Terror War Consequences
[letter from an e-mail forwarded to this website author
by friend, Jane Young, 4 July 2004]
First of all, what chance does a believer have for taking the message of Jesus (Isa al Masih...Jesus the Messiah) to followers of Islam if we say bad things about their key figure? Is that in ANY way to the road to "right relationships" as urged by Jesus?
[Muslim agenda]** [key Muslim thinker's influence]**[who has the "right" to
***THE WORLD SITUATION * A LETTER TO MY
[This is said to have been written by a retired
attorney, to his sons, May 19, 2004.]
"Dear Tom, Kevin, Kirby and Ted,
"As your father, I believe I owe it to you to share
some thoughts on the present world situation. We have over the years discussed a lot of
important things, like going to college, jobs and so forth. But this really takes precedence
over any of those discussions. I hope this might give you a longer term perspective that
fewer and fewer of my generation are left to speak to. To be sure you understand that this is
not politically flavored, I will tell you that since Franklin D. Roosevelt, who led us
through pre and WWII (1933-1945) up to and including our present President, I have without
exception, supported our presidents on all matters of international conflict. This would
include just naming a few in addition to President Roosevelt - WWII: President Truman -
Korean War 1950; President Kennedy - Bay of Pigs (1961); President Kennedy - Vietnam (1961)
; eight presidents (5 Republican &4 Democrat) during the cold war (1945-1991);
President Clinton's strikes on Bosnia (1995) and on Iraq (1998) . So be sure you read this
as completely non-political or otherwise you will miss the point.
"Our country is now facing the most serious threat
to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes
WWII). The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us
who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really
"First, let's examine a few
"1. When did the threat to us start? Many will say
September 11th, 2001. The answer as far as the United States is concerned is 1979, 22 years
prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us: Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979;
Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983; Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983; Lockerbie, Scotland
Pan-Am flight to New York 1988; First New York World Trade Center attack 1993; Dhahran, Saudi
Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996; Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998; Dar es Salaam,
Tanzania US Embassy 1998; Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000; New York World Trade Center 2001;
Pentagon 2001. (Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist
attacks worldwide) .
"2. Why were we attacked? Envy of our position, our
success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened during the administrations of Presidents
Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. We can not fault either the Republicans or
Democrats as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate
predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.
"3. Who were the attackers? In each case of attacks
on US they were Muslims.
"4. What is the Muslim population of the World?
"5. Isn't the Muslim religion peaceful? Hopefully,
but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the predominately Christian
population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was
also Christian), that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or
you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for political
reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests). (http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm). Thus, almost the same number of Christians were
killed by the Nazis, as the 6 million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom
heard of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on
the Jews, he had no hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating the
Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian or any others. Same with the Muslim
terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way - their own people or the
Spanish, French or anyone else . The point here is that just like the peaceful Germans
were of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may
be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are
fanatically bent on doing - by their own pronouncements - killing all of us infidels. I don't
blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up or
"6. So who are we at war with? There is no way we
can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be
politically correct and avoid verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way
to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.
"So with that background, now to the two
1. Can we lose this war?
2. What does losing really mean?
"If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two
pivotal questions. We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the
major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the answer to the second
question - 'What does losing mean?'. It would appear that a great many of us think that
losing the war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home and going on about our
business, like post Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get. What losing really
"We would no longer be the premier country in the
"The attacks will not subside, but rather will
steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us
quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us over the past
18 years. The plan was clearly to terrorist attack us until we were neutered and submissive
"We would of course have no future support from
other nations for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see we are impotent
and can not help them.
"They will pick off the other non Muslim nations,
one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It
doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq.
Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the
troops. Anything else they want Spain to do, will be done. Spain is
"The next will probably be France. Our one hope on
France is that they might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished
too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it may already be
too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and fading fast. See the attached article
on the French condition by Tom Segel .
"If we lose the war, our production, income,
exports and way of life will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal
with us if they were threatened by the Muslims. If we can't stop the Muslims, how could
anyone else? The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war and therefore are
completely committed to winning at any cost. We better know it too and be likewise committed
to winning at any cost.
"Why do I go on at such lengths about the results
of losing? Simple. Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put
100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to
"So, how can we lose the war? Again, the answer is
simple. We can lose the war by imploding. That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to
recognize the enemy and their purpose and really digging in and lending full support to the
war effort. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided,
there is no way that we can win.
"Let me give you a few examples of how we simply
don't comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation.
"President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary
of Transportation. Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between
17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we
are taking this thing seriously? This is war. For the duration we are going to have to give
up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to lose
some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.
And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII
and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact added many more since then. Do I
blame President Bush or President Clinton before him? No, I blame us for blithely
assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness and all of our civil rights during
this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get
them out of your head.
"Some have gone so far out in criticism of
the war and/or our Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us
lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is because they just
don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the
enemy that we are divided and weakening, it concerns our friends, and it does great damage to
"Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the
politicians and media, regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war, perhaps exemplifies
best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue involving the treatment of a few Muslim
prisoners of war by a small group of our military police. These are the type prisoners who
just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands,
cutting out their tongues and otherwise murdering their own people just for disagreeing with
Saddam Hussein. And just a few years ago these same type prisoners chemically killed 400,000
of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type enemy fighters who
recently were burning Americans and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of
Iraq. And still more recently the same type enemy that was and is providing videos to all
news sources internationally, of the beheading of an American prisoner they held. Compare
this with some of our press and politicians who for several days have thought and
talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of some Muslim prisoners - not burning them,
not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating"
them. Can this be for real? The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment
of the Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of comprehension and
understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle we
are in and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can.
"To bring our country to a virtual political
standstill over this prisoner issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned
- totally oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country,
can survive this internal strife. Again I say, this does not mean that some of our
politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they absolutely oblivious to
the magnitude of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been
pushing us for many years. Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all
infidels. That translates into all non- Muslims - not just in the United States, but
throughout the world. We are the last bastion of defense.
"We have been criticized for many years as being
'arrogant'. That charge is valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we believe
that we are so good, powerful and smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all those
who attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in
the world. We can't. If we don't recognize this, our nation as we know it will not survive,
and no other free country in the World will survive if we are defeated.
"And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout
the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of
the Press, equal rights for anyone - let alone everyone, equal status or any status for
women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the
"This has been a long way of saying that we must be
united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self inflicted fall of
the Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or
"If we don't win this war right now, keep a close
eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to
increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach little by little on the
established French traditions. The French will be fighting among themselves over what should
or should not be done, which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united
resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?
"Democracies [modern ones] don't
have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force. Instead, they give
their freedoms away, politically correct piece by politically correct piece. And they are
giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that they abhor freedom and
will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power. They have universally
shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who
will be the few who control the masses. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically
correct, about the "peaceful Muslims"?
"I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I
said above. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. I believe that after the
election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in
and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about. Do whatever you
can to preserve it.
 By the way, on Vietnam, the emotions are still
so high that it is really not possible to discuss it. However, I think President Kennedy was
correct. He felt there was a communist threat from China, Russia and North Vietnam to take
over that whole area. Also remember that we were in a 'cold war' with Russia. I frankly think
Kennedy's plan worked and kept that total communist control out, but try telling that to
anyone now. It just isn't politically correct to say so. Historians will answer this after
cool headed research, when the people closest to it are all gone.
 As you know, I am a strong President Bush
supporter and will vote for him. However, if Senator Kerry is elected, I will fully support
him on all matters of international conflict, just as I have supported all presidents in the
 Source for statistics in Par. 1
 The Institute of Islamic Information and
 Note the attached article by Tom Segel
referred to in Foot Note 6 infra, the terrorist Muslim have already begun the havoc in
France. (The note was not attached to the e-mail I received.)
 I checked this article with two sources - Hoax
Busters and Urban Myths. It does not come up as a Hoax on either. I also then e-mailed Mr.
Segel and he confirmed the article was his.
 I don't think the Army or any branch of
service runs any type of war any more. It's done by senators and congressmen. There are too
many civilians involved." Returning Iraq veteran, Sgt. 1st Class Greg Klees as quoted
in the Cedar Rapids, IA Gazette on May13th, 2004.
 There are 64 Muslim countries. This does not
count countries like Spain that are controlled by the Muslim terrorists."
Jesus strapped to the
But, even more...but similarly...compelling, the
only way for a Muslim to be sure that the balance scales judging his/her life are tipped in
favor of eternity in heaven with Allah is to die a martyr. However, in effect, Jesus strapped
Himself to the cross so that Muslims wouldn't have to strap themselves to homicide bombs!!
[quote] So, if at all possible through missionary or inside spread of the Gospel, this is a vast people who who yearn for the non-fanatical message from Jesus of right relationships.
Respected theologian and Prison Fellowship Board
member Timothy George recently posed a provocative question: "Is the Father of Jesus the God
of Muhammad?" To judge by what politicians, Muslim leaders, the media, and even some churches
are saying, the answer is an unequivocal "yes." Many suggest that Islam is just a variation
of Christianity and Judaism—and that Islam is a "peace-loving" religion that was "hijacked"
by terrorists. Some—like President Bush—are saying these things for sound prudential reasons,
to prevent a backlash against innocent American Muslims, etc. Others claim there's no real
difference between Christianity and Islam because such distinctions between the religions
tends to suggest that all religions are not morally equivalent—and thus those distinctions
offend against the tenets of postmodernism, multiculturalism, and secularism. [uniqueness of
But the fact is, judging by the
humanly-claimed divine attributes, Christians and Muslims don't worship the
same God—and, historically, Islam is anything but peace-loving. Or, if Muslims think that
the God that they worship is the God of Abraham, then they have a seriously distorted view of
God. [attributes of God]
Christianity (like Judaism) teaches that God is a God of redemption. Both Old and New
Testaments affirm that God is love, a God who initiates and champions a relationship with His
people. By contrast, Muslims believe that god, or Allah in Arabic, is aloof and distant. He
is primarily a god of justice rather than a god of love. And he is not a god who redeems his
people, but a god who must simply be obeyed. Islam is fatalistic in a way that would have
never lead to the modern scientific and societal achievements elsewhere in the world [see
"What Would the World Have Been Like If Jesus Had Never Been
While, for most Muslims in America, Islam is
simply "a religion", there is another, more dangerous aspect. As Dr. Samuel Schlorff, an
expert with Arab World Ministries, writes, "There is another side to Islam, a side that
embraces violence 'in the way of Allah'…Muslims believe that Islam's destiny is to extend its
control until the whole [non-Muslim] world is subject to Islamic law in an Islamic state,
and this includes the use of force." Today this force is being brutally exerted worldwide. In
Indonesia, well-armed Islamic militia are raping and slaughtering their Christian neighbors,
burning their homes and forcing them to convert to Islam. In Sudan, two million black Christians
have died as a result of their Arab Muslim government's attempt to impose Islamic law on its
non-Muslim population...is this not racism at its worst? Nigerian Christians face similar
The truth may be that bin Laden and his followers
did not hijack Islam; they simply took it seriously. As Harvard historian Samuel
Huntington puts it, Islam has "bloody borders." If such evil & vicious thinking and
attitudes are not stopped by rational Muslims, then all Muslims will be...against their
wills...converted in the mind of "the world" into violence suspects and one of the world's
great religions into a cult of death!
***give me your comments about this
check out the Highest
(posted 4 July 2004; latest update 1 September