Islamic Jihadists responsible for Arson Attack of Bethlehem Monastery

"A lot of work has to be done to change the way preaching is done in mosques because far too often they provoke people and foment hatred. Anti-Christian hatred and violence should stop."

Arson attack at Bethlehem’s St Charbel Monastery, probably the work of Islamic fundamentalists, says Maronite leader

Asia News — September 28, 2015

Bethlehem (AsiaNews) – Sobhy Makhoul, the chancellor of the Maronite Patriarchate in Jerusalem, told AsiaNews that the fire that broke out over the weekend at St Charbel Maronite Monastery (pictured) in Bethlehem was deliberately set. “It was an act of arson, not a fire caused by an electrical problem, an act of sectarian vandalism by radical Muslims.”

The fire caused no casualties or injuries because the building is currently unoccupied and under renovation, but the damage is evident and the local Christian community is now fearful of further violence.

Differing Views from Catholic Clergy on the Threat from Jihad and Shariah

Pope Francis' recent visit to the United States has prompted much commentary. It is impossible for me to cover it all, but this particular report, which includes links to three additional articles (below the break), was forwarded to me and gives clear insights into the problems with statements by Pope Francis.

See also: William Kilpatrick: 'Humility and Hubris'

Differing Views from Catholic Clergy on the Threat from Jihad and Shariah

By Christopher W. Holton, Terror Trends Bulletin — September 27, 2015 (Thanks to Plamen)

Pope Francis at the 9/11 Memorial, Ground Zero, NYC (Telegraph UK)

With the visit of Pope Francis to the United States, some attention has been paid to his views on Jihad in general and the September 11 attacks in particular.

On a visit to the September 11 memorial at Ground Zero, the pope made a statement that we find offensive and born of ignorance.

From USA Today:

In a remark some relatives of 9/11 victims may disagree with, the pope attributed “the wrongful and senseless loss of innocent lives” at Ground Zero to “the inability to find solutions which respect the common good.”

To what solutions could Pope Francis possibly be referring?

What “solutions which respect the common good” would have convinced Osama Bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Mohammed Atta that violent Jihad was wrong?

Al Qaeda and all Jihadist groups have as their goal the imposition of Shariah through violent Jihad. We can only assume that the pope is unaware of this. We must also assume that he is unaware that mainstream Islamic doctrine also calls for the imposition of Shariah worldwide.

Which Catholics and other Christians should be sacrificed to live under Shariah for the “common good?”

This was not the first time Pope Francis made statements that demonstrate an ignorance of Islamic doctrine.

Ancient Faith Interview: Islam through the heart and mind of a convert to Orthodox Christianity - Part 1

This is a very knowledgeable, in-depth interview with "George," who converted to Islam as a teen, studied at a madrassa (an Islamic school), memorized portions of the Qur'an, studied the hadith and Sira, and by God's grace eventually found his way to the True Faith, to the Holy Orthodox Church.  

Excellent and informed questions from Kevin Allen.
Very much looking forward to Part 2.

Islam: Through the heart and mind of a convert to Orthodox Christianity - Part 1

Interview by Kevin Allen for Ancient Faith Today

Ancient Faith Radio, October 1, 2015

In this two-part interview Kevin's guest is "George", who became a Sunni Muslim at age 14 and studied to become an Imam at a madrasa, studying Quran, Arabic language, Islamic theology, hadith and jurisprudence. He left Islam and became an Orthodox Christian 20 years later. 

Among other things, Kevin and his guest discuss Islamic theology, common misunderstandings of Christianity by Muslims, differences between "orthodox" Islam and the Nation of Islam, the true understanding and practice in Islam of slavery and jihad, and the extraordinary journey that led "George" to Orthodox Christianity.

Play in Popup and Keep Browsing 

Christianity will not Disappear from Its Country

"It is a grave error for Christians to tie their survival to the survival of a regime that protects them or to a foreign intervention that will defend them. The most dangerous thing is for Christians to abandon their mission and their witness, which can be summed up as bearing the cross, for the sake of their survival..."

by Priest Georges Massouh, Notes on Arab Orthodoxy,
via Pravmir — October 2, 2015
See more articles by Fr Georges Massouh.

Photo: A painting of the martyrs inside of the church of the

Holy Martyrs of Japan, in Japan, Missouri.

The Christians in my country– or at least most of them– think that their existence in this Middle East will not last without the support of the rulers and strongmen of this world or without dispensing with Christian “beatitude”. However, if we go back through Christian history, we find that the persistence of Christianity has been fundamentally based on sincerity and faithfulness to the teachings of Christ the Lord, those teachings that reached their culmination on the cross. It is a mistake to think that the Christian presence in the Middle East has persisted thanks to their own power.

At the end of the second Christian century, an unnamed Christian sent a letter to a pagan named Diognetus in defense of Christianity in which he said,

“Do you not see how they throw Christians to wild beasts in order to compel them to deny the Lord, but they are not defeated? Do you not see that the more martyrs there are, the more Christians there are?”

The writer of the letter adds that, even if they are a small group of people, it is not right for Christians to isolate themselves in ghettos, since they are in the midst of the world, enriching it like the power that the soul radiates through the body.

Fr Georges Massouh

This letter, which was composed at the height of the persecution that the Roman Empire waged against Christians, is the best expression of a Christian mentality rooted in the Gospel. Persecution did not deter Christians from the faith, but rather increased their numbers. Fear did not reign over those approaching persecution and it did not dampen their resolve. Rather, it increased their insistence on the correctness of their belief and their hope of eternal life. They approached martyrdom as ones approaching true life. This is why this era is called the golden age of Christianity. 

Christians did not join forces with emperors, governors or rulers and they did not make truces with Nero, Marcus Aurelius or Diocletian. They did not cooperate with them and they did not submit to their authority. Some men at the Roman court, some officers and soldiers, declared their Christianity by renouncing their positions and livelihoods in order not to serve an unjust state. They went forth to martyrdom after having cast aside the weapons that they could have used to fight, in order to bear witness to the Lord and His Church. In this way the Apostles Peter, the fisherman, and Paul were victorious over Nero and his entourage. In this way the Church was victorious over the Empire.

William Kilpatrick: 'Humility and Hubris'

In this well reasoned article, William Kilpatrick urges "humility before the facts." And one of the most undeniable facts of the last fourteen centuries continues to be Islamic persecution of Christians, to the point of near eradication in lands which were nearly 100% Christian at the dawn of the seventh century. Kilpatrick urges Catholic bishops:

"Will Christianity in Europe survive successive waves of Muslim migrants? Considering what’s at stake, the attitude of the Pope and numerous European bishops is puzzling. We expect bishops to remind their flocks of the duty to help those in need. But we also expect them to warn Christians when there are grave dangers involved."

See also my article, On Refugee Crisis, Christian nations should be 'Wise as Serpents'.

Humility and Hubris

by William Kilpatrick, Crisis Magazine, September 29, 2015:

Much has been written about the Pope’s humility, and he himself has often spoken about the need for humility. Yet it is possible to detect a certain amount of hubris in the positions he takes on political and scientific matters.

For example, it takes a certain level of hubris for a man to take a public stand on the threat of global warming when he has no background in the subject, and when the evidence for global warming is sketchy. On that score, it would be interesting to know if the Pope or his advisers subscribe to the “hockey stick” model of global warming promoted by Dr. Michael E. Mann of Penn State University, and later given a starring role in Al Gore’s documentary An Inconvenient Truth. If they do, are they aware that scores of eminent scientists and climatologists are now deserting the Mann model faster than retirees are deserting the frozen-over country otherwise known as the Northeast.

I’m not saying that the Pope is puffed up with pride—just that he must be awfully sure of his opinion to promote the global warming scare at just the point in time when so many prominent scientists are beginning to have their doubts. “The ecological crisis threatens the existence of humanity,” said Pope Francis. Yet the earth has been warming and cooling for millions of years, and will likely continue to do so for a long time to come.

Moreover, one has to be decidedly sure of oneself to stress the urgency of addressing this hypothetical hyper-crisis when there is another ominous and much more obvious threat to global safety. The pope has spoken about the persecution of Christians and other minorities in the Middle East and Africa, but not with the same urgency he reserves for environmental issues. When speaking of the genocide being committed in the name of Islam, Pope Francis tends to use the language of moral equivalence. Thus, when addressing Congress he lamented:

Our world is increasingly a place of violent conflict, hatred and brutal atrocities committed even in the name of God and of religion. We know that no religion is immune from forms of individual delusion or ideological extremism. This means that we must be especially attentive to every type of fundamentalism…

“Religion?” What religion might that be? Although Pope Francis is quick to condemn rapacious capitalist corporations for the crime of environmental destruction, he lets Islam off the hook for the “brutal atrocities.” Rather, he spreads out the blame for “violent conflict” to include generic fundamentalists from every religion. Could be Catholics. Could be Mormons. Could be Buddhists. Best not to look too closely.

The Pope seems quite sure about things that are widely debated. He is sure that global warming is an imminent threat, and he is sure that violence has nothing to do with Islam. Pride, as they say, goeth before a fall, and, in a way, the pope’s sublime assurance that he is on the right side of the issues helps open the door for even more violent conflict. But before going into that, let me say a bit more about hubris—or, to be specific, liberal hubris.

When it comes to strictly theological matters, it’s not wise to try and fit popes into liberal and conservative categories. But otherwise it seems safe to say that on many political and economic issues, Pope Francis (along with others in the hierarchy) tends to line up with liberals and with the big government solutions that liberals favor. The hierarchy often simply borrows the liberal analysis of problems, assuming that a great deal of thought has gone into the analysis.

But anyone who has dealt with liberals knows that, with some exceptions, they are more interested in feeling good about their policies than in checking to see whether the policies work. What allows them to skip over the details is the presumption that they are highly intelligent, because all the smart people—in government, in the universities, and in media—agree with them. The thinking process for liberals consists largely in checking around to see what other liberals are saying. In brief, if your intentions are good, and if all the best people are of the same mind, there’s no need for further research.

U.S.-Iranian Pastor Abedini’s Ordeal in Iran Tests, Builds Faith of Wife, Children

Both Pastor Saeed Abedini and his wife Naghmeh are modern-day confessors for Christ. Keep them in your prayers.

U.S.-Iranian Pastor Abedini’s Ordeal in Iran Tests, Builds Faith of Wife, Children

Morning Star News — September 29, 2015

Addressing president of Iran or her kids, Naghmeh Abedini chooses words carefully.

Naghmeh Abedini,

wife of U.S.-Iranian pastor

Saeed Abedini. (Facebook photo)

ISTANBUL, Turkey (Morning Star News) – Iranian President Hassan Rouhani yesterday declined to meet with the wife of imprisoned U.S.-Iranian- pastor Saeed Abedini during his trip to the United Nations, days after the Christian’s wife learned he had recently been tortured.

Rouhani instead said in a television interview that releasing Iranian criminals held in U.S. prisons would change the “atmosphere and environment,” hinting that such a change would be necessary for possibly freeing prisoners such as Abedini. The Iranians in question were sentenced to prison for violating the international trade embargo placed on Iran for trying to develop nuclear weapons, Rouhani said.

“There are a number of Iranians in the United States who are imprisoned, who went to prison as a result of activities related to the nuclear industry in Iran. Once these sanctions have been lifted, why keep those folks in American prisons? So they must be freed,” he said Sunday (Sept. 27) on CNN through an interpreter. “If the Americans take the appropriate actions vis-a-vis Iranian citizens who are being imprisoned here, then the right atmosphere and environment will be created for reciprocal action perhaps.”

Rouhani left New York Monday afternoon (Sept. 28) without responding to a request by Abedini’s wife, Naghmeh Abedini, for a meeting. She and lawyer Tiffany Barrans, international legal director for the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), will remain in New York in hopes of meeting with Gholam Ali Khoshroo, the Iranian Ambassador to the United Nations.

Naghmeh Abedini reaffirmed her husband’s innocence and said the Iranian government is treating him “like a pawn in a game of chess.”

“President Rouhani’s demand that America release 19 criminals in exchange for his consideration of releasing individuals like my husband, imprisoned solely for his faith, demonstrates that the Iran of today is no different than the Iran who took Americans hostages during the Iranian revolution,” she said in a press statement. “The environment is ripe for Iran to demonstrate it is ready to re-enter the global market and international scene of diplomats; it is time to show its good will, to change its image from one of a pariah to a member of the global society who will protect fundamental rights.”

Naghmeh Abedini commemorated the three-year mark (Sept. 26) of her husband’s wrongful imprisonment with fasting and candlelight prayer vigils as she prepared for the possibility of meeting with the president of Iran. On Sunday (Sept. 27), she attended a prayer vigil in Boise, Idaho, where she lives with the couple’s son and daughter.

The vigil, one of more than 810 held last week around the world, according to the ACLJ, was held a week after she addressed more than 100 parliamentarians from almost 50 countries at the International Panel of Parliamentarians for Freedom of Religion or Belief. After her presentation, 67 parliamentarians signed a letter to the speaker of the Iranian Parliament calling for Abedini’s release.

Torture

A few days after the parliamentary meeting, Naghmeh Abedini received word from her in-laws that her husband had been tortured once again by prison officials.

Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Shariah, Jihad

"Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country... Roughly 300,000 Muslims living in the United States believe that shariah is 'Allah’s law that Muslims must follow and impose worldwide by Jihad'.”

Center for Security Policy, June 23, 2015

According to a new nationwide online survey (Below) of 600 Muslims living in the United States, significant minorities embrace supremacist notions that could pose a threat to America’s security and its constitutional form of government.

The numbers of potential jihadists among the majority of Muslims who appear not to be sympathetic to such notions raise a number of public policy choices that warrant careful consideration and urgent debate, including: the necessity for enhanced surveillance of Muslim communities; refugee resettlement, asylum and other immigration programs that are swelling their numbers and density; and the viability of so-called “countering violent extremism” initiatives that are supposed to stymie radicalization within those communities.

Overall, the survey, which was conducted by The Polling Company for the Center for Security Policy (CSP), suggests that a substantial number of Muslims living in the United States see the country very differently than does the population overall.  The sentiments of the latter were sampled in late May in another CSP-commissioned Polling Company nationwide survey.

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”  When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Only 39% of those polled said that Muslims in the U.S. should be subject to American courts.

Putin strong, disarming, humorous, fascinating in CBS 60 Minutes Interview

Timed to coincide with the Russian President's address at the United Nations General Assembly on Monday, September 28, 2015, this in-depth interview is fascinating to watch, and may prove to be a masterful reset of Mr. Putin's image in America and the West. Kudos to Charlie Rose for some challenging, provocative questions, to which Mr. Putin gave some very thoughtful and revealing answers.

All eyes on Putin

by Charlie Rose, CBS News, September 27, 2015

At a time of icy relations with the U.S., Russian President Vladimir Putin gives a rare -- and surprising -- interview to 60 Minutes

The following is a script from "Putin" which aired on September 27, 2015. Charlie Rose is the correspondent. Andy Court, producer.

There aren't many world leaders who have generated as much interest as Russia's Vladimir Putin. All eyes will be on Putin when he speaks at the U.N. tomorrow and meets with President Obama, at a time when he has placed himself and his country in the middle of the most pressing issues of our times. He helped the U.S. and its Western allies broker the nuclear deal with Iran, and now, with a Russian buildup of aircraft, military equipment and personnel in Syria, he has put himself and his country at the center of that civil war and the fight against ISIS.

Now, when his relations with the United States seem to be at a post-Cold War low, suffering under Western economic sanctions imposed on Russia, Putin may be looking for a way to restore his international influence and gain the respect he seeks for his homeland.

Just before his trip to the U.S., Putin invited us to meet him at his state residence outside Moscow where we found him characteristically confident and combative as he made the case that the focus in Syria should be on fighting ISIS rather than removing Syrian President Assad.

Putin to West at the UN: "Do you realize what you have done?" - UPDATED!

• Putin proposed “generally broad international coalition against terrorism,” likening the suggestion to the anti-Hitler coalition formed to battle fascism in Europe,

• Warned that international policy toward the region has led to an Islamic State with plans that “go further” than simply dominating the Middle East,

• Warned of global threat from ISIS: “We believe that any attempts to play games with terrorists, let alone to arm them, are not just short-sighted, but hazardous. This may result in the global terrorist threat increasing dramatically and engulfing new regions.”

Putin: "Do you realize what you have done?" 

by Everett Rosenfeld, CNBC, September 28, 2015:

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday admonished those who supported democratic revolutions in the Middle East, telling the United Nations they led to the rise of a globally ambitious Islamic State.

“Instead of the triumph of democracy and progress, we got violence, poverty and social disaster — and nobody cares a bit about human rights, including the right to life,” Putin said through a translator. “I cannot help asking those who have forced that situation: Do you realize what you have done?”

The Russian president added that the power vacuum following these revolutions led to the rise of terrorist groups in the region — including the Islamic State group.

Misrata, Libya - right, before US involvement; left, after US involvement.

He told the General Assembly it would be an “enormous mistake” not to cooperate with the Syrian government to combat the extremist group.

“No one but President (Bashar) Assad’s armed forces and Kurdish militia are truly fighting the Islamic State and other terrorist organizations in Syria,” he said.

In an earlier speech at the U.N. , President Barack Obama said it would be a mistake to think that Syria could be stable under Assad.

Acknowledging some of the criticism lobbed at Russia’s proposal, Putin said his country is only proposing to help save the world from terrorism.

Putin Bests Obama in UN Showdown on Syria

Obama triples down on his politically correct Mideast fantasies, while Putin correctly analyzes ISIS and Assad.

by Robert Spencer, PJ Media — September 29, 2015

Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin both spoke at the United Nations on Monday, with Putin reiterating a call he made in September for an international coalition against jihad terror and the Islamic State in particular. Obama again rebuffed that call, although this time he left the door slightly open to some kind of cooperation with Russia.

The sticking point is Bashar Assad — and the differences that Obama and Putin have over Assad’s regime demonstrate yet again that when it comes to the jihad threat, Putin is assessing the situation realistically while Obama is operating in the realm of politically correct fantasy.

Putin skewered those fantasies in his UN speech Monday when he noted the failure of the Arab Spring to do what Barack Obama and the entire political and media elites insisted it would do: bring to the Middle East a flowering of democracy and freedom:

Instead of the triumph of democracy and progress, we got violence, poverty and social disaster — and nobody cares a bit about human rights, including the right to life. I cannot help asking those who have forced that situation: Do you realize what you have done?

No, they don’t realize what they have done, and they’re poised to do more of it.