Why Akathleptos?

Why Akathleptos? Because it means Uncontainable. God is infinite. Hence, the whole universe cannot contain Him. The term also refers to the incomprehensibility of God. No man can know everything about God. We can know Him personally but not exhaustively, not even in Heaven.

Why Patmos? Because the church is increasingly marginalized and exiled from the culture.

Why Pen-Names? So the focus is on the words and not who wrote them. We prefer to let what we say stand on its own merit. There is precedent in church history for this - i.e., the elusive identity of Ambrosiaster who wrote in the 4th century A.D.

“Truth is so obscured nowadays, and lies so well established, that unless we love the truth we shall never recognize it." Blaise Pascal

Saturday, March 25, 2017

The Naive Criteria Of Law Enforcement In Ascertaining Islamic Threats

Department of Homeland Security agent Philip Haney revealed the federal government’s appeasement of supremacist Islam in his book, “See Something Say Nothing.” The difficulty of anticipating and preventing attacks by people such as the recent London attacker Khalid Masood who are apparently "lone-wolf" operatives using vehicles and machetes as weapons underscores the importance of understanding the religious dimension to the threat Western Civilization faces, Haney contends.

Haney correctly points out that the West has “a blind spot” when it comes to the threat of Islamic jihad. He experienced it firsthand as a Department of Homeland Security officer who worked with one of the National Targeting Center’s advanced units, which provides information in real time to officers at ports of entry. Haney helped develop a case in 2011 on a worldwide Islamic movement known as Tablighi Jamaat. Within a few months, the case drew the “concern” of the State Department and the DHS’s Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Office because the Obama administration believed it unfairly singled out Muslims. The case effectively was shut down, even though the intelligence had been used to connect members of the movement to several terrorist organizations and financing at the highest levels, including for Hamas and al-Qaida.

Only a few years later, Syed Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, were found to have been tied to Tablighi Jamaat, meaning if the case had been allowed to continue, the attack might have been prevented. Later, Haney also found the Orlando killer Mateen had a link to the case. Haney has said that if he had been given the opportunity to question San Bernardino killer Farook upon his return to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia in 2014, he would have asked him about the fact that he had grown a Shariah-compliant beard and was wearing an Islamic headdress while his passport photo showed him bareheaded and clean-shaven.

“We need to adjust and improve our ability to observe and address this tactical blind spot,” Haney said. "You can still do it without violating our civil rights and civil liberties.”

The refusal of law enforcement to acknowledge the religious foundation of Islamic terror is fatal. As I pointed out here in July 2016,

... the problem is that terrorists are simply reading the Islamic texts as the first Muslim did - i.e., they are true to Islamic theology. "Radical" Islamists are simply being true to the text and teachings. The mainstream media works overtime to deceive people in falsely identifying Muslim terrorists as "radical Islam," when these acts of terror have in fact been carried out by Muslims in accordance with the teachings of Islam since its inception 1400 years ago.

The lie of 'radical Islam' or 'Islamic extremists' has also been advanced by Muslim advocacy groups like the terror-linked CAIR and others who have bullied and intimidated the media into presenting a false narrative about Islam and Muslims, claiming that acts of terror carried out here in the US and around the world are the work of a very small minority of 'radical Muslims' and that the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful and just want to live quiet lives.

While the vast majority of Muslims may not engage in jihad or acts of terror, it is noteworthy that their leaders almost never publicly denounce those acts but actually try to justify them. Why? Because jihad is an undeniable central teaching of Islam. The only correct delineation between Muslims is "practicing Muslims" and "non-practicing Muslims". When a Muslim commits an act of terror in the name of 'allah,' they are doing precisely what their religion teaches them. When a Christian commits a heinous act of violence/terror, they are acting in clear violation of the teaching of Scripture.

The term "radical Islam" is meaningless since Islam is inherently radical by nature. The truth is that there is no such thing as radical Islam.  The term is an invention of western politicians in a desperate attempt to confront the problem of Islamic terrorism, without offending Muslims.

No comments:

Post a Comment