Tag Archives: terrorism



Boko Haram

“Western education is forbidden.” Roughly translated that’s the meaning of Boko Haram, words in the Hausa language, which refer to the Nigerian Islamist terror group.

A few months ago, the group kidnapped over 200 teenage girls from one school. They have not been seen since. A leader of the group stated last week that the girls have all been married off. ISIS was selling kidnapped women in Iraq for $1,000 each. It seems likely Boko Haram gave the girls away to terrorists fighting in their group.

Yesterday came news that 46 teenage boys have been killed in another school in Nigeria by Boko Haram.

The number 46 reminded me of a community where we once lived, the city of Bath, in Michigan, just outside of Lansing.

In the spring of 1927 the local school was blown up and 46 people, mostly youngsters at the school, eventually died as a result of that day’s carnage. It remained the worst terrorist attack in US history until Oklahoma City in April 1995, which also claimed many young lives in a daycare facility.

On a website devoted to the Bath disaster are the following introductory words:

“On a cool Spring morning in May of 1927 the Treasurer of the Bath, Michigan, Consolidated School District fire/dynamite bombed his home and farm and collapsed the North half of the school building (having intended to destroy all of it). Within the hour he had committed additional murders in the middle of the village by the suicidal detonation of shrapnel-shrouded explosives that he had packed into his vehicle. Over the following year a total of 46 people would be dead as a result of that day’s mayhem and many, many more would be counted among the injured & maimed. After 86 years this incident still ranks as the worst instance of school violence in U.S. history.”

Like Oklahoma City, this particular incident was an example of homegrown terrorism.

We lived in Bath when 9/11 happened, the worst terror attack in American history. So far. I fear others lie ahead that will be worse in terms of numbers of deaths. 9/11 was perpetrated by Islamist terrorists who hated the West. ISIS is made up of people who feel the same way. Boko Haram reflects a great deal of anger directed at Western education.

Hatred of the West is not going away.

Will ISIS or Boko Haram be defeated? Not likely. Certainly not in the short-term.

Nigeria’s police and military are a joke. That is true right across West Africa. The police are less a force to capture criminals, than people who extort money out of innocent members of the public. The military in most countries is not well disciplined and will run away when confronted by armed insurgents, such as Boko Haram.

Terrorism threatens all of us, even children in school. It’s the scourge of the age. Although the vast majority of terror attacks are perpetrated by Islamists, adherents of all religions are capable of extremely violent acts.

These awful acts should inspire Christians to pray ‘Thy Kingdom Come” (Matt 6:10). Only when Jesus Christ returns and it’s clear which religion really is the truth will terrorism come to an end.



Brendan Tevlin was a 19-year-old American white male who was murdered in June by an African-American Muslim who told the police he was fighting jihad (holy war). He was shot eight times while sitting in his car at a traffic light. His killer claimed this was vengeance for America’s killing Muslims in Iraq.

Brendan’s murder received no national media attention, some say because he was a white man murdered by a black male but it’s more because the police rejected his claim to be fighting jihad – the case is being treated as a simple murder case.

The 82-year-old great grandmother decapitated in London, England, by a young black Muslim male also received little attention. The police dismissed the perpetrator’s claim to be fighting jihad and are not treating it as a terrorist act.

But what if they are wrong on both sides of the Atlantic? What if these one-man jihadis are the real thing? What if we increasingly see this happening in the months to come?

Will we even realize it’s happening?

The British Prime Minister David Cameron over the weekend condemned the beheading of British aid worker David Haines by ISIS. In his speech, he reminded us that Islam is a religion of peace. We’ve heard it from both British PM’s and American presidents.

But . . . is this true?

Somebody sent me a link to a Charlie Rose interview. Charlie Rose is arguably America’s best interviewer, certainly for those who like serious news. But, at 72, he’s a member of the liberal sixties generation that believes in multiculturalism and has no interest in religion. Because of this, they are fond of repeating the mantra that “Islam is a religion of peace,” sometimes stated as “all religions believe in peace.”

President Obama and his two predecessors along with successive British prime ministers have all said the same.

Bill Maher is an American stand-up comedian, political commentator and talk show host. He supports the legalization of marijuana and same sex marriage. He is also against all religion and made a documentary film in 2008 titled “Religulous.” He definitely fits into the liberal, anti-religious segment of American society. He is 58.

But, when interviewed by Charlie Rose, he was quite vociferous and forceful in condemning Islam as being quite different from Christianity. There is a violence and intolerance in Islam that you don’t see in Christianity, was the essence of what he was saying. When Charlie Rose awkwardly asked him if he would be willing to join him in a discussion with a “moderate Muslim,” Maher quickly quipped: “Find me one!

Perhaps Maher was thinking about Mohammed’s farewell address in 632 AD. Speaking to his followers he said: “I was ordered to fight all men until they say ‘there is no god but Allah.” By contrast, Jesus Christ said to His disciples: “Those who live by the sword shall perish by the sword.” (Matthew 26:52) Admittedly, most Christians have not lived up to His standard.

Perhaps we are starting to see a sea-change in the attitudes of some of our liberal intellectual elite. If so, it’s about time.

It’s only natural that this elite that forced their opinions on the rest of us are taking their time to face up to changing realities. But there is hope. Winston Churchill once said that “a conservative is a liberal that got mugged.”

A few more terrorist incidents and the electorate will change their thinking.

That’s if the police will be honest and describe such incidents as the acts of “terrorism” they are.


Mandela and Mugabe

The massive global adulation given to Nelson Mandela in the days following his death shows how much we are all influenced by the media and how brainwashed we have all become by political correctness.  George Orwell’s classic “1984” has come true – there seem to be few left who can think for themselves and not practice “new speak.”  Orwell preceded political correctness by over two decades, but saw it coming.

As I wrote Friday, most whites in South Africa think that Mandela helped avoid a bloodbath during and after the handover from white to black rule in 1994.

Now, having said that, let’s look at some other facts:

  1. While in office, Mandela turned a blind eye to the excesses of other African presidents.  South Africa’s geographic position and its economic might can be used to achieve political goals in the region.  The white National Party government of John Vorster brought down white-ruled Rhodesia.  Mandela and the African National Congress could easily have brought down Robert Mugabe, but neither he nor his successors have done so.  He even met with Mugabe and other despots and befriended them.
  2. Mandela was guilty of 156 acts of terrorism, resulting in the deaths of many people.  He pleaded guilty to these acts – there is no doubt he authorized them.  A century ago he would have been hanged for terrorism and never heard of again.
  3. In dismantling the white government, the result has been a 1,100% increase in the murder rate, the deaths of an estimated 68,000 whites including over 4,000 farmers, and a rise in crime that has everybody fearful.  When I first visited South Africa in 1974, people I stayed with did not lock their doors.  Now, they have bars on windows, high fences, electronic alarms, dogs and everything they can buy to protect them in their own homes.  It should also be remembered that there have been far more black deaths.  Black on black violence is a far greater problem and often goes unrecorded.
  4. Note the following list of Mandela’s accomplishments sent from a South African friend.  “The fruits of his takeover are mammoth unemployment; increased tension and conflict between the nine different black nations (each composed of several tribes); debasement of the currency by 700%; 8+ million illegal refugees from other African countries; an exploding crime rate; legalization of pornography, abortion, homosexual marriages, etc., which were previously banned by the white government … massive abuse of women and rape; break-down of law and order, and violence against farmers as happened in Rhodesia.”   All of these things would likely have happened with any African president, but there were clearly negative consequences when white rule ended, as there were everywhere else on the continent.

Additionally, there is great uncertainty about the future and has been for years.  If Mandela stopped a wholesale massacre of the whites, his successors may not be able to do so for long.  At some point, South Africa is likely to force land redistribution on the country in a bigger way, just as in Zimbabwe – more white farmers will lose their land.  When Zimbabwe did that, there were serious food shortages, eventually made up by the importation of food from South Africa.  When South Africa’s food production drops by 90% as a result of similar land thefts, where will the food come from to feed the people?   Whites are commercial farmers, while the native African population practice subsistence farming, growing only enough for their own needs.

The Wider Story

We need to understand the wider story here.

When I was in school, almost all of Africa was ruled by European powers, mostly the British and the French.  Only Ethiopia and Liberia were never colonized by Europeans, with the result they were the poorest and most backward countries on the continent.  That fact alone should make people take a second look at the colonial period.

The British Empire in Africa alone was bigger than the United States.  Every colony and the dominion known as the Union of South Africa, were food exporters.  Now, after five decades of independence, they are almost all food importers.

This was part of the blessings promised to the descendants of the patriarch Joseph, whose two sons were to “become a people” (the United States) and a “multitude of nations” (the British Empire and Commonwealth).  (Genesis 48:19)  The name Joseph means “God increases,” a promise of physical prosperity to the patriarch and his descendants.

Other blessings that followed these white settlers were basic freedoms like freedom of religion and freedom of the press; the Bible itself; property rights; relatively efficient and responsive administration; the rule of law and an independent judiciary; plus a political system copied on Great Britain, which gave the various colonies the stability they needed to prosper.  While these colonies existed they were a part of the western world, a major plus for the United States, which took over world leadership after World War II.

Decolonization ended all this.

It was followed by political instability, serious economic decline, a massive lowering of living standards for the ordinary people and a freefall in food production.  But nobody in the West could say anything, cowed by political correctness.

Note what Ghanaian author George Ayittey has to say on this:  “My criticisms of African governments were greeted with suspicion in North America and western Europe.  I quickly learned that, in the United States, African leaders, especially those from black Africa, were viewed almost as saints.  Blacks, having been enslaved and colonized in the past, could do no wrong.  Criticizing African leaders, especially in the North American media, is often regarded as ‘blaming the victim.’  To do so is not “politically correct.””  (Africa Betrayed, by George Ayittey, 1992, page xvi)  Do you see now why you’re not hearing anything negative about Nelson Mandela?

Political Correctness continues to this day.  Nelson Mandela is the hero of the western, progressive, left-wing elite.  No one from the present US Administration attended Mrs. Thatcher’s funeral.  No American president, either, attended Churchill’s funeral – four will be present at Mandela’s.  Conservative Churchill was a relic of the Victorian age to them; Mandela was the future, symbol of the new multicultural ‘rainbow’ world dreamt of by the Fabians, John Lennon, JFK, Lenin and other influential men and organizations.   Their dream is of one world government, where all races and all religions blend into one.

Of course, without Churchill, we would all be goose-stepping and speaking German.   Hitler was the greatest racist of all – the Africans would have had no chance if he had conquered their continent.  Churchill was the great imperialist – he inspired the peoples of the British Empire to fight as one against the Third Reich.  The Empire no longer exists – what will Britain do next time there is a major threat to world peace from the continent of Europe or anywhere else?

What will Africa do if western countries can no longer send them aid?  Having kicked out the white farmers, they will have serious food shortages.

Those of us who have lived in Africa have lived through the fall of the British Empire.   South Africa was the last part to fall, in 1994, to the ANC and Nelson Mandela.

This is a major reversal for the modern Israelites, but they cannot see it for what it is.  Political correctness and the cult of celebrity have, rather, made it all seem progressive for Africa and for the world.

But it’s the slow fulfillment of the curses to come upon Israel, prophesied in Deuteronomy chapter 28, for their rejection of God.  “You shall build a house, but you shall not dwell in it; you shall plant a vineyard, but shall not gather its grapes … the alien who is among you shall rise higher and higher above you, and you shall come down lower and lower.”  (verses 30 & 43)

Africa has gone out from under Israelite domination.  So has Asia.  All that’s left  are the US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and some north-west European nations – and they are all well down the road that will lead them to the same gentile domination that has befallen Africa!



A 25-year-old British soldier, father of a two-year-old boy, was repeatedly stabbed and decapitated in broad daylight in the Woolwich district of London, May 22nd.  The two perpetrators of this crime were not ashamed; they did not run away, rather they boasted to passersby that this will be the fate of many more British people – until the United Kingdom and other western nations remove their troops from Muslim lands.

Both of these men were British citizens, one the son of Nigerian immigrants who converted to Islam over ten years ago.  Both clearly felt a far greater loyalty to Islam than to the country that took them in and greatly increased their opportunities in life.

Once again, politicians and the media expressed incredulity that such a thing could happen.  The usual words were mouthed, words that people want to hear but words that sound increasingly hollow.  British Prime Minister David Cameron expressed the comment that this heinous crime was an insult to Islam.  Really?  It’s not as if this was the first such crime.  Nine years ago, the Dutch citizen Theo van Gogh was similarly killed on the streets of Amsterdam.  His crime was making a ten-minute documentary film on how the followers of Islam treat their women.

The bombings on the London Underground and on a bus in 2005 used a different methodology, but the perpetrators expressed similar sentiments – an intense hatred of the West, contempt for their adopted country and strong disagreement with British involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Would all this animosity and the threats of violence change if Britain and the other allies removed all troops from Muslim lands?  Not likely.  For a major push is going on, something akin to what has happened in previous periods in history – the territorial expansion of Islam!  Western Europe, including Great Britain, is increasingly Islamic as immigration and a high birthrate have combined to project Islam to the forefront of national life.  As one London imam said some years ago, “We will not stop until the crescent moon flag flies on top of Buckingham Palace!”

The Islamic religion started with the prophet Mohammed in the third decade of the seventh century in the area of Mecca and Medina in what is now Saudi Arabia.  By the end of the same century Islamic military forces had spread the religion across the whole of North Africa and much of the Middle East, conquering Jerusalem, Egypt and other parts of the Byzantine Empire.  In 711 they landed in Gibraltar.  Only 21 years later, exactly 100 years after the death of the prophet, their advance was stopped just outside of Paris by French forces led by Charles Martel, the grandfather of Charlemagne.

Further expansion by Islamic forces led to the Crusades at the end of the eleventh century.  Encroachments upon Christian territories continued until the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks in 1453.  In the following century the island of Rhodes was conquered and an attempt was made to take Malta.  Later, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Islamic forces pushed right into the heart of Europe, reaching the gates of Vienna in 1529.  Vienna was attacked again in 1683.

A reversal took place during the period of European colonialism, when the British and the French dominated the Middle East.  The collapse of the Ottoman Empire less than a century ago led to further western involvement in the area and, in 1948, to the establishment of the nation of Israel.

Once again, Islamic imperialism threatens the West but political correctness obscures the reality.

After World War II, there were hardly any Muslims in western lands.  Today, there are millions, thanks to short-sighted immigration policies coupled with the push for diversity.  In the UK, the official figure is 1.6 million, but it’s likely much higher.  Even if only one percent are inclined to acts of violence like the ones already committed in London, that’s at least 16,000 terrorists within.

During the IRA’s terrorist campaign against the British, it was estimated that they only had 200 active terrorists at the most.  We’re talking here of multiple times that number.

Acts like the latest one in Woolwich are likely to become quite common as Islamic militants push for a greater say in Great Britain and other western countries. The bombings at the Boston Marathon indicate the US will experience similar acts. Remember, the ultimate goal is domination, to rule over the infidels, the non-believers for whom they have only contempt.

The problem of Islamic militancy will not be resolved by Britain pulling troops out of Afghanistan.  That’s a separate issue.  The real problem here is Islamic imperialism, the endless drive to impose Islam on the rest of the world.  The West’s open-door policy of the last few decades has allowed Muslims to make significant inroads into western countries.

Millions of people in Muslim lands believe the “Christian” West is at war with them.  The only way they can win the war is by bringing the conflict to western nations, so that people in the West experience the kind of violence seen daily in many Muslim lands.  Thanks to the changing demographics of the last few decades, western countries themselves have made this possible.  We can only expect more attacks like the one in London on May 22nd.