The target audience of this post is the Christian who takes the Scriptures seriously, as written, but styles himself as a political moderate. In particular, if you have seen fit to chastise your brothers for their ‘heartless’ and supposedly ‘unchristian’ attitude towards the Syrian ‘refugees’, this post is very much for you.
It was so very interesting watching my Facebook feed fill up with sanctimonious denouncements of Christians, by Christians, who were opposed to absorbing the ‘Syrian Refugees.’ The interesting part was not the sanctimony, but the timing. It was almost as if someone had rang a bell, and the dogs dutifully salivated. You see, the people who have been raising alarm about the ‘Syrian Refugees’ have been doing so for a long time.
As it happens, my Facebook feed has been constantly updated over the last several years with numerous concerns about Christians being wiped out in the Middle East and the U.S. government doing nothing about it. A Democrat, Mark Arabo, has been smuggling Christians out of the Middle East and into the United States for quite a long time–Syrian refugees among them.
When Glenn Beck openly declared that he would risk jail to smuggle Syrian refugees into the United States back in September, I saw some sympathetic remarks, but I saw an awful lot of comments to the effect that Christians should work within the rule of law, and therefore could not support Beck’s position.
Clearly, Syria did not just become a nightmare just last week, so why is it that only last week did you take an interest? People, including many Christians, have been advocating for getting Syrian refugees (along with many others) out of the region for months and years, but only last week did you see fit to take a stand?
Let’s think about what happened last week. Oh, yea, that’s right. More than a hundred people were slaughtered in Paris. What did that have to do with any refugees, Syrian or otherwise?
I will tell you the answer, and you’re not going to like it.
Essentially, Barack Obama knew that the Paris attacks were precisely the sort of thing that conservatives have been warning about for years and even decades. The attack is one of many that have already transpired and many more that are yet to happen, with many of them due directly to his own policies in the Middle East. The Paris attack is the kind of thing that has the ability to shake the cobwebs out for even the most uninformed person. It does not require higher education in order to see the connection between radical Islamicists running amok and policies seemingly designed to facilitate them running amok. In fact, my observations seem to suggest that the higher the education, the less one’s ability to see the connection.
He invented an issue out of whole cloth, appropriating to himself a position that was actually the position of Christian conservatives for years, and painting those very same Christians as being in opposition to it.
And you fell for it. Hook. Line. Sinker.
One of the reasons you fell for it is because you misconstrue and misunderstand why people pushed back against Obama’s comments. You think the opposition is against the ‘refugees’, per se, just like you think that people who are against illegal immigration are being heartless (so much for the rule of law, eh?). No. The ‘opposition’ is a reflection of the complete lack of confidence that people have in Obama himself, and more broadly, a lack of confidence in the competency of our Federal government to do what they say they’re going to do.
Your reaction against your fellow Christians is based on Obama’s characterization of those who oppose him, rather than on the actual positions of those Christians.
Haven’t you noticed how under the Obama administration we’ve been led from one crisis after another? This is intentional, and part of the program.
When I heard Obama’s comments, especially the ones about Republicans being afraid of ‘widows and orphans‘, I knew it was just part of the playbook that liberals and progressives have been acting out of for decades, but which Obama has mastered and institutionalized in his administration.
Go ahead and watch that video clip of the ‘widows and orphans‘ again, and then remember that Obama actually studied and taught the principles of Saul Alinsky. Alinsky was an atheist who knew that he could not transform the United States unless he got the Church on his side. Like Margaret Sanger, who specifically used black pastors in her effort to depopulate the black population, Alinksy would co-opt the Christian church in America; his ‘Industrial Area Foundation’ is the founder and sponsor of the ‘Gamaliel Foundation’, a group that lists Alinsky’s book as required reading and specifically goes into churches to agitate for the kinds of things Alinsky wanted to achieve. Go ahead, check it all out. Perhaps start here.
Three of Alinksy’s ‘rules’ jumped out at me when I heard Obama’s remarks.
Rule #13: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
You Christian ‘moderates’ have been decrying the polarization of the United States in the last decade or so and seem to think its because of something that conservatives have been doing. It’s actually part of the liberal activist program. It is they that have been personalizing and polarizing things, and Obama the most. Can you not see how his comments are a perfect application of this rule?
Rule #5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.
You thought Obama’s comments merely unfortunate? No sir. They are calculated. Completely calculated.
Rule #4: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.
Alinsky immediately goes on to explain just who he has in mind, here:
“You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”
He’s talking about you, brother.
Getting Christians to pile onto other Christians, ostensibly in the name of Christianity, is precisely what Alinsky–and Obama–wanted to do.
And you fell for it.
The seemingly impossible has been achieved: Christians, thinking that they are interceding on behalf of ‘Syrian Refugees,’ have piled onto Christians who actually have been interceding for Syrian refugees for months, and even years.
Meanwhile, the one whose policies directly led to the destruction of country after country in the Middle East, manages to escape scrutiny. Again.
Where do you think ISIS got their weapons in the first place?
The legitimate refugees are fleeing the various Islamo-totalitarian regimes that came into power due to Obama’s instigation of the Arab Spring, beginning in Tunisia, burning through Libya and coursing through Egypt, on its way to Iran and Syria. Do you remember what happened to Gaddafi? You can bet that Assad, in Syria, did, pal.
A funny thing happened in Iran. When the Islamic hard-liners evidently rigged the election there, the genuine Muslim moderates took to the streets. Given what had transpired elsewhere, these Iranian people thought the United States had their backs. Instead, they were put down, mercilessly. From Obama: crickets.
The only reason there are refugees at all is because Obama put a torch to the region. Except in a few cases where strange twists of fate occurred, hard-line Islamcists surged to power. In Egypt, the military stepped in and deposed the Muslim Brotherhood, which had taken power. Obama protested. In Syria, Assad saw the writing on the wall and knew that he had to act decisively. It appears extremely likely that Obama armed ISIS, and the death of the ambassador in Benghazi was connected to this fact.
No wonder that Hillary Clinton has fought the release of her emails so vigorously and the State Department has dragged its heels on everything.
If this is all true, and it seems likely that it is, what did you expect Assad to do?
I mean, really.
Pretty much everywhere else, Islamcists grabbed control, and moved to purge the region for Allah.
Don’t you think its reasonable to think that a better solution is to ‘fix’ the region so the people can live in their own homelands safely, rather than simply patching over the problem by bringing those people over here, leaving those lands firmly in the hands of Islamcists? And what about the fact that Islamicists are not shy about their intention to infiltrate the mass of refugees in order to carry out their work?
Whatever else you may think, it is not ‘unchristian’ to want to solve a problem at its source.
I will tell you what is unchristian, though.
It is ‘unchristian’ to allow yourself to be manipulated, over, and over, and over, and over again. Of all people, Christians are supposed to be the most discerning. When the media says “jump!” Christians shouldn’t be the first to enthusiastically shout, “how high?”
Stop taking things at face value when there are obvious and glaring reasons to be suspicious about what is going on. Stop paying attention only to what Obama is saying, and look at what he is doing.
Which, of course, is an important thing to remember for any politician–nay, for any person.
“By their fruits you will know them.”
Please, please, please stop playing right into ‘their’ hands.