The Bataclan And The Death Of The Globalist, Secular Utopia
BY Herschel Smith
9 years, 1 month ago
“Thou shalt not kill,” God to Moses to the world.
“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven,” Jesus Christ, Son of God, to the world, Matt 5:3.
“You shall not curse a deaf man, nor place a stumbling block before the blind …,” God to Moses to the world, Lev 19:14.
This is a picture of the Bataclan. Look at it. And look at it some more.
Take note of what one woman said about the attack.
Miss Wilson, 49, originally from New Orleans, also told how she witnessed the gunmen deliberately targeting concert-goers in wheelchairs. The gunmen hunted down disabled people who were sat in an area specially set aside for wheelchair users.
The mass killing of women and children, the most defenseless among us, in Iraq, isn’t an accident or incidental feature of militant Islam. It’s who they are. It’s what they do. There is no mercy, there is no compassion, there is no love, there is no respect, there isn’t even honorable war. There is only wretched evil, queued up straight from the pit of hell.
Self denial is all that is left in Europe. It must be the Jews, since this band played in Tel Aviv recently (no more anti-Semitic ideology can be found anywhere than the American university – this is what they’re thinking, you know it is) . Except that it’s not really the Jews. ISIS has declared that the American blood is best, and we will taste it soon. It must be American strikes in Iraq and Syria, except that ISIS attacked France. Gun control laws work, except that the attackers all had guns. Semi-automatic guns are the culprit, except that one of the attackers used a pump action shotgun. The police will protect us, except more than 100 perished in Paris that awful night.
The world is a confusing place to the progressive mind at the present. Don’t be confused with them. Germany won’t close her borders, France will remain an open society, and not to be outdone, America failed its test on 9/11 more than a decade ago. Our borders are still open, and we still invite disparate cultures from across the globe to ensconce here.
But no civilization in more than a millennia has been able to peaceably coexist with Islam. Add to that the effects of Hispanic and Latino immigration, the financial pressure on the middle class from all of this additional baggage, and a government that increasingly wants to enslave its people, and a pressure cooker of historic proportions is being set up.
Everyone in the French government is shocked. No thinking man is shocked. This was the inevitable deliverance of a ruling class who hates us. America is the product of Continental and Scottish Calvinism, unquestionably a Christian nation. The current administration, along with ISIS, hates who we are. This is coming to America – it is already in America – and it is our responsibility to be ready for it.
|
|
On November 16, 2015 at 12:56 am, tballard56 said:
“no civilization in more than a millennia has been able to peaceably coexist with Islam” Yet this simple fact seems to escape our government leaders and progressives everywhere. It’s Neville Chamberlain syndrome on steroids.
On November 16, 2015 at 1:25 am, Sando182 said:
That is a horrific picture that has not lessened its impact since I first saw it this morning.
TheReligionofPeace.com shows 27282 deadly terror attacks since 9/11/2001 – just under 5200 days ago. That’s more than 5/day. So much for peaceful coexistence.
On November 16, 2015 at 7:56 am, MattBracken said:
Radical Islam is an insane rape and murder cult.
Moderate Islam is its Trojan Horse into the West.
On November 16, 2015 at 5:04 pm, Billy Mullins said:
+10,000 Matt. As always you hit the nail squarely on the head.
On November 16, 2015 at 8:34 am, UNCLEELMO said:
There are three cases of Islamic terrorism that I can remember offhand where there was evidence that the perps were high on drugs- Mumbai, India, the theatre in Chechnya and the backpack found on the ISIS fighter killed by Kurdish forces in northern Syria or Iraq. It keeps running through my mind that for the most part no one ever mentions that drugs seem to play a huge part in the attraction to joining the cult of death.
On November 18, 2015 at 1:49 am, Spiny Norman said:
Recall that the Waffen SS were famously hopped on speed. The Assassin cult indulged in hashish. The Viking berserkers used halucinogenics. This is nothing new.
On November 16, 2015 at 12:35 pm, BluesStringer1955 . said:
Mr. Smith, what relation do the Bible verses and quotations in the beginning of this piece have to do with the rest of the piece? I ask because the sub-text of the rest of the piece seems to be a call to arms, while the Biblical references would seem to prohibit, or at the very least, discourage such an approach. The Biblical references are pretty clear, while your last line, “…and it is our responsibility to be ready for it,” leaves much room for interpretation with no suggestion how to be “ready for it” while still adhering to Biblical mandates.
Is there a conflict between what the Bible tells us and what you think we should do in preparation for islamic terror here at home? It’s an honest question, and one for which I have no preconceived notions other than simply not being able to discern what your answer (if any) will be from simply reading your piece. I am conflicted myself. My gut says ‘kill’em all and let God sort things out,” but my concern for my eternal soul requires that I temper that human instinct with study and prayer to make sure I’m not breaking God’s law(s). These are tough times, and I pray also that everyone is taking into consideration the same concerns while under the current-day pressures of what we’re witnessing around the world.
On November 16, 2015 at 12:45 pm, Matthew Wilbanks said:
I believe the Bible verses are directed at the terrorists, not us. They tie in with his first paragraph about them targeting people in wheelchairs.
On November 16, 2015 at 12:50 pm, BluesStringer1955 . said:
If that be the case, then we’re expecting people who don’t read or even believe in the Bible to adhere to its precepts? Maybe you’re right, but if that’s the answer to my question, it doesn’t address the conflict for me.
On November 16, 2015 at 1:06 pm, Matthew Wilbanks said:
I doubt he’s expecting them to read or follow those verses, just showing that from a Biblical perspective they are pure evil. The first verse is from an incorrect translation, it should read “Thou shalt not murder”, which is exactly what the Islamists did. The second and third verses are just God demonstrating his love and compassion for the weakest among us. I just think he’s making a distinction between a compassionate religion and a murderous one. If you take those verses as direction for us, I still don’t see any conflict. The word “retzach” in Hebrew very clearly means “murder” not “kill” (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D7%A8%D7%A6%D7%97). Jesus later said to sell your cloak and buy a sword. He had no problem with killing in self defense.
On November 16, 2015 at 4:24 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Right. A bit of Biblical hermeneutics here. As to the specific translation (or transliteration), it doesn’t matter. The ten commandments is moral (or constitutional) law. It is explained and exegeted by the case law in Numb, Lev and Deut. So for example we know that lying in wait to murder is not acceptable because case law explains that, and defending oneself is acceptable because stipulations are made for that.
There is absolutely no conflict whatsoever between any of the things I have proposed here. Only improper interpretation would lead one to conclude that Christians must allow their loved ones to be abused and perish at the hands of evil men. No one in their right mind teaches that that is what the Bible teaches.
See also:
http://www.captainsjournal.com/2012/09/25/christians-the-second-amendment-and-the-duty-of-self-defense/
On November 16, 2015 at 4:33 pm, Herschel Smith said:
See the response below for some of your questions. The article discusses the Biblical requirements, explains that no only does ISIS violate them, they do so in the superlative manner, in which we can stipulate that ISIS easily meets the definition of enemy. If so, closing the borders is a moral requirement, but since our president is aligned with the enemy, he won’t. That means that (a) enemies are coming, (b) enemies are in our midst, (c) we can treat them as enemies, in fact, MUST treat them as enemies and prepare to defend ourselves and loved ones.
Beyond that, the article shocks the senses by explaining the degree to which ISIS is willing to go to expand their borders (shooting women, children and physically disabled), as means of terror, rather than take on healthy fighting men.
The Bible verses are for you. Guns are for you to use against them.
On November 16, 2015 at 6:22 pm, BluesStringer1955 . said:
Thanks for the clarification. My conflict has nothing to do with any issues with defensive killing, either as an individual or as a country. Closing the borders I get. Deporting illegals I get. Even enforcing the 14th Amendment as-written and as-intended by denying citizenship to “anchor” babies I get. Carrying everywhere every time and being ready to defend my own, my wife’s or any innocent life that I can save who is in the sights of a murderer (terrorist or otherwise), I get.
I have read several articles on this site, usually following links from Sipsey, and sometimes I just stop by on my own. This particular article was linked on forum in flux. I wouldn’t have hesitated calling it a “liberty movement” forum some years back, and at the same time, I wouldn’t have hesitated calling it a “Christian” forum, or at least Christian-centric.” Nowadays, I do hesitate on both counts. The link here was posted in a thread that highlighted one of Ann Barnhardt’s latest offerings, entitled, “Cut the Crap: The problem is islam, and it has to be exterminated. Period.” I don’t know how to do an HTML link, but here’s the URL if anybody’s interested: http://www.barnhardt.biz/2015/11/13/cut-the-crap-the-problem-is-islam-and-it-has-to-be-exterminated-period-2/
Now, I’ve read and quoted and linked to many, many things that Ann has written over the last five or six years, and am almost always with her, just as I am almost always with Mike Vanderboegh, Herschel Smith, and David Codrea. In fact, it’s more like “literally” always with those last three, but I found both the title and the body of the piece of Ann’s to be talking about literally exterminating more than a billion people, and it was in the context of a rather heated discussion that I was led to this article, where it seemed it *could be* promulgating the same, or at least a similar, meme. I agree wholeheartedly that islam is evil. I agree with anyone who asserts that this country and even down to the individual, should be wary of muslims in this country. I don’t see how we can deny them the right to practice their religion in this country though. I don’t want to drive them underground to live as Christians must now live in Syria, Northern Iraq and elsewhere. I am anything but an advocate for political correctness, but I find even the word “exterminate” to be not only offensive to the senses, but to be advocating for an offensive foreign war, and I am not an advocate for more foreign wars whether it be politics or the Bible that drives my opposition to it, which, in reality, it is both.
So I asked a question to make sure I understood the intended meaning(s) of what I was reading. It never occurred to me that anyone would read so much into a simple question, or get tweaked by it, but there it is. And to the extent that any of the respondents and/or Mr. Smith think that pursuing more war in foreign lands is either a biblically, politically, or defensively sound idea, I would encourage all to remind themselves of Madison’s warning: “If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
Otherwise, good luck and God Bless you all. Sorry for the intrusion.
On November 16, 2015 at 6:42 pm, Herschel Smith said:
I understand all of your points. I would consider myself, like Mike, a Christian libertarian. Let them live the way they see fit, without interference from me.
But they cannot do that here. They should not be ensconced into America in a disparate culture, religion, political system and climate, and us assume that it will work. It will lead to bloody war.
As for what happens when war comes, that’s a different story. I don’t happen to agree with restrictive ROE, and so for example if I had been Marcus Luttrell, I would have shot those goat herders to make my escape.
Warfare ROE and those “innocent” folks who get swept up in the conflict, is another story for another time, much more complex than I have discussed here.
EDIT: Good questions are never an intrusion. That’s why there is a comment section.
On November 16, 2015 at 2:03 pm, Fred said:
Dear Sir,
First. They (death cultists in this case) simply have intent against the natural order of God is all. If you are a believer then you understand from where this intent hails. If you are not a believer then seek Jesus. An entire aspect of your being lies dormant. Beseech Him to activate it. Who wouldn’t want to be informed by the supernatural spirit of God? Man oh man is it the coolest thing.
Believers who read the scripture and study in bible courses easily understand the
bible. Its meaning will become increasingly apparent for us. If you claim Christ already then may I be so bold as to recommend that you get your nose in the bible and your hind end in a quality study course please.
Second. NOT first. I would suggest this course of action that our gracious host
has posted earlier. “Guns, ammunition, and practice, family, clan and tribe.
Do it. Prepare now. Time is short. Your loved ones are counting on you.”
On November 16, 2015 at 2:15 pm, Fred said:
Oh and one additional thing. When a believer reads his bible daily then the matter of what is rightous self defense becomes appearant as well.Should we “kill them all” you ask. Seek the LORD.
On November 16, 2015 at 10:45 pm, Josh said:
With respect, I think you are reading to far in to the purpose of the scripture presented at the opening of the article. Its purpose is exactly as it appears: a juxtaposition.
Juxtaposed against an absolutely bracing image of brutal, mass execution, the scripture serves to frame the executioners and their creed. In my opinion, the scripture also serves to juxtapose Biblical teachings and law with the filth inside the Quran.
I don’t think reading anything more in to the opening of the article is productive, and certainly no cause to align Herschel with the likes of Ann Barnhardt.
Finally, I am absolutely not accusing you, but I think the conversation you’ve instigated and the subjects and topics you’ve reached to tangentially connect are exactly the sort of thing a DHS agent would do to probe at “right wing extremism,” or even set up entrapment.
So let this be a reminder: Daesh is not the only enemy. The federal Leviathan is here, in our midst as well. It is watching and listening and even participating. And when it does participate, it sounds very much like you.
Guard your hearts’.
On November 16, 2015 at 2:14 pm, MrApple said:
If you are unsure at all about the true nature of Islam then please look up the books and videos of Dr. Bill Warner. This man presents Islam in a complete no BS manner by simply pointing out the nature of Islam through the very words of the holy books of Islam themselves.
On November 16, 2015 at 4:17 pm, BluesStringer1955 . said:
Umm…Guys, I politely asked Mr. Smith what his purpose for putting the Bible references up front was and then seeming (to me) to not tie them into the rest of the piece. Matthew Wilbanks politely gave a very reasonable, rational answer which may very well say basically the same thing(s) Mr. Smith would say in answer to my question, but then, I don’t know. That’s why I addressed my question to the author of the piece and emphasized that it was an honest question, derived from what I perceive to be a similar conflict within myself, and now here’s Fred asking if he may be so bold as to take for granted that any question or conflict in a Christian’s mind derives from ignorance of Jesus or lacking study of the Bible. Fer cryin’ out loud, Fred, if you’ve never asked a question of someone that you couldn’t understand their invocation of scripture, then may I be so bold as to suggest that you’re a phony. No Christian ever learned everything they need to know from simply reading the Bible. That’s what pastors and Sunday School teachers, and ostensibly, other knowledgeable Christians, are for. Your holier-than-thou scolding is out of line.
Bottom line, my question wasn’t about anything I said in asking it, it was about what Mr. Smith meant in writing it. Unless one of you is a secondary pseudonym of Mr. Smith, which I highly doubt, I wasn’t looking for commentary on my question from any of you.
On November 16, 2015 at 4:57 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Response above, but I would add to it. God’s laws are for all people in all times and in all circumstances. ISIS terrorists will stand before God just like I will. These laws will condemn them. But they also instruct us, and serve as a guidepost to judge other men and their actions. For us, it helps understand just what kind of people they are, and how we should treat them. Thus, killing them should become easy for us.
Yes, I mean EASY. Not regretful, not forlorn, but easy, a subject of celebration.
On November 16, 2015 at 11:38 pm, BluesStringer1955 . said:
Understanding what kind of people they are should translate to a
Christian how easy it should be to kill them? You are not reading from
the same Bible as I am, Mr. Smith. Nor are you particularly well-aligned
with Mike on this topic. Read this, “I’m taking a poll. How many of you are willing to kill a Muslim infant because his or her parents are Muslim?” and this, “Yes, there are Muslims innocent of any crime, and this is what God has to say about that.” and this, “Notice: Comments along the lines of “The only good Muslim is a dead Muslim” will not be posted”
and then tell me how Mike is trying to convince his Christian readers,
libertarian or otherwise, that killing muslims should “thus…become
easy for us” just because we “understand just what kind of people they
are.”
You say we cannot run in the face of duty. I have no duty
to France, nor they to the US, which they have demonstrated countless
times over the last couple of centuries. I certainly have no duty to
Syria or Northern Iraq, and yet a significant percentage of my tax
dollars have been used in and around those locales for decades with not
one shred of accomplishment in the furtherance of political stability or
less death and destruction of innocents to show for it. I’m not
advocating total isolationism, but more foreign wars is not the answer,
either politically, biblically or just plain ol’ rightfully. I’ll even
offer to gear up, man up and pony up money to participate in rescuing Christians from being
slaughtered over there, and I would support immigrating them here and
working towards assimilating them into
our culture, but I’ll be damned
(quite literally) if I allow myself to be swayed towards indifference of
their “collateral” deaths as we “easily” kill all the muslims around
them.
Sorry, this is getting rather ridiculous. I just got a notification of Josh’s reply above while typing this reply to the owner, and it seems apparent that I was indeed intruding on an echo chamber where no trespassers will be allowed unless willing to take “respect” in the form of thinly-veiled accusations of being a government collaborator. I seriously doubt the oh-so-“respectful” Josh can cite undeniable proof of him being a victim of DHS data-mining, but I can. Bottom of Page 17, “BluesStringer” is quoted by the ADL: “Violent Voices: Anti-Government Extremism Takes on New Intensity” A year or so later DHS, through a FOIA request, was forced to reveal its sources for this report, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.” The ADL report that I was quoted in was among their sources, as was the SPLC and other far left, non-governmental organizations whom the government has no authority whatsoever to enlist civilian groups as watchdogs outside of any pretense of constitutional due process.
To think that a question asked and answered could lead to such wild conjecture, erroneous judgments and disrespect under the guise of some half-witted stranger on the internet being taken seriously by anyone that he knows “exactly” what kinds of folks are DHS agents is just too brain-dead an atmosphere for me to abide. So like I said, sorry for the intrusion, it won’t happen again, not even when Mike or David make the mistake of linking here. Later.
On November 17, 2015 at 12:05 am, Herschel Smith said:
How, precisely, did you get, or did I say, anything whatsoever about yours or my duty to France? The duty of which I spoke, and which was absolutely clear except for your misdirect, was to your loved ones.
How, precisely, did I say, or did you get, the notion that I said killing Muslims should become easy, or was even the subject of this conversation? It had to do with killing those who would target us, e.g., ISIS or like-minded followers. You’re making things up.
You know, I do tire of people who read on a fifth grade level.
On November 17, 2015 at 9:06 am, Josh said:
Someone’s salty.
On November 18, 2015 at 3:45 pm, Isahiah62 said:
perfect essay..sharing this now