Thinking Outside the Blog, written by Louis Lapides offers readers a much - needed pit stop to help us refine our thinking on life's big issues. In his blog Louis steers us outside those comfortable mental roads we often travel on when it comes to the way we think about God, religion, politics and culture. Thinking Outside the Blog maps out a highway of wisdom that must be revisited over and over.
Izhar Khan, iman of a Margate, Florida's mosque was arrested recently on charges of funneling money to Pakistan's Taliban. Southern Florida's Sun Sentinel reported before the spiritual leader could begin his Friday 6 a.m. worship service, he was arrested by federal agents and city police.
Officials report Khan was part of a larger conspiracy linked to the Pakistani terrorist group. According to the indictment against Kahn, "it was the purpose and object of the conspiracy to advance the jihad of the Pakistani Taliban against the Pakistani government and its perceived allies, including the United States, in order to displace the lawful government of Pakistan and to establish Sharia."
Kahn's mosque was stunned at the arrest of their iman. However, the most stunning aspect of the charge against Khan was the description of their spiritual leader.
Worshipper Navin Singh, 34 stated "He's not a bad person at all, he's very good, very respectful. He's into his religion and sports and that's it." Such shocking words to describe a man who covertly sent funds to the terrorist Taliban organization.
The Taliban are known to not only have killed Pakistani supporters of their government but also conspired to kill American troops sent to Pakistan to overthrow the Taliban. Consequently, Mr. Nice Guy was sending funds to Pakistan that were used to kill members of the U.S. military. "He's not a bad person at all." In my book Khan is a murderous Islamic monster; not a nice guy who is just into his religion and sports.
Another congregant described Khan as a "typical 76-year-old grandfather just preaching and teaching good values, just 'do's and don'ts' and we did not have any inclination that he had any kind of political motivations."
How do you describe a person who has been accused of supporting terrorism as a "typical grandfather" just preaching good morals? Have these people lost their minds, knowing their leader may be responsible for funding the deaths of hundreds or thousands of Muslims and Americans? Is Islam that blinding that its adherents can no longer recognize evil?
What blind devotion to a supporter of terrorism. The members of the Masjid Jamaat Al-Mumineen mosque should be hanging their heads in shame.
Thank God the Council on American-Islamic Relations suspended Izhar Khan as leader of the mosque. CAIR announced "The Muslim community rejects and condemns terrorism . . . and any support of terrorism."
The odd part of the Sun Sentinel article, written by Linda Trischitta and Paula McMahon, is that the two journalists devoted three columns quoting congregants who had nothing but positive words to say about their arrested leader. "He's a man of spirituality and humble, peace loving." "Whenever I came here [the mosque], he prayed and was peaceful." The article was slanted in the direction of making Khan out to be an everyday Joe-Iman.
Kahn was not a nice guy at all. In a private conversation included in the indictment against him, the iman was described, "[Hafiz] Kahn, upon hearing that mujahedeen in Afghanistan had killed seven American soldiers, declared his wish that God bring death to 50,000 more."
Shouts of "USA! USA! USA!" rang out in the streets of midtown Manhattan and in front of the White House at the news Sunday night of the demise of top Al-Qaeda terrorist Osama bin Laden. The celebrations of the killing of the mastermind behind the 9/11 attack on the U.S.A. were patriotic and victorious.
However, for the past two days radio talk shows were flooded with callers who questioned whether or not Americans should celebrate the death of bin Laden. Several people felt the celebrants were cheering in the streets as though their favorite sports team had won a World Series or Super Bowl championship.
I reject this thoughtless comparison and question the wisdom of those who dare compare the rejoicing of over a city's baseball team to the sense of justice felt over the shooting of an enemy of America who killed thousands of our people. Unlike several sports street celebrations, there was no rioting, destruction of property, looting or attacks on the police by those who enjoyed America's victory over Al-Qaeda's evil leader.
Many callers felt those who rejoiced over the Al-Qaeda leader's death were no different than our enemies who danced in the streets when New York's Twin Towers fell on 9/11. In fact, the opinion voiced by many stated we should never celebrate the death of anyone. Rather, the demise of a person is always a time of sadness. All deaths are equal.
I find nothing distasteful at the sight of Americans rejoicing over the news of Osama bin Laden's death. Yet I find a lot to take offense at by callers who felt Americans should not rejoice over the death of a noted enemy of America.
First, the celebration over the death of Osama bin Laden marked the triumph of good over evil. Osama bin Laden plotted with his Al-Qaeda goons to kill as many American citizens as possible, including Muslims. In several videos bin Laden gladly took responsibility for masterminding the 9/11 massacre. For the families who lost loved ones in the toppling of the Twin Towers, the United Airlines Flight 93 disaster and the attack on the Pentagon, they were given a sense of righteous revenge knowing bin Laden faced justice.
Second, the celebration of the death of Osama bin Laden is a normal reaction to the downfall of a wicked leader. Though I was not alive when the news came across the wires that Adolph Hitler was dead, I can imagine the celebration by "America's greatest generation" over the death of this maniacal dictator.
I rejoiced when Saddam Hussein, the murderer of hundreds of thousands of his own Iraqi people, was hung for his heinous crimes. In the Book of Esther chapter 9:16-18 describes how the people of Israel created the Feast of Esther or Purim to celebrate the death of Haman, a Persian official who plotted the destruction of the Jewish people in Persia. In addition to Haman's death, the Jewish people also killed 75,000 inhabitants of Persia who were seeking to destroy the Jewish population. Esther 9:19 describes how the Jewish people set aside the fourteen day of the month of Adar as a "day for gladness and feasting."
Third, the celebration over the death of Osama bin Laden demonstrates that all deaths are not the same. When a loved one dies, we are saddened by their passing. However, when Osama bin Laden was shot in the face and in the chest, I was not saddened for his wives nor the bin Laden family. I saw his death as just dessert for a man who dedicated himself to terrorist activities and devoted his talents to the destruction of others. Proverbs 11:10 instructs us that "When it goes well with the righteous, the city rejoices, and when the wicked perish there are shouts of gladness."
If a person struggles over the ability to feel of sense of justice when an evil man is executed, that individual has lost their moral compass.
I remember as a young child watching the hanging of Nazi killer Adolph Eichmann, and how proud I was of the Israelis for tracking down this monster, putting him on trial and then executing him for the genocide of hundreds of thousands of Jewish people. As a young child I had a sense of justice and have refused to allow our morally softening culture from taking that quality from me.
I'm sad to say that many of the callers protesting the celebration of the death of bin Laden over the radio were men. I would call them men who have lost their moral spine - men who most likely would not serve in the military due to their refusal to see the necessity of war to protect and preserve the freedom of our country.
I often wonder if these same men would've refused to fight Hitler's Nazi Germany were they alive during World War II. No wonder the Marines' slogan say, "We're looking for a few good men."
We can no longer remain silent about the abuse of women by Islamic men in the Middle East. Under Islamic law right now women are oppressed, denied human rights, treated as property, false accused of crimes and sexually abused.
After a period of silence female journal Lara Logan shared her horror story on "60 Minutes" Sunday night. While Islamic men rejoiced in Cairo's Tahrir Square at falling of Hosni Mubarak's Egyptian despotic regime, a mob surrounded the journalist and raped her with their hands and literally tore her body apart.
Logan is using her story to bring awareness to the sexual mistreatment of female journalists in the Middle East. Logan must also realize the mistreatment of females by extremist Islamic men is not solely directed at female journalists but women in general. Let us not forget how women protesting the facade of Iran's President Ahmadinejad "election" to office were beaten in the streets of Tehran by the leader's forces.
In Cyrus Nowrasteh's film The Stoning of Soraya M the film exposes the account of the abuse of one woman in Iran who was falsely accused of a crime leading to capital punishment by stoning to death.
It's too bad that most U.S. women's rights groups are so focused on abortion and equal rights in the work place that they are virtually silent at the mistreatment of women around the world, especially in extremist Islamic countries.
Even when Muslim's scholars are quizzed about the Koran's support of husbands beating their wives, the answers are often confusing and circuitous.
To keep readers aware of the mistreatment of women in the Middle East, here is a reproduction of Lara Logan's harrowing experience captured by Melissa Maerz in a Los Angeles Times article.
Breaking a months-long silence, CBS war correspondent Lara Logan talked to "60 Minutes" on Sunday night about what really happened to her in Cairo's Tahrir Square. On the night of Feb. 11, as the dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak was falling, Logan joined the more than 100,000 people celebrating in the square, where she says a mob turned on her and sexually assaulted her.
"Suddenly, before I even know what's happening, I feel hands grabbing my breasts, grabbing my crotch, grabbing me from behind," she told Scott Pelley of "60 Minutes."
Things quickly spiraled out of control. "I think my shirt, my sweater was torn off completely," she said. "My shirt was around my neck. I felt the moment that my bra tore. ... And I felt them tear out, they literally just tore my pants to shreds. ... I didn't even know that they were beating me with flagpoles and sticks and things, because I couldn't even feel that. Because I think of the sexual assault, was all I could feel, was their hands raping me over and over and over again. ... They were tearing my body in every direction at this point, tearing my muscles. And they were trying to tear off chunks of my scalp, they had my head in different directions."
Logan said she was fighting for 25 minutes and didn't think she would live. "I was in no doubt in my mind that I was in the process of dying," she said. But thinking about her two children at home in Washington helped her focus on staying alive.
Eventually, she said, she was rescued by a woman dressed head to toe in black religious robes. "Just her eyes, I remember [I could see] just her eyes," Logan said. "She put her arms around me. And oh my God, I can't tell you what that moment was like for me. I wasn't safe yet, because the mob was still trying to get at me. But now it wasn't just about me anymore.
"It was about their women and that was what saved me, I think," she said. "The women kind of closed ranks around me."
Logan flew back to Washington, where she spent four days in a hospital as she was treated for cuts, bruises and internal tearing. She's been recovering at home with her husband and children. "I felt like I had been given a second chance that I didn't deserve," she said of her family. "I came so close to leaving them, to abandoning them."
Logan told "60 Minutes" that she was speaking out to help end the code of silence surrounding sex assaults on female journalists.
As a guest on Fox's Bill O'Reilly show last night, Samaritan's Purse CEO Franklin Graham was asked about Pastor Robert Bell's denial of hell in his book, Love Wins.
Graham, son of evangelist Billy Graham, wasted no words in describing Bell as a "false teacher and a heretic" because "the Bible is very clear that there is a hell." Playing the devil's advocate O'Reilly questioned whether the belief in eternal damnation in hell is cruel. The evangelist responded.
What's cruel is a person who rejects Almighty God and slams the door in God's face. The Bible says God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son.
Graham made it clear that God has made every provision possible through the gift of His Son Jesus Christ so that no one need spend eternity separated from God.
Pastor Rob Bell of Mars Hill Bible Church, outside of Grand Rapids, Michigan, has become the center of controversy due to his denial of hell recently reported in Time magazine's cover article. Bell is a declared participant in a growing movement trying to pass themselves off as part of evangelical Christianity known as the "emerging church."
The emerging church phenomenon is a new generation churches, according to Christianity Today known for their improvisational approach to everything "from worship to leadership to preaching to prayer." Unfortunately, emerging church pastors are also taking an improvisational approach to the authority of the Bible.
I have to ask myself if a so called "christian" movement questions the reliability of the Word of God, then what is this movement emerging towards. Heresy? False doctrine? A watered-down version of the New Testament?
In an CT interview with Pastor Bell, he told the evangelical magazine that he started questioning his own assumptions about the Bible, "discovering the Bible as a human product, rather than a product of divine utterance."
Bell's wife Kristen confessed in the same interview that she grew up thinking "that we figured out the Bible that we knew what it means. Now I have no idea of what most of it means." With statements like these from the Bells, perhaps Mars Hill Bible Church should rename itself to "Mars Hill Bibleless Church."
It also seems any pastor who associates himself with the views of Pastor Bell may lose his job. At the end of March, North Carolina Methodist minister Chad Holtz was fired from his pastoral position after expressing his doubts over the existence of hell. Holtz was outed for his beliefs after posting on his Facebook page support for Pastor Bell's book Love Wins.
As a former pastor I rejoice that evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham, pastor and author John Piper and Southern Baptist Theological Seminary president R. Albert Mohler, Jr. are stepping forward in condemning the false teachings that are expressed by the leaders of the emerging church movement, especially Pastor Bell.
In a time when sound doctrine is essential to communicate the good news of Jesus the Messiah to a lost world, we cannot be improvising the eternal truths of the Word of God as seen in this current movement.
The challenge to the growing rank of emergent churches is to start emerging back to holding fast to timeless teachings of Jesus, and stop worrying how to make Jesus more relevant to today's aimless culture. Jesus Himself told His contemporaries that "heaven and earth will pass away, but my words shall not pass away" (Matthew 24:35).
In 1975 John Lennon wrote the song Imaginein which he visualized a world where hell does not exist:
Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Now Pastor Robert Bell of Michgan's Mars Hill Bible Church has sketched out the theology to accompany Lennon's classic tune.
On the cover of the April 14th issue of Time magazine, the question sparked by Rob Bell's book new best seller, Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived, is asked, "What If Hell Does Not Exist?"
The Time article offers a meandering outline of Bell's theology regarding the issue of hell's existence. The news magazine makes it crystal clear that the traditional evangelical message is that salvation is found only in the atoning death of Jesus Christ. Bluntly stated, Time author Jon Meacham acknowledges the classic Christian viewpoint, "In the Evangelical ethos, one either accepts this and goes to heaven or refuses and goes to hell."
In contrast the Michigan pastor suggests that the redeeming work of Jesus Christ "may be universal." In other words, every person who has ever lived has a place in heaven. Rather than parlay with Bell's non-evangelical theology on every jot and title, I want to address a few disconcerting issues in his belief system:
*Pastor Bell's lack of certainty in his denial of the existence of hell is a red flag. In contrast to the New Testament authors who speak with confidence about salvation through Christ alone, Bell speaks of his "salvation for everybody" with a great deal of uncertainty. He feels the eternal destiny of those who don't accept Christ is a "mystery" and that his view is a "suggestion".
Of what advantage is Bell's beliefs if they are merely uncertainties and suggestions of mystery? Pastor Bell is concocting a stew of controversy in the church over issues he is not really sure of himself. Consequently, his book helps no one but is a tragic piece of Christian literature whose sole purpose is to raise doubt regarding the veracity of the Bible.
Perhaps Bell should have written a science fiction novel about a make-believe Christian utopia rather than a book about a make-believe theology!
*If Bell's view of hell is true, then, as Meacham points out, "Christianity becomes [little] more of an ethical habit of mind than a faith based on divine revelation."
If all Christianity has contributed is just one more religiously based moral code, then Christ died needlessly. Without the substitutionary death of Jesus, the Apostle's have given us a set of rules to follow in order to live a better life. Eternal salvation through Jesus becomes a non-issue in Pastor Bell's uncertain theology.
Even if Jesus died for everyone resulting in the fact everyone is going to heaven, where is the motivation for sharing the gospel message? There is no need for the church to share the message of Christ and there is no need for the cross which is the essence of the gospel message.
*Finally, if there is no hell as John Lennon merely imagined, then there lacks a sense of justice in the universe. In the afterlife both the victimizer and the victim are destined to the same end. Even if one believes the afterlife is a state of sleep or annihilation, the adherent to this view has to deal with the fact life ends without a sense of divine justice. Hitler and Mother Teresa share the same fate.
An afterlife without divine justice means that murderers like Jeffrey Dahmer, Joseph Stalin and Pol Put will never face judgment for their sins. Unless they confessed their sins and sought forgiveness from Christ for their heinous crimes, they will be enjoying eternal bliss with their victims.
Though I am not a betting man, I highly doubt if anyone of these brutal killers ever repented of their sins and begged Jesus for forgiveness. I don't know about you, but a world that does not include divine justice is a sad, meaningless world.
The worse aspect of Bell's Love Wins is his question, "What does it mean to be a Christian?" Bell's book leads us to the conclusion that a follower of Christ is non-judgmental, lacks a sense of conviction about the gospel message of eternal life through Christ and that other faiths are no different than the New Testament message of salvation through Jesus. If am a Buddhist, then why do I need to accept Jesus as my Savior if He has already redeemed my soul and promises me heaven?
Robert Bell has a lot of answering to do for his "denial of hell" which has placed him outside the fold of the evangelical faith.
This week newspapers trumpeted the significance of the discovery of 70 lead codices (manuscript volume) that could impact our knowledge of early Christian history. Some scholars are of the opinion this find may be more important than the Dead Sea Scrolls.
According to the BBC News this could be the earliest Christian writing in existence.
Tests so far by metallurgists on the badly corroded lead leaves. unearthed in a northern Jordanian cave, suggest the books were not made recently, suggesting they are not a fake. The jury will have to remain out on the dating of this discovery until all the evidence has been examined.
Director of Jordan' Department of Antiquities, Ziaf al-Saad advocates the books may have been composed by Christians living in the "few decades immediately following His [Jesus] crucifixion."
The Jordanian government is arguing the codices were smuggled out of Jordan by an Israeli Bedouin who claims the relics were in his family for 100 years. Rather than belabor the issue of who owns the books, biblical scholars need to focus on the validity and meaning of this possible unprecedented find.
The Composition of the Codices
The books, which turned up five years ago, were cast in lead before they were bound together by lead rings. They resemble an ancient spiral notebook. The pages or leaves are the size of a credit card and the text contained within the manuscripts are written in ancient Aramaic - the language of Jewish people living in the time of Jesus.
Presently a British team of archaeologists, headed by David Elkington, a scholar of ancient religious archaeology, is investigating these objects that may have made the rounds among early Jewish believers in Jesus.
So far, according to Yahoo News inspection of the codices contain "a number of images and textual allusions to the Messiah, as well as some possible references to the crucifixion and resurrection."
In the upper square of one of the book covers, a seven-branch menorah is displayed. Elkington states the presence of the menorah would be interpreted by early Christians as indicating Jesus. Since the menorah was placed in the holy place in the Temple, it spoke of the presence of God. Since Jesus brought the presence of God on earth, the menorah on the manuscript cover, says Elkington, points to Jesus.
The Validity of the Codices
Are these codices valid or not? My main concern is the readiness of some Christian scholars to add their twentieth century theological biases to the understanding of this ancient relic.
There is a cross in the foreground, and behind it is what has to be the tomb [of Jesus], a small building with an opening, and behind that the walls of the city. There are walls depicted on other pages of these books, too, and they almost certainly refer to Jerusalem.
Davies is way too assured when he states, "it is a Christian crucifixion taking place outside the city walls." One cannot forget that Jesus was not the only one crucified by the Romans.
Crucifixion was a regular method of execution of Jewish rebels against the Romans rule in the early centuries. A casual examination of the New Testament reveals the two thieves that were crucified next to Jesus at a location outside the city walls that was probably used to execute Jewish Zealots.
When Davies says, "what has to be the tomb [of Jesus}, he needs to rear back before making such bold pronouncements until further evidence is brought forth. We cannot forget the forgeries of other so-called Christian relics such as the ossuary that was said to contain the bones of James, the half brother of Jesus.
The questionable reference to the resurrection of Jesus. Along with the image of the menorah, a text reads, "I shall walk uprightly," a sentence Robert Pigott, BBC News religious affairs correspondent, says could refer to the resurrection of the Messiah. He also maintains this phrase appears in the Book of Revelation.
The presumption this phrase refers to the resurrection is Pigott's conjecture and thus far is not supported by any similar statements from either Jewish or Christian source materials. Christians should be hesitant to quickly conclude like Pigott that we have an early reference to the resurrection of Christ in the lead leaves.
The preposterous reference to the sealed book in Revelation I am amused by the view put forth by the Yahoo article that "since some of the codices were sealed, prompting yet more breathless speculation that they could include the sealed book, shown only to the Messiah, mentioned in the Book of Revelation."
This view is fallacious for several reasons:
First, the sealed book mentioned in the futuristic vision in Revelation 5:1 refers to a heavenly (not earthly) scene taking place before the throne of God, and only the Lamb of God, Jesus was able to open the book (vs. 6). So these codices could not be the book that could only be opened by Jesus.
Second, further reading of Revelation 5 shows the sealed book contains the seven seals of judgment to fall upon the earth during the period of the tribulation on the earth prior to the return of Jesus (Revelation 6).
Third, if the sealed book can only be shown to the Messiah, why are we even discussing this archaeological find? All the experts would need to open the sealed books would be a pair of wire cutters and the mystery is solved. Fortunately, the mystery is already solved since we are already told what is contained in the sealed book in the Book of Revelation.
Conclusive Comments
Whether or not the codices are authentic remains to be seen. For sure, their discovery is exciting and could contain a link to the early Jewish followers of Jesus. If anything, these codices, assuming they are not forgeries, can provide many unanswered questions concerning the beliefs of the early Jewish followers in Yeshua in the first century. If the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus are contained in these manuscripts that would put to rest the liberal Christian view that the resurrection of Jesus was a doctrine fabricated by Gentile Christians in later centuries.
I would be the first one to celebrate the validation of the widespread faith in Jesus as Israel's Messiah among first century Jews. However, for now the jury is still out on confirming the authenticity of this important archaeological discovery.
"WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?" Louis Farrakhan shouted at President Obama over WVON-AM 1690 radio in Chicago on Saturday's broadcast.
Farrakhan's Controversy Over Libya
Minister Farrakhan, long-time Nation of Islam leader aimed his tirade at the U.S. President over his decision to call Libya's Muammar Gaddafi to step down from his leadership role. Gaddafi is the object of America, Great Britain and France's ire over the slaughtering of Libyan citizens who are protesting his dictatorship politics and seeking his resignation.
Farrakhan, outspoken supporter of Obama and recipient of a lifetime achievement award from Obama's former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, is a noted anti-Semite and racist. In his criticism of the president, the Minister cautioned Obama:
I warn my brother do not let these wicked demons move you in a direction that will absolutely ruin your future with your people in Africa and throughout the world…Why don’t you organize a group of respected Americans and ask for a meeting with Gaddafi, you can’t order him to step down and get out, who the hell do you think you are?”
Farrakhan's Blind Eye Towards Muslim-on-Muslim Mass Slaughter
Farrakhan reference to "wicked demons" describes the leaders of "imperialist" Great Britain, France and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton who decided to establish a "no fly" zone in Libya. Farrakahn is infamous for calling white people "white devils" yet he ignores the Islamic demons in his own backyard.
Not once in Farrakhan's biased rant on Chicago radio did he condemned the slaughter of Libyan citizens - fellow-Muslims - by the Libyan leader.
Minister Farrakhan was quick to condemn President George W. Bush for advancing into Iraq for the purpose of regime change. Yet Mr. Farrakhan never condemned his Muslim brother, Saddam Hussein, in his murderous use of WMDs against the the Kurds and against Shi'ite Muslims in the Iran-Iraq war. The Nation of Islam leader also skipped over the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis Hussein tortured and savagely slaughtered during his evil reign.
Farrakhan displayed a jaundiced eye towards the miserable human rights violations unleashed by Iranian leader Ahmadinejad upon fellow Iranians, especially Islamic women.
It is clear the Nation of Islam leader, like his Chicago cohort, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, is more concerned with condemning America as an imperialist force than he is in blasting Islamic leaders for their slaughter of thousands of fellow-Muslim brothers and sisters. In recent years America has shown more concern over the death of Muslims than the Black Muslim Minister!
Farrakhan's Consistent Hatred of Israel
Farrakhan wasted no time in his radio fireside "rant and rave" to condemn Israel as he addressed Americans:
Is it that you are so concerned over the blood that is being shed in Libya that you look the other way when the Israeli Defense Force was bombing innocent people of Gaza, unarmed men, women and children? But our government looked the other way.
Mr. Farrkahan not once acknowledged the terrorists attacks on Israel by Palestinian citizens of Gaza that preceded the IDF's attack on the Gaza. Calling the Palestinians "unarmed" demonstrates the Minister's ignorance of the fact the Israeli military discovered tunnels running from Gaza to Egypt for the purpose of transporting arms into Palestinian territories. Just last week Israelis commandeered an Iranian ship bound for the Gaza Strip loaded with weapons to be used in terrorist actions against the people of Israel.
From the Black Voice News we learn more about Farrakhan-Gaddafi-Palestinian connection:
Gaddafi used this jackpot [discovery of oil on Libyan soil] to finance such radical military outfits as the Irish Republican Army (IRA), the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), and any group considered oppositional to imperialism.
Farrakhan's Blame of Black Problems on the Jews
Just who is Louis Farrakhan? Most people are not familiar with the Chicago-based Nation of Islam's leader. An excellent violinist, Farrakhan's appreciation for fine arts and culture has not hindered him from being a low class race monger.
According to a 2009 Anti Defamation League Report, Farrakhan accuses the Jewish people of "sucking the blood of the black community." The Islamic leader also claims the state of Israel will have no peace because "there can be no peace structured on injustice, lying, thievery, murdering and using God's name as a shield for your dirty religion."
Farrakhan believes blacks are superior to whites and are God's chosen people and that blacks should have a separate nation within the United States.
When Farrakhan speaks Americans must take into account here is a man who called Hitler a "very great man . . a great German." When he tried to explain his comment, he made his stand even worse, "He was indeed a great man, but also wicked-wickedly great."
Anti-Semitism is a staple of the Nation of Islam. Some of their book shops display and sell copies of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," a forgery claiming a plot exists in which Jews are conspiring for world domination. Yet Farrakhan and followers play down the Islamic desire to convert all infidels and to bring the whole world in submission to Allah.
Farrakhan's Beliefs Cannot Be Ignored
The controversial Louis Farrakhan can be written off as a marginal nut job that need not be dealt with. Regardless, he is a man of influence as seen in his 1996 visit to Gaddafi along with Rev. Wright. Afterwards Gaddafy offered Farrakhan a $5 million dollar interest free loan to be used to fund the Nation of Islam in their war against "white devils" and Jews. Thankfully, this gift was blocked by President Clinton.
Several times in his radio speech, Farrakhan calls Gaddafi "Brother Muammar" and asked Obama to consider he is allying himself with countries who want to kill "Brother Muammar." One wonders since Farrakahn refers to Obama as the "son of a Kenyan man", if he considers our president a brother to Gaddafi due to their similar Muslim background. Obama did live as a Muslim from ages six to ten while living in Indonesia with his nominally Islamic step-father and white mother.
Though several degrees of separation exists between Farrakhan and our president, the steps are not that far away. Farrakhan has great influence on President Obama though former pastor Jeremiah Wright [a man Obama sat under for twenty years a a congregant in his church] with his raging hatred for America.
We can only hope Obama will ignore the deep loathing Farrakahn and his former pastor both have for the country "Brother Barak" is now leading.
