Trump's 'Cyber' Policy Against ISIS Is… 'Hey Look At This New Poll!'

from the well,-that's-something dept

While Hillary Clinton’s tech policy proposals seem to be the standard mix of empty promises and vague nothingness designed to not pin her down on anything really serious, Donald Trump’s tech policy proposals have basically been incomprehensible nonsense.

Trump apparently feels that this kind of incomprehensible nonsense is working for him, so he doubled down this week. As first noted by CNN reporter Sopan Deb, Trump responded to a question from (Trump supporter) General Michael Flynn about ISIS and cybersecurity with a word salad of complete nonsense:

If you can’t read that here’s the key part:

Michael Flynn: And to stay on ISIS a little bit because this is a really — I think this is an important topic – it’s one of the national security threats that our country faces today. You have described at times different components of a strategy. Military, cyber, financial and ideological. Can you just expand on those four a little bit?

Donald Trump: Well, that’s it. And you know cyber is becoming so big today. It’s becoming something that a number of years ago, short number of years ago, wasn’t even a word. And now the cyber is so big. And you know you look at what they’re doing with the Internet, how they’re taking and recruiting people through the Internet. And part of it is the psychology because so many people think they’re winning. Any you know, there’s a whole big thing. Even today’s psychology ? where CNN came out with a big poll. Their big poll came out today that Trump is winning. It’s good psychology, you know. It’s good psychology. I know that for a fact because people they didn’t call me yesterday, they’re calling me today. So that’s the way life works, right?

But I think we’re doing very well and I really thank the state of Virginia, so many different places have been so incredible. So I thank you very much. But cyber has been very, very important and it’s becoming more and more important as you look and a lot of it does have to do with ideology and psychology and lots of other things. You know, we’re in a different world today than we were in 20 years ago, 30 years ago. And one of the biggest problems and one of the reasons that we have to knock them out is because the weaponry is so powerful today. You know, in the old days, you could’ve said, “Well look they have rifles.

We have rifles. We shoot and they have uniforms. We have uniforms.” This is a whole different war. The weaponry is so powerful. And we have to beat them over there. We’re allowing people to come over here. We’re allowing, think of it. Your military people — we’re allowing people to come over here. And you know, I used to watch the migration, and I’d see people with cell phones, I said, “where did they get cell phones?” And some of those people had very horrible things on their cell phones including the ISIS flag. And you say, what are we doing? What are we doing? But we’re allowing people to come here and we don’t know. Do they turn on us? Are a small percentage of them bad? Because if a small percentage is bad, that’s not acceptable. That’s not acceptable. We can’t take the risk. Just a small percentage can do such damage. So we can’t take the risk. So, General, the bottom line is we have to get very tough and we have to get very smart or we’re not gonna have much of a country left. I can tell you that right now.

So, uh, wait. What? Apparently Donald Trump’s “cybersecurity” policy is “Hey, look at this poll that says I’m winning!” And also “How did ISIS get cell phones?” Meanwhile, the brave Philip Bump over at the Washington Post tried to fact check the only clear factual statement in that rambling mess: that the word “cyber” was just created a few years ago. Of course, that’s not true (though I guess that depends on what you consider to be a “short number of years ago”), but I’d argue that the fact that “cyber” predates the birth of one Donald Trump, that the statement isn’t all that accurate.

But, really, who gives a fuck concerning when Donald Trump thinks the word “cyber” was first coined? The real question should be on what’s the actual policy here, because in those three paragraphs above there’s nothing even remotely resembling a policy, or a coherent idea. Clinton’s tech policy is a hot mess of emptiness, but at least there’s a policy that people can look at and talk about. Trump, on the other hand doesn’t even seem to recognize what cybersecurity means and what a policy would entail.

Oh, and as for the claims about how ISIS is “recruiting people through the internet” multiple studies on that have suggested that ISIS’s internet recruitment strategy isn’t all that effective — that most recruiting is done through real world networks, rather than virtual ones. But you know which groups really are having success growing their online presence? White nationalists and neo Nazis, with many of them strongly supporting… Donald Trump.

?On Twitter, Isis’ preferred social platform, American white nationalist movements have seen their followers grow by more than 600 per cent since 2012,? the study, authored by JM Berger, stated. ?Today, they outperform Isis in nearly every social metric, from follower counts to tweets per day.?


Donald Trump is a prominent subject among white nationalists on Twitter. According to the study, white nationalist users are ?heavily invested? in the Republican?s candidacy. Tweets mentioned Mr Trump more than other popular topics among the groups.

So, yeah. I wonder what Donald Trump’s “cyber policy” to deal with those folks would be.

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Trump's 'Cyber' Policy Against ISIS Is… 'Hey Look At This New Poll!'”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
OldGeezer (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 National Write-In Campaign

Millard Fillmore in 1850 was the last president that wasn’t Democratic or Republican. He party was Whig. It had became a major party formed to oppose Andrew Jackson. 3 other Whig presidents were elected. Ross Perot in 1992 was the only 3rd party candidate to win any significant percentage of the vote since Theodore Roosevelt in 1912.

PRMan (profile) says:

Wow...Mike can't read...

“And you know you look at what [ISIS is] doing with the Internet, how [ISIS is] taking and recruiting people through the Internet. And part of it is the psychology because so many people think [ISIS is] winning.”

That makes perfect sense in response to the question.

“Cyber: ISIS is using the Internet to recruit and as propaganda.”

“Just like CNN says I’m winning and my campaign is suddenly happier.”

I’m no Trump supporter, but this article makes you look bad, not him.

Thad (user link) says:

Re: Wow...Mike can't read...

That makes perfect sense in response to the question.

Well, no, it doesn’t. The question was:

You have described at times different components of a strategy. Military, cyber, financial and ideological. Can you just expand on those four a little bit?

The two sentences of Trump’s answer that you quoted amount to “ISIS uses the Internet to recruit people.” Those two sentences are preceded by I’m-sure-this-is-already-a-meme gibberish (“And now the cyber is so big”), and followed by half a paragraph bragging about his poll numbers, then more gibberish (“And one of the biggest problems and one of the reasons that we have to knock them out is because the weaponry is so powerful today. You know, in the old days, you could’ve said, “Well look they have rifles. We have rifles. We should at they have uniforms.” This is a whole different war. The weaponry is so powerful. And we have to beat them over there.”), and finally his usual anti-immigrant rhetoric, sprinkled with confusion about how ISIS sympathizers get cell phones.

In what way do you assert that this “makes perfect sense in response to the question”?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Wow...Mike can't read...

So saying ISIS is winning and it’s helping them recruit people is a cyber position?

That’s Mike’s whole point, Trump has no position on the issue, he’s just saying random things that pop into his head that have little to do with the issue.

Also as Mike pointed out, ISIS does most of their recruiting offline, not online.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Wow...Mike can't read...

Question for you…do you view Sarah Palin as some kind of fascinating orator, with a strong command of the English language?

Because not for nothing, if you think that’s response make perfect sense, you might want to peruse some of her speeches as well. They’re right at the same intellectual level.


I.T. Guy says:

Re: Re: Serious Seriousness

C’mon there is no big red button he can go push to launch missiles. It’s not like Obama can decide he wants nuke something and go do it.

The president can order the release of nuclear weapons, the order must be confirmed by the Secretary of Defense.
The President cannot unilaterally use the nuclear codes to launch a nuclear attack, according to a report by Jason Fritz that was commissioned by the International Commission on Nuclear Non­proliferation and Disarmament. Rather, the United States enforces a two­ person rule with respect to nuclear activation at every level. At the highest level, this rule requires that the President jointly issue launch orders with the Secretary of Defense. The rule continues down the line, with commanding officers and executive officers working in tandem, and missile operators agreeing on launch order validity.

Lets stop the Nuclear FUD.

OldGeezer (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Serious Seriousness

Isn’t the Secretary of Defense appointed by the president? I know congress has to confirm appointments but judging from our choice of candidates neither party is thinking rationally these days. In the military there is the saying “shit runs downhill”. If Trump could convince the top brass to go along with some stupid decision it could go through with few underneath seriously challenging it. It was many years before it was released how close we came to a nuclear exchange during the Cuban missile crisis. 2 out of 3 of the Russian officers aboard a submarine wanted to launch when we dropped depth charges.

I.T. Guy says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Serious Seriousness

I’m just saying the decision is not completely his and everyone acts like there is a bust in the Oval Office with a retractable head that conceals a big red button that launches missiles.

The Russians have checks and balances just like we do. Thankfully there was at least one officer that was using his head.

“The rule continues down the line, with commanding officers and executive officers working in tandem, and missile operators agreeing on launch order validity.”

Thad (user link) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Serious Seriousness

Your argument against electing someone who has openly mused that maybe using nuclear weapons wouldn’t be such a bad idea is that at least he’d have to appoint a second guy to approve the decision, and that guy would have to be approved by a Congress controlled by his own party.

I’m just going to let that stand on its own.

Chuck says:

Re: Re: Re: Serious Seriousness

One small problem: the President appoints the Secretary of Defense (and, unlike every other cabinet position, does not need to have the appointee confirmed by congress). In any real launch scenario, the president can simply fire the Secretary of Defense and appoint one who will go along with the launch – ad nauseum, if needed. The nearest janitor who hates his job/life/etc and is so apathetic that he doesn’t care if the world ends might be our Secretary of Defense for a couple minutes (yanno, until impact/detonation…)

tl;dr The 2-man rule is only a working failsafe if one of the two men isn’t the other man’s employee.

OldGeezer (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Serious Seriousness

The fact that one officer out of three did not want to fire off a missile that could have set off a nuclear holocaust is not much comfort. Coming down to one man preventing WWIII doesn’t make for a lot of checks and balances. What if a different officer would have been assigned to that sub that day? Many of the missiles in Cuba were ready to go and you can bet we had ships and subs that could have taken Moscow off the map. I don’t JFK was bluffing about retaliation.

NoahVail (profile) says:

Found an earlier draft of Trump’s Cyber-ISIS policy speech

I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because some people out there in our nation don’t have maps and, uh, I believe that our education, like such as in South Africa and, uh, the Iraq, everywhere like such as and I believe that they should, our education over here in the U.S. should help the U.S., er should help South Africa, and should help the Iraq and the Asian countries so that we ill be able to build up our future for our children.

OldGeezer (profile) says:


In all that rambling there is not one coherent connected thought. Does Trump have ADHD? How can anyone support this dummy? I’m not advocating for Hilary but at least she is intelligent. That’s what makes her dangerous. When she was in the senate she took full advantage of the insider trading exemptions for congress that would send anyone else to prison to make millions. Trump has a long history of failed ventures and contractors that went bankrupt when he didn’t pay them. He claimed that he was going to finance his own campaign and now he is asking for donations.

We can only hope that one of these campaigns implode and someone qualified steps in. If either of these disasters win we are in for years of scandals. Watergate and slick Willie’s BJs will pale in comparison.

I.T. Guy says:

Re: Re: Re: WTF?

I don’t think someone’s lack of literary skills necessarily reflects their intellect. I think, for all the money Trump has, he’s on the social level of a blue collar worker. He has no filter whereas most of us can adjust our attitudes for the social situations we are in. Don’t get me wrong, he’s not the guy to lead the country, but Hills isn’t either.

Thad (user link) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 WTF?

I think that’s pretty insulting to blue-collar workers. I’ve known very few people, of any social status (and, lest we forget, Trump was born into a wealthy family and has never been blue-collar in his life), who were as inarticulate as Trump or who were as bad at adjusting their behavior according to their current social environment as you’re suggesting.

Your point that some people are inarticulate but still perfectly smart is a fair one. Your assertion that Trump is one of those people is not.

Chuck says:

Re: Re: Re:3 WTF?

On this point, the difference between Trump and Average Redneck Guy is that, if you drop Average Redneck Guy into a black tie gala, he’ll at least TRY to act classy.

Trump, meanwhile, revels in intentionally acting inappropriate. He isn’t the guy innocently making an inappropriate fart joke whilst sitting at the table. He’s the drunk guy who tore off his tuxedo shirt and is now dancing in the chocolate fountain.

Anonymous Coward says:

He doesn't say much of anything, which is better than assuming you know something when you don't.

Doubletalk tells me he doesn’t want to answer the question, probably because he doesn’t have a coherent understanding of the problem.

Taking a position on technical problems based on social philosophy tells me that HRC doesn’t grok the difference between theory and implementation. This why I suspect she is NPD. This behavior is symptomatic of the disorder.

Knowing your ignorant is WAY less dangerous than relying on your own infallibility to overcome your ignorance. People with NPD just assume they are perfect and demand everybody around them work around their infallability. They are right, even when that are completely batshit; not even in the ballpark; wrong.

This leads to serious dischord in management, and results in a perpetual stream of scapegoats and drama. This archetype shows up in spades everywhere around her. People with this disorder are destructive and vindictive. She is basically a female version of Richard Nixon.

Fortunately there is Johnson/Weld. These guys have an uncomfortably different view for some people. But it stops being uncomfortable once you realize that these guys are thinking 50 years down the road, not six months. And that is a VERY good reason to vote for them.

Personally I’d like to see Weld take over and fold Jill Stein into the platform as VP, and run a combined Libertarian/Green ticket. The two aren’t philosophically incompatible, though the fringe of their bases shouldn’t be left alone in a room if there is booze present.

Jill would be a great candidate in 2020, or 2024 and THAT would be a woman candidate I would certainly vote for. But only after she centers up on mens rights, which would be clearly demonstrated by collaborating with the libertarians on a dual party ticket.

If you aren’t thinking third party at this point, you aren’t fully valuing the responsibility that comes with your vote.

Thad (user link) says:

Re: He doesn't say much of anything, which is better than assuming you know something when you don't.

But it stops being uncomfortable once you realize that these guys are thinking 50 years down the road, not six months.

Nope, abolishing the Department of Education still seems pretty uncomfortable to me 50 years down the road.

That said, while I wouldn’t vote for Johnson, if any pollsters call I’m telling them I am. Whether I agree with him or not, he should be in the debates.

Jill would be a great candidate in 2020, or 2024 and THAT would be a woman candidate I would certainly vote for. But only after she centers up on mens rights

aaaaaand I’m out.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: He doesn't say much of anything, which is better than assuming you know something when you don't.

“You’re saying Clinton is the one with narcissistic personality disorder? Wow.”

In consideration of your implication, I would say that Trump is probably psychotic. But yes, Clinton is probably NPD. Being a good seducer and very convincing liar is actually symptomatic of both personality disorders. (look it up)

In the case of psychotics it comes from not having any ethical compass. In the case of NPD, they tend to mirror people in order to conceal their own insecurities.

In terms of leadership, the dangers presented by both are different. Psychotics are dangerous to everybody. NPD’s are dangerous mostly to their own people. So it is a question of whether you want the impending shit storm facing everybody, or just you.

Personally I look at it from a time allocation standpoint.

nasch (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: He doesn't say much of anything, which is better than assuming you know something when you don't.

I’m not convinced you really know much about these disorders.

In consideration of your implication, I would say that Trump is probably psychotic.

“Psychosis refers to an abnormal condition of the mind described as involving a “loss of contact with reality”. People with psychosis are described as psychotic. People experiencing psychosis may exhibit some personality changes and thought disorder. Depending on its severity, this may be accompanied by unusual or bizarre behavior, as well as difficulty with social interaction and impairment in carrying out daily life activities.”

This doesn’t seem to me to describe Trump at all.

“Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a long-term pattern of abnormal behavior characterized by exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive need for admiration, and a lack of understanding of others’ feelings. People affected by it often spend a lot of time thinking about achieving power or success, or about their appearance. They often take advantage of the people around them.”

That, on the other hand, is Trump to a T.

Being a good seducer and very convincing liar is actually symptomatic of both personality disorders. (look it up)

I did; neither psychosis nor NPD is particularly characterized by dishonesty according to WP. The article on psychosis does not contain the word seduction or seduce. There is one reference to one psychologist’s characterization of the “amorous narcissist”, which it notes is not included in the DSM or ICD.

“Convincing liar”…. I don’t know that she’s more or less convincing than most successful national politicians. They are almost universally liars, some better than others, because that’s what we demand of them.

I don’t think Clinton is “a good seducer” (Hillary that is). She is not very charismatic and has admitted she’s not a very good campaigner. People who favor Clinton tend to do so for pragmatic, political, or ideological reasons, not because they find her personally appealing. Trump, on the other hand – the phrase “cult of personality” gets used a lot to describe the way his followers are attracted to him personally, and it has little to nothing to do with his policies (such as they are) or politics (whatever they are today).

In the case of psychotics it comes from not having any ethical compass.

It sounds like you might be mixing up psychosis and psychopathy.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 He doesn't say much of anything, which is better than assuming you know something when you don't.

“It sounds like you might be mixing up psychosis and psychopathy.”

I was. And thank you for the correction.

My knowledge is based loosely on a little reading and some therapy. I’ve worked in quite a few facets of I.T. over the years and have run into both types a number of times. (you probably have too given the stats)

I’ve just accrued a lot of flags from people who are screwed up twists over the years. It is hard to put your finger on, because it is a moving target. But you get to where you can read the cons like a Chinese menu. The pictures are different. The bad English is different. But it is pretty much the same everywhere.

At this point Brand R and brand D have trapped the American people into a prisoners dilemma situation. The issue right now isn’t who to choose. It is whether you have a choice at all.

So I looked at Johnson/Weld, and I see a lot of imperfect. The biggest issue I think most people see with them is their view on taxes and social services.

They are really bad at explaining why their ideas will work. (which is not uncommon when people have good ideas). So after some consideration, I can conceive of a few ways their tax system would end up working quite well.

And I think it actually works in a way that dovetails really well with the Green Party. It has to do with using graduated taxes and changing the subsidy systems. But I can see how it might end up creating more growth than the current system, AND being more equitable as well.

I’m not saying it wouldn’t suck for a while. I’d estimate at least a 2 year down bump in GDP. But after that you’d see stable progressive growth for a very long time.

Third parties ARE the second party in American politics. And if these guys are plausibly in the right hemisphere, that is good enough. Because the other guys aren’t interested having in an electoral system at all.

JoeinTheGarage says:

Trump Navigation System v1.0a

One thing I noticed about trump, is he may be uninformed about something, and then gets informed. Turning it all around with zero grief and drama. When we are wrong, we are wrong, we change and move on. Trump is reflecting that from what I see. What would you rather have a Traitor hide every wrong? At least with Trump you can TEACH him what the fuck is wrong with his own logic and Trump will get it and counter it with an adjustment.

Treason runs this country, I pretty confident there’s more than a few things ALL of us will get wrong in that light. Secrets that we won’t know, which set policy and things the way they JUST ARE…

As long as Trump isn’t fed bullshit about cyber to the point where you can hear the fascism intent in the words, then things will be fine. But like Sugar is poison for arteries so too are fucked up interests poisoning trumps navigation system.

Trump is a heck of a guy, he won’t get the YEARS he served back, most people don’t get that. Imagine losing 15 years and then realizing your going to lose 10 more cause the last 15 made it this way. These traitors have taken 1/4th of all our fucking lives!

I want to relax again. Fuck.

nasch (profile) says:

Re: Trump Navigation System v1.0a

One thing I noticed about trump, is he may be uninformed about something, and then gets informed. Turning it all around with zero grief and drama. When we are wrong, we are wrong, we change and move on.

Can you find a single instance of Trump admitting he was wrong about something? If he’s really like you say there should be thousands, because just about everything he says is wrong.

On the other hand, here’s a quote that suggests he might not be that humble.

“Why do I have to repent or ask for forgiveness, if I am not making mistakes?”

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Trump Navigation System v1.0a

At least with Trump you can TEACH him what the fuck is wrong with his own logic and Trump will get it and counter it with an adjustment.

Yeah, that was tried with Bush. He was dumb as a fucking bag of hammers too. (no offense to hammers intended)

But he was surrounded by Dick (more than just a name) Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, who certainly steered this country in the right direction…

That was sarcasm – I’m stating it specifically because I’m genuinely afraid you’d think I was serious.

GEMont (profile) says:

...nothing up my sleeve....

Donald Trump is not really running for POTUS.

He was hired by Corporate America to make their real candidate, Hillary Clinton, appear to be the only choice possible.

I would think that a decade of Obama – the last fake democrat the corporatists selected as POTUS, who literally fulfilled every plan that George Bush started and then turned the USA into the Fascist dream come true police state we have today – would have shown most Americans that there is no Democratic Party in the US now.

There is only the one party – fascists/corporatists – who use both labels; Democrat and Republican.

Trump is simply a hired professional who excells at bullshit and bafflegab and who will do absolutely anything for enough money – their kind of people.

Fascists always hide behind the labels of the real political parties they infiltrate and absorb.

Nazi means National Socialist – about as far from corporatist/fascist as is possible.

It just happened to be the name of the party the German corporatists invaded and absorbed before they started WW-2.

Clinton will start WW3 – the ultimate fascist wet-dream – 1000 years of War.

John Mayor says:


Sadly!… neither Trump, nor the GOP, are addressing the REAL CRUX of Islam!… i.e., the Muslim/ Islamic confusion over who Muhammad actually was, and WHY he introduced his “DOCTRINE” to the world! And, if properly assessed and addressed, we could then communicate our PROOFS of the basis of/ for this confusion to Muslim/ Islamic peoples through our global institutions!… and, likewise, to the rest of our impacted communities, worldwide!
This matter of “RADICALIZATION”, is– to me!– a real PUBLIC HEALTH issue!… when an entire “faith population” on our planet is living under the DELUSION that a would-be, self- styled “faith leader’s” “religion”, IS SANCTIONED BY GOD! And it’s akin to our populations centuries ago, when millions of people believed the world was flat! And it was NO LESS a PUBLIC HEALTH concern back then, than what the global Muslim/ Islamic FAITH ISSUE is today! Simply put, when people around the world began to realize that the earth was indeed round, then things began to change for the better! And the “para-dogmas” structured around the old way of seeing the world no longer had value, and social acceptance!
ALL OF US ARE STUPID OF MANY THINGS!… and, if we could, somehow, learn of that of which we are inherently stupid, our lives would improve– dramatically!
The ensuing personal findings, and resolve, are– I suggest!– the “T-A-C-T-I-C-A-L F-R-O-N-T L-I-N-E” that the international “community of interests” should be employing in their respective, and collective campaign/ s, re Muslim/ Islamic indoctrination!… AND!… for use against the likes of ISIS! And!… I suggest!… should be used in place of Trumpian and GOPic “REACTIONS” to worldwide aggressions! And!… in the process of REACTING to such, causing further “COLLATERAL DAMAGE”, and continued impetus for the “PSEUDOCAUSE” of “PSEUDO-MUSLIM/ ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS”, AND THEIR EXTREMISM!!
And so… for those who may wonder about Islam… and its place in the world… I offer you the following treatise…
In an attempt to ascertain the Biblical Truth concerning the veracity of the “claims” attributed to the said prophet Muhammad (by whomever, and whenever), and afterupon my examination of both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, and the Quran, I happened upon a couple of remarkable verses in the Book of Luke, in the New Testament of the Bible (although, found elsewhere, within the New Testament!).
Under the Book of Luke, Chapter 16, Verse 16, we read, “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed UNTIL (my emphasis) John (i.e., John the Baptist!).”… and, within the Book of Luke, Chapter 7, Verse 28, we read, “I say to you, among those born of women, there is NO ONE GREATER (my emphasis) than John (i.e., John the Baptist!)”! [Gideons Translation]
Simply stated, if the claim on page 8 of the book titled, The Quran Translated: Message For Humanity, is correct… and which reads, “… Being the last of these Prophets, Muhammad was to be God’s FINAL (and thus, ULTIMATE!) Messenger!…”… then!… the words attributed to Christ within the Book of Luke, Chapter 7, Verse 28, are UNTRUE! And so!… making Christ “confused”– at best!… or– worse!– A LIAR! But!… if the words of Christ within the Book of Luke, Chapter 7, Verse 28, and, in Chapter 16, Verse 16, are TRUE!… then!… not only was Muhammad NOT the greatest of the Prophets, he (Muhammad!)– AND, MORE IMPORTANTLY!– COULD NOT HAVE BEEN A PROPHET, AT ALL (i.e., as such is described, within the pages of the Bible!)! For!… and apart from Christ’s words in Luke 7: 28 (extolling praise, glory, and the Seal of Finality on John the Baptist!)… how could the Law and the Prophets be up UNTIL John, yet– nevertheless!– a subsequent prophet (and yea!… supposedly!… THE GREATEST PROPHET!) is revealed some six hundred years after the fact, of the time of Christ (see, Quran, CH 33: 41… and note: With the exception of Ahmadi Muslims, “Khatamu ’n-Nabiyyīn”– “Seal of the Prophets”!– is regarded by Muslims to mean that Muhammad was the last of the prophets sent by God!)?
And thus, the battle… then!… obviously!… is between the claims proffered by the self-styled prophet of God, Muhammad!… and, the claims CLEARLY ATTRIBUTED to Christ! And as for the said appearance of Archangel Gabriel to Muhammad to bestow upon Muhammad a SPECIAL PROPHETIC DISPENSATION (as outlined in the work, The Quran Translated: Message For Humanity!), such an act by Gabriel (something not mentioned in the Bible!) would put Gabriel in conflict with the words– and will!– of Jesus Christ!… and– ultimately!– in conflict with GOD! And so, if the said prophet Muhammad did in fact receive a visit from an Angel, I would strongly assert that that Angel, was someone OTHER, than Gabriel!
And so!… there can be only ONE!… CLEAR!… resolve to this epistemologic dilemma!:… either Jesus Christ or Muhammad, was “confused”!… OR!… A LIAR! For!… God is not “confused”!… and God is not a LIAR! And!… as there is OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE for the veracity of the claims put forward by Jesus Christ, the “confusion”!… OR!… DISHONESTY!… IS NOT CHRIST’S! As 1 John 2: 22 states, Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the ANTICHRIST!– denying the Father and the Son. [NIV]
But with regard to the “CONSERVATIVE REACTION” to Islam… the view of the “self-avowed/ averred” “CHRISTIAN RIGHT (and its supporters… e.g., the Right-wing GOP!)”, that THESE have a “DEVINE/ SACROSANCT DISPENSATION (i.e., one ‘blessed by God’!… AND YEA, ‘A RIGHT, AT THE HEART, OF THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS CHRIST!… leaving aside for the moment, those claiming a “SACROSANCT HUMAN RIGHT”!– in deference to the non-Christian, Humanist members of the GOP!) to bare arms in defence of themselves (e.g., against the likes of ISIS!), and in defence of the “downtrodden” of the world… is… well!… SUSPECT! And!… begs the question: “Is their ‘DEVINE POSTURE’, and ‘DEFENSIVE POSITION’, JUSTIFIED THROUGH JESUS CHRIST?” Well… let us examine (i.e., those who profess Christ!) a few further New Testament passages, to find out!
In Matthew Chapter 05, Verse 38, Christ states: “You’ve heard that it has been said: ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, THAT YOU NOT RESIST (PHYSICALLY CONTEND WITH!) EVIL: WHOSOEVER SHALL HIT YOU ON ONE CHEEK, TURN TO THAT ONE, ALSO, THE OTHER.” In Matthew Chapter 10, Verse 16, Christ states, “Be aware!… I send you out AS SHEEP, in the midst of wolves; therefore, be as wise as serpents, BUT HARMLESS, AS DOVES.”
Next, the ensuing is a question put to Christ from a Pharisaic lawyer… in an effort to tempt Christ! In Matthew, Chapter 22, Verse 36, the Pharisaic lawyer asks (in an attempt to catch Jesus in some act of pompous pontification, and religious sophistry!): “Master, which is the GREAT COMMANDMENT in the Law?”; V37) Jesus said unto him, “YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND”; V38) “THIS IS THE FIRST AND GREAT COMMANDMENT”; V39) “AND THE SECOND IS LIKE UNTO IT!… ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR, AS YOURSELF'”; V40) “ON THESE TWO COMMANDMENTS, HANG ALL THE LAW, AND THE PROPHETS!”
Next, are the words of Paul to the Ephesians, concerning the Christian’s struggle with evil: In Ephesians Chapter 06, Verse 12, Paul states: “FOR WE (CHRISTIANS!) WRESTLE NOT AGAINST FLESH AND BLOOD; BUT, AGAINST PRINCIPALITIES, AGAINST POWERS, AGAINST THE RULERS OF THE DARKNESS OF THIS WORLD, AGAINST SPIRITUAL WICKEDNESS IN HIGH PLACES.”
Next, in advance of His anticipated sojourn to the Garden of Gethsemene, Jesus sought to convey an important message to His entourage– and, to all others who might bear witness (then, and in the future!)!– about the error of physically resisting/ contending with evil (in an effort to vanquish it!)! And!… in preparation!… set in motion, the ensuing means– whereby!– His message to be told, could be told!
In Luke, Chapter 22, Verse 36, Christ states to His entourage: “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it!… and likewise, a knapsack! And let the one who has no sword, sell his cloak, and buy one (a sword!)”; V37) “For I tell you, that this Scripture must be fulfilled… in Me: ‘And He was numbered with the transgressors.'” “For what is written about Me, has its fulfillment”; V38) And they said (those with Christ!): “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” And He (Jesus!) said to them: “It is enough”; V39) And when Jesus came out, He went (as was His custom!) to the Mount of Olives; and His disciples followed Him.
Subsequently, and upon completion of His efforts in the Garden of Gethsemene, Jesus stood ready to confront the evil, advancing upon Him and His followers. In Matthew, Chapter 26, Verse 46, Jesus states: “Rise, let us be going. See… My betrayer is at hand”; V47) While He was still speaking, Judas came (one of the original twelve disciples!)… and, with him, a great crowd… with swords, and clubs… from the Chief Priests… to the elders of the people; V48) Now the betrayer had given them (those with Judas!) a sign; and, saying to them (those with Judas!): “The one I will kiss, is the man… seize Him”; V49) And he came up to Jesus, at once, and said: “Greetings, Rabbi!”… and he (Judas!) kissed Him (Jesus!); V50) Jesus said to him: “Friend, do what you came to do.” Then they (those with Judas!) came up, and laid hands on Jesus… and seized Him; V51) And suddenly, one of those who were with Jesus stretched out his hand, drew his sword (i.e., Simon… Peter… see, John 18: 10)… , and struck the servant of the High Priest… cutting off his ear; V52) Then Jesus said to the one (Peter) who drew the sword: “PUT YOUR SWORD BACK INTO ITS PLACE. FOR ‘ALL’ WHO USE THE SWORD, WILL PERISH BY THE SWORD”; V53) “DO YOU THINK THAT I CAN’T APPEAL TO MY FATHER?… WHO WILL, AT ONCE, SEND ME MORE THAN TWELVE LEGIONS OF ANGELS!”; V54) “BUT HOW, THEN (if God were to do this!… Jesus continued!) SHALL THE SCRIPTURES BE FULFILLED?”… THAT THUS, IT MUST BE SO (i.e., that the prophesied events should happen in the manner, as was prophesied!)?”
An interesting response to His disciples– to say the least!… and, after having compelled them to buy, and bring the weapons, in the first place! And!… at a time, of the greatest physical threat to the life of Jesus!… that would lead to His very crucifixion! But!– and as it turned out!– to teach them (and all who would eventually receive these actions, and words!), an important lesson:… VENGENCE IS GOD’S PREROGATIVE!– NOT MAN’S!; VENGENCE IS NOT THE RESERVE OF THOSE CLAIMING CHRIST!; AND, IT IS NOT TO BE METED OUT, IN THIS WORLD! And!… Jesus adds an additional reinforcement, in the Book of John…
In John, Chapter 18, Verse 36, Jesus states: “MY KINGDOM ‘IS NOT’ OF THIS WORLD!… IF IT WERE, MY SERVANTS ‘WOULD HAVE FOUGHT (and I’ll add here… when Judas, and his gang, met Christ!)’, THAT I MIGHT NOT BE DELIVERED OVER TO THE JEWS!…”
And so, are we (who profess Christ!) to adopt the view… today!… in 2016!… that THIS WORLD (the world that Christ declared was NOT His Kingdom!), IS TO BE MADE HIS KINGDOM!… IS TO BE MADE “OUR” KINGDOM!… THROUGH BLOODSHED? AND!… AS IF!… THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, HAD ARRIVED!
And further… and in a perverse– SATANIC-BACKED!– attempt to subvert the simple story of the AGAPE LOVE of Jesus Christ for God, and for mankind, the following Bible passage is often cited as some kind of “DEVINE SUPPORT” for the position, that “CHRISTIANS” should “BATTLE EVIL THROUGH THE FLESH”!
The questions to be asked here, are these: “Is the ‘laying down’ of one’s life for one’s friends (AS A CHRISTIAN!), the same as TAKING THE LIFE OF ANOTHER, OR THE LIVES OF OTHERS, IN ONE’S DEFENCE OF ONE’S FRIENDS?” “And if so, how can/ does such a position remain CONSISTENT, with the totality– AND CLEAR!– teachings, of Jesus Christ?”
Simply put, given all of the aforenoted Scriptures (and those unstated!), there can be ONLY ONE INTERPRETATION of/ for John, Chapter 15, Verse 13… and that is: “OUR ‘LAYING DOWN’ OF ONE’S LIFE FOR A FRIEND– I.E., AS A TRUE CHRISTIAN, AND IN THE SPIRIT OF GOD!– MUST BE IN THE MANNER, OF JESUS CHRIST (I.E., ‘WITHOUT’ THE SHEDDING OF THE BLOOD, OF ANY OTHER)!”
Terrorists, and Terrorism, are NOT “THE PROBLEM”!… are NOT our ‘TARGET”! They’ve never been “THE PROBLEM”!… nor, will they ever be “THE PROBLEM”!
However distasteful one might find what I’ll term, ISISic Muhammad_Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy (i.e., Muhammunchausen Syndrome By Proxy… or ISIS-MSBP!)… and ISIS-born Marahiq-Muhammad_mujahidization (i.e, Preteen-Muhammujahidization!) of Marahiq-Muhammad_mujahideen (i.e., Preteen-Muhammujahideen!) suicide bombers!… what’s WORSE, is the PREMEDITATED “POLITICORADICALIZED COLLATERAL MURDER” OF CHILDREN, as a “REACTIONARY TREATMENT” of the “SOCIAL SEQUELAE” of “ISISic RADICALIZATION” generally!
T-H-E-R-E W-I-L-L B-E N-O J-U-S-T-I-F-I-C-A-T-I-O-N B-Y G-O-D F-O-R T-H-O-S-E W-H-O P-R-O-F-E-S-S C-H-R-I-S-T, F-O-R T-H-E-I-R H-A-V-I-N-G A-B-A-N-D-O-N-E-D T-H-E M-E-S-S-A-G-E O-F J-E-S-U-S, T-H-A-T W-E (C-H-R-I-S-T-I-A-N-S!) C-O-N-T-I-N-U-E T-O L-O-V-E O-N-E A-N-O-T-H-E-R!… A-N-D, D-E-S-P-I-T-E T-H-E E-V-I-L-S C-O-N-F-R-O-N-T-I-N-G U-S!
As 1 Corinthians 13: 1-3 states: 1) If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have L-O-V-E, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal! 2) If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have L-O-V-E, I am nothing! 3) And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have L-O-V-E, it profits me nothing!
As a footnote– AND PLEA!– to the followers of Islam, and to the Global Muslim Community (leaving aside, for the moment, those who are of other faiths!): remember!… Islam attests to the existence of the person of Jesus Christ; however, the Old Testament (the Testament and Bible, of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob!… and to which, Islam subscribes!) DOES NOT ATTEST TO THE PERSON OF MUHAMMAD! And a Testament, and Bible, that preceded the birth of Jesus Christ!… and!… His New Testament!
One can only speculate (save, God’s intervention, and revelation!) as to why Muhammad, and Islam emerged! Possibly the encroachment of Judaism!… and possibly the additional encroachment of the Roman Catholic movement (the latter of which, St. Paul… in tears!… warned the 1st century Christians, would arise! And!… which took the lives of many Christians, and non-christians alike! And!… in the name of God, and Christ!)! But, whatever the reasons!… the words of Christ are clear!… John the Baptist was THE ONLY, FINAL!… AND GREAT!… PROPHET OF GOD!
Please!… no emails!

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...