans after they conquered this city in Iraq:

isis terrorist hands out quran in mosul

Yes, that’s right:  this terrorist, his face covered to hide his identity (or maybe to protect his delicate facial features from the burning sun?), may have recently sawed off some child’s head and is now handing out Qurans to the citizenry.  Does not this speak volumes? And is not “Allāhu Akbar” routinely shouted out when Muslims participate in the most heinous of crimes?

I have to say that I would be very concerned if Christians did two things:  behead innocent people while shouting “Jesus is Lord!” as they performed the deed.  Something would just not fit right with the world’s perception of “gentle Jesus, meek and mild” if this was routinely done by those who are called by His name.  We would certainly not claim that Christianity was a “religion of peace,” would we?

This is why Islam is cutting its own throat with these never ending parades of the most barbarous and unthinkable violence imaginable against innocent people.  Why?  Because it is proving that the heart and soul of Islam is a brutal ideology, one that must be fought against on every side, eradicated from the lips of a civilized world.

It is time to resurrect the spirit of the Crusades and wipe this form of barbarism off the planet.


Senseless violence won’t help Michael Brown

Matt Walsh wrote an excellent post on Michael Brown.  The facts are still being gathered to determine exactly how he died; the public needs to be able to sift the lies from the truth.

Obviously, someone is spreading lies in the facts of Brown’s death.  One camp is rioting, looting, burning, shooting and causing mayhem in the streets while holding up their arms and yelling, “Hands up; don’t shoot!” when confronted by the police.

The other camp is seeking to piece together the facts from this death, but doing so without the need to burn down and destroy the town while they search for the truth.

Not all blacks in Ferguson and the surrounding area are participating in the mayhem creating crimes; one in particular has  created a Youtube video rebuking his fellow blacks for the senseless crimes being committed.

Why is it that the black community has chosen to respond to this unfortunate incident in this manner?  Why do they so often resort to this kind of senseless criminal activity when one of their community members is shot and killed, before the facts are known?  And even if it is found that the cop who killed him was wrong, is this a reason to burn and loot and destroy innocent people’s property?  Is this the way to bring justice to Michael Brown, if he is indeed innocent?

Where are the Martin Luther King, Jr.’s leading protests in a peaceful manner?  What possible good can come from rampaging through the streets of Ferguson, throwing Molotov cocktails?  It is only reinforcing the firmly entrenched stereotypes that non-blacks have toward rampaging, lawless blacks.


The shooting of Michael Brown

The Ferguson police have released a surveillance video showing that Michael Brown, shot to death by Officer Darren Wilson, was involved in a strong-arm robbery before the confrontation with police that ended his life.

Some people are claiming that this has nothing to do with the separate issue of his alleged wrongful death.  Michael Curry, President of the Boston NAACP, said this:

“Even if this kid wasn’t perfect, the bottom line is whether he put his hands up and whether the police fired on an unarmed man.  That should be the focus of this conversation — not what took place beforehand.”

Note the use of the word “kid” by Mr. Curry.  Earlier in this same article, Brown was described as “an unarmed black teenager.”  Most of the articles that I have read describe Brown in a similar fashion.  In my mind, before I saw the still pictures of Brown in the video as he was in the process of robbing the market, I visualized him as a skinny, young black teenager with an innocent face.  We don’t often associate a “kid” with criminal activity but one of innocence and goodness.

As I read more articles (again, before seeing the pictures of Brown), my first reaction was to look upon his death with suspicion; I was genuinely swayed by the opinions of others who reported that Brown was ruthlessly gunned down by the police officer.

The “Hand’s up, don’t shoot!” rallies that were held around the country further influenced me.  How could this innocent young black teenager, who possibly just started puberty and didn’t need to shave, have been so brutally gunned down when he had his hands up in the air for the officer to see?

Then I saw the pictures from the surveillance video and began to dig deeper into this story.  I noted that Brown was nothing like the mental picture I had conjured up: no skinny, acne-scarred toothpick of a teenager but a full grown giant of a man, 6’4″ and 292 pounds.  The way he bullied and assaulted the convenience store clerk for the box of Swisher Sweet cigars wiped out any remaining sympathy I had for this criminal.  And once we go from believing a “kid” was ambushed by power-hungry cops to seeing a criminal robbing a store and bullying the store clerk, our perspectives instantly change.


Why does the media insist on calling this dead criminal a “teenager”? Because it feeds into their strategy of coloring the facts, of creating a fictional character out of someone who did not exist, and feeding into the “victim mentality” of so many in the black community.

I was genuinely duped by the media’s systematic shading of the facts in this sad case.  I would not have been surprised to learn that Brown, before being gunned down by this racist cop, was studiously cramming for his entrance exams into some university following his high-school graduation.  Was I ever deceived.

Evidently, facts matter little to lawyer Benjamin L. Crump, who is representing the parents of the deceased. “There is nothing based on [the] facts that have been placed before us that would justify the execution-style murder,” he said. He also claimed that Brown’s parents were “beyond outraged” at the allegations.  Crump then described the release of police records as an “old game of smoke and mirrors” that the police often use to tilt the facts in their favor in such circumstances.

The claim that Brown’s involvement in robbing this convenience store has nothing to do with the subsequent deadly altercation with the police is absurd.  In fact, it has everything to do with what happened—it shines needed light on what might have took place in the patrol car which ultimately led to his death.

For example, if Brown bullied the store clerk, its possible such intimidation tactics were part of his method of operation.  At the least, it shows that Brown was capable of such behavior,  far from the innocent lamb he was earlier portrayed as.

Brown’s family, according to this NBC post, called the death of Brown a “brutal assassination.”  The article continues:

“The family said in a statement: ‘There is nothing based on the facts that have been placed before us that can justify the execution style murder of their child by this police officer as he held his hands up, which is the universal sign of surrender.'”

Note this carefully worded statement loaded with language intended to provoke reactions and emotions:  ‘…justify the execution style murder of their child,’ ‘as he held his hands up…the universal sign of surrender.'”

These words are a rush to judgment, intended to incite heated emotions from this community.  The officer who shot and killed Brown, like any accused of such a crime, is “innocent until proven guilty,” and this only if he is found at fault.  The officer has not been charged with any crime, so why the incendiary language of “execution style” and “murder of their child”?There is no credible evidence that Brown was “murdered” “execution style.”  And Brown, as seen, is no “child.”

It is clear what is happening: the family and community are using this tragic incident as an opportunity to lash out against what they feel are injustices against them from this predominantly all white police department.  Do their grievances have a legitimate foundation?  Perhaps they do, but intentionally whipping up emotions by employing language that cannot possibly, at this point in the investigation, be verified is irresponsible and has contributed to the looting, violence and destruction of property that has occurred.

Those making these irresponsible statements, and those publishing them, knowing full well the reactions they will cause, must share in the blame for the mayhem that has followed.


More on wisdom

If you were asked to choose between one million dollars in cash, tax free, or the gift of biblical wisdom, which would you choose?

Think carefully before you answer; it will reveal much about your value system.

Granted, the gift of a million dollars would be hard to walk away from, particularly for a seemingly abstract concept like biblical wisdom.  Someone might argue that not accepting such a mountain of cash would be downright foolish–even unwise.

“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,
And the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.”  Proverbs 9:10 (NASB)

“How much better it is to get wisdom than gold! And to get understanding is to be chosen above silver.”  Proverbs 16:16

The Book of Proverbs in the Old Testament is a treasure trove of wisdom.  I have mined its rich ore for decades and have been immeasurably blessed by the practical advice it offers.

A pastor I sat under for a couple of years gave this timeless advice on reading Proverbs, which contain 31 chapters:  each day, read the chapter in Proverbs that corresponds to the day of the month.  For example, today is February 20th, so you would read the 20th chapter of Proverbs, tomorrow is the 21st so you would read the 21st chapter, etc.

I have followed his advice for decades.  In some ways, the wisdom of Proverbs has become a part of my thinking process due to its saturation in my mind through long, repeated reading.

Though many would say I’m insane, if I were asked to choose between a million dollars in cash and the biblical gift of wisdom, I would choose wisdom.   I have learned that wisdom, as the Proverbs teach, is worth far more than silver or gold.

Let me give you a practical example.  Tattoo’s are the rage today, particularly among the younger crowd.  It is not uncommon to see women with their arms covered in tattoo’s, a sight once reserved only for “macho men.”

While these tattoo’s can sometimes be works of art, is it wise to put them all over your body?  Just because they might look stunning today on your arms and neck, what are they going to look like in ten to twenty years?  Ugly and repulsive, especially when your youthful skin starts to sag and the once vibrant colors  fade away.

And just because you might love that particular pattern or picture inked into your skin today, that is no guarantee you will feel the same affection for it next year.  The problem with tattoos are their permanence:  soap and water doesn’t wash them off.

Look at this picture.  Did this man make a wise decision?

Do you think this was a wise choice for a permanent face tattoo?

I encourage you to read, mediate and ponder the entire fourth chapter of Proverbs.  Choose wisdom over the million dollars.  You will never regret it.

The evil of Islam

The gruesome and horrifying pictures coming out of Iraq that shows beheadings, crucifixions, and other forms of torture on the Christian and other minority populations is beyond description.  Such things should never be seen or committed against innocent people.

I will post several below, but must warn readers that the images will be very disturbing and graphic.  My reasons for this is to highlight the evil of Islam as is practiced by the Islamic terrorists known as the “Islamic State (ISIS).”

I’m having difficulty controlling my emotions as I view these horrific images of what is being done to innocent men, women, and particularly children by these Islamic animals who are committing heinous war crimes against civilians.  Such acts against humanity defy reason and description and these men have forfeited their rights to life.  Such monsters should be hunted down, tried and executed.

The following photos are particularly disturbing because they show an innocent little girl who was beheaded.  As excruciatingly painful as these photos are to look at, the accompanying photos of the father holding her is just as heartbreaking.

Little girl beheaded 1

Little girl beheaded 3

Little girl beheaded 2

Can any father imagine putting himself in the place of this other father, holding the lifeless, decapitated body of his four or five year old daughter?  Even if the information on the photo is incorrect and is not the child’s father, the emotion on the man’s face tells us of his anguish, anger and disbelief.  It is beyond comprehension that any human being would murder an innocent child and decapitate her.

The civilized world needs to declare war on Islam.  I am not saying that we should declare war on every single Muslim, for there must be many Muslims who are as horrified as myself and others over these photos.  But the war we need to declare on Islam is that strain of this perverse religion that condones, encourages, supports, executes and funds these type of crimes against humanity.  We need to eradicate this kind of satanic ideology from the planet in whatever way possible.

I need to ask:  where are the outcries against this barbarism from moderate Muslims?   Yes, there are reports of Saudi Arabia and the Arab League denouncing ISIS, but are these Arab countries doing anything to halt the atrocities?

One major problem with Islam is the fact that beheading is found in the Quran.  Since this is true, it will be difficult for Muslims of any stripe, liberal or conservative, Sunni or Shia, progressives or moderates, to openly condemn this inhumane practice.  If the practice is encouraged in Islam’s “holy book,” those opposing it will be seen as infidels or even enemies of Islam.

“So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either [confer] favor afterwards or ransom [them] until the war lays down its burdens…” Quran 47:4

Note should be taken that other translations of the Quran read, “strike off their heads.”  My copy of the Quran reads, “smite at their necks.”  Also, note that these verses come from Qurans that have been sanitized by Muslim scholars to remove the more offensive language from the original Arabic.  These terms, “strike their necks” and “smite at their necks” have been translated in older Qurans as “cut off their heads.”

Here is another:

“[Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, ‘I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.'” 8:12

Here, the “Lord” of Islam is telling the angels to cut off both heads and fingertips of unbelievers, or anyone who is not a Muslim.  Can any Christian, a believer in Jesus, imagine the Son of God telling the angels to cut of non-Christian’s heads and fingertips, simply for not believing in Him?

This is why the inhumane and evil treatment that these Muslim fanatics are perpetrating against innocent people in Iraq is not surprising to the average Muslim living in that area of the world.  After all, beheading is not only commanded in their “holy” book, but was practiced by their beloved prophet, Muhammad.  How can the practice be condemned?

These crimes against humanity currently orchestrated against the civilian population of Iraq by ISIS is the reason for America to aim her advanced weaponry against these murderers.  It should be a continual, ongoing and never-ending operation until this satanic practice, and those who participate in and promote it,  are eradicated from the planet.

isis terrorist hands out quran in mosul

The photo above shows one of the ISIS terrorists handing out copies of the Quran in a city they captured.  I wonder if his hands are stained with the blood of an innocent child he recently beheaded?  Does anyone question where these murderous thugs get their inspiration for their violence and beheadings but in the Quran?  The irony and hypocrisy of the so-called “religion of peace” is clearly shown in this photo.