Shocking New Study Reveals Just How Many Muslims Support ISIS (And It’s Frightening)

Yet another poll of “regular” Muslims seems to show that a shockingly high number actually agree with Muslim extremism. This time, a poll finds that a whopping 42 million support the creation of a worldwide caliphate, an Islamic order that would outlaw all other religions.

Many non-Muslims console themselves with the assumption that “most Muslims” don’t support extremism or terrorism. But nearly every time a poll is taken, this notion that Muslims stand four square against extremism is shot down.

According to Ryan Mauro of the Clarion Project, this new study should serve as a warning about Muslim extremism. With these results, “ISIS is only a fraction of what it could potentially become,” Mauro said.

“If we don’t act quickly, this is still going to grow,” he continued, “and what we’re looking at today is going to look like the good old days compared to the future.”

This isn’t the first time a study seemed to show that Muslims agree with or lean toward Islamic extremism.

A recent study of British Muslims found that fully a third felt that the British government was at fault for the radicalization of young Muslims, not Islam, not ISIS, and not al Qaeda.

Britain isn’t alone. A new study of U.S. Muslims conducted last month by the Center for Security Policy found that a large number of American Muslims felt that sharia law was better than the U.S. Constitution. They also felt that they should be allowed to ignore the Constitution and instead be judged by “sharia courts” in America.

Not long ago, another poll by the Pew Research Center found that 88% of Muslims in Egypt and 62% of Muslims in Pakistan favor the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim religion.

The same poll found that honor killings were acceptable to many Muslims and that putting adulterers to death was a perfectly sane punishment.

Finally, during the “draw Mohammad” controversy, not to mention the murders of 12 staff members of Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris, large numbers of Muslims around the world agreed that freedom of speech should be illegal and that any harsh words against Islam should be made a crime.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Watch: It Only Takes 2 Minutes For This 12-Yr-Old To Completely Demolish George Takei

12-year-old conservative C.J. Pearson criticized actor and activist George Takei on his YouTube channel after the Star Trek star made comments critical of United States Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for his dissent in last week’s ‘gay marriage’ ruling.

Takei told KSAZ in an interview Tuesday that he was “angry” at Thomas for dissenting from the majority in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized ‘gay marriage’ in all 50 states. “He is a clown in blackface sitting on the Supreme Court,” Takei said. “He gets me that angry. He doesn’t belong there.”

Pearson, taking exception to Takei’s remarks, took to his widely popular YouTube channel shortly thereafter. “Some people that demand the most tolerance can be the most intolerant who you will ever meet in your life,” Pearson said. “And these racist bigoted comments coming from this man is just one more indication of that.”

“I am sick and tired of the left calling us racist, calling us bigots, and calling us people who don’t care about black people,” the boy continued. “But yet, when they say that ‘someone’s got a blackface.’ And well, it’s a okay. It’s not okay! It’s never been okay and it never will be okay. Understood, George?” Pearson took the rest of the video to address Takei directly:

Because guess what, George? I’m sorry, but if a man stands for what he believes, and for Clarence Thomas it was that marriage is between a man and a woman and the Constitution doesn’t grant that purview that’s between a man and a man and a woman and a woman. That’s his belief.

And for you to call someone a blackface is one of the most racist comments that anyone really could. And you are a disgusting tool. You don’t deserve a voice in the public arena. You don’t deserve a voice in the public arena, you don’t deserve to speak up, really. You’re disgusting. And you need to shut up, sit down, and think about what you said. This is outrageous.

Pearson announced Friday on his Facebook page he would be taking a “break from politics and political commentary” after noting a woman threatened to sue him for expressing his opinions. He did say he will have a team that will continue to monitor all of his social media platforms in the interim.

Do you support C.J. Pearson? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

With Same-Sex Marriage, America Has Officially Lost Its Collective Mind

With the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage last week, the fundamental building block of society is no longer affirmed by the rule of law. Rather, by judicial fiat, the legal doors have been thrown open for legitimization of literally any possible kind of relationship as viable and recognizable by the state.

Dr. Patrick Fagan, a sociologist and psychologist has said: “The family is the fundamental building block of society and predates the state and even the societies it builds… At the heart of the family is the mother and father who bring their children into existence.” This is a self-evident truth, regardless of who said it; and anthropologists, biologists, sociologists, politicians, and religious leaders have reiterated that very sentiment. The family is the building block of society and civilization; and the cornerstone to that foundation, or the genesis of it, is a mother and a father.

As evidence that the nation has collectively lost its mind, the highest court in the land has affirmed that “Adam and Steve” are as viable in creating the social building blocks of society as Adam and Eve were. But such convolution is unavoidable in a society where words no longer have literal meaning, but are only interpreted based on contemporary perceptions of “rights” and state-sanctioned privileges.

As logically bizarre as it is, the tenets of the 14th Amendment were used as justification. The Amendment was adopted following the Civil War to ensure that all citizens, regardless of color, were assured “equal protection of the laws.” The tenet was crucial to resolving issues related to race, and logically tenable. After all, no one has the ability to choose their race, their skin color, or other congenital features determined genetically. Nor can they arbitrarily choose their sex, which is why it’s also logically tenable for application of the Amendment in cases related to sexual discrimination.

But now, for the first time, “equal protection of the laws” is applied based on behavior and choice. For even if there are predilections, or a predisposition, to behave in a certain way, it is still ultimately a matter of choice whether each person acts on those inclinations. And with this caveat, application of the equal protection clause can now be legally, albeit illogically, applied to anything that is behaviorally based, or has an element of choice to it. Since the “right” to “marry” no longer has any legitimacy as an anthropological, biological, or social convention, as etymologically it has held for eons, everything and anything is game.

All “marriage” restrictions can now be revisited, reinterpreted, and re-adjudicated from the bench. Marriage will continue to be redefined since it is no longer based on natural law. There is no viable logical limitation that can be applied to prevent further morphing of the term. It will of necessity evolve to include everyone who loves anyone, or anything. The man who wanted to marry his horse a few years ago can no longer be logically proscribed, and the trio from Montana who said this week they want to be married are all viable. And all other barriers and restrictions will necessarily fall as well since the logic and the fundamental raison d’être behind marriage is now discarded in the dustbin of history.

The political leap from equal treatment of individuals under the law, to equal treatment of behavior and relationships under the law, is one of quantum proportions that defies logic.

And since equal protection now can be applied to behavior and choice, what’s to prevent the next fad group averring their presumed “constitutional rights” from requiring egalitarian application of the rule to income, aptitude tests, performance reviews, school exams, or any other “right” that some hair brained group claims they’re entitled to per “equality under the law”? Pandora’s legal box of horrors has now been thrown open!

No wonder the most logical and constitutionally sound justice on the court, Justice Antonin Scalia, ripped the majority opinion as mercilessly as he did. He called it a “judicial Putsch” that poses a “threat to American democracy.” He added that a “system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy.” He said the Court’s “naked judicial claim to legislative—indeed, super-legislative—power bulldozed the right of the People to self-government.”

In a freaky, unconventional way, America has advanced in its claim to being the “land of the free.” We are now free from logic, common sense, and the literal rule of law. Welcome to the new Wild West, where laws can mean what they don’t literally say; the rights of the people as asserted by initiative and referendum are voided by five politicians in robes, posing as “judges” of the Constitution; and natural law, laws of biology and sociology, as well as language etymology, are all trash-canned to allow 1.5-2.5% of the population to have their lifestyle validated and affirmed.

In light of current judicial trends, no wonder Jefferson referred to the judicial branch as “the despotic branch.” Abraham Lincoln aptly described our current state: “If the policy of the Government upon vital questions…is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made, the people will have ceased to be their own rulers.” Interestingly, he may have also provided the solution. “The people — the people — are the rightful masters of both congresses, and courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it.”

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Rick Perry Releases Awesome New Campaign… Cartoon?

If you combine “Schoolhouse Rocks” with “Beavis and Butthead,” you get former Texas Governor and current Presidential candidate Rick Perry’s new web video, “Economic Freedom: An Animation.”

And yes, it’s just as awesome as it sounds…

The video, titled, “Economic Freedom: An Animation,” features a man driving by signs sporting President Obama’s campaign slogans and listening to gloomy news reports on the radio. Eventually the protagonist flees to Texas where his standing of living appears to markedly improve.

Of course with the press being the press, some are mocking it, while others call it different and kinda cute. Unfortunately, the video is getting buried under an avalanche of Donald Trump stories, which is awful because this really is brilliant. Like we keep saying, culture is where the game is won. Lightening up and doing fun things like this video, while also encouraging donations, helps reach an audience that Rick Perry needs to reach.

An audience, mind you, that only knows Perry from his 2012 debacle, or from the parody the the mainstream media presents. This video just may help change that.

More of this, please. And less of reality stars who aren’t actually conservative (no matter how much traffic he sends to your website) who are going to end up dropping out of the race anyway.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

WARNING: This Sort Of Shock Video Could Become Commonplace With More Police Body Cams


Ever since the shooting death of Michael Brown by Ferguson, Mo., police officer Darren Wilson, there’s been an increasing number of calls for the use of body cameras by law enforcement in big cities as well as small towns. Only a few weeks ago, the Obama administration began a program to study the impact of having officers routinely wear body cams to record interactions with the public, especially with people suspected of crimes or those with whom the officer may have a controversial encounter.

As reported by USA Today, the Justice Department is putting up tens of millions of dollars toward the purchase of some 50,000 body-worn video cameras.

“Body-worn cameras hold tremendous promise for enhancing transparency, promoting accountability and advancing public safety for law enforcement officers and the communities they serve,” Attorney General Loretta Lynch said.

However, as the video associated with this report graphically shows, what those police body cams capture can also hold the tremendous potential for exposing the public to shocking, even horrifying, scenes.

The New York Daily News reports that a 47-year-old Texas man was caught on body-mounted cameras worn by two police officers as he pulled a gun on the cops, who then dropped the man in a hail of bullets. It all happened on May 31st, starting inside a restaurant in Palestine, Tx., then moving outside, where the man is seen drawing a gun that turned out to be a BB pistol.

Identified as James Bushey of Elkhart, Tx., the man was supposedly wanted for questioning in connection with the theft of beer from a nearby store. What appeared at first to be an incident-free detention of the suspect in the restaurant’s bathroom quickly escalated into a fatal confrontation.

Ater an investigation by police and prosecutors, the two officers involved in the fatal shooting were cleared of wrongdoing and the recording of their actions was released. You can watch what happened by clicking on the video above.


What do you think? Is it good that the footage from police body cams is released to the public so we can all see just what happened in cases like this? Weigh in on the conversation by commenting below.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth