Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host
Spiritual warfare is a part of the political struggle we find ourselves in during these trying times. As a child I remember that we were taught the world will get much worse, and as "Christian Soldiers" it was our job to combat the wickedness that would be coming. Often Christians call themselves "spiritual warriors," and I have often said that I am a warrior for the United States Constitution. The language used is in a spiritual sense. The context is not that of going out and shooting people, or committing to conventional warfare. Even the Founding Fathers did not originally intend to engage in an armed revolution. They petitioned the king and British parliament for a redress of grievances, they pleaded as free Englishmen that the empire treat the colonies with the same respect as all Englishmen. It wasn't until the British began firing shots that our American Revolution became a bloody one.
When breaking down the shootings that have plagued the Obama administration, we find that nearly all of the gunmen were either liberal left Democrats, or Muslims (who vote Democrat). So, while the Democrat Party and the media are attempting to establish a narrative that all conservative Republicans are gun-clinging, Bible-clinging radicals who are just itching to cause trouble, in reality more than 90% of the mass shootings would go away if Democrats would just quit shooting at people.
Essentially, the liberal left has been poking the right-of-center folks in the chest, pushing them, taunting them, trying to get a violent reaction out of Christians, conservatives, Republicans, military veterans, and all of the other patriotic folks they hate to the core. The Right, however, has not been willing to fall for the provocations. Desperate, realizing they can't win in the arena of ideas, the Democrats have determined they can only win if they make people believe The Right is dangerous. To establish that narrative, the incitement has been stepped up.
Frustrated, the liberal left is lashing out. Planting false flags. Doing what they can to get in the face of their opposition in order to illicit a reaction.
While the effort to instigate the right-of-center is not organized in a way we might imagine a bunch of guys in black suits with black suitcases might manage, and we are being told these incidences are caused by lone wolves, the effort is coordinated in the sense that the agitators know what to do. They know, based on signals by speeches and tweaks to the narrative of the liberal left politicians and media, that it is time for them to step up the attacks, be more vigorous in the chest-poking, and create enough chaos that it encourages greater government control and more intense enforcement.
Jeff Hood, the organizer of the July 7th Dallas Black Lives Matter rally, is one of those agitators. The leftist provocateur is a homosexual Islamist (seems like an oxymoron to me) who calls himself a Christian pastor. Of course, just because someone says something, it doesn't mean it's true. The Westboro Baptists are not Baptists, Islam is not a Religion of Peace, and Barack Obama is not a Christian, nor a Constitutionalist.
In 2015, after Americans protested the CAIR organized “Respect the Prophet” event in Dallas, Jeff Hood said: “I think that Texas Muslims are the real Christians.”
On Conservative Voice Radio during the recording of our July 16, 2016 broadcast, I brought up another character who says that "Muslims are more Christian than Christians," Dr. Zakir Naik. Dr. Naik's argument is one that on the surface may seem like it has some validity. Uninformed minds may recognize the legalism being presented as something that makes sense to them. Never mind that the teachings of Islam is enforced by the sword. Dr. Naik's list of Muslim adherence to Christianity includes alchohol, pork, and circumcision. Christians, he explains in his rant, don't adhere to those things as they are commanded by the Bible.
While the Koran is doctrinal, the Bible is largely a historical text and many of the "commands" it lists were to Israel, and under the old covenant (Old Testament). Jesus Christ, and the New Testament, represents the new covenant. The legalism is set aside because Jesus fulfills the law. When we accept Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit the law becomes self-evident. The ban on the eating of pork and shellfish at the time were warnings that were directed to protect Israel, since those foods were dirty, and could contain disease. To disobey would place someone in peril regarding his or her relationship with God.
Under the new covenant, the way to become close to God is not through our actions, but through Grace. Salvation is a gift. What is expected to us through our works is not what saves us, but the Bible says we will be known by our fruit. Our works, so that we may produce good fruit, are self-evident for we have with us the Holy Spirit. Whether or not we eat pork does not make us more or less Christian. What makes us Christian is our relationship with Jesus Christ.
In a response to Naik, a Christian apologist goes through a list that refutes Naik's claims, reminding us that Christianity is about a relationship with Christ, not serving as a mindless automaton under the blood-soaked fear of an angry unmerciful Allah.
Like Naik, Jeff Hood has bought into the legalistic arguments, and has used them for his deception. He claims to be a Christian pastor, but he is instead a Muslim collaborator. He has sympathized continuously with the Islamists and members of ISIS who are marginalized by society, writing in response to Paris:
“In our Islamophobic society, I have no question that Jesus is so intimately incarnated with and connected to our Muslim friends that he has become one. If we want to walk with Jesus in this moment of extreme oppression and marginalization, we will too.”
Hood also advocates that Jesus converted to Islam – and posts images of Jesus as a Muslim:
Jeff Hood dresses much like a Sufi Islamist, but has openly proclaimed that he is a homosexual. In his book, The Courage to be Queer, he wrote that “Jesus was the most queer person on Earth.”
And because Jesus was “queer” this gave him the strength also to be queer. He added:
“In fully living into the Queer within, Jesus became different and made all the difference.”
Hood also advocates that Jesus converted to Islam – and posts images of Jesus as a Muslim:
Jeff Hood dresses much like a Sufi Islamist, but has openly proclaimed that he is a homosexual. In his book, The Courage to be Queer, he wrote that “Jesus was the most queer person on Earth.”
And because Jesus was “queer” this gave him the strength also to be queer. He added:
“In fully living into the Queer within, Jesus became different and made all the difference.”
According to Breitbart, Hood has supported violence against the police for a while. He wrote in a post as a response to a police shooting in Dallas from April 24, 2015:
"For now, the blood of black men will continue to roll down driveways, streets and sidewalks with impunity. However, God is not mocked. The judgment is coming. Those police who continue to spill the blood of black men will be held accountable…for black blood matters just as much as any other blood to God."
Also, this post from May 11, 2015:
“The police are always prepared for a gunfight. We shouldn’t be surprised when they actually get one.”
In a June 18 website post, Hood wrote: “Keep blowing sh#@ up baby!”
In one of his most recent tweets, dated June 26, Hood tweeted a story about Social Justice Activist Charles Moore, who went out in a blaze of glory two years ago by lighting himself on fire in front of a Texas shopping mall.
As organizer of the Black Lives Matter protest in Dallas, was Hood in touch with Johnson and were the two planning an assault against police? Or, was the whole purpose of the march to simply open up the opportunity for a shooter to kill police?
Journalist Brandon Darby reported that Hood told the Dallas Morning News he wanted to "create a space for anger and rage" against police.
That statement by Hood tells me the Dallas massacre was by design. Either, the shooter, Micah Johnson, was in cahoots with Hood and the violence was specifically planned, or Hood's expectations with creating the event was that a shooter would emerge and do what Johnson did. Either way, in my opinion, the Dallas massacre of five police was by design.
Barack Obama, and those around him, may even be saying to themselves, "Keep the narrative alive. Good job, Mr. Hood. Things are going exactly as planned."
Democrats have been using the Dallas shooting situation to hammer on their "white people are racist" narrative. Obama said, “we” need to “open our hearts” on the subject of race. We know that when Obama says "we," he really means "you" - the stupid people, as he sees you, who are not as enlightened and thoughtful as he and his ideological compatriots are. Hillary Clinton has chimed in, as well.
Then, Obama also made the unbelievable assertion that it’s easier for a poor kid in a struggling neighborhood to get a Glock than a book.
Then, Obama also made the unbelievable assertion that it’s easier for a poor kid in a struggling neighborhood to get a Glock than a book.
Really?
Since the shooting in Dallas, Obama has also suggested we need to federalize the police, as has other democrats like Hillary Clinton.
You remember Rahm Emanuel's famous words, right?
"Never let a crisis go to waste.”
A centralization of power is what the Democrats seek, and Obama is now pulling no punches. He's going for broke.
A centralization of power is what the Democrats seek, and Obama is now pulling no punches. He's going for broke.
“I want to start moving on constructive actions that are actually going to make a difference,” he declared at a press conference in Poland, in response to a question about the killings in Dallas.
Obama referenced a panel he selected to offer “practical concrete solutions that can reduce — if not eliminate — the problems of racial bias” in the aftermath of the 2014 riots in Ferguson, Missouri, stating, “If my voice has been true and positive, my hope would be that ... [the panel identifies] problems, it frames them, it allows us to wrestle with these issues and try to come up with practical solutions."
The panel made its recommendations in the “President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing Report,” published in May 2015.
The solutions offered include more federal control of the nation’s police. The report calls for more police training and practices, under the direction of the federal government. Methods to advance this goal include federal lawsuits and grants. Then, once local governments become dependent upon these grants, the threat of cutting them off can be used to press for changes in policies to comply with federal dictates. With federal money comes federal control. Just ask the schools and development agencies around the country.
So far, 30 police jurisdictions have adopted federal rules through the use of federal lawsuits.
The individual identity of our States, counties and cities are an important part of localism. The federal government was not designed to encroach upon internal issues. A federalization of the independent police departments would take away their independence, and law enforcement would become more like the IRS, and Common Core.
Obama referenced a panel he selected to offer “practical concrete solutions that can reduce — if not eliminate — the problems of racial bias” in the aftermath of the 2014 riots in Ferguson, Missouri, stating, “If my voice has been true and positive, my hope would be that ... [the panel identifies] problems, it frames them, it allows us to wrestle with these issues and try to come up with practical solutions."
The panel made its recommendations in the “President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing Report,” published in May 2015.
The solutions offered include more federal control of the nation’s police. The report calls for more police training and practices, under the direction of the federal government. Methods to advance this goal include federal lawsuits and grants. Then, once local governments become dependent upon these grants, the threat of cutting them off can be used to press for changes in policies to comply with federal dictates. With federal money comes federal control. Just ask the schools and development agencies around the country.
So far, 30 police jurisdictions have adopted federal rules through the use of federal lawsuits.
The individual identity of our States, counties and cities are an important part of localism. The federal government was not designed to encroach upon internal issues. A federalization of the independent police departments would take away their independence, and law enforcement would become more like the IRS, and Common Core.
So long neighborhood cop, hello standing army prepared to force the federal government's will upon the population through brute intimidation and strong-arm tactics.
The arrival of United Nation's troops on American soil will probably assist with the implementation of the federalized policies, too.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
No comments:
Post a Comment