THE THREE BIG THREATS THE U.S. & THE WORLD MUST FACE

THE THREE BIG THREATS THE U.S. & THE WORLD MUST FACE

JOHN PEPPER

John Pepper is a former CEO and chairman of Procter & Gamble and also served as chairman of the Walt Disney Company.

Ian Kershaw’s magisterial new history of Europe from 1914-1949, To Hell and Back, reminds us that during the 40-year period from 1914 to 1945, Europe came close to self destruction in two world wars and an economic depression that cost over 50 million lives.

Yet, defying centuries of internecine warfare and history, Europe came together in the second half of the 20th century to form organizational constructs (NATO, ECM, etc.) that make the prospect of another war between the European nations inconceivable.Yes, tensions still exist: economically and socially. And will continue to. But the common interests were so clear and the bonds now so strong that war is not conceivable.

Today, in the early years of the 21st century, I believe our civilization faces a question not dissimilar to what was faced in the 20th century: “Will we allow civilization and the world as we know it and want it to be, to self-destruct?”

This may strike the reader as a needlessly draconian question. I do not think it is.

What are the risks to our civilization as we know it? I believe there are three.

One is the threat of fundamentalist driven terrorism seeking to expand its reach across borders and annihilate “non-believers” via a new caliphate.

The second is the threat of nuclear disaster. Let us not allow the half century which separates us from the first hand ravage of the hydrogen bomb to disguise the annihilation to civilization which will result from atomic warfare. To our knowledge, we are the only celestial body with life as we know it. The possibility of our ending it is in our hands.

The first and second threats are related for a doomsday scenario is having a nuclear device in the hands of terrorists.

The third threat, while less immediate is no less real: climate change which would cripple life as we know it on earth.

It is clear that confronting and curtailing these threats will require nations to work together as they have not before. Without trying to identify an exhaustive list, these nations must include the United States, Russia, China, Western Europe, Japan, Saudi Arabia and India.

There are those who will object to Russia and China being included, attributing to these nations the intent to expand their geographic reach. The evidence that this is their intent is frail, defies what their leaders assert and what is in their own best interest.

Neither  China or Russia are driven today by a mission which seeks to convert other nations to a given ideology (unlike Germany under the Nazis or ISIS today). Neither have a need for more land. Like the United States and Western Europe, they are threatened by ISIS. Yes, their values, their economic and judicial systems will not be identical to ours. Corruption may exist at higher levels. And they will look for good relations with neighboring countries just as we in the United States always have with countries near our own.

But the commonalities of their interests – preserving peace and safety for their citizens, being treated with respect – will be far greater than the differences.

Just as world leaders following World War II had the wisdom to bring together organizational coalitions to normalize cooperation and the creation of stronger bonds so must the world leaders do that today.

With regard to Russia, we had the opportunity to create an organizational construct which would have bound its interests those of the West post glasnost and perestroika in the early 1990’s.

We missed that opportunity. We have the opportunity again, confronted by the greatest threats we have had since that of Nazi Germany in the 20th century.

Today’s leaders will be judged by how well they seize this opportunity. I believe the future of civilization as we know it depends on it.

As the West finally awakens to all-out Islamic invasion, President Obama remains in denial – or worse

America enters World War III

As the West finally awakens to all-out Islamic invasion,
President Obama remains in denial – or worse

It's been an era of strange, otherworldly warnings. 

Pope Francis, referring to the growing barbarism and genocidal fury of Islamic jihadists and specifically ISIS, eerily predicted months ago that a "piecemeal World War III" was emerging, evidenced by ever-mounting "crimes, massacres, destruction."

World leaders agreed – from Jordan's King Abdullah, who called the fight against ISIS a "Third World War" and urged all nations to help neutralize the threat posed by the metastasizing terror army, to former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, to former Ukrainian ambassador Yuri Shcherbak – all warning that we are literally staring World War III in the face.

In the U.S., clear-headed pundits echoed the warnings: "World War III has begun," opined top-rated radio talker Mark Levin. "I sincerely believe it. ... It hasn't begun like any other war, but it's begun. ... and I believe we're going to be attacked." Newt Gingrich added, "The real war is worldwide and the real enemy is Islamic supremacy in all its forms. The center of gravity," added the former House Speaker, "is not Syria. The center of gravity is the Internet." Glenn Beck agreed we're looking at World War III, but warned that that "Nobody will recognize it yet. ... Just like we were at the beginning of World War II when they invaded Poland. We are entering those times – we just don’t know it yet."

Barack Obama is not seeking "legacy"; what is he seeking?

Barack Obama is not seeking "legacy"....

Sylvia Thompson 

To the many gullible souls out there who truly think that Barack Obama is "legacy building" in his all-out assault on America, I implore you to bow out of the conversation because you are not seeing clearly.
 

The term legacy carries positive connotations of something bequeath that is to the receiver's benefit. Everything that Barack Obama does is calculated to destroy America, which he despises. This man no more cares about legacy than he fears being properly prosecuted by the white political leaders whose responsibility it is to remove him from office.

 I focus on white leaders, because whites are still in the majority and they fill the majority of political offices. If the majority of political operatives were of some other ethnicity, I would lodge my complaint against that group. Ethnicity is an issue only because Obama is half-black and he uses that fact to intimidate guilt-conflicted white people. Otherwise, he would have been impeached and likely in prison for treason by now.

 Barack Obama's sole aim has been, since he first entered politics and continues as he winds down this presidency, the complete destruction of America as it was founded.

 It is an insult to the intelligence of all Americans who must listen to elitist pundits on Fox news and elsewhere, and political drones in either party endeavor to make Obama's behavior fit a pattern of normalcy. Attributing his destructive policies to "legacy building" is either self-delusion on the part of the people who make that claim or cowardliness.

This is my take

Obama's nuclear deal with Iran has nothing to do with legacy but rather to enable a Muslim nation to wage nuclear war with America and Israel – the two nations that he most despises. Does anyone wonder why Russians praise Vladimir Putin despite what the rest of the world might think of him? Putin cares about his country, that's why.
 

Obama despises the American military because traditionally it has been a mainstay of America's strength and our strength infuriates him.

 Imposition of a polluting homosexual, anti-Christian agenda upon the military ranks destroys unit cohesion and literally terrorizes male members with the prospect of sodomy rape. Such rapes have increased since the forcing of open homosexuality in the ranks, against the will of a majority of members I might add and couple that with an infiltration of women, for whom all standards of strength must be reduced, and Obama attains his goal of emasculating and demoralizing the forces.

 He could not care less about a legacy of making the forces more diverse. Besides, President Truman diversified the military as much as it should be when he integrated it. Obama's objective is its destruction.
 

Obama reopened relations with Cuba because Cuba is Communist. Legacy is not his concern here either, but rather to scuttle America's attempts to keep Communist influence out of the Americas. That Cuba has major issues with human rights does not matter. Like his Marxist African father before him, he despises the West and all that it represents.

 Obama lawlessly declares open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens, because he wants to overrun America with third-world people who bring little more than dependency with them. This tactic not only does not ensure a legacy, but rather it guarantees the eventual conversion of America itself into third-world status, if it is allowed to continue.

 Bill Clinton started the travesty of increasing the numbers of third-world immigrants at the expense of culturally more suited immigrants from European and European-influenced nations, but Obama has taken the trend to lawless, destructive extremes. He is fully aware that many of these invaders have no intention of assimilating.

 It is only the outcry of a majority of Americans that holds back this hateful invasion scheme, and Donald Trump's entry onto the political scene to oppose that scheme is a saving grace for our nation.

 These are but a few instances of behavior that display the loathsome character of Barack Hussein Obama. And he is allowed to roam freely through the American landscape poisoning and polluting as he goes, sure in the realization that no one will stop him because he is "black."

 The day that we no longer have to hear the prattle about his "legacy building" will not be soon enough for me.

 Many, many Americans are thoroughly fed up with Barack Obama and the spineless crop of political leaders who ignore his criminality. It is yet unknown whether Republicans will ever garner the backbone to become a true opposition party and hold him accountable. Promising signs are the House conservatives' getting rid of establishment types John Boehner and Kevin McCarthy as House Speaker and Speaker hopeful, respectively, and Donald Trump's entry into the 2016 presidential race with enough money and testicular fortitude to tell the Establishment and the Left where to shove it.

 Should these positive trends not continue and the 2016 election cycle yield no movement to counter all the harm that Barack Obama has done to this nation, I think there will be massive disruption. Those folks in the National Rifle Association ads currently running on television seem very serious to me, and that is a good thing.

---

Sylvia Thompson is a black conservative writer whose aim is to counter the liberal spin on issues pertaining to race and culture.
 

Ms. Thompson is a copy editor by trade currently residing in Tennessee. She formerly wrote for the Conservative Forum of Silicon Valley California Newsletter and the online conservative blog ChronWatch, also out of California.
 

She grew up in Southeast Texas during the waning years of Jim Crow-era legalized segregation, and she concludes that race relations in America will never improve, nor will we ever elevate our culture, as long as there are victims to be pandered to and villains to be vilified. America is better served without victims or villains.

Radical Muslim and Rattlesnake Logic

Radical Muslim and Rattlesnake Logic

 

As long as we insist on maintaining the moral high ground, we will NEVER win the war on terrorism!  We're in a conflict in which we absolutely INSIST on playing by the rules - against a maniac group who have NO rules whatsoever.

 

We need to be using Rattlesnake Logic in dealing with terrorists...

 

After the Boston bombing the news media spent days and weeks trying to determine why these men did what they did.  They want to know what America did to make these brothers so angry with us.  They want to know why these men were not arrested before they did something so terrible.  The media is in a tizzy about this new era of homegrown radicals and about why and how they can live among us and still hate us. (The media has a LOT to explain to us)

 

A Texan explained it though:

 

Here in west Texas, I have rattlesnakes on my place, living among us.  I have killed a rattlesnake on the front porch.  I have killed a rattlesnake on the back porch.  I have killed rattlesnakes in the barn, in the shop and on the driveway.  In fact, I kill every rattlesnake I encounter.

 

I kill rattlesnakes because I know a rattlesnake will bite me and inject me with poison.  I don't stop to wonder WHY a rattlesnake will bite me; I know it WILL bite me because it's a rattlesnake and that's what rattlesnakes do.  I don't try to reason with a rattlesnake or have a "meaningful dialogue" with it.  I just kill it.  I don't try to get to know the rattlesnake better so I can find a way to live with the rattlesnakes and convince them not to bite me.  I just kill them.  I don't quiz a rattlesnake to see if I can find out where the other snakes are, because (a) it won't tell me and (b) I already know they live on my place.  So, I just kill the rattlesnake and move on to the next one.

  

I don't look for ways I might be able to change the rattlesnake to a non-poisonous rat snake... I just kill it.  Oh, and on occasion, I accidentally kill a rat snake because I thought it was a rattlesnake at the time.  Also, I know for every rattlesnake I kill, two more are lurking out there in the brush.  In my lifetime I will never be able to rid my place of rattlesnakes.

  

Do I fear them?  Not really.  Do I respect what they can do to me and my family?  Yes!  And because of that respect, I give them the fair justice they deserve... I kill them.  As a country, we should start giving more thought to the fact that these jihadists' are telling the world their goal is to kill Americans and destroy our way of life.  They have posted graphic videos on the Internet showing them beheading Americans.  They are serious.  They are exactly like rattlesnakes.  It is high time for us to start acting accordingly!

  

I love this country.  It's the damn government I'm afraid of!  Why?  Look at what the White House co ti ues to tell the country!!

Stop Grieving for the Present....

Stop Grieving for the Present....

by Glynda Linkous

My people wait for My justice, for My judgments on the nations. You long for your

(real) home and that is right.

My judgments will not be pleasant to see, but your understanding of what is taking 

place will help you in this. These things must be, for scripture must be fulfilled. The 

time of the end is at hand.

You do well to prepare for the lost who will seek Me in this time for they will be many,

and My people must be ready to receive them, to relay the gospel to them, to 

embrace them in My love.

Be about My business in the earth as you await the end, My children.

No peace in our time - Understanding Netanyahu

No peace in our time

by Charles Krauthammer

Of all the idiocies uttered in reaction to Benjamin Netanyahu’s stunning election victory, none is more ubiquitous than the idea that peace prospects are now dead because Netanyahu has declared that there will be no Palestinian state while he is Israel’s prime minister.

I have news for the lowing herds: There would be no peace and no Palestinian state if Isaac Herzog were prime minister, either. Or Ehud Barak or Ehud Olmert for that matter. The latter two were (non-Likud) prime ministers who offered the Palestinians their own state – with its capital in Jerusalem and every Israeli settlement in the new Palestine uprooted – only to be rudely rejected.

This is not ancient history. This is 2000, 2001 and 2008 – three astonishingly concessionary peace offers within the last 15 years. Every one rejected.

The fundamental reality remains: This generation of Palestinian leadership – from Yasser Arafat to Mahmoud Abbas – has never and will never sign its name to a final peace settlement dividing the land with a Jewish state. And without that, no Israeli government of any kind will agree to a Palestinian state.

Today, however, there is a second reason a peace agreement is impossible: the supreme instability of the entire Middle East. For half a century, it was run by dictators no one liked but with whom you could do business. For example, the 1974 Israel-Syria disengagement agreement yielded more than four decades of near-total quiet on the border because the Assad dictatorships so decreed.

That authoritarian order is gone. Syria is wracked by a multi-sided civil war that has killed 200,000 people and that has al-Qaeda allies, Hezbollah fighters, government troops and even the occasional Iranian general prowling the Israeli border. Who inherits? No one knows.

In the last four years, Egypt has had two revolutions and three radically different regimes. Yemen went from pro-American to Iranian client so quickly the U.S. had to evacuate its embassy in a panic. Libya has gone from Moammar Gadhafi’s crazy authoritarianism to jihadi-dominated civil war. On Wednesday, Tunisia, the one relative success of the Arab Spring, suffered a major terror attack that the prime minister said “targets the stability of the country.”

From Mali to Iraq, everything is in flux. Amid this mayhem, by what magic would the West Bank, riven by a bitter Fatah-Hamas rivalry, be an island of stability? What would give any Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement even a modicum of durability?

There was a time when Arafat commanded the Palestinian movement the way Gadhafi commanded Libya. Abbas commands no one. Why do you think he is in the 11th year of a four-year term, having refused to hold elections for the last five years? Because he’s afraid he would lose to Hamas.

With or without elections, the West Bank could fall to Hamas overnight. At which point fire rains down on Tel Aviv, Ben Gurion Airport and the entire Israeli urban heartland – just as it rains down on southern Israel from Gaza when it suits Hamas.

Any Arab-Israeli peace settlement would require Israel to make dangerous and inherently irreversible territorial concessions on the West Bank in return for promises and guarantees. Under current conditions, these would be written on sand.

Israel is ringed by jihadi terrorists in Sinai, Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Islamic State and Iranian proxies in Syria, and a friendly but highly fragile Jordan. Israelis have no idea who ends up running any of these places.

Well, say the critics. Israel could be given outside guarantees. Guarantees? Like the 1994 Budapest Memorandum in which the U.S., Britain and Russia guaranteed Ukraine’s “territorial integrity”? Like the red line in Syria? Like the unanimous U.N. resolutions declaring illegal any Iranian enrichment of uranium – now effectively rendered null?

Peace awaits three things. Eventual Palestinian acceptance of a Jewish state. A Palestinian leader willing to sign a deal based on that premise. A modicum of regional stability that allows Israel to risk the potentially fatal withdrawals such a deal would entail.

I believe such a day will come. But there is zero chance it comes now or even soon. That’s essentially what Netanyahu said in explaining – and softening – on Thursday his no-Palestinian-state statement.

In the interim, I understand the crushing disappointment of the Obama administration and its media poodles at the spectacular success of the foreign leader they loathe more than any other on the planet. The consequent seething and sputtering are understandable, if unseemly. Blaming Netanyahu for banishing peace, however, is mindless.

History's Proven Solution to Barbarism

History's Proven Solution to Barbarism

-Dr. Marshall Foster
The “civilized” world is in shock as it is bombarded daily with scenes of kidnapping, burning or beheading of Christians, journalists, aid workers and soldiers.

What hope is there of ever ending such barbarity by Islamic radicals like ISIS? The story of one man who confronted a nation filled with human sacrifice, genocide and sex slavery, can give us lasting encouragement. This man’s name was Patrick. We know him today as St. Patrick, the founder of Ireland. There once was a land so barbaric and backward that even the Roman Empire refused to go there. Early medieval maps designated the unmapped territory of Ireland with the title “Here do be monsters.”

Over 1,000 Irish slave traders attacked a small town on the northwest coast of Britain in 405 A.D. Their goal? - To capture hundreds of Christian youth and sell them into slavery back in Ireland. Sixteen year old Patrick was beaten, bound and thrown into the raider’s ship and quickly transported back to Ireland along with hundreds of other youth. There this Celtic boy, the son of a Christian elder and nobleman, was sold as a slave to a pagan, druid warlord named Miliucc in the frozen north of the Island.

Approaching Miliucc’s fort, Patrick would have seen human skulls hanging from the pointed stakes which formed the palisade, the defensive wall. Druids believed that the human head was the seat of the soul of their enemies. They drank from their skulls and they hung the shrunken heads of rivals on their belts. It was a culture of death, similar to the modern ISIL. They even used the same techniques of sacrifice to their pagan gods as the Islamic radicals of today, such as burning their captives alive in cages.

During Patrick’s ordeal he would have witnessed the Celtic pagan ritual of Beltaine during which a colossal wicker cage in the form of a man was assembled – the Wicker Man. Many rival clansmen, runaway slaves and even innocent children were crammed inside this cage.

Then the Wicker Man was set aflame. In the fiery inferno the screams of the victims could be heard for miles delighting the chief and terrorizing the people. During his captivity, as he barely survived in the open fields tending sheep, Patrick prayed over a hundred times a day. According to his own writings he was radically converted to a sincere faith in Christ.

After six years in captivity Patrick writes that God spoke to him saying, “Your ship is ready” and directed him to escape to the eastern coastline. He boarded the ship and eventually came home to Britain and his family. But not long after, God spoke to Patrick in a dream and he heard Irish voices saying, “Please, holy boy, come and walk among us again.”

Patrick heard the call and after years of preparation he sold his noble title, bought three small sail boats and took twelve friends with him to go back to serve the people that had enslaved him as a boy. Over the next 30 years, beginning in 435, Patrick preached the loving gospel of forgiveness to the Stone Age culture of Ireland, whose people were still enslaved to druid gods of death and human sacrifice.

With no army, facing almost certain death, Patrick proclaimed the true God of loving kindness and forgiveness with such power that the youth, especially, were challenged to abandon their gods of fear and violence and give themselves to the great cause of liberating the hearts of people all over the world.

Author Thomas Cahill explains how he envisioned the Irish pagans of the 5th century responding to Patrick’s message. The Irish must have thought “We can put away our knives and abandon our altars. These are no longer required…He has given us His own Son, and we are washed clean in the blood of this lamb. God does not hate us; He loves us.”

Without an army or support from the Roman church, Patrick went from town to town setting up over 300 churches, schools and monasteries. He trained thousands of ministers who began to translate and preserve the great documents of antiquity in desolate, cold monastic outposts on the edge of civilization. Cahill says, “as the Roman Empire fell, as all through Europe matted, unwashed barbarians descended on the Roman cities looting artifacts and burning books, the Irish … took up the great labor of copying all of Western literature….Without the Mission of the Irish Monks, who single-handedly re-founded European Civilization throughout the continent… the world that came after them would have been an entirely different one – a world without books. And our own world would have never come to be.” Patrick and his disciples also were the first nation to end sex trafficking and slavery.

But how is this “early history” relevant to us today in our current struggle with radical Islam and atheistic Communism? Patrick illustrates history’s only proven strategy that has subdued the blood-lust of lost souls from any pagan ideology to give up their beheading ways. Ireland was no aberration. Its peaceful transformation became an example which has been repeated in nations worldwide. Let us proclaim, with sincere humility, the God-honoring fact that the tyrannical pagan nations of Ireland, Scotland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Holland, France, England, America, Australia, New Zealand and dozens of other nations have been peacefully liberated by Jesus, the true Liberator.

Civilization, based on the rule of law, however, stands on the brink of collapse because we have forgotten the source of our civility – the God of the Bible.

The biblical strategy of liberty, although primarily based upon the voluntary conversion and transformation of individuals, does not preclude the necessity in this fallen world of restraining evil by force. It is a self-evident truth, confirmed throughout the Scriptures, that all people have a right and a duty of self-defense against lawless rogues. While rebuilding pagan nations can never be accomplished by force, the military, led by civil magistrates (Romans 13, Gen. 9) has the right and responsibility, as do the people, to defend themselves and their land from attack. See the “Christian Just War Theory” for details.

John Calvin was faced with the extinction of Christianity five centuries ago in Europe at the hands of the Ottoman Turks. The great Biblicist put the major responsibility for the future of Christendom in the right place – right at the steps of the church. Calvin said “Until the Church finds the will and heart to reach the Muslims with the Gospel we shall always be at peril.” So it is today.

The church has the major responsibility, as God’s Ambassadors of reconciliation, to reach the unreachable and disciple the nations, remembering that Christians also were all at one time “dead in our trespasses and sins.”

Muslims have a problem:

Muslims have a problem:

The Shoe Bomber was a Muslim
The Beltway Snipers were Muslims
The Fort Hood Shooter was a Muslim
The underwear Bomber was a Muslim
The U-S.S. Cole Bombers were Muslims
The Madrid Train Bombers were Muslims
The Bafi Nightclub Bombers were Muslims
The London Subway Bombers were Muslims
The Moscow Theatre Attackers were Muslims
The Boston Marathon Bombers were Muslims
The Pan-Am flight #93 Bombers were Muslims
The Air France Entebbe Hijackers were Muslims
The Iranian Embassy Takeover, was by Muslims
The Beirut U.S. Embassy bombers were Muslims
The Libyan U.S. Embassy Attack was by Musiims
The Buenos Aires Suicide Bombers were Muslims
The Israeli Olympic Team Attackers were Muslims
The Kenyan U.S, Embassy Bombers were Muslims
The Saudi, Khobar Towers Bombers were Muslims
The Beirut Marine Barracks bombers were Muslims
The Besian Russian School Attackers were Muslims
The first World Trade Center Bombers were Muslims
The Bombay & Mumbai India Attackers were Muslims
The Achille Lauro Cruise Ship Hijackers were Muslims
The September 11th 2001 Airline Hijackers were Muslims'

Think about it...

Buddhists living with Hindus = No Problem
Hindus living with Christians = No Problem
Hindus living with Jews = No Problem
Christians living with Shintos = No Problem
Shintos living with Confucians = No Problem
Confusians living with Baha'is = No Problem
Baha'is living with Jews = No Problem
Jews living with Atheists = No Problem
Atheists living with Buddhists = No Problem
Buddhists living with Sikhs = No Problem
Sikhs living with Hindus = No Problem
Hindus living with Baha'is = No Problem
Baha'is living with Christians = No Problem
Christians living with Jews = No Problem
Jews living with Buddhists = No Problem
Buddhists living with Shintos = No Problem
Shintos living with Atheists = No Problem
Atheists living with Confucians = No Problem
Confusians living with Hindus = No Problem

Muslims living with Hindus = Problem
Muslims living with Buddhists = Problem
Muslims living with Christians = Problem
Muslims living with Jews = Problem
Muslims living with Sikhs = Problem
Muslims living with Baha'is = Problem
Muslims living with Shintos = Problem
Muslims living with Atheists = Problem
MUSLIMS LIVING WITH MUSLIMS = BIG PROBLEM

ISIS declares Christians No. 1 enemy

ISIS declares Christians No. 1 enemy

Iraq’s Christians have been forced to flee or face certain death in the path of ISIS terrorists.

In an updated version of its propaganda booklet, “Dabiq,” ISIS clearly identifies its No. 1 enemy – Christianity.

The cover photo shows a black ISIS flag flying over the Vatican. The booklet describes the terrorist army’s desires to conquer Rome and “break the cross,” according to Arutz Sheva, an independent Israeli news network.

According to some Islamic traditions, the Islamic prophet Muhammad predicted that the occupation of Istanbul, Jerusalem and Rome would pave the way for the Islamic messiah or mahdi.

The declaration surfaces amid growing concern over the widespread persecution of Christians in the Middle East. ISIS has executed hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Christians throughout Iraq and forced many to flee the country. Up to 100,000 Christians remain in the capital of Baghdad, as ISIS is now within eight miles of the city.

A joint conference between the International Christian Embassy in Jerusalem and the World Jewish Congress in Jerusalem was held earlier this week to discuss the dire situation for Christians.

“Across the Middle East, in the last 10 years, 100,000 Christians have been murdered each year. That means every five minutes a Christian is killed because of his faith,” Father Gabriel Nadaf, who has campaigned for Christian Arab rights and for local Christians to support Israel, told the United Nations Human Rights Council in September. “Those who can escape persecution at the hands of Muslim extremists have fled. … Those who remain, exist as second if not third-class citizens to their Muslim rulers.”

An estimated 12 million Christians lived in the Middle East, according to a July estimate in the London Guardian. But that number has been thought to have decreased drastically since the ISIS summer takeover of nearly half of Iraq, including the city of Mosul, which had been home to Christians for 2,000 years. [remember the Jews under Hitler}

As Islam jihadists have gained ground throughout the Middle East over the past three years, the Christian community has faced persecution in a number countries, including Egypt, Iraq, Libya and Syria.

In Egypt, Coptic Christians have been targeted by violence from the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafi groups. There have been reports of church burnings and killings of Christians.

In Syria, al-Qaida-linked rebels have threatened to kill Christians who do not join the fight against President Bashar Al-Assad.

Iran has persecuted Christians relentlessly as well, recently making headlines for burning the lips of a Christian man caught eating during the Ramadan fast.

For those that believe the lie of "Moderate Islam" they need to understand the distinction of being Muslim by nationality and Muslim by faith.  Therein lies the understanding of the brutality of the Muslim Faith.

Here are some key questions citizens might ask themselves as they listen to the speech:

Here are some key questions citizens might ask themselves as they listen to the speech:

1. How does the President define the nature of the enemy? Is it geographic or ideological? Do the key aims have to do with territory in Iraq and Syria or with a poisonous belief system with no borders? Any narrow focus on Iraq and Syria is doomed to fail.

2. Can Obama bring himself to describe the religious intensity of our enemies? ISIS and its allies are deeply motivated by religion. Refusing to admit that weakens any strategy to defeat them.

3. What would the President consider victory? If it is not the complete defeat of radical Islamism, it will not be a successful strategy. Talking about "managing the problem" or "containing the problem" is a concession of defeat. Every day the Islamic State, Hamas, Boko Haram, al Qaeda and their allies survive, they recruit new people, develop new techniques and become more dangerous

4. How does he intend to defeat the more than 10,000 terrorists from more than 50 countries that are fighting with ISIS, and how does he account for the fact that the threat is in 50 countries, not two?

5. What is his strategy for defeating the terrorists and recruiters we now know are coming from the United States? British Prime Minister David Cameron is proposing significant restrictions on travel and activity by radical Islamists in the UK. How does Obama propose to counter potential American terrorists?

6. Is he prepared to ask for more resources for the military, which he is using in more and more places while continuing to cut the budget? It is impossible to have a serious strategy of defeating radical Islamism without an increase in funding for the military unless he plans to transform the Pentagon dramatically. Will he submit such a funding request to the Congress?

7. Is his strategy designed to achieve rapid, decisive victory? There are rumors of a three-year campaign. That would be an absurdity. In three years, the radical Islamists will have recruited more people in more countries. It took three years and eight months from the attack on Pearl Harbor for the United States to defeat fascist Italy, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Taking that long to defeat the Islamic State would be an exercise in self-defeating timidity.

8. Does the President plan to lead the fight against radical Islamism or merely to support others who he asserts have to lead? If radical Islamism and the Islamic State are mortal threats to Americans and to the United States, then we have to defeat them, even if Iraq is incompetent, Syria is a dictatorship, and the Europeans are timid. This has to be a coalition that is led by America, not a coalition that leads America. Which is Obama describing?

9. What are his plans for an extended conversation with the American people to build enough support that the strategy can be sustained with popular approval until victory is achieved? One speech, one time is a beginning, not a program for victory.

10. Will he seek congressional authorization for the plan he outlines? This is crucial because the conflict must be the country's war, not Obama's war, and a vote in Congress will legitimate his action.

11. Finally, since ISIS is a direct threat to the U.S. will the president have the resolve and leadership to go it alone (and show leadership) if he does not get a U.N. coalition to back him?

OBAMA’S ISIS PRESSURE POINT IS DEMS WORST NIGHTMARE

OBAMA’S ISIS PRESSURE POINT IS DEMS WORST NIGHTMARE

As if the pressure of running under President Obama’s domestic policies wasn’t bad enough for vulnerable Democrats, the administration’s quandary over what to do about the ravages of the Islamist terror group ISIS is making the squeeze unbearable. 

Back in Washington from his two week vacation, the president hunkers down with senior advisors at the White House today. Among those meetings, a session with Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, who warned ISIS “is beyond anything that we’ve seen.”

Republican hawks seized on the comments Sunday, hammering Obama to take more aggressive action and exhibit leadership in place of a “feckless” foreign policy. Meanwhile Democrats, who have been tepidly supportive or staying under the radar during the administration’s limited air strikes in Iraq, have another policy crisis to run away from as their chances of holding control of the Senate look increasingly remote.

President Obama may be under pressure to act quickly, but he has already said a solution in Iraq is “a long term project.” That’s little consolation for those on the president’s team facing voters just 10 weeks from now, no matter which policy direction he chooses.