Sibby Online

An admitted Christian may want to consider being a false teacher if admitted pagan Larry Kurtz supports your leftist positions

Yesterday Larry Kurtz left this comment:

South Dakota is one big Lake Mitchell, Steve: putrid and dying. Read the comment from Laurisa at Cory's blog, Sibby. You're a christian like Pat Powers is a yoga instructor.

http://dakotafreepress.com/2017/12/27/howie-brands-all-leftists-as-anti-god/#comment-94364

Here is what commenter named Laurisa said:

I’m a seminary student and a devout Christian, and I am a very proud leftist. And I certainly have no intention of changing that once I graduate and begin work. And I am joined in those views by the vast majority of my classmates.

First of being "very proud" is a violation of Biblical principles. In addition, some seminaries are a source of false teachers. Here is an example:

My name is Steve Cha, and I was a student who was in the MAT graduate program. I have recently left Fuller Theological Seminary after studying one year with the school. I felt burdened to share with you why I decided to leave Fuller after much contemplation. This will not be easy for me to say, but I feel that I need to do it for the sake of God’s honor and for the future of the school.

Over the course of the year (from Spring 2011-Spring 2012), I have had an uncomfortable and unsatisfying experience at Fuller because of its teaching, which, quite frankly, borders on heresy. I’m not talking about peripheral biblical issues like charismatic spiritual gifts or modes of baptism, but the core, foundational doctrines that all Christians should agree on, as established by the New Testament and illustrated by the 16^th Century Reformation.

During my five quarters at Fuller, I have had professors who defied the trustworthiness of Scripture, questioned the literalness and existence of eternal hell/lake of fire, taught a form of theistic evolution over the six-day creation account established in the book of Genesis, hinted that Jesus may not be the only way to heaven, and shaped the gospel message and Jesus’ work on Calvary to make it fit the paradigm of a cultural mandate and social justice type of message instead of the orthodox view of what the gospel and the cross means, which is God’s punishment of sinners with eternal hell, Jesus’ sacrifice and atonement to satisfy God’s justice and wrath, Jesus’ imputed righteousness, salvation by faith in Christ alone, etc.

So after pointing out to Larry that since he is using a false teacher as a basis, he doesn't have a clue as to what Christianity is about, he responded with this:

The history of christianity is rife with paternal idolatry and the adoration of women as breeders only leading some of us to believe you are completely subservient to your wife just as you were to your mother. That you use this forum to vent your frustration with your own history of being pussy whipped is abundantly clear.

You're a miserable sinner, Steve: something we pagans abandon on our paths to self-actualization.

If you are being honored by a pagan, then you need to question whether you positions fit Biblical Christianity. This explains how Larry has Christianity and paganism turned around:

God early and clearly commanded the descendants of Abraham not to have any other gods besides him ( Exod 20:3 ). This strict, undivided loyalty was the basis of the covenant relationship God established between himself and the people of Israel.

Sadly, the whole of biblical history is punctuated by the numerous times the people of God turned away from him to engage in the worship of a strange god or goddess. People in the lands surrounding Israel had deities that continually tempted the Israelites to turn from their own God.

Artemis. Greek goddess (K. J. V. Diana) of fertility worshiped at Ephesus and elsewhere during the New Testament era. Her worship combined Greek, Roman, and Anatolian elements and dates back to ca. 1000 b.c. In Ephesus a temple was built in the third century b.c. to replace an earlier one that burned down and became known as one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. A well-known statue of Artemis emphasizes fertility. Paul's preaching directly challenged her worship and precipitated a riot that only official interaction could quell ( Acts 19:23-41 ). In the end the worship of Christ prevailed and the cult of Artemis disappeared from history.

And...

Ashtoreth was a popular goddess in several cultures. Her worship attracted the Israelites shortly after their settlement in Canaan. At the heart of this pagan religion was the worship of the fertility or fecundity "forces/features" that characterized the animate aspects of the created world. Ashtoreth's popularity among the Phoenicians and other northwest Semitic peoples was long-standing.

The major confrontation between Ashtoreth and Yahweh took place during the days of Eli, Samuel, and Saul. Particularly after the defeat on Mount Gilboa, the people of Israel faced an almost imponderable theological dilemma. Instructions were sent throughout the land of the Philistines to proclaim victory over Israel and their God Yahweh. The proclamation was to be made in the temples of their idols and among the people ( 1 Sam 31:6-10 ): the Baals and Ashtoreths were mightier than the Lord!

Ashtoreth's influence was finally discredited by Josiah, who "cleaned house" by destroying the shrines erected by Solomon. He made clear that Yahweh was the onlyand trueGod for the people of Israel.

So one who is a serious Biblical Christian would reject the pagan goddess worshipers which are driving America's feminist movement. The Bible is clear that those who are involved with  "paternal idolatry and the adoration of women as breeders" have turned away from God. They would be false Christians. 

I am not surprised another false teacher, claiming to be a devout Christian, shows up on Cory Heidelberger's web site providing the anti-God movement reasons to attack Christians. Seems this Laurisa is following the foot steps of Cory's wife Erin and wishes to be a goddess worshipped by leftists. 

A big thank you to Larry Kurtz for helping me make my points. I just wished he would us a little more tact, but perhaps that is just the pagan in him. He certainly is an example of one living in darkness and needs to instead follow the light of Jesus Christ.

Critics of Muhammad and Islam go back to the Seventh Century

Many of today's anti-Christians defend Islamic supremacy with this argument:

To understand any phenomenon, its roots must first be understood.  Unfortunately, not only do all discussions on the conflict between Islam and the West tend to be limited to the modern era, but when the past, the origins, are alluded to, the antithesis of reality is proffered: we hear that the West—itself an anachronism for Europe, or better yet, Christendom—began the conflict by intentionally demonizing otherwise peaceful and tolerant Muslims and their prophet in order to justify their “colonial” aspirations in the East, which supposedly began with the Crusades.

Bestselling author on Islam and Christianity Karen Armstrong summarizes the standard view: “Ever since the Crusades, people in the west have seen the prophet Muhammad as a sinister figure….  The scholar monks of Europe stigmatised Muhammad as a cruel warlord who established the false religion of Islam by the sword. They also, with ill-concealed envy, berated him as a lecher and sexual pervert at a time when the popes were attempting to impose celibacy on the reluctant clergy.”

That nothing could be further from the truth is an understatement.  From the very first Christian references to Muslims in the seventh century, to Pope Urban’s call to the First Crusade more than four centuries later, the “Saracens” and their prophet were consistently abhorred.

Here are some details:

Muhammad is first mentioned by name in a Syriac fragment, also written around 634; although only scattered phrases are intelligible, they all revolve around bloodshed: “many villages [in Homs] were ravaged by the killing [of the followers] of Muhammad and many people were slain and [taken] prisoner from Galilee to Beth…” “[S]ome ten thousand” people were slaughtered in “the vicinity of Damascus…”   Writing around 640, Thomas the Presbyter mentions Muhammad: “there was a battle [Adjnadyn?] between the Romans and the Arabs of Muhammad in Palestine twelve miles east of Gaza.  The Romans fled…  Some 4,000 poor villagers of Palestine were killed there … The Arabs ravaged the whole region”; they even “climbed the mountain of Mardin and killed many monks there in the monasteries of Qedar and Bnata.”  A Coptic homily, also written around the 640s, is apparently the earliest account to associate the invaders with (an albeit hypocritical) piety.  It counsels Christians to fast, but not “like the Saracens who are oppressors, who give themselves up to prostitution, massacre and lead into captivity the sons of men, saying, ‘we both fast and pray.’”

Towards the end of the seventh and beginning of the eighth centuries, learned Christians began to scrutinize the theological claims of Islam.  The image of Muslims went from bad to worse.  The Koran—that “most pitiful and most inept little book of the Arab Muhammad”—was believed to be “full of blasphemies against the Most High, with all its ugly and vulgar filth,” particularly its claim that heaven amounted to a “sexual brothel,” to quote eighth century Nicetas Byzantinos, who had and closely studied a copy of it.   Allah was denounced as an impostor deity, namely Satan: “I anathematize the God of Muhammad,” read one Byzantine canonical rite.

But it was Muhammad himself—the fount of Islam—who especially scandalized Christians: “The character and the history of the Prophet were such as genuinely shocked them; they were outraged that he should be accepted as a venerated figure.”   Then and now, nothing so damned Muhammad in Christian eyes as much as his own biography, written and venerated by Muslims.  For instance, after proclaiming that Allah had permitted Muslims four wives and unlimited concubines (Koran 4:3), he later declared that Allah had delivered a new revelation (Koran 33:50-52) offering him, the prophet alone, a dispensation to sleep with and marry as many women as he wanted.  In response, none other than his favorite wife, Aisha, the “Mother of Believers,” quipped: “I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires.”

Based, then, on Muslim sources, early Christian writers of Semitic origins— foremost among them St. John of Damascus (b. 676)— articulated a number of arguments against Muhammad that remain at the heart of all Christian polemics against Islam today.   The only miracle Muhammad performed, they argued, was to invade, slaughter, and enslave those who refused to submit to him—a “miracle that even common robbers and highway bandits can perform.”  The prophet clearly put whatever words best served him in God’s mouth, thus “simulating revelation in order to justify his own sexual indulgence”; he made his religion appealing and justified his own behavior by easing the sexual and moral codes of the Arabs and fusing the notion of obedience to God with war to aggrandize oneself with booty and slaves.

Perhaps most importantly, Muhammad’s denial of and war on all things distinctly Christian—the Trinity, the resurrection, and “the cross, which they abominate”—proved for Christians that he was Satan’s agent.  In short, “the false prophet,” “the hypocrite,” “the liar,” “the adulterer,” “the forerunner of Antichrist,” and “the Beast,” became mainstream epithets for Muhammad among Christians for over a thousand years, beginning in the late seventh century.   Indeed, for politically correct or overly sensitive peoples who find any criticism of Islam “Islamophobic,” the sheer amount and vitriolic content of more than a millennium of Western writings on Muhammad may beggar belief.

Taneeza Islam, who refuses to denounce the Muslim Brotherhood and their support of Hamas, said there is a lot of history. Sadly most will not even look at the history because they are afraid of so-called Islamophobes. What do you call a phobia about a fake phobia? Hypocrisy?

Anybody playing identity politics is wrong, no matter which side you are on, proved by Pat Powers using Cory Heidelberger's racist based cultural Neo-Marxism

Pat Powers goes after Lora Hubbel for being a racist:

It seems we have a morning every once in a while where we find ourselves going “Oh God. Lora Hubbel really did that,” and we’re recoiling in horror over her saying something horribly insane or horribly offensive. Or as we’re finding this morning, both.

...

“SD’s Pocahontas – the man is a Dutchman pretending to be an Indian”  Jesus wept. She’s trying to insinuate he isn’t Native American?

He is an enrolled member of the Rosebud Sioux tribe, lives on the Rosebud Indian reservation, and represents them in the legislature. I’m a Republican, and anyone besides Lora can easily say that there’s nothing false about his heritage.

Identity politics is where the race-baiting cultural Neo-Marxist worldview has taken us. From a Biblical Christian worldview, we should understand that there is one race, the human race. Heinert's heritage should be irrelevant. But sadly the political activists are now distracted from the issue of how corruption has been festering in South Dakota. The important lesson to learn here is that the liberal Democrats are supporting the continuation of the corrupt practices ant that puts then on commn ground with the liberal Republican Establishment. Lora Hubbel's mistake was the decision to play identity politics with these racists. The result is finger pointing, personal attacks, and these have been coming from all sides of South Dakota's political arena over the years.

 What we are lacking is grace:

Through one blood (the sacrifice of Christ), God is calling people from every tribe and language and people and nation to create a new family by grace to the praise of His glory.

After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. And they cried out in a loud voice: “Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!”

—Revelation 7:9–10; NIV

The apostle John, isolated on the Greek island of Patmos, had been given a vision of the future—a revelation—of what was to come. Before his mind a picture of phenomenal magnitude was unfolding; a gathering in heaven in which the multitudes of humanity (from every people group) stood together as one unified body worshiping Jesus Christ, their Lord and their Savior:

And they sang a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll, and to open its seals; for You were slain, and have redeemed us to God by Your blood out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation” (Revelation 5:9; NKJV).

Through one blood (the sacrifice of Christ), God is calling people from every tribe and language and people and nation to create a new family by grace to the praise of His glory. In heaven, the celestial city will be a cosmopolitan society void of the sin of the first Adam. There will be no night, for the Lord himself will be their light. Every tear will be wiped away, and the grace of God and the Lord Jesus Christ will reign.

This is our future. This is the destiny of the Church—and the Church today can be an earthly preview of this heavenly reality.

Do we dare to dream that the Church can move beyond divisions of Darwinian “race” relations to the unity of grace relations? Loving relationships united by the Cross and governed by the Bible lead to reconciliation. Such relationships among Christians across cultural and ethnic backgrounds are like a neon sign publicizing that grace has transformed and identified us as followers of Christ (John 13:34–35).

Pat Powers shows he doesn't get it as he follows up with his racist attack after Lora Hubbell for clearly saying this Biblical truth:

" I say dividing peoole by race is racist. we are all PEOPLE not races."

Lora understands Biblical point of view, there is just one race that originates from Adam and Eve. She is not the racist, but those who are attacking her based on race are. That would include Troy Heinert, who made this comment. And also the anti-American Brandon Ecoffey, who promotes Indian supremacy, as he promotes Indian tribal nationhood and sovereignty, and then calls Lora a Nazi. The idea that we are all "people" and not separate races,  is the very message of Ken Ham's One Race One Blood:

Discover the origin of people groups (there is only one race), the genetics of skin color, and biblical truths on “interracial” marriage. This fascinating book explores racism and its roots in the hearts and minds of millions.

Most people do not realize how intimately connected the popular idea of evolution and the worst racist ideology in history are. Ken Ham and Dr. Charles Ware reveal the compelling history of the effect of an evolution-based belief system on the history of the United States, including slavery, the Civil Rights Movement, and abortion. They go beyond politically-correct speech to show the tragic global harvest of death and tragedy that stems from Darwin’s controversial beliefs.

• Uncover the the origin of the word race and the tragic legacy of Darwin’s theory.
• Discover the disturbing connection between evolutionary thought and the most ruthless (and bloody) dictators in history.
• Join an eye-opening discussion on racism and its roots in the hearts and minds of millions.
• Step beyond the legal precedents to find the true solution in the Bible—one that resolves this issue in the hearts of mankind.

The biggest mistake that one can make when running for office is to tell a bunch of deceived citizens the truth. If you really want to win, you have to tell people what they want to hear.  You have to be willing to perpetuate lies. The political system has been corrupted due to lies that are fostered on children via public education. Evolution is one of the biggest lies. It builds the foundation for the indoctrination in college by cultural Neo-Marxists, where race is used to divide and conquer. So we have people guilty of what they are accusing others of doing. Jesus was quick to point out the hypocrisy of the people's leaders.

In South Dakota, the resulting identity politics ends up distracting us from the truth...which is both party establishments are part of the corruption that has been exposed by GearUp-gate. In Gear Up we have the Democrat's special interest on the take, along with SDGOP operatives. The only sane idea would be elimination of as many federal programs as possible, but that would be too conservative.

True conservatives are fighting an up hill battle, as the SDGOP establishment is trying to separate itself from true conservatives. Truth to power will not work when the masses lack discernment. And that truth should never be spoken by one who is serious about winning an election. I don't know if Lora is serious about winning, but if so, she needs to stop telling people the truth. They will never get it. Pat Powers just demonstrated that truth. 

There is one thing that we all good use more of, and that would be grace. But first we have to reject the lies fostered by the system, work on adopting a Biblical Christian worldview, and then obtain the ability to discern truth from lies.

Cory Heidelberger contines to be a Muslim Brotherhood bully and attacks a South Dakotan

I have already covered Cory Heidelberger's use of propagandist Ayaz Virji. On his post, Cory attacks and denigrates a South Dakotan who wrote a letter to the discredited anti-Christian Aberdeen American News with this comment:

Here’s another long-winded commenter, Porter. Local far-right crank Pati Koeniguer follows the Noem/Krebs strategy of shouting about falsehoods without identifying a single false statement made by Dr. Ayaz Virji during his November visit to our fair city. Koeniguer’s letter to the editor appears in my morning paper on, appropriately, the darkest day of the year:

Why did Northern State university allow speaker Dr. Ayaz Virji to speak on the campus? (“Minn. doctor talks about Islam and disinformation,” American News, Nov. 30.)

Dr. Virji immediately stated his reason to start speaking was because in his county, Lac qui Parle, Minn., 60 percent of the vote went to President Trump. While he said this isn’t political, he called our president a bully, childish and a idiot, he ran down Fox News, Sarah Sanders and Sean Hannity.

I don’t remember how many times he used the words “brown skin” as a means of discrimination toward Muslims. He failed to mention that over 300 brown skin Muslim people were killed in Egypt last month by brown-skin Muslims.

Dr. Virji said 94 percent of the terrorist attacks in the U.S. are done by non-Muslims, only 6 percent were done by Muslims. He also said there are only 200,000 Muslims on the terrorist list. How many terrorist killed 3,000 Americans of all colors on 9/11?

Are NSU, the mayor, and the Aberdeen Area Diversity Coalition pro-CAIR (THE Council on American–Islamic Relations)? Why are they aligning themselves with people connected to a group named as a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates? No one cares about Islam, that is CAIR ‘s narrative. Sharia is the issue, it is a government woven into a religion. You want that type of government move to another country. Dr. Virji said he’d move to Dubai if put on a registry.

We get it: NSU, diversity coalition and CAIR are “never-Trumpers” who despise the U.S. as it is. CAIR is on a strategic disinformation tour across the states. People need to find out the truth and it is not a doctor from Minnesota throwing out nonfacts and expecting us to believe them [Pati Koeniguer, letter to the editor, Aberdeen American News, 2017.12.21].

No real refutation, no facts, just more anti-Muslim bile. Ugh—and I pay good money for this newspaper.

But Koeniguer gives a good example of Julia Ebner’s thesis: radical Muslims and radical Christians need each other to keep polarizing the community and dismissing intelligent, moderate, empathetic discourse like that offered by Dr. Virki [SIC].

Not only did I expose the misinformation put out by Virji, I also presented the misinformation and slanderous bully tactics of Bristine mainstream media propagandist Julia Ebner.

The "94 percent of the terrorist attacks in the U.S. are done by non-Muslims" comes from Loonwatch, another bully for the Muslim Brotherhood who denigrants those they disagree with. Here is the rebuttal Cory is looking for:

Since January, 2010 the Islamic propaganda outlet, Loonwatch.com, has prominently posted an article with the title "All Terrorists are Muslim… except the 94% that aren’t."  Although not saying exactly who it is that believes "all terrorists are Muslim", the gist of the piece is that an FBI report from seven years ago concluded that the vast majority of attacks have nothing to do with Islam. 

As Loonwatch puts it:

• Only 6% of terror attacks are by Muslims
  
  
•  7% of terrorism is by Jewish extremists
  
  
• 66% of terror attacks are by leftists and Latinos
  
  

This would appear to defy common sense.  Reports of bombings, shootings, stabbings and even beheadings by terrorists cross the newswire each day.  Some are indeed the work of communist groups or nationalists, but the vast majority are clearly the product of Islamic extremists who kill in the name of religion. 

Loonwatch is playing a couple of tricks here - the biggest being that they are drawing on domestic data only.  In other words, when they say that 94% of terrorists aren't Muslim, they actually mean in the United States, where terror attacks are relatively rare and Muslims make up only 1% of the population. 

So, if we ignore the overwhelming bulk of attacks across the globe, Muslims are "only" six times more likely to commit acts of terror than the general population.  The numbers get even worse for Loonwatch on closer examination.

As it turns out, much of the FBI list includes "violence" against property rather than people. In fact, the formula used by the agency to define terrorism is somewhat fuzzy.  While it includes tree-spiking and bank robbery, for example, it somehow omits the Arizona assassination of a Sunni cleric by Iranian terrorists in 1980, the 1990 murder of Rabbi Kahane by an Islamic radical at a New York hotel, and even the killing of two CIA agents by a Muslim extremist at Langley in 1993.

When Americans hear the word 'terrorism', however, what comes to mind isn't vandalism, but rather those acts of genuine violence that are intended to cause loss of life.  So, how do we focus on these incidents and filter out the rest?

Well, perhaps the best way of knowing whether terrorists are serious about killing people is if they actually do.  Since Muslims and non-Muslim terrorists have equal opportunity to kill, Loonwatch shouldn’t object to an analysis of only those attacks which cause deaths.  What does the data have to say when we exclude non-lethal attacks?

Even by the FBI’s curious standard, the sort of truly violent terrorism that most concerns Americans is extremely rare in the United States.  Only 29 attacks on their list of incidents between 1980 and 2005 resulted in actual death.  Of these 29 attacks, Islamic extremists were responsible for 24%, accounting for 2,981 kills (civilians only), while the non-Muslim attack body count is 196.

Thus, what the FBI report is really saying is that a demographic which makes up only 1% of the American population accounts for one-fourth of all deadly terror attacks in the U.S. and 94% of related casualties!  (The 94% statistic is somewhat ironic because it is the same figure than Loonwatch is touting to dispel concerns).  The Jewish population in the U.S. is more than twice that of Muslims, but there were only three so-called Jewish attacks during the entire 25 years (all by the "Jewish Defense League") with a total of three killed. 

Since 2005, there have been at least six additional deadly attacks that would probably qualify as terrorism in the U.S. even to the FBI.  One was the 2012 shooting by a skinhead that resulted in six deaths at a Sikh temple and the other five were by Muslims, which left 19 dead.  This means that since 1980, Muslims in the U.S. have been 35 times more likely to commit terror than all other demographics combined.

So there you go Cory. A little long for a letter to the editor, but why don't you a head and link to this post and respond without calling me an Islamophobe, as I have already told Cory that I am focused on the Muslim Brotherhood, not Muslim in general. Better yet, leave a comment on this post so we can have a public discussion about what Taneeza Islam is doing in South Dakota. Lets drop the personal attacks and deal with facts, something that you expects from others, but not from yourself. That is a trait of a true supremacist.

Cory Heidelberger and Taneeza Islam are teaming up to bully South Dakota's government by using fascist tactics

While attending Taneeza Islam's presentation on November 28 at the University of South Dakota, it was clear that her intentions was to build a coalition to deal with the legislators in Pierre. Yesterday I covered Cory Heidelberger's use of Julia Ebner, who is a British establishment media hack caught bullying Tommy Robinson with the false accusations of him being a right extremist Islamophobe promoting Neo-Nazi racist supremacist. If you go to Heidelberger's web site, you will find the same tactics being used on counter terrorism experts that come to South Dakota to warn us about Islamism.

Perhaps we should listen to Sharia Hobbs, writer of the novel ‘The Gori’s Daughter’, as she explains what is happening in England:

I am no longer shocked or surprised to hear stories of men and women from the police force facing disciplinary action for criticising Islam. Men and women who have an impeccable work record who all of a sudden find themselves losing everything for saying halal meat is barbaric or for saying Sharia courts should be shut down. It should be shocking and it should be headline news that the very people who are supposed to serve and protect us, risk losing their jobs, for ‘insulting Islam.’ I suppose we should go back to the beginning to find out how we got here.

When my father arrived in the UK in the late 60s he had no interest in getting special treatment, happy to be in the land of the free. Where money really did grow on trees and women were more accessible than they were back in Pakistan. What was there not to love about his new home, apart from the freezing cold, it was better than the poverty he had left behind. Did he want it to be ruled by Sharia? Hell no? This was the late 60s remember and it was Iran and Afghanistan that were slowly being taken over by Islam. It was in Iran and Afghanistan that women were protesting against the forced veiling and all the other restrictions Islam forces on women and men.

Fast-forward to the UK and it is obvious sharia is creeping into everyday life. The Home Affairs Committee has launched an inquiry into Sharia courts that operate in the UK; some say there are 80 sharia courts although due to their secretive nature the true number is unknown.

Cory Heidelberger and Taneeza Islam have been teaming up to bully anybody who is critical of Islamism. Hobbs shows us what happens when this agenda is allowed to continue by having the government enforce Sharia Law in the name of stopping hate speech:

In August last year I was invited, along with many others, to speak at an event organised by Anne Marie Waters of Sharia Watch UK. An event, at which I spoke about how Islam kills women, kills them not just physically but mentally and emotionally. This is not a lie and we only need to look to Muslim countries to see how women are punished. We know in the UK that Muslim women are punished too, we have laws to protect them from forced marriage, from FGM, HBV and there is talk of making breast ironing a crime too. The one thing these evil acts all have in common is religion, some argue and say it is cultural and I say it is religion. Africans, Egyptians, Indians, Pakistanis, and Indonesians to name some carry out FGM, all are completely different cultures yet religion is the common denominator.

Anne Marie received hassle from the police, she couldn’t hold the event outside Westminster they said, so she chose another location and that too was not suitable, as she needed to apply for permission. It seemed like there was nothing but obstacles put in her way with those in charge hoping she would cancel the event. Anne Marie is a strong woman and refused to back down and so eventually they gave up and allowed her to hold the event outside Westminster, her first choice of venue.

If you want to march calling for Sharia law and for a Caliphate in the UK then no obstacles will be put in place, instead the police will walk alongside you to protect you from any backlash. While you march you can wave the ISIS flag and that too goes unchecked. Protest against Sharia and mock Islam and you may well find yourself arrested.

You can also wave banners and hold placards calling for the ‘Death of British Soldiers’ that too is allowed and given a free pass. Protest against the evil and barbaric ways in which Islam kills women, stoning, lashing, beheading and you may find yourself being accused of a ‘hate crime.’

Hobbs started her piece with  a quote from Andrew Cummins, “Islamophobia – A word created by fascists and used by cowards to manipulate morons.” I have told Cory Heidelberger back in June that his use of that word is part of the problem, yet he continues to promote it. And Taneeza Islam's USD program was all about the dreaded Islamophobia Network. Hobbs explains what the real agenda is:

Some laugh and say the fear is not rational and that Muslims do not want Islam to take over the UK. These are the liberal leftie Islam loving and appeasing for votes and the deluded.

Britain is becoming like Iran and Afghanistan in the 60s when the Islamist were taking over, Sharia is creeping into everyday life and there are too many quick to silence those who speak out about it. We have a Labour councillor who demands that a school change its uniform policy to allow a 4 year old to wear a hijab, we jail those who place bacon onto mosque door handles and give them longer sentences than we do to those who mutilate their daughter’s vagina we do not even arrest those who force FGM onto their daughters.

And...

Call me an Islamophobe all you want, it won’t stop me from speaking out about the ways in which the government is being bullied by Islamists, I do not want to be ruled by Sharia and I know there are millions of others like me, Muslim and non-Muslim, who agree. They cannot silence us all.

Time for South Dakotans to stand up to the Islamist bullies that have infiltrated South Dakota. That effort is being lead by Taneeza Islam in partnership with Cory Heidelberger. Their political agenda includes bullying members of the South Dakota legislature. Do we really want to go down the path that Britain has taken?

Cory Heidelberger uses two propagandists to spread a false conspiracy theory that says counter-terrorism experts are allies with Islamic terrorists

Here is the latest lie that Cory Heidelberger is using to falsely attack those he considers his political adversaries:

Among the smart things that Minnesota physician Ayaz Virji told an Aberdeen crowd last month was that al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other terrorists use the same prooftexting and propaganda tactics that right-wing anti-Muslim nativist groups use to recruit and radicalize followers dedicated to the proposition that we are in a war of civilizations justifying the most extreme and unscrupulous tactics.

Now London-based researcher Julia Ebner expands on Dr. Virji’s thought, devoting an entire book to her proposition that Islamist terrorists and far-right extremists are actually “rhetorical allies” who “desperately need each other in order to push their narratives”

Minnesotan John Hinderaker, who still considers South Dakota his home state, went to one of Virji's propaganda programs and has this analysis:

The tweet linked to this article by reporter Stephanie McCrummen. It tells the story of Dr. Ayaz Virji, a graduate of Georgetown University medical school who practiced family medicine in Florida and Pennsylvania before moving to Dawson, Minnesota, in 2014.

...

The assumption that underlies the Post story is that Trump voters must be flawed people–bigoted, ignorant or both. Someone who didn’t begin with that presumption might say that the Virjis’ experience demonstrates that Trump voters are not, in fact, bigoted and ignorant, but that conclusion doesn’t seem to have occurred to either the doctor or the reporter.

...

This is where the Washington Post enters the story. Dr. Virji accepted one more speaking invitation, in another small Minnesota town called Granite Falls. The Post sent a reporter, Stephanie McCrummen, and a photographer to spend time with the Virjis and cover the Granite Falls appearance. Is it overly cynical to believe that the Post was hoping for an outburst of rural ignorance and bigotry that it could document for its urban, liberal readership?

The Post story strikes a sinister note leading up to the Granite Falls event, with a nurse describing that town as “a little bit rough” and a neighbor of the Virjis offering, somewhat hilariously, the use of a bulletproof vest. The sponsors of the meeting arranged for two police officers to attend.

If the Post’s reporter and editor were hoping for signs of bigotry, they were disappointed.

...

Dr. Virji continues with a flat misrepresentation that reveals the ignorance underlying his hatred of President Trump:

He began talking about Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, who had referred to Islam as a “vicious cancer.”

“There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world! Now, according to General Flynn, we have to purge them? ‘We have to purge the world of Islam!’” he said in a mocking voice.

Of course, General Flynn never said any such thing. Referring to al Qaeda and the Islamic State, he said that “Islamism” is a “disease inside the Islamic world,” an -ism like Nazism, Communism, etc. and a “vicious cancer” that “has to be excised.” You can listen to Flynn here. Dr. Virji purports to be teaching lesser-educated Minnesotans, but in fact he is misleading them.

He was far off his outline now.

“You can sense I’m angry about that,” he said. “Wasn’t Jesus angry when he went into the temple and knocked over the tables of the money changers? He was angry. Injustice should make us angry! Okay? I am angry about the election. Because there is injustice there, and I have felt that within my family. And with the burning of mosques? And something like 150 bomb threats to Jewish synagogues? We should think.”

What burning of mosques? It turned out that the bomb threats against Jewish institutions were made by a young Israeli who was paid in Bitcoin by foreign interests or governments, and by an African-American leftist here in the U.S. Virji was wrong to draw a connection between these events and the presidential election. Again, he misleads his audience.

He looked at Duane again, a neighbor he had considered a friend before the election but had barely spoken to since.

“I’ll tell you. After the election, I was angry. And I was angry at my community for what they did. And I was ready to leave. Okay? I was ready to go and say you know what? Not my job. People think I’m a terrorist? I’m outta here. Fine. Find somebody else. The reason I’m here is not because I want to — my faith is very personal to me. I’m here because who else is going to do this, if not me?”

People were just sitting there, listening, not saying anything.

Again, Virji couldn’t resist dragging President Trump into his discussion of Islam:

He moved on to what the Koran says about women, that they should be treated with dignity, and what Trump had said about grabbing women.
“What did he say? What did he say? You know what he said.”

Finally, after an hour and a half of such invective, during which “not one person had left the room,” Mandy France, the intern pastor, “tapped him on the arm and whispered that he needed to finish.”

...

The people of Dawson seemed good and genuine until they voted for the wrong presidential candidate. Who is the bigot? Who is blinded by prejudice? I see no sign that the Post’s reporter understands that she and Dr. Virji are drawing the wrong lesson from the story they tell, but I suspect that a great many readers will take away quite a different point from the one that they intended.

Here we learn about Julia Eber's leftist propaganda:

Robert Spencer has already written an excellent rebuttal of an article by a Quilliam researcher which appeared in the Guardian which smeared a number of leading counter-jihad people. This has received huge attention because Tommy Robinson, with Rebel Media, went to Quilliam’s offices to confront Julia Ebner in person. This article (first posted on Tundra Tabloids) takes apart the Guardian piece from Tommy’s perspective in particular.

Right off the bat, Quilliam researcher Julia Ebner’s article in the Guardian opens with a combative headline:

The far right thrives on global networks. They must be fought online and off.

The photograph caption reads:

The far right has gained influence on all levels: from far-right populism to white supremacist terrorism, from alt-right movements to neo-Nazi groups.

That is a huge problem because in around 1000 words, the only names that appear are:

• Tommy Robinson (three times)
• Alex Jones (not as an individual)
• Robert Spencer
• Pamela Geller
• Marine Le Pen
• Donald Trump

And

• Jo Cox
• Tommy Mair (convicted of murdering MP Jo Cox)

While the author may claim the intention was not to paint Tommy Robinson as “far-right” or “white supremacist,” the article is absolutely clear the author considers him to be a celebrated leader of what she calls the “British far-right landscape” and beyond into the entire worldwide “far-right” movement, even on to “white supremacist terrorism.” He is the only character in her narrative referred to multiple times in different settings.

...

The next paragraph sings the praises of Quilliam’s work against the “far-right,” culminating in the repetition of the following claim:

The Metropolitan police even warned that the threat from far-right groups is as severe as the jihadist threat.

This refers back to widely reported remarks by Scotland Yard Deputy Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu and came in the wake of the horrific murder of Jo Cox:

Mr Basu added: “Currently just under 10 per cent of all Prevent referrals relate to the extreme right-wing and we have put programmes in place to support those at risk of being radicalised.

Which seems to contradict the assertion “extreme right-wing” threats are as “severe as the jihadist threat,” when they make up only 10% of “Prevent referrals.” Obviously it is not mentioned where the other 90% come from. And it’s not mentioned how many murders, arrests, charges and convictions there have been for active Islamic terror plots vs “far-right” unsavoury speech.  I’ll leave that up to your imagination.

So far, the entire opening of the article is hammering away at the far-right and white supremacists. It continues with another paragraph which opens:

The British far-right landscape is increasingly splintered and leaderless. But low membership numbers of street protest movements such as the EDL and Pegida UK are hardly comforting.

This is the first mention of the EDL which Tommy Robinson founded but has left, and has no control or involvement with today. Pegida UK is not a significant focus of activity. The next part seems also to be building toward a main point:

Some of their former cohort have joined smaller, more militant groups while others have focused their efforts on spreading hate online. Increasingly, far-right movements show signs of collective learning and create powerful multiplier effects for their messages. As early adopters of new technology, they have been exceptionally good at using social media to widen their echo chambers and foster ties with like-minded groups abroad.

The “early adopters of new technology” might well be an allusion to Tommy Robinson’s recent involvement with Rebel Media from Canada. An alliance which has dramatically increased the professionalism of his activism and the reach of his message. No evidence, links, tweets or examples are given for this, however, so we can only surmise.

The next paragraph introduces a new term: “counter-jihadis,” which, interestingly, is one that could well apply to Tommy Robinson, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer. However it is immediately linked to “German and Polish neo-Nazis” against whom Tommy, Pamela and Robert have always spoken. Remember: Tommy has even been arrested (without charge) for punching Nazis who tried to infiltrate old EDL demos. He is universally hated by neo-Nazis. One of the earliest videos he made was the symbolic burning of a swastika flag to tell neo-Nazis and other race haters they weren’t welcome.

...

Somehow we arrive at the end of this confused journey to find the greatest problem the author sees are “binary world views.” Are we to believe that the problem with jihadi Muslims murdering people all over the world is less severe than people opening the Koran and arriving at the un-nuanced view that much of it is a direct call to violence? It seems that any number of violent Islamic terrorist groups also feel the Koran and other Islamic texts are a direct call to violence against the Infidel.

Just for pointing this out, without any reference to racial discrimination or atrocious concepts of “blood purity,” this author, Quilliam and the Guardian feel they can write whatever they like about Tommy Robinson with impunity and without any real way for him to fight back. Dear Guardian, would you like to publish this rebuttal?

There is a reason Tommy Robinson’s message and reach are growing: he’s talking about very important subjects in very clear language. It’s not a matter of nuance or lack of it. It is about not allowing overcomplications, which groups like Quilliam try to create, to hide quite simple realities. No matter what Quilliam proposes to do about Islamic reform, the same core Islamic texts which Tommy reads and talks about contain direct calls to violent, Islamic supremacist conquest which Muslim jihadis have followed for 1400 years.

Spreading lies about Tommy has to come to an end. If you spread lies about Tommy Robinson his first course of action will be to come and discuss this with you. Tommy is not violent, he will not cause any damage, but he will confront anyone who lies about him. He’ll bring along his film crew from Rebel Media. Together they now have a far larger reach and influence than most outlets in the British media.

Sad that Cory Heidelberger's readers are not allowed to read my research on what he writes as he has banned me from his web site. (I confirmed that I am still banned) And he doesn't visit this web site and comment on what I am presenting. He must have some sort of a phobia of his own. This is not an environment where we can have a respectful and construction conversation about any kind of problem or issue facing South Dakotans. Instead Cory insists on insulting those he disagrees with by using false accusations that are designed to promote hatred. and that is exactly what his post I linked to above does. He is being a hypocrite, with a severe case of psychological projection. He is part of the problem, and certainly not interested in a comprehensive analysis on the issues facing South Dakota. He should have kept the original name of his blog, because what he is doing has little to do with being free to express ones thoughts, and more about being mad at those he and his cohorts disagree with. But that would mean Cory truly cares about being honest and transparent about his cultural Neo-Marxist worldview that promotes hatred of Western culture, whites, males, and Christians.

Will Taneeza Islam publicly denounce Linda Sarsour for the latest allegation of Sarsour's support for the sexual abuse of Sharia misogyny?

[Note: Here is a link to a screen shot of Taneeza Islam's Facebook that contains a photo of her with a group of women that includes Linda Sarsour. I heard that the photo has been removed from the Taneeza's Facebook. If you find it there, please leave a link in the comments.]

Interesting that today's sex police in America only need allegations to charge sexual abuse. Now a leading Muslim feminist and Democratic activist is on the hot seat. Linda Sarsour has a history of attacking women who are critical of fundamental Islam. This is in regard to the terrorist attack in Manchesther:

Self-styled "homegirls in hijabs" — like New York militant Linda Sarsour — and many of their progressive western backers afraid of being labelled racist or "Islamophobic" are staying silent or downplaying the anti-women Islamist ideology linked to the terror strike in Manchester.

And...

In New York, however, self-described Palestinian-American-Muslim political activist Linda Sarsour — a defender of Sharia law and Saudi Arabia's record on women — kept her social media reactions to a minimum: about a generically "evil" terrorist attack on "kids having a good time" — not young girls and women.

Ms Sarsour, who wears a Salafist-approved veil that conceals all her hair and ties up tightly under her neck, once said she wished she could "take the vagina away" of staunch critic of Islamic theology and women's rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Ms Ali, along with another critic, "didn't deserve to be women", said Ms Sarsour, who is the head of the Arab American Association of New York.

Ms Sarsour co-led the Women's March on Washington after Donald Trump's election, a march that expressly portrayed the veil as a symbol of feminist struggle, despite millions of women around the world being forced or pressured to wear it.

Recall that Taneeza Islam used the hijab to present the moderate view of Islam:

I was about to raise my hand when the primary sponsor decided to ask Taneeza about how feminism intersects with her religion in regard to the issue of women wearing the hijab. Taneeza responded by saying she will piggyback off what was already said. That with any religion, and with Islam, there is a continuum of liberal and conservative. The way we look to finding the answer is through reading the Quran and the teachings of Mohammed and scholars. She then said the decision lies with myself. The hijab means “modesty” and in context of American culture she chooses to dress modesty by not wearing shorts or tank tops. And she was not wearing a hijab, nor was she wearing one in the many pictures and TV news interviews that I witnessed. She went on to say that she knows some women who wear the hijab for political and not religious reasons.

There at the end she could have very well to have been talking about Linda Sarsour who was quoted to say, “When I wasn’t wearing a hijab I was just some ordinary white girl from New York City. Wearing hijab made you know that I was Muslim.” That would be a typical attitude of one who is practicing identity politics.

I found her overall analysis of the liberal Sharia interpretation of the hijab very odd coming from a CAIR-MN Civil Rights Director who in 2011 responded to a sheriff that would not allow a female Muslim to wear a scarf in jail with this:

"A Muslim woman's practice of wearing a headscarf is a sincerely held belief which is a protected exercise of her religion. Asking her to remove her headscarf is asking her to be naked in front of others. A headscarf, unlike a crucifix or other ornament, is not a mere accessory but an essential article of clothing for those Muslim women who practice it."

So in 2011, we see her anti-Christian Islamist supremacy being used to implement Sharia Law by using a religious rights argument, but on November 28^th she is saying that the hajib is a personal choice when arguing Islam is exclusively a moderate belief system. Should we now lean toward the November 28^th presentation being false propaganda intended to mislead those who don’t know better?

But Sarsour's  "Salafist-approved" hijab points to the fundamentalist view of Islam that fuels ISIS and other terrorist organizations. This is from a moderate Muslim:

Al Qaeda, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, Boko Haram, the Shabab and others are all violent Sunni Salafi groupings. For five decades, Saudi Arabia has been the official sponsor of Sunni Salafism across the globe.

Most Sunni Muslims around the world, approximately 90 percent of the Muslim population, are not Salafis. Salafism is seen as too rigid, too literalist, too detached from mainstream Islam. While Shiite and other denominations account for 10 percent of the total, Salafi adherents and other fundamentalists represent 3 percent of the world’s Muslims.

Unlike a majority of Sunnis, Salafis are evangelicals who wish to convert Muslims and others to their “purer” form of Islam — unpolluted, as they see it, by modernity. In this effort, they have been lavishly supported by the Saudi government, which has appointed emissaries to its embassies in Muslim countries who proselytize for Salafism. The kingdom also grants compliant imams V.I.P. access for the annual hajj, and bankrolls ultraconservative Islamic organizations like the Muslim World League and World Assembly of Muslim Youth.

The pure Sharia viewpoint does include misogynist treatment of women. So here is the latest allegation directed at Sarsour:

The inspiration behind the Women’s March on DC, Linda Sarsour, has been accused of enabling the alleged sexual assault and harassment of a woman who worked for the feminist activist, according to the victim and two sources directly familiar with the matter.

Allegations of groping and unwanted touching were allegedly brought to Sarsour during her time as executive director of the Arab American Association. In response, Sarsour, a self-proclaimed champion of women, attacked the woman bringing the allegations, often threatening and body-shaming her, these sources alleged. The most serious allegations were dismissed, Asmi Fathelbab, the alleged victim told The Daily Caller, because the accused was a “good Muslim” who was “always at the Mosque.”

“She oversaw an environment unsafe and abusive to women,” said Fethelbab, a former employee at the Arab American Association. “Women who put [Sarsour] on a pedestal for women’s rights and empowerment deserve to know how she really treats us.”

Here are the details:

The problems began in early 2009 when a man named Majed Seif, who lived in the same building where the Arab American Association offices are located, allegedly began stalking Fathelbab.

“He would sneak up on me during times when no one was around, he would touch me, you could hear me scream at the top of my lungs,” Asmi Fathelbab tells TheDC. “He would pin me against the wall and rub his crotch on me.”

Asmi claims one of Majed’s alleged favorite past times was sneaking up on her with a full erection.

“It was disgusting,” she tells The Caller. “I ran the youth program in the building and with that comes bending down and talking to small children. You have no idea what it was like to stand up and feel that behind you. I couldn’t scream because I didn’t want to scare the child in front of me. It left me shaking.”

Here are Sarsour's alleged response:

Asmi Fathelbab says Sarsour regularly body-shamed her and enabled Seif’s sexual assault.

According to Fathelbab, Sarsour threatened legal and professional damage if she went public with the sexual assault claims.

“She told me he had the right to sue me for false claims,” Asmi recalls, adding that the assaulter allegedly “had the right to be anywhere in the building he wanted.”

Desperate after multiple dismissals by Sarsour, the distraught employee says she went to the president of the board of directors, Ahmed Jaber.

“Jaber told me my stalker was a ‘God-fearing man’ who was ‘always at the Mosque,’ so he wouldn’t do something like that,” Fathelbab claims. “He wanted to make it loud and clear this guy was a good Muslim and I was a bad Muslim for “complaining.”

Then there is the loss of employment that is the very essence of sexual harassment in the workplace:

After Fathelbab’s contract was up, Sarsour allegedly threatened to keep her from working again in the city.

“She told me I’d never work in NYC ever again for as long as she lived,” Asmi says. “She’s kept her word. She had me fired from other jobs when she found out where I worked. She has kept me from obtaining any sort of steady employment for almost a decade.”

Two people who knew Fathelbab during her time at the Arab American Association spoke with TheDC on condition of anonymity. Both collaborate her story, recalling that Asmi would return “emotionally distressed and in a panic” from work, often describing it as an “unsafe” work environment.

In today's environment in America, all it takes are allegations of sex abuse  for people to lose jobs and position. So shouldn't the table be turned against Sarsour? Will Taneeza Islam denounce Linda Sarsour for her Sharia compliant misogynist treatment of women, and will Cory Heidelberger join her.  This is now a second time that I give Taneeza the opportunity to support moderate Muslims. Is she hiding her allegiance to the Muslim Brotherhood's Wahhabi based Salafism? South Dakota needs to hear her explanation regarding the photo I addressed at the top of this post. 

It is vital that South Dakota learns about her real agenda, and South Dakota's media is not much help, as they continue to promote her Islamophobia propaganda. And I have already confronted Cory Heidelberger for being a part of that same problem. So far, playing politics is more important to him than is free speech and the truth. Cory has joined with Taneeza as they use the supremacist tactic of denigrating their credits in order to silence them.

Malachi Petersen responds to my analysis of Taneeza Islam's USD presentation on Islamophobes, as my research continues

During the weekend Malachi Petersen leaves a comment on the post I put up regarding the University of South Dakota presentation of Taneeza Islam:

Steve,

Thanks for coming out to the event last month! I appreciated your question! Hopefully you were able to chat with Taneeza about some of the concerns you've posted here after the event was over. Irregardless, I'm glad that you were willing to be exposed to a viewpoint that countered your own. We need more of that from all sides! I once had a very wise criminal justice professor tell my class that in order to be students of the world we need to "look around the lantern" every once in awhile (which is how I found myself on this blog).

Best,

Malachi Petersen*

*Contrary to this post, not a Neo-Marxist :)

Here is an excerpt from the post regarding the Neo Marxist point:

On November 28, 2017 at the University of South Dakota Muenster University Center, Taneeza Islam presented, “Understanding Islamophobia and Anti-Refugee Bigotry in South Dakota.”   Sponsors of the presentation included South Dakota Voices for Peace (which is Taneeza’s non-profit), the USD International Office, the USD Office for Diversity, the USD Muslim Students’ Society, and the USD Center for Diversity & Community. The primary sponsor was Malachi Petersen, a USD graduate student studying public administration, who was quoted at the University web site:

“In the current political climate, it’s vital for students and young professionals to be able to sort fact from fiction when it comes to hot button topics such as immigration. As future leaders in politics, science, and business, it’s up to USD students to create an inclusive environment in our state and nation to promote economic growth and social equity for future generations."

His position fits nicely into the cultural Neo-Marxist social justice camp that has been pushed by American Universities for decades thanks to the efforts of those of the German Frankfurt School who came to America to escape Hitler.

Taneenza started her presentation out by saying that Islamophobia is rooted in xenophobia, which is a fear of people from different countries. She also mentioned those with “brown skin”, which clearly signaled her argument was based on the racist component of the cultural Neo-Marxist worldview fomented by the Frankfurt School.

In fact that is how I started out my analysis. It was not intended to be a personal attack, but instead a way to understand the basis on how the America's leftists have partnered up with the Islamist movement. I will be emailing Malachi in order to move this discussion forward. My hope is to get a public forum put together where some of those that Taneeza Islam calls Islamophobes can go face to face with her.

My current research is a book written by Rovert Dreyfus called, "Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam." This is not some rioght-wing conspiracy theory. The author seems to be coming from the so-called progressive left. From Wiki:

Robert "Bob" Dreyfuss is an American investigative journalist and contributing editor for The Nation magazine.^[1] His work has appeared in Rolling Stone, The Diplomat, Mother Jones, The American Prospect, TomPaine.com, and other progressive publications.

This is how Amazon describes the book:

"The most clear and engaging history of the deadly, historic partnership between Western powers and political Islam."―Salon.com

Devil's Game is the first comprehensive account of America's misguided efforts, stretching across decades, to dominate the strategically vital Middle East by courting and cultivating Islamic fundamentalism.

Drawing on extensive archival research and interviews with dozens of policy makers and CIA, Pentagon, and foreign service officials, Robert Dreyfuss follows the trail of American collusion from support for the Muslim Brotherhood in 1950s Egypt, to links with Khomeini and Afghani jihadists, to longstanding ties between radical Islamists and the leading banks of the West. The result is as tragic as it is paradoxical: originally deployed as pawns to foil nationalism and communism, extremist mullahs and ayatollahs now dominate the landscape, thundering against freedom of thought, science, women's rights, secularism―and their former patron.

Chronicling a history of double-dealing, cynical exploitation, and humiliating embarrassment that continues to this day, Devil's Game reveals a pattern that, far from furthering democracy or security, ensures a future of blunders and blowback.

I will be presenting excerpts that's some of the points I have been making on this web site. This will show that it is historically illogical for the cultural Neo-Marxists to politically partner with Islamists, as Neo-Marxists like Cory Heidelberger deny there is a close relationship between officials of the American government and the Muslim Brotherhood. As the above excerpt says, this has stretched across decades.

Aberdeen America News taking heat for its leftist distortion of reality by painting a Catholic principal a racist

The Aberdeen American News wrote its own opinion piece regarding the removal of a swastika from the Aberdeen Roncalli school building:

School officials tried to remove the graffiti using solvents, but the paint wouldn’t come out of the brick. On Dec. 1 Aberdeen Catholic School System President Jeff Simmons said that a sandblaster would need to be called in.

We were not thrilled with Simmons’ lax response to leaving the graffiti visible for more than a week. Sure, it couldn’t be blasted off, but why not paint over it? Or cover it with a tarp?

It’s good not to give the vandals the attention they crave, that’s true. But let’s not leave Nazi symbols on buildings either, OK?

Thumbs up to Metzinger for doing what the school should have done — shut down racism without hesitation.

Their Facebook page has these comments:

This post is false! They owe Jeff Simmons an apology for what they said about him, he was trying to find someone that could blast it off, and we helped them out. So the one who wrote this story is a complete moron and owes Jeff and Randy both an apology.

This post is false! They owe Jeff Simmons an apology for what they said about him, he was trying to find someone that could blast it off, and we helped them out. So the one who wrote this story is a complete moron and owes Jeff and Randy both an apology.

Randy Metzinger and his fiancé gives us the real news:

While I appreciate the shout out for removing the graffiti let's make no mistake about it, the administration wanted this removed. Both Jeff and Tom were clear in the belief that racism has no place in our world and they wanted this disgusting display removed from the school's walls. From our first conversation to the time I started was about 2 hours so the decision was made quickly. I would like to think we are all on the same team in this situation.

Ok well my fiance is Randy at Sarge's and I contacted Roncolli and they called us back and got us out right away to do it. Whoever is writing this story, please don't use Randy to say that Roncolli wasn't doing what was necessary to have the graffiti removed! This post was not accurate! The only people that did anything wrong in this situation are the people that spray paint the stuff on Roncolli walls. Well and this newspaper that refused to say they screwed up and offers no apology for this comments made.

And...

There needs to be an apology written in the paper for this crap. Get your facts straight. It’s ridiculous that Mr. Metzinger had to come in and defend that actual true story. Shame on you for reporting distorted news... what happened to unbiased truth and ethics??

Great job by Randy but subpar job of reporting American News... Always divisive and always negative.

And we have Cory Heidelberger who is also divisive and negative while putting out fake news. Here is his analysis on the removal of the swastika:

Nazis are bad. The adults inviting out-of-state racists to speak in Aberdeen are a greater threat to our community than the young punks doodling on buildings

Like the Aberdeen paper, Cory is saying those committing the crimes are not the issue, but the victims are. And saying all of those exposing the Muslim Brotherhood's Wahhabi agenda are Nazis is like saying all Muslims are terrorists. Cory Heidelberger continues to be part of the problem with is whitophobic hate mongering. And it looks like there are some people in Aberdeen who are tired of the lies and race baiting as the Aberdeen leftist who proudly but falsely call themselves "free press" promote fake victimhood. The purpose seems to be creating an army of white haters, including Islamists like Taneeza Islam. These activists are playing politics, and not in the business of solving problems in order to make South Dakota better, but instead their work will turn Aberdeen into another component of the Islamic State. It is past time for the Aberdeen American News and Cory Heidelberger to start removing their anti-Christian supremacist graffiti, including their use of "Islamophobes". That word is equivalent to the use of the "N" word. It is designed to denigrate and silence those they don't like and hold a prejudice on.

So will Cory call Islamists who kill atheist bloggers an Islamophobe Network

This is not from the Islamophobe Network:

(DHAKA, Bangladesh) — The man accused of carrying out a bomb attack in New York City’s subway system was influenced by the sermons and writings of a radical Muslim preacher, but appeared to have no known links to local radical groups, Bangladeshi officials said Wednesday.

The suspect, identified as Akayed Ullah, a 27-year-old Bangladeshi immigrant, had asked his wife in Bangladesh to read the writings and listen to the sermons of Moulana Jasimuddin Rahmani, the currently imprisoned leader of a banned group called Ansarullah Bangla Team, said Monirul Islam, a top official of the counterterrorism department.

The group has been linked to killings and attacks on secular academics and atheist bloggers in Bangladesh. Rahmani is serving time in prison for his involvement in the killings.

Will South Dakota atheist blogger Cory Heidelberger take note of this warning regarding the actions of Islamist groups who kill atheist bloggers and end his Sharia affair with Taneeza Islam, or will he dismiss it as misinformation from the Islamophobe Network? Will he insist that until an atheist blogger dies in South Dakota at the hands of Jihadists, that such talk is just Islamophobia? Cory doesn't believe in wearing a seat belt because he  has never had a car accident, otherwise he would be a carophobic. And he does not believe he should wear a helmet because he has never dumped his bike, otherwise he would be suffering from bikophobia.

Here are more facts about Ullah:

Ullah arrived in the United States in 2011 and the Department of Homeland Security said he is a lawful permanent resident of the U.S. who was living in Brooklyn. He came to the U.S. on a visa issued to him based on a family connection to a U.S. citizen.

Do you suppose Cory will smarten up and change his position on DACA and immigration? I am not holding my breath.