A nuance new to me of our enemy’s tactics has come to light which seriously affects politicians’ and public’s perceptions. As in the caveat to Paws 4 thought, it’s a topic I’d much rather not blog about, but current events require this information to be shared. It should help you to understand the huge, beguiling deception blinding national leaders.

An “aha!” moment instigated continuation of those musings. Long-standing readers may recall, like my friend and fellow End-times teacher-author ‘Neil Mac’, that ‘jigsaw pieces’ occasionally bring revelation ‘out-of-the-blue’.

After popping a small ‘piece’, the last link, into my brief comment to the re-blog of Joel Rosenberg’s post on the war against Christianity, it struck me that link is part of an ‘invisible’ jigsaw. Not exactly as depicted in this photo by Ponsulak, it seemed like I’d inserted a ‘piece’ into a large puzzle, part of which covers Islamist actions.

To the first ‘puzzle pieces’, or links to comments on US National Prayer Breakfast, I added two more on the Crusades. It was upon later reading the last of these four at leisure that I was struck by it’s being like a piece connecting one area to another (rather  like Salvatore Vuono’s picture here).

That ‘piece’ connects the modern revival of Islam in all its original barbarity that overflowed from Arabia 1,500 years ago with my musings on the Devil’s plot to avoid the Lake of Fire. Now, it’s not the fact that this phenomena is part (5) of my historical evidence, but more the facts emerging from further analysis that brought a better perspective.

Historical Evidence cont’d

In those musings we considered just a few events to support my thesis that satan is the source of anti-Semitism and Christian disunity. There’s a ‘rationale’ to such a strategy.  Nowadays,we’re brainwashed into ignoring the historical facts behind Christianity’s massive reaction 920 years ago to 460 years of jihad – widespread strategic attacks and invasions. That is, it all started 1,380 years ago – and ISIS/ISIL want the whole world to regress not improve! (Hence, my re-blog’s link to Dr Warner’s itemised listing.)

Also, militant Muslims, backed by mendacious academics in Western universities, use that twisting of historical facts to pretend they’re victims of the Crusades: but in actual fact, Muslims came out as the winners!!

What is deeply disturbing is the fact that presidents Clinton and Obama were duped, or else wallowed in self-imposed ignorance, about the Crusades – and displayed this in public!  My readers in the States will be aware of the outcry following Remarks by the President at National Prayer Breakfast in Washington on 5th February when Mr Obama said, and I underscore the cause of the issue:

“…we have seen violence and terror perpetrated by those who profess to stand up for faith, their faith, professed to stand up for Islam, but, in fact, are betraying it.  We see ISIL, a brutal, vicious death cult that, in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism…and claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions…[examples of sectarian wars] a rising tide of anti-Semitism and hate crimes in Europe, so often perpetrated in the name of religion

“So how do we, as people of faith, reconcile these realities…operating alongside those who seek to hijack religious for their own murderous ends? 

“Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history.  And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.  In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ…”

To his credit the President didn’t refer to deep anti-Semitism that had riddled European churches since the ‘early Church fathers’ and led up to the Holocaust. (Reformer Martin Luther was renowned for his strident, ungodly dislike of Jews!)

Even so, cluelessness masks deep disingenuity over the recent anti-Semitic murders of French and Danish Jews, as Elliot Abrams (Senior Fellow at the CFR and just one among myriad experts) pointedly questions and explains, Why can’t the White House see Terrorism and anti-Semitism? (see his linked lead-in post too).

Franklin Graham, outspoken son of Billy Graham, took issue with Obama’s comments, as emphasised above. On his Facebook page the evangelist sought to correct them:

“Today at the National Prayer Breakfast, the President implied that what ISIS is doing is equivalent to what happened over 1000 years ago during the Crusades and the Inquisition. Mr. President–Many people in history have used the name of Jesus Christ to accomplish evil things for their own desires. But Jesus taught peace, love and forgiveness. He came to give His life for the sins of mankind, not to take life. Mohammad on the contrary was a warrior and killed many innocent people. True followers of Christ emulate Christ—true followers of Mohammed emulate Mohammed.”

A fortnight later Franklin asks about the butchery in Libya,

“…In a statement the White House even called the 21 Christians who were beheaded “Egyptian citizens,” refusing to identify them as Christians. The truth is–their barbaric murderers openly said they killed them because they were “people of the cross.” Why is the President seemingly continuing to protect Islam and refusing to open his eyes to the truth?” (emphasis added)

The essential point, as in several earlier posts, is to compare the founders of both faiths – that of Islam just doesn’t, and cannot, bare comparison with Jesus.

William Koenig’s perspective on this as an accredited journalist at the White House and editor-in-chief of World Watch Daily is worth noting too:

“An important point to remember is that President Obama’s speeches have a specific audience or audiences in mind. At the National Prayer Breakfast…he equated the Christian (ie. Catholic) Crusades with radical Islam’s brutality. Moreover, he neglected to contrast the sacrificial love of Jesus Christ, who came as the Savior to the world, with the brutality of Mohammed, who attempted to dominate and terrorize the world…

 “What did Muslims hear? A Muslim apologist who happens to be the President of the United States, and who calls himself a Christian, lectured Christians not to be on a “high horse”. He equated horrific Muslim violence with Christians who resorted to violence in two specific periods in history.”

This furore comes as no surprise. I questioned the President’s claims to be “a student of history” in his 2009 Cairo speech, which benefitted the Muslim Brotherhood. To the very deep disquiet and legitimate suspicion of many Americans, the MB since infiltrated and became too influential within the US administration, as lawyer and author Joseph Klein recently maintained in Obama Bolsters the Brotherhood.

Also refer to Tuesday’s article by Ephraim Karsh, professor emeritus of Kings College London, on White House Delusions, Islamist Realities, wherein he tells what happened after Cairo. UK readers will find relevant material by searching on ‘Cordoba foundation’ and ‘UK islam and democracy conference’ by Global MB Watch.

‘Four Myths About The Crusades’

Historian Paul Crawford’s above-titled article is the revelatory ‘jigsaw piece’ referred to above. It was first published by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute in 2011, but I found it through the Catholic News Agency. It gave me a new perspective into another tactic used by the Devil against Christianity. This scholarly paper should be recommended reading for every serious student of history; click to read in full.

The author, a specialist teacher of medieval history, opens by referring to Bill Clinton’s speech in 2001 where he, like Obama, excused the perpetrators of 9/11 by comparing them to medieval crusaders!

Crawford’s well-reasoned and illuminating essay exposes the falsehoods behind and adroitly disposes of:

• Myth #1: The crusades represented an unprovoked attack by Western Christians on the Muslim world.
• Myth #2: Western Christians went on crusade because their greed led them to plunder Muslims in order to get rich.
• Myth #3: Crusaders were a cynical lot who did not really believe their own religious propaganda; rather, they had ulterior, materialistic motives.
• Myth #4: The crusades taught Muslims to hate and attack Christians.

What opened my eyes to a nuance in the devilish scheme to avoid the fiery lake was a scenario cloaked within the facts underlying Myths #3 and #4, for which the scholar’s opening gambit to the first (#3) reads:

“This has been a very popular argument, at least from Voltaire on. It seems credible and even compelling to modern people, steeped as they are in materialist worldviews. And certainly there were cynics and hypocrites in the Middle Ages…

“In the modern period, there were two main European schools of thought about the crusades. One school, epitomized by people like Voltaire, Gibbon, and Sir Walter Scott, and in the twentieth century Sir Steven Runciman, saw the crusaders as crude, greedy, aggressive barbarians who attacked civilized, peace-loving Muslims to improve their own lot. The other school, more romantic…saw the crusades as a glorious episode in a long-standing struggle in which Christian chivalry had driven back Muslim hordes. In addition, Western imperialists began to view the crusaders as predecessors, adapting their activities in a secularized way that the original crusaders would not have recognized or found very congenial…”

Free from church controls, the Enlightenment’s intellectual and philosophical liberality nourished a growing rejection of religion, agnosticism and atheism. So a jaundiced view of Christian scripture and history developed. Consequently, Western intelligentsia put their own twist upon the Crusades.

Part 2 will look at how this diabolical spin generated Myth #4; that the Crusades taught Muslims to hate and attack Christians – and the implicit activity of the “Father of Lies” in avoiding his ultimate demise.

[‘Hand Holding Puzzle Piece’ and ‘Puzzle’ courtesy Freedigitalphotos.net]