Category: Religion

Who Is Paying the ‘Racist Trolls’ Who Disagree With Alonso Gurmendi?

Posted on October 29, 2025October 29, 2025

“Alonso Gurmendi Dunkelberg is a Fellow in Human Rights at the London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of Sociology. His work focuses on the history of the international regulation of war and political violence, from a postcolonial perspective. Prior to joining LSE, Alonso worked at King’s College London, Oxford University, the University of Michigan, and the University of the Pacific. He is a contributing editor for the international law blog Opinio Juris and a member of the International Law Association’s Committee on the Use of Force. “

For more than 30 years — going back to a time when research involved sifting through card catalogs, poring over indexes of reference books and cross-referencing titles found in bibliographies, etc. — it has been my habit to begin any argument by seeking an answer to the question, “Who am I arguing with?” If a person’s argument is so unusual as to attract my attention, it is likely that this person has an unusual biography, a background that may explain why they are making whatever claim has inspired me to consider a response. This habit has served me well over the years, and there have been occasions when I found myself chuckling like Patton: “Rommel, you magnificent bastard! I read your book!”

The online argument that brought Alonso Gurmendi to my attention began with him endorsing a video by Zohran Mamdani:

“This is exactly what is needed. To stop. Take a step back. Break the flow of the news cycle and speak the truth: that Islamophobia is socially accepted in the West. That these people are racist. And deserve to be treated as such. That this racism needs to end. Now.”

As might be expected, critics slammed Gurmendi’s justification of the Jew-hating Mamdani’s sophistry, and (also not unexpectedly) Gurmendi then smeared these critics as mercenary trolls:

“I gotta say, the completely ridiculous amount of super aggressive racist trolls in this specific tweet on this specific day feels completely fabricated and paid for“

So, if you criticize Alonso, you’re a “racist troll,” and he suspects that your online activity is “paid for” — by whom? When you see that kind of insinuation, certain questions ought to immediately arise. Seldom have I ever accused anyone of being bought off, even though that it’s widely known that some online activity is subsidized by various entities, foreign and domestic. Such names as Pierre Omidyar, George Soros and the Koch brothers are often bandied about as funding pay-for-play activism online.

However, the specific nature of Alonso Gurmendi’s rhetoric — accusing Mamdani’s critics of being racist Islamophobes — casts a certain light on his claims that those who disagree with him are “paid for.”

This suggested a query: Has Alonso accused Israel of genocide in Gaza? Oh, yes. Yes, indeed. He wrote an entire article about it!

I’m very excited to share with you my latest article, “How to Hide a Genocide: Modern/Colonial International Law and the Construction of Impunity”, just published @JournalGenocide.

I apply the modernity/coloniality framework to argue that, since Lemkin’s original proposition,…

— Alonso Gurmendi (@Alonso_GD) January 23, 2025

Published in January 2025, Gurmendi’s article assumes as a fact that Israel’s war in Gaza was an act of genocide:

“This process of hiding genocide has become painfully visible nowadays throughout the unfolding obliteration of Palestinians in Gaza. Despite repeated attempts at stopping the violence through various international institutions, international law appears powerless, with commentators repeating, almost as mantra, just how difficult it is to prove genocidal intent.”

Recall that the Gaza War began with Hamas launching a mass terrorist attack against Israeli civilians, murdering more than 1,200 and kidnapping 250. Recall also that the people of Gaza elected Hamas as their government with the full knowledge that Hamas is a terrorist organization dedicated to killing every Jew in Israel.

All of which is to say, it is not “difficult . . . to prove genocidal intent” on the part of Hamas. Israel is defending itself against genocidal enemies, and the only reason “the obliteration of Palestinians in Gaza” continued as long as it did is because Hamas refused to surrender. Yet somehow this reality is invisible to Alonso Gurmendi, whose motives seem rather obvious: He agrees with Hamas that Israel should be destroyed.

Alonso Gurmendi is a native of Peru who currently lives in London, and good luck getting him to explain why he’s obsessed with helping Hamas annihilate Jews in Israel, or why (to return to the original topic) he considers himself obliged to act as a campaign cheerleader for Zohran Mamdani in New York. Meanwhile, he’ll write entire articles to explain that anyone who disagrees with him is a Nazi.

“Modern right-wing rhetoric is essentially the same as Hitler’s 1925 rhetoric”@Alonso_GD writes about fascist takeover of the global right and how it’s basically just a rebranding of Hitler’s ‘superior race’ argument. pic.twitter.com/bwOb5JxZMp

— Zeteo (@zeteo_news) October 28, 2025

Ah, but what about our headline question: Who is paying the “racist trolls”? What sinister force could be funding the “super aggressive” and “completely fabricated” criticism of Alonso Gurmendi?

Are his enemies being paid in shekels, perhaps? Isn’t that really what Alonso Gurmendi intended to insinuate, that anyone who objects to his anti-Israel propaganda is a hireling of Zionist Jews?

Well, I haven’t checked my PayPal balance lately, so maybe the Mossad is secretly paying me — keeping it a secret even from me — but I would gladly hate this particular son of a bitch for free. Anyone who wants to join the Volunteer Troll Army can just look at Alonso Gurmendi’s timeline on X and jump into the fight. Tell him the Mossad sent you.

Vindicated: Britain’s ‘Grooming Gangs’ Finally Get the Attention They Deserve

Posted on January 8, 2025January 8, 2025

Because Elon Musk decided to remind people of the role that Britain’s Labour Party played in the “grooming gang” scandal, suddenly millions of people who never knew about the scandal — particularly in the United States — are talking about this as if it were breaking news. And while I suppose I should be grateful that this gruesome tale is finally getting the attention it deserves, excuse me for asking: Where were these people 10 or 15 years ago, when I was frequently calling attention to this?

Nov. 26, 2010: Muslim Men Led U.K. Girl-Rape Gang
Nov. 27, 2010: Report: ‘Issues of Culture, Ethnicity and Identity’ Raised in U.K. Rape-Gang Case
Nov. 30, 2010: Muslim Columnist: U.K. Rape Gang Case Exposes ‘Disgusting Cultural Beliefs’

That was my first spate of coverage, nearly 15 years ago, and in 2014, I wrote extensively about “The Rotherham Horror”:

Imagine if more than a thousand girls, some as young as 11, were sexually exploited by members of a fundamentalist religious cult. Now imagine that authorities refused to act to stop this heinous abuse of young girls because of their fear of offending public opinion.
Except you don’t have to imagine this. It actually happened.
And the fundamentalist religious cult? Yeah: Islam.

Subsequently, I wrote about Emma Jackson, who was pimped out by these gangs beginning at age 13. What is amazing about all this is how the problem was widely known for years and yet was ignored, as I remarked when activist Tommy Robinson was arrested in 2018:

Class prejudice was clearly a factor in this. Most British journalists are from the college-educated upper classes, while the girls being raped and pimped out by these Muslim gangs were mostly from a class that Americans would call “white trash.”
It’s not as if the “grooming” gangs were a big secret, after all. Young Pakistani men were parking their cars in front of schools to pick up their 14- and 15-year-old “girlfriends” and, because these girls were generally from the welfare-dependent lower classes, nobody seemed to care. Police, educators and social-service agencies ignored what was going on, and as for the media, well, they wouldn’t want to be accused of “racism” or “Islamophobia” for reporting on this phenomenon.

Radical feminist Julie Bindel was actually the first to write about the so-called “grooming gangs” in 2007, and it was also covered at great length by my friend Pamela Geller. It was a “fringe” concern back then, and to see the story surge to the top of the headlines because Elon Musk slammed the British Prime Minister — well, welcome to the party, pal.

The irony is profound.https://t.co/0Q6lFoyrfq pic.twitter.com/bt6E96qJI7

— The Patriarch Tree (@PatriarchTree) January 8, 2025

Happy Thanksgiving to All!

Posted on November 28, 2024

We gather together to ask the Lord’s blessing;
He chastens and hastens His will to make known;
the wicked oppressing now cease from distressing.
Sing praises to His name, He forgets not His own.

What a wonderful holiday! Turkey and dressing, mashed potatoes and gravy, green bean casserole, sweet potato souffle, pecan pie — we’re living the good life here at the McCain homestead. Half of our children and one-third of our grandchildren will be among those gathered around the table for this afternoon’s feast. Our eldest daughter is with her family in Florida, our Army son with his family in Alaska, and third-year law student Jefferson is with his girlfriend’s family in Michigan. Despite the fact that not all our offspring will be here for Thanksgiving this year, we are nonetheless grateful for the many blessings we do enjoy. And we will try not to grumble about such misfortunes as today’s pro football schedule, with the NFL serving up such turkeys as the Giants (2-9) versus the Cowboys (4-7). We understand that the league officials in charge of scheduling could not have predicted how bad those teams would be. The Cowboys were coming off a 13-win season last year, but now they’ve completely collapsed and the Giants are so awful they cut their former “franchise” quarterback and will now be starting Tommy DeVito.

Probably most readers don’t care about the NFL, and you came here expecting some kind of political commentary. Well, how about Kamala as your alcoholic aunt rambling incoherently at Thanksgiving?

OK, who did this??pic.twitter.com/ZTjCXxjCYl

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) November 27, 2024

We can afford to laugh at that, as we give thanks that our nation has been spared from the Kamala Harris presidency. By the way, do you know how the second verse of that Thanksgiving hymn goes?

Beside us to guide us, our God with us joining,
ordaining, maintaining His kingdom divine;
so from the beginning the fight we were winning:
the Lord was at our side — the glory be Thine!

“From the beginning the fight we were winning” — pardon me for employing that phrase in a mere secular context, but it is appropriate to the recent political campaign. Our friend Dana Pico calls attention to a confession from senior Harris campaign advisor David Plouffe:

Plouffe said the campaign’s internal polling never had Harris ahead of Trump.
“We didn’t get the breaks we needed on Election Day,” he said. “I think it surprised people, because there was these public polls that came out in late September, early October, showing us with leads that we never saw.”

Because I never talk about my day job, I can’t tell you exactly how much vindication that confession gives me, but it’s a whole lot. Do you remember what the polls looked like in September? Harris was ahead by four points, said CBS News. No, wait, she was ahead by five points according to NBC News. And then Reuters said, “Hold me beer — Harris is ahead by six points!” Those polls were all bullshit, and I knew they were bullshit at the time, but it’s nice to have the confirmation from a senior advisor to Harris that even they knew those polls were bullshit.

Harris was never ahead of Trump, whose victory was a sure thing all along — “from the beginning the fight we were winning.” As to why this should have been so, I don’t want to get too theological:

For generations, American school children learned the story of the First Thanksgiving as having been celebrated by the Pilgrims of New England at Plymouth. Vaguely I recall being a kindergartner, with a feathered Indian headdress (actually made of construction paper) and participating in a Thanksgiving pageant in which the Pilgrims wore black hats (also made of construction paper), relating the tale of how the English colonists had learned from the natives how to plant corn, thus ensuring the survival of the settlement. Public schools in Georgia did not yet offer kindergarten, so we attended the one at Austell Methodist Church, with Mrs. Bookout as our teacher, and the religious significance of Thanksgiving was emphasized.
As familiar as the tale of that first Thanksgiving in Massachusetts is to most Americans, it was not actually the first Thanksgiving in America. That honor belongs to Virginia, where the Good Ship Margaret arrived from England in 1619 carrying 37 men who settled at Berkeley Plantation. These men were Anglicans, not Puritans, but their two-and-half-month trans-Atlantic voyage had been perilous, beset by storms, and during their journey they had earnestly prayed to God for their safety. . . .

You can read the rest of my latest Substack article, and while you’re there, please sign up for a free subscription. Thanks, and may God bless you.

Tim Walz Lies About Everything

Posted on August 23, 2024August 23, 2024

Before we talk about Tim Walz’s latest “gaffe” (which is what the media call it when a Democrat gets caught lying) can we first talk about the underlying issue? Human reproduction is not complicated, and requires no medical assistance. Generations of our ancestors, stretching back to the dawn of history, successfully reproduced without any more help than could be obtained with a bottle of wine to set the mood. To this day, getting pregnant remains so simple that it is easily accomplished by 10th-graders in the backseat of a Dodge. So when you hear Democrats talk about “reproductive health,” you know that some kind of deception is being practiced. “Reproductive health” is usually just liberal code-speak for abortion, except when it’s about handing out contraceptives to minors at taxpayer expense (and without parental consent), but in general, “reproductive health” is a misleading euphemism in that what is really being discussed is preventing the normal, healthy function of the reproductive system. (By the way, as a father of six myself, I’d be happy to explain “the normal, healthy function” to anyone who doesn’t understand it, but you’ll have to pay me for that educational seminar.)

All of this is preamble to the abnormal and unhealthy governor of Minnesota and his wife, who apparently are on the losing side of the Darwinian competition, and thus required medical assistance to accomplish what 10th-graders so easily do in the backseat of a Dodge.

Do I mean to scoff at the unfortunate experiences of so many people who experience similar difficulties? No, but I’m not the one trying to turn this whole subject into an agenda in a presidential campaign. It’s Democrats who are doing that, and then double-dog-daring us to criticize their policies, so they can then turn around and accuse us of trying to impose some kind of Handmaid’s Tale authoritarian dystopia on the nation. When you decide to turn your personal narrative into a political argument, you thereby invite scrutiny of the details of your life and if, in the resulting discussion, other people’s feelings get hurt — whose fault is that? Not mine. So spare me your crybaby antics, please.

In 1994, then 30-year-old Tim Walz married then-27-year-old Gwen Whipple. “The Walzes underwent fertility treatment at Mayo Clinic for seven years before their children were born in 2001 and 2006,” Wikipedia tells us, implying that as soon as they got married, they went directly from the wedding to the Mayo Clinic. What was the underlying medical problem? Was Tim suffering from a low sperm count? Was there something wrong with Gwen’s fallopian tubes? But excuse my Calvinistic perspective in saying that, if you can’t get pregnant without seven years of treatment at the Mayo Clinic, you might want to contemplate the possibility that parenthood is not part of God’s will for your life.

See what I mean about turning personal narratives into political agendas? I’m not the one who decided that America should have a “national conversation” about the pros and cons of medical interventions in the reproductive process, requiring me to ask questions about the specific details of the Walz’s personal problems. Democrats initiated this discussion with the intent of exploiting it for political advantage, and imagine they can decide the exact terrain on which the resulting battle should be fought, but here I’ll invoke Sherman’s famous reply to Hood: “Talk thus to the marines, but not to me.” Those who choose to inaugurate conflict are entirely responsible for the consequences, and have no right to impose limitations upon those they have attacked.

Tim Walz tried to turn his personal problems into a political attack on Republicans, claiming that somehow Donald Trump would shut down the Mayo Clinic or whatever, and I’m not going to be limited in how I respond. You see, there’s two ways to look at this “reproductive health” thing — science or religion — and either of those perspectives raises profound questions. Let’s start with the scientific view.

According to liberals, The Science™ is Darwinian evolution. Anyone who doubts the evolution narrative is denounced as a dimwitted bigot, but what does Darwinism suggest about “assisted reproductive technology”?

We are encouraged to believe that evolution is synonmous with progress — the species literally improving, becoming better through “survival of the fittest” — which is why those of us who are skeptical of Darwinism are regarded as such reactionaries, since we are portrayed as opponents of this evolution-as-progress scheme. But proponents of The Science™ are remarkably inconsistent in their interpretations of what “progress” should mean. It would seem self-evident, for example, that reproductive failure in any organism is a sort of evolutionary verdict, and yet advocates of The Science™ neverthless defend “assisted reproductive technology” as an evasion of this verdict. Unable to conceive offspring by natural means — disqualified from the “survival of the fittest” — the genetic misfits are provided with artificial meddling to enable them to pass along their bad genes, producing another generation of maladapted mutants.

Undoubtedly, some people’s feelings would be hurt by such a blunt description of what The Science™ of Darwinism implies in regard to infertility, and the medical efforts to treat infertility through IVF (in vitro fertilization) and other such interventions. If your feelings are hurt, however, don’t blame me, blame Tim Walz, who tried to score political points by claiming his wife got IVF (she didn’t, she got intrauterine insemination, which is something else), a lie intended to leverage his personal narrative in accusing Republicans of trying to ban IVF.

“Those bigots are against PROGRESS!”

Here’s Walz two weeks ago in Philadelphia talking about IVF: “This gets personal for me and my family” pic.twitter.com/ElUSdMu4QO

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) August 20, 2024

Perhaps you see why I take General Sherman’s attitude toward these miscreants — if you start a war with me, don’t complain about how I choose to finish the war. We’re at the “March to the Sea” phase now.

Having made the Darwinian argument against “assisted reproductive technology” (i.e., allowing defective people to propogate their inferior genes), I’ll remind readers that I have never believed in Darwinism. Instead, I’m a biblical fundamentalist of Calvinist inclination, and as such, believe in the ultimate sovereignty of God. We pray for God’s blessings, and pray also to escape God’s curses.

“See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil . . . I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.”
— Deuteronomy 30:15, 19 (KJV)

That’s God’s promise, and also His warning. Should we depart from our faith, and fail to “choose life,” we are responsible for the consequences, which are clearly predicted — the alternative to life is death.

We may wish to think we are no longer judged by the law which Jehovah imparted to a nomadic tribe of former Egyptian slaves, but here’s the thing: If God actually does exist, our unbelief doesn’t alter that fact; His existence is not dependent upon our belief, and He remains sovereign despite our impudent infidelity. God’s judgment may be witheld, and our destruction thus delayed, for reasons which we cannot fathom, as the divine will is beyond our comprehension. But we are, at all times, “sinners in the hands of an angry God,” as Jonathan Edwards famously preached, and ought to be cognizant of and grateful for God’s mercy.

There are those — even some Christians — who think Christianity is all about the afterlife, trying to enter Heaven or avoid Hell, as if God never rewards or punishes behavior in the here and now, as if the court of divine justice has been adjourned until Judgment Day. Well, just who do you think God is, anyway?

“The Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.”
— Exodus 34:6-7 (KJV)

Thus spake God to Moses, and these verses have attracted widespread attention for the idea of “generational curses,” in which we may suffer for the wrondoing of our ancestors, or that our own iniquity may visit a curse upon our descendants. Some deceivers (wolves in sheep’s clothing) have used this to exploit the superstitions of the ignorant, so that you have certain preachers who tell their flocks that they can achieve freedom from a “generational curse” for a fee, more or less — the suggestion that generosity in offerings will purchase the desired result.

My dear brothers and sisters, that’s not how it works.

If it is the case that “the iniquity of the fathers” should be the cause of our sufferings, then we ought to accept the divine chastisement gratefully. Should it appear to us that we are somehow cursed, that misfortune haunts our footsteps, it is vain, foolish and sinful to imagine that God is not righteous in His judgment. If God has ordained our fate, who are we to say that we somehow deserve better than the portion allotted to us? However great our suffering may be, shouldn’t we consider the possibility that it could be worse, and therefore be thankful for God’s mercy?

Well, I leave aside that sermon, and let the reader find his own conclusion, but my point is, you cannot cheat God. And that is what seems to me to be involved with “assisted reproductive technology.”

As a Christian, I view children as a blessing from God, and am grateful for my numerous progeny — a blessing I owe to grace, rather than to any merit I may claim, for I am surely nothing but a wretched sinner. When I behold those who have been less favored by God in such matters, it gives me pause, because how is it that somehow God judged me worthy of such a blessing, which He has denied to others who, by all appearances, are much better people than I am? Whatever the explanation, I thank God that I didn’t need seven years of treatment at the Mayo Clinic.

Perhaps there are those who, researching Tim Walz’s background, will point to the fact that he is a lapsed Catholic, now affiliated with the “woke” ECLA, and conclude that God is wise in all His judgments. And I further suppose that many readers, whether religious or secular, will look at how Tim Walz lied about the treatment he and his wife got at the Mayo Clinic, and conclude that Walz’s word simply cannot be trusted.

We are approaching what Ronald Reagan once famously called “A Time for Choosing,” Oherwise nobody would care about the formerly obscure governor of Minnesota who, by his attempted deception, has provoked a public discussion of “assisted reproductive technology” that is long overdue. Walz’s effort to score political points by falsely accusing Republicans of seeking to ban IVF should direct our attention to the criticism of such procedures as unethical — a criticism I’m sure most Americans have never considered. Contemplate what Michael Crichton was trying to tell us in his novel Jurassic Park, with the line from Dr. Ian Malcolm: “God creates dinosaurs. God destroys dinosaurs. God creates Man. Man destroys God. Man creates dinosaurs . . .”

You cannot cheat God. Mankind’s efforts to evade the divine will are foolish and sinful, and the consequences are always bad.

And on the Eighth Day, God Said, ‘Everybody Should Buy Evan Sayet’s Book’

Posted on March 9, 2024March 9, 2024

“Not liking something doesn’t mean that that something doesn’t exist. If it did, then there’d be no such thing as a Jennifer Aniston movie.”
— Evan Sayet, from his new book

Ten years ago, I credited Evan Sayet with having written “the most important book since Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type,” and now he’s topped even that achievement with his comprehensive demolition of the Darwinian worldview, Magic Soup, Typing Monkeys, And Horny Aliens From Outer Space: The Patently Absurd Wholly Unsubstantiated and Extravagantly Failed Atheist Origin Myth.

Evan and I go way back. It was at CPAC 2007 that I was wandering through the lobby of the Omni Shoreham Hotel after midnight and happened upon Evan in the company of a fellow I recognized, Andrew Breitbart, who had not then ascended to his status as the world’s most famous Internet provocateur. Because I knew that Breitbart was Matt Drudge’s right-hand man, and because I worked at The Washington Times — where getting Drudge links to our stories was essential to maintaining our profile — I immediately insinuated myself into this group, which also conveniently happened to have picked up a 12-pack of beer. So I ended up spending the night in their hotel room, where Evan tried to sleep while I listened to Andrew tell his amazing stories. Was this meeting a matter of mere chance? Was it a random accident? Or was it destiny — fate, kismet, or dare I say, the will of God in action?

Dear friends, there are no coincidences, and the same divine force that put me in that hotel drinking beers with Breitbart until 3 a.m. also brought forth other miraculous events that the godless would have us believe happened by mere luck. This is the crux of Evan Sayet’s attack on what he properly calls the Militant Materialist worldview of those atheists who claim that Darwinian theory disproves the existence of God.

Coincidence — chance, random luck, statistical probability — is what the atheists offer as the explanatory alternative to Creation. Evan Sayet grabs hold of this point with the ferocity of a pitbull and does not let go until the Godless Serendipity Theory is bleeding out from a loss of credibility:

Atheism is not a scientific belief. In fact, it is neither scientific nor a belief. Militant atheism is not an ideology. It is a weapon used by demagogues and would-be revolutionaries to clear the moral path to their rise to power and the godless way in which they intend to rule.

Evan’s book is crammed full of pithy paragraphs like that, as well as many laugh-out-loud punch lines like that gag about Jennifer Aniston movies. A veteran stand-up comedian and writer for TV comedy shows, Evan knows how to make his points with humor, but as much as you’ll enjoy his jokes, you’ll also understand that Magic Soup is a very serious project, given the totalitarian implications of the atheist worldview.

Ask yourself a question: “Why am I reading this?” Out of all the blog posts in the entire World Wide Web, why are you reading this one? Could it be that Almighty God wants you to buy Evan Sayet’s new book? Far be it from me to presume to speak on God’s behalf, but let the reader ponder the improbability of any other explanation for why you are, in fact, reading a blog post with such a headline. There are no coincidences.

Whereas I tend toward a Calvinistic explanation of how God’s will operates in human affairs, my good friend Evan Sayet is arguably closer to the original source of our monotheistic faith, IYKWIMAITYD.

When Evan contacted me to let me know he had a new book on the market, one of the first things he told me was that it had gotten a glowing review in Chronicles, to which I replied, “Wow.” Because, as I was aware, Chronicles has sometimes had a reputation as being not entirely friendly toward Members of the Tribe. It would be grossly unfair to say that Chronicles is, or ever was, anti-Semitic, but the magazine is proud of its status as the de facto journal of paleoconservatism, and thus the nemesis of neoconservatism, and if you’ve followed the history of that obscure conflict — as I have, by necessity — you perhaps understand why I was impressed to learn that Chronicles had heaped praise on Magic Soup.

How often must I repeat myself: There are no coincidences. Because you see, dear reader, that when I went to find the Chronicles review of Evan’s book, I discovered that it was written by none other than former Michigan Rep. Thaddeus McCotter — who just happens to be the political hero of my co-blogger Smitty. What are the statistical probabilities of such a happenstance? Never mind — it’s the divine will at work, and you can believe whatever you want to believe, but as for myself, I’m 100% certain that it was none other than Jehovah who aligned this so perfectly.

We live in troubled times, my friends, and never has it been more urgent to rally the faithful to defend against the worldwide armies of godlessness that have now surrounded the Camp of the Saints (Revelation 20:9).

You can — indeed, you should, and I would argue, you must — click here to buy Magic Soup, Typing Monkeys, And Horny Aliens From Outer Space: The Patently Absurd Wholly Unsubstantiated and Extravagantly Failed Atheist Origin Myth for $15.99, and by purchasing it through this link, of course, you’ll provide a small commission to me, at no extra cost to yourself. It would be a mitzvah, and may God bless you for it.