Thursday, December 29, 2011

"The caliphate," is "alive and growing within Europe!

For more than 30 years, Bat Ye'or, a refugee from Egypt, has been writing about Christians and Jews living under oppression in Muslim lands. She is writing new book, "Europe, Globalization and the Coming Universal Caliphate," that looks at Muslims living in lands that once were Christian but today call themselves multicultural. She predicts Europe will not remain multicultural for long. She is convinced that Europe, sooner rather than later, will be dominated by Islamic extremists and transformed into "Eurabia" — a term first used in the mid-1970s by a French publication pressing for common European-Arab policies.
Immigrants can enrich a nation. But there is a difference between immigrants and colonists. The former are eager to learn the ways of their adopted home, to integrate and perhaps assimilate — which does not require relinquishing their heritage or forgetting their roots. Colonists, by contrast, bring their culture with them and live under their own laws. Their loyalties lie elsewhere.
Ye'or contends that a concerted effort is being made not only to ensure that Muslim immigrants in Europe remain squarely in the second category but also that they become the means to transform Europe politically, culturally and religiously. Leading this effort is the Organization of the Islamic Conference, established in 1969 and which, a few months ago, no doubt upon the advice of a highly compensated public relations professional, renamed itself the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.
The OIC represents 56 countries plus the Palestinian Authority. It claims also to represent Muslim immigrants — the "Diaspora" — in Europe, the Americas, Africa and Asia. It is pan-Islamic: It seeks to unify and lead the world's 1.3 billion Muslims. In a manual first published in 2001, "Strategy of Islamic Cultural Action in the West," the IOC asserts that "Muslim immigrant communities in Europe are part of the Islamic nation." It goes on to recommend, Ye'or notes, "a series of steps to prevent the integration and assimilation of Muslims into European culture."
The IOC, she argues, is nothing less than a "would-be, universal caliphate." It might look different from the caliphates of the Ottomans, Fatamids and Abbasids. It might resemble, instead, a thoroughly modern trans-national bureaucracy. But, already, the OIC exercises significant power through the United Nations, and through the European Union which has been eager to accommodate the OIC while simultaneously endowing the U.N. with increasing authority for global governance. Among the other organizations that Ye'or says are doing the OIC's bidding are the U.N. Alliance of Civilizations, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights and the European Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation (PAEAC).
In the eyes of OIC officials, no problem in the contemporary world is more urgent than "Islamophobia" which it calls "a crime against humanity" that the U.N. and the E.U. must officially outlaw. Even discussing why so much terrorism is carried out in the name of Islam is to be forbidden. The OIC insists, too, that international bodies ban "defamation of religion" by which it means criticism of anything Islamic. Defamation of Judaism, Christianity, Bahai, Hinduism and even heterodox Muslim sects such as the Ahmadiyya is common within the borders of many OIC countries, a fact the OIC refuses to acknowledge.
Instead, the OIC has specifically "warned" the E.U. and the "international community" of the "dangers posed by the influence of Zionism, Neo-Conservatism, aggressive Christian evangelicalism, Jewish extremism, Hindu extremism and secular extremism in international affairs and the 'War on Terrorism.'"
Though funding for terrorist groups flows generously from individuals in oil-rich OIC countries, the organization itself is not a supporter of terrorism. Neither, however, is it an opponent. Violence directed against those it views as enemies of Islam is defined as "resistance" -- even when civilians, including women and children, are the intended victims.
While the OIC expresses concern for the rights of Muslim immigrants in the West, the egregious mistreatment of foreign workers in the Gulf countries (and other Muslim countries as well) is not something OIC officials deign to discuss. Nor has the OIC ever condemned the genocide of the black Muslims of Darfur or the genocidal intentions toward Israelis openly expressed by Hamas, Hezbollah and the rulers of Iran.
European diplomats might at least insist that the OIC accept the principle of reciprocity. If there is to be a "dialogue of civilizations" shouldn't both sides get to air grievances? Shouldn't Europeans work to end the persecution of religious and ethnic minorities in OIC countries and to grant foreign workers in Muslim countries basic rights and a path to citizenship? If the Saudis want to fund and control tens of thousands of mosques around the world, is it too much to ask that they permit people of other faiths to at least worship on their soil?
Evidently it is and Ye'or offers this explanation: Committed to a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-lateral ideology that rejects patriotism and even national identity and cultural pride, afflicted by guilt over their imperial and colonial past — and ignorant about more than a thousand years of Islamic imperialism and colonialism -- Europeans have become dhimmis in their own lands: inferiors who accept their status and submit. The OIC, by contrast, rejects multi-culturalism, openly professing the superiority of the Islamic faith, civilization and laws.
"The caliphate," Bat Ye'or concludes, is "alive and growing within Europe. It has advanced through the denial of dangers and the obfuscating of history. It has moved forward on gilded carpets in the corridors of dialogue, the network of the Alliances and partnerships, in the corruption of its leaders, intellectuals and NGOs, particularly at the United Nations."
If you think that's alarmist, if you think the OIC sincerely seeks cooperation with the West or that Europeans know where lines must be drawn and have the courage to draw them, read her book. Or just wait a few years.
For more on this see this web site:

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

I Am Wondering...

With Iran on the verge of securing the latest in weapons technology with the RQ-170 Sentinel drone showing up intact - on Iranian television, Israel's leaders may be turning back to the basics. This week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that he was re-establishing a weekly Bible study at the Prime Minister's official residence. 

Netanyahu explained that he intended to follow in the footsteps of former Prime Ministers David Ben-Gurion and Menachem Begin. They also conducted weekly studies of the Old Testament during their tenures. Netanyahu said that he wanted to promote a love of the Scriptures among government leaders and, through them, the rest of Israel. 

It's interesting to note that some of Israel's most influential leaders were great students of the ancient prophets and their predictions, Ben-Gurion and Begin included. It is also said that Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, though a Muslim, was a student of the Bible. I sometimes wonder if the courage shown by both Sadat and Begin to sign a peace treaty that has endured for more than three decades may have been, in some way, a result of their knowledge and appreciation of the ancient prophecies. 

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Closing Church Doors on Christmas?

Since Christmas falls on Sunday this year for the first time since 2005, some churches have decided to close their doors that morning. The rationale goes something like this: Our folks are busy enough on Christmas morning. They’ll have guests in town for the holiday. Attendance will probably be low anyway. Let’s just encourage everyone to spend the morning at home with family.
It’s not that I have a problem with spending time with my family. In fact, there’s very little else I’d rather do than spend time with my wife and kids. However, I do have a problem with canceling church on Christmas morning.
Such a decision not only keeps God’s people out of church, it keeps God’s praises off their lips. Most of those who decide to stay home that morning aren’t going to be singing a rousing rendition of “Joy to the World” at 10:45. Instead, they’ll do what they do every Christmas morning. They’ll get up. They’ll peek under the tree. Dad will get some coffee. Mom will get the camera. Let the festivities begin!
Yet, when you read the biblical accounts of the first Christmas, you see that it’s all about worship. Mary worships God when she’s told the wonderful news of the impending incarnation (Luke 1:46ff). An unborn John the Baptist worships in the womb. Zechariah worships at the birth of John (Luke 1:67-79). The Magi worship. The angels worship. The shepherds worship. Simeon worships. And Anna worships. Do we see a trend here?
Deciding to stay home on Christmas morning has spiritual implications. Rather than gathering as a body of believers to worship our God and Savior, many will spend the morning doing anything but that. Let’s not, in the name of family, join our unbelieving neighbors in denying God the praise He deserves on Christmas morning.

Sunday, December 11, 2011

Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood Favoritism Will Lead to War in the Middle East

I share this article with you from Walid Shoebat written by By Keith Davies.
Over the last year we have seen our government sell out Hosni Mubarak, the key leader who has brought relative peace and stability in the region. Instead, we have jumped on board with the “Arab Spring” which has led to Islamists taking power. My colleagues and I are not privy to CIA intelligence, but if we were able to predict such things based on common sense and our expertise in Middle East affairs, why could not our government see? Or maybe they can. It seems our government is infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood and, along with political correctness from politicians who choose reelection over common sense, has allowed the Middle East to become a powder keg ready to explode.
President Obama chose military intervention to remove Qaddafi from power yet ignores Syria, and when the Iranian people were protesting, he ignored them as well. Why? It appears that the Muslim Brotherhood pulls the strings at the State Department. Many of Obama’s key advisers are Muslim Brotherhood operatives. The Muslim Brotherhood could not allow a secular free country to arise in Iran, which would be likely if the Mullahs were overthrown. Obama did their bidding, stood silent, and provided no aid.
The situation in Syria is a little more complex, as military intervention could provoke Iran to war (being an Assad ally) as well as a major proxy war against Israel, but Turkey is ramping up pressure so the Muslim Brotherhood has already a key ally in the AKA party headed by Prime Minister Erdogan, who is part of the Muslim Brotherhood apparatus leveraging its power to undermine the Assad regime. Therefore, the Muslim Brotherhood does not need the USA to do its heavy lifting in Syria. It is only a matter of time before Assad is forced out.
The mainstream media are so stupid with regards to the Middle East that they do not even know what they don’t know. “The Arab Spring is about freedom” is ridiculous. While the spark may have been about freedom, the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamists have used this spark to achieve their goals, which is the sixth Caliphate, and have almost succeeded with the finishing line in sight.
Leon Panetta, adding to the complete folly of US policy in the Middle East, has criticized the United States’ so-called ally Israel for not reaching out to Turkey and Egypt. However, Israel is the only one that does the reaching out, and it appears the more reaching out it does, the bigger the black eye it gets. Ironically, when it was forced to use military force to defend itself in the past, the aftermath of those conflicts brought more stability and peace than when they “reached out.” Over sixty years of reaching out to the world, and still people like Leon Panetta seem to think that just one more time will make a difference and will sway world opinion. How many times have I heard that story over the last thirty years? One example for the doubters was the withdrawal from Gaza, which did not improve relations with the Arabs but instead caused thousands of rockets to rain down on Israel’s southern border.
The policy of the USA from 1979 to the present has now made the whole of the Middle East an unstable war zone with Shia Mullahs in Iran and now from Turkey, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen, and soon, Syria and others will come under the influence of the Nazi-style Muslim Brotherhood. We contend that Obama has deliberately brought on this because of his radical agenda and has been allowed to succeed with a combination of infiltration, naivety and political correctness.
Turkey is the key, and it will take over influence of the whole of the Sunni Middle East, using calls for peace to deceive, and when it achieves its goals of power it will then wage war against Israel. Iran will flex its muscles and will achieve its goal in gaining a nuclear weapon and will use that weapon against Saudi Arabia. After Saudi Arabia is destroyed, then all focus will be on Jerusalem.
Original Article: