The Human Events story alluded to in Lay Pulpit’s last article stated that there are misconceptions about “radical Islam” vs. “moderate Islam” – that there is no such thing as “moderate” Islam, but only Islam. Human Events also quoted some of the same Koran passages that the YouTube video in our last article used to prove its point. This is certainly true: Islam is, to repeat, NOT moderate, but militant – malevolently militant – both in the Koran’s written word and in the actions of Islam’s followers (as recent events in the news have borne out).
Yes, it should be -- but will they? Convincing well-meaning Moslems that Christianity is the one true system of belief -- and to expect them to “come around” -- is easier said than done. Getting “rational” Moslems to concede to Christian principles is one thing -- but convincing them to give up the religion that they’ve been steeped in "from the cradle" is quite another. Besides, they might counter that the irrational passages cited in our last article's video were “cherry-picked” and/or “taken out of context,” and that the Koran has just as many “just and rational” passages that echo many of our own beliefs. And then there’s the question of “atmosphere,” i.e., can an atmosphere of mutual trust, tolerance, and understanding be created to permit such discussion and “dialoguing” (and, hopefully, “progress”) to take place? That is an elusive goal.
And the reason that it is elusive has to do with something at which we hinted in our last article: our liberal media. What they report – and, more importantly, how they report it – tends to create an inflammatory, not tranquil – atmosphere. Nowadays, we seldom get the truth anymore through “official channels” – as another Human Events story illustrates most clearly: we were told by our news media that the black “unarmed teenager” (Michael Brown) recently shot by police in Ferguson, Missouri was “shot in the back while surrendering.” The real facts dispute just about everything the mainstream media reported. Here is an excerpt from what the Human Events article had to say:
When ideology trumps the facts, ideology has a way of escalating its disconnect. The original narrative out of Ferguson was that a racist cop gunned down an innocent and inoffensive “teenager” for no reason, shooting him in the back while he was trying to surrender. (They never got around to explaining why someone would turn his back to the police officer while surrendering, but it was part of the mythology.) As each part of that narrative has been peeled away, agitators have suddenly started claiming it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter that Brown was huge and intimidating, not a little “teenager.” It doesn’t matter that the officer was injured. It doesn’t matter that the police officer is a six-year veteran with a clean record. It doesn’t matter that Brown roughed up a store clerk and stole cigars from a liquor store. It doesn’t matter that the primary hostile witness was revealed to be a liar and accomplice to the robbery. It doesn’t matter that Brown wasn’t shot in the back. It doesn’t matter that he had marijuana in his system…*
Was the media’s reporting here an “accidental,” isolated case of “bad reporting” in which “they just happened to get it wrong”? NO!! It was a deliberate, orchestrated attempt to misrepresent and deceive, on the part of people who knew exactly what they were doing. And the same “misrepresentations” (i.e., lies) told about Ferguson, Missouri are repeated to us EVERY day, by ALL of our major media, on ALL fronts. If we are to make any sense out of anything, those foregoing words in bold-face type need to be understood and accepted implicitly. The old joke, “How can you tell when a politician is lying?” (Answer: “When his lips are moving”) applies here. So, to reemphasize, we are being lied to, EVERY day, by ALL of our major media, on ALL fronts. We earlier stated that we seldom get the truth anymore through “official channels.” “Seldom” is not the right word; “never” is a better one.
We also earlier stated, “Islam is, in and of itself, NOT moderate, but militant – malevolently militant – both in the Koran’s written word and in the actions of Islam’s followers (as recent events in the news have proven).” But that brings up another point to be considered (and why the last sentence’s words “in the news” were put in italics); those “recent events” were reported by the mainstream news media – and are therefore – for the reasons we have just been giving -- highly suspect. Yes, these events most certainly did occur – but why all the sudden reporting of them recently? There has been a plethora of “extremist Islamic” activity reported of late – and that should worry us. The practical result of this reporting has been to inflame our emotions of hatred (against Moslems), just as the emotions of blacks in Ferguson were inflamed (against a white police officer).
And to repeat and reinforce once more, all of this is an orchestrated thing. The media are doing a great job of “keeping the pot boiling” in both cases – of maximizing misunderstanding and chaos – and of creating an atmosphere of dysfunction, confrontation. fear, and mutual distrust. They are doing their best to polarize people and to inflame emotions on both sides – and we are all too aware of what happens when “emotions” take over. They are distorting everything – and, again, this is no accident.** The result is an atmosphere where cooperation and “progress” are almost impossible to achieve – at least in human terms. And that is one of the many reasons why converting Moslems (or even “dialoging” with them) is so difficult – and “easier said than done.”
In an atmosphere of mutual distrust, sitting down and “having a rational discussion” is not about to happen. Yes, as we said, there are “rational” Moslems, but many are NOT of that mindset. Many of the “rank and file” Moslems are very similar to the “Gerties” of SGG: they’re narrow-minded, gullible, and blindly obedient. (Islam is simplistic and “cultish” to begin with, and appeals mainly to the “less cerebral” set, who are easily swayed, not by “theoretical inconsistencies,” but by “mob demagoguery." Put another way, "how does one negotiate with a suicide bomber?") And even for Islamic “moderates,” how is that kind of “atmosphere” possible, humanly speaking, in today’s “media climate”? Creating that atmosphere is theoretically possible – but it’s a tall order. To repeat, the media poison just about everything that we see and hear – and the media are firmly in control.
That being said, we can’t, however, just “give up” and do nothing in the face of things. The “good news” is that the Koran is “an easy target,” and that its tenets are easy to shoot down: they are self-contradictory, self-deprecating, and easily disprovable – and the Koran is full of them. It also must be remembered that a system of belief, to have any validity, must be philosophically sound; and its tenets, like math or science theorems, must hold up to logical scrutiny – and Islam’s don’t. Any system that contradicts itself cannot abide. As Our Lord Himself put it, “A house divided against itself cannot stand” – and Islam is such a “house.” So, bringing it down can be done -- but it won’t be easy. As we inferred earlier, logic doesn’t work very well on a mob – plus, there is a well-orchestrated campaign of misinformation and manipulation going on to keep all sides in a state of max confusion, consternation, and conflict – a pretty grim scenario. Nonetheless, we must “do our part” to combat Islam, regardless of what that “scenario” might be.
It is deplorable that neither the “establishment” Church nor traddieland’s self-serving hucksters are doing their part, and that others must sound the alarm (such as lay forums like this one, and – increasingly -- Protestants). Ironically, it is they – Protestants -- who are taking the lead in this – as well as in other things (such as, speaking out against Evolution). To repeat what was said in our last article, we need good men, i.e., good priests, to take Catholicism’s part of that “lead.” And our part, the laity’s? Besides supporting good priests in their efforts, we need to withdraw our support from bad priests – from self-serving parasites who drain our wallets to feather their own nests. Are you listening, Gerties?
*Contrast this coverage of that black youth shot by a white cop with the non-coverage given to a white youth shot by a black cop (click here for details).
**Actually, they have been doing it for generations: fomenting class and/or ethnic divisiveness, politico-economic and religious discord, “gender” struggles (feminism, “gay rights,” etc.) – not to mention, “environmental” and “climate” “issues.” It is an attack on all fronts – a “divide and conquer” strategy that targets all mankind. And who are the “they” who are doing this? The ultimate “orchestrator” behind all of this is, of course, the devil – but his “instruments” in this are human: “they” are those same Zionists who control our media -- and they label (and “shout down”) as “anti-Semitic” anyone who speaks out against them.
The irony is that most Zionists, i.e., Jews, are not Semitic but Asiatic – from a place in south-central Asia called Khazaria (that occupied parts of what are now Ukraine and Asiatic Russia) – and are referred to as “Khazars” or “Ashkenazi” Jews. Actually, there are probably very few Semitic Jews left today. Not only that: there is, in fact, no specific “genetic marker” that exists today for “Jews.” Another irony: many of today’s Arabs are of Semitic blood; so, to call them “anti-Semitic” is a bit of a “contradiction,” to say the least.
Additionally, it must be noted that “Israel” is a secular – not religious -- state, and that very few “Israelis” are “practicing Jews” (in the religious sense). Most are “non-religious” in nature and are “Jews” in the political or “ethnic” sense only. Many, in fact, are openly atheistic – opposed to any creed. And those who are religious (including many orthodox Jews) often reject the Zionist agenda, because they see it as a worldly one, not a spiritual one. The Zionists’ “kingdom,” like that of the Pharisees of old, “is of this world.”
The Zionists have stated several times – in no uncertain terms – that their ultimate “agenda” is not just one of “establishing a homeland” for themselves, but of “getting a much larger piece of the pie” (in fact, the “whole pie,” if you get our drift). Their first “piece” of that pie, Israel, was formed in 1947 (with U.S. and British sanction and collaboration), at the expense of the Palestinians who lived there -- and who were dispossessed of that land to make way for them. [It is no wonder, then, why the Palestinians feel the way they do. I wonder what we’d do if someone came in and kicked us out of our homes, and then gave America back to the Indians. I think that we’d feel the same way!] And ever since, there has never been peace in that part of the world -- and the Mideast has become the constant, never-ending quagmire of strife and discord that it is today.