Day: November 18, 2015

EX PRIEST RICHARD BENNETT EXPOSES POPE FRANCIS & THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH

Exposing Jesuit Pope Francis
and the False Roman Church,
Actively Destroying True Christianity
& America From Within

Published on Nov 15, 2015
Not only does the Roman system conceal its own wickedness, it exalts the glory that the world gives to Pope Francis. That man that claims to be the Holy Father and Head of the Lord’s Church mocks our Lord and our Heavenly Father. The exposing of current documented facts about the Roman Church and its Pope, make this video valuable to protect people across the world for its perilous influence. Please make this video known to your friends and church members. And kindly let us know if you are speaking or writing to reveal the subtle guile of the system called the Roman Catholic Church. And as we pray for a display of the Lord God’s truth and grace, as this video is viewed, we praise Him. We also thank you for helping us make known this information to others.

OBAMA LETS TERROR MIGRATE TO AMERICA, MOST OF ALL REPUBLICAN MAJORITY STATES & SMALL TOWNS FOR NOW

OBAMA LETS TERROR MIGRATE TO AMERICA, MOST OF ALL REPUBLICAN MAJORITY STATES
AND INTO SMALL TOWNS, NOT THE BIG CITIES;
KEEP QUIET, AND YOU’LL GET USED TO THE TYRANNY!
Published on Nov 17, 2015
In the wake of the terror in Paris. President Obama is blatantly disregarding the very real concerns of the American people. Rather than review the policy to bring in 10,000 Syrian refugees after the horror the world witnessed just 5 days ago. Obama, clutches like a madman to his power. And stays the course on the Bilderberg fueled globalist demand that he oust President Bashir Al Assad from Syria. Rather than do whatever it takes to protect the United States, Obama is leaving the gates wide open as he shuns the overwhelming concerns of Americans and aids an invading force to quietly enter the United States.

People are flooding social media to encourage Americans to call their congressional representatives to stop the resettlement of Middle Eastern migrants after government officials and contractors admitted the migrants cannot be tracked or vetted properly. The White House announced it was still accepting at least 10,000 migrants over the next year despite the Paris attacks.

Similar to what happened in France prior to the attacks in Paris. An armory in Massachusetts was mysteriously broken into on Saturday night, thieves made off with 16 guns, 6 rifles, and 10 pistols. Cartel gunmen pursued by Mexican Police walked right across the U.S. border and disappeared. While Isis calls for attacks on Washington D.C. and ramps up the possibility of terror on one of the many cities found on the ISIS kill list.

VIDEO:

KSHAMA SAWANT’S SPREAD OF SOCIALISM IN SEATTLE, WASHINGTON~ITS COMING $15 PER HOUR MINIMUM WAGE~RELATIONSHIP WITH BERNIE SANDERS, SOCIALIST CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT

MARXIST FROM INDIA INTENDS TO DAMAGE CAPITALISM IN AMERICA; THEN GO GLOBAL, JUST LIKE BERNIE SANDERS

SEE: 

SAWANT GIVES SOCIALIST WELCOME TO BERNIE SANDERS

ABOVE: They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Kshama Sawant, the leading member of  Socialist Alternative embraces Sanders the nominee for the Capitalist Democratic Party. On the other hand a scowling Sanders holds his hand up from Savant’s shoulder. He does not want to be seen to be too enthusiastic about being too close to the socialist. 
BUT: LEFT COAST IMPORT & NEW YORK JEWISH LIBERAL SOCIALIST 
ARE CLOSE IN MANY WAYS,
BESIDES PRESSING THE FLESH
JUST OVERLOOK THE AGE DIFFERENCE


RED GUARD SEATTLE: SOCIALIST, COMMUNIST, OR BOTH?

MAJORITY MOB RULE AGENDA
FROM WIKIPEDIA:
Kshama Sawant is a member of the Socialist Alternative party, the United States section of the British-based Trotskyist international organization the Committee for a Workers’ International (CWI). She has referred to herself as a Marxist. Sawant has stated that she does not advocate for any system like the “bureaucratic dictatorship” of the former Soviet Union, but for democratic socialism meaning “the society being run democratically in the interest of all working people on the planet, all children – everybody who has needs, and all that being done in an environmentally sustainable manner.”
The core issues of Sawant’s campaign were a minimum wage increase to US$15/hour, a “millionaire’s tax” or income tax on wealthy Seattleites, and rent control. Sawant said rent control is “something everyone supports, except real estate developers and people like Richard Conlin…” and compared the legal fight for its implementation to same-sex marriage, and the legalization of marijuana in the United States, both of which she supports. Her campaign for a $15 an hour minimum wage has been credited for bringing the issue into the mainstream and attracting support for the policy from both Seattle former Mayor Mike McGinn and Seattle current Mayor Ed Murray. In response to criticism that a $15 an hour minimum wage could hurt the economy, she said, “If making sure that workers get out of poverty would severely impact the economy, then maybe we don’t need this economy.” In her most recent campaign, Sawant called for large Seattle companies such as Starbucks and Amazon to be unionized. In previous campaigns, she has advocated the nationalization of large Washington State corporations such as Boeing, Microsoft, and Amazon.com and expressed a desire to see privately owned housing in “Millonaire’s Row” in the Capitol Hill neighborhood turned into publically owned shared housing saying, “When things are exquisitely beautiful and rare, they shouldn’t be privately owned.” During an election victory rally for her City Council campaign, Sawant criticized Boeing for saying it would move jobs out of state if it couldn’t get wage concessions and tax breaks. She called this “economic terrorism” and said in several speeches that if Boeing moved jobs out of state, the workers should take over Boeing facilities and bring them into public ownership. She has said they could be converted into multiple uses, such as production for mass transit. Sawant also supportssingle-payer health care. Sawant maintains that a socialist economy cannot exist in a single country and must be a global system just as capitalism today is a global system. 

The Spread of Socialism in Seattle

BY CLINTON ALEXANDER
for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The socialist movement in Seattle, Washington, has not come quietly onto the scene in the form of politicians with clandestine motives slowly changing laws. Socialism in the Emerald City is bursting forth loudly and with pride. The fact that it is being taken quite seriously by many in the Pacific Northwest and has a stronger foothold than ever causes it to require more serious examination — not only by those in the Seattle metropolitan area, but across the nation as well.
With roots stemming from the Occupy Wall Street movement, an economics professor and outspoken socialist is making her mark in Seattle. Stepping into the Washington State political scene first in 2012, Kshama Sawant, a former software engineer from India and a professor of economics at a community college in the city, campaigned for a seat in the state House of Representatives as a member of the Socialist Alternative party. Though she was defeated in that race, she would not remain on the sidelines for long.
In 2013, Sawant ran for a seat on the Seattle City Council. Painting incumbent Richard Conlin as being in the corner for big business interests, she campaigned heavily on a socialist platform and was widely seen to have won the debates. On November 15 Conlin conceded the election — and a new chapter in Seattle politics began.
Having recently come through her first reelection campaign, Sawant is presently leading in ballot counts and is expected to come away with another victory after mail-in ballots are counted. Results are set to be announced on November 24.
After she spent much of her first term working on the $15-an-hour minimum wage, and promising a coming rent control fight, a reelection to the seat is clear confirmation that her constituents align with her politics.
The election of a self-avowed socialist in the city of Seattle is clearly not an anomaly. It is not the story of a person with deep pockets and political aspirations simply getting lucky. Sawant spent two years doing the exact things she campaigned on.
With the rise of politicians such as Bernie Sanders proudly touting socialist policies on a national level, it may be beneficial to take a closer look at the direction in which Seattle is moving. An economic ideology that would have once drawn the ire of most Americans is now being touted by many as the answer for perceived financial woes in Seattle, as well as across the nation.
Sawant has declared that companies such as Amazon.com should be nationalized. In 2013, when the Boeing Company was in negotiations with unions, she declared: “The workers should take over the factories, and shut down Boeing’s profit-making machine.” When Boeing threatened to move jobs out of the state of Washington, Sawant advised that such an act would amount to nothing short of “economic terrorism” and asserted that if workers took over the factories it would be “democratic ownership.”
That a politician has put forth such astounding statements, and has been taken seriously enough to have been reelected, is astounding in itself. However, the socialist movement in Seattle is not relegated to the rantings of only one person. In the face of small business owners across the city, Mayor Ed Murray, Sawant, and the entire city council pushed the increased minimum wage, and the mayor signed it into law. At the time, The New American spoke with a few of those business owners and managers about the harmful effects of such a law, and their comments may be seen in the article “Seattle’s Coming $15 Minimum Wage.”
To this date the concerns of those business owners have been completely ignored. They have been given no other choices but to either pay up or go under.
The minimum-wage law in Seattle begins at the bottom with the worker receiving a certain wage and works backward from that point. The socialist movement has decided across the board that if a business owner cannot support the wage, then his establishment has no right to remain open.
Another pet issue resolutely championed by Sawant is rent control. In an interview with the Socialist Alternative last month, she asserted,
Right now, landlords have the right to raise rents by however much they like: 50%, 100%, or even 200%. People can only take stagnating wages and skyrocketing rents for so long before they fight back.
The basic belief system being pushed is that the workers — not the owners — of a business have the right to decide the wage rate. In the housing market, it is the idea that the tenants should determine rent pricing rather than the owner of the property. The rent control battle goes to the very heart of a fundamental right of all U.S. citizens: the right to do with one’s private property as one likes.
Citing income inequality and high rent, the socialist movement is attempting to rewrite our basic economic system. However, socialists have no intention of remaining in one small corner of the nation. According to a Gallup Poll from January 2010, a majority of Democrats and other liberals have a positive view of socialism. While there may not be a large number of socialists in office across the nation, the ideology is spreading.
Socialism has gained a foothold in Seattle not because a professor of economics at a community college managed to secure office and fool her supporters. It has increased in popularity in large part because many young people feel disenchanted with the current economic climate. However, an economic ideology that has been proven to be a failure time and again is not the answer.
The cries have already begun for a national minimum wage to follow Seattle’s lead. Healthcare has been nationalized. Politicians such as Kshama Sawant are touting the supposed evils of capitalism.
Meanwhile the answers given from our nation’s capital often differ only in their method of dividing up more and more tax dollars.
If the minimum wage increases, small businesses close, and property rights are further restricted, then the result of the socialist movement will be increasingly smaller shares of a shrinking economic pie.
There are indeed logical answers that can move our nation in the right direction: abundant jobs, middle-class wealth, and protections for individual rights, but socialism isn’t it. Property rights must be upheld and laws that stifle businesses must be struck down.
_______________________________________________________________
SPEECH AT SOCIALIST PARTY RALLY IN U.K. 2014

“Capitalists are criminals of our society”,
Kshama Sawant

Published on Nov 14, 2013
Seattle city councilwoman Kshama Sawant goes on anti capitalist rant at a Trayvon Martin rally, July 20th, 2013. “The Capitalist system itself…Is at the root of racism, hatred, and fear of black people, people of color, of poor people” “We need to…put on trial capitalism itself”

AT BERNIE SANDERS RALLY, 
FELLOW SOCIALISTS

Kshama Sawant Gives Socialist Response to Obama’s 2015 State of the Union Address

Seattle’s Coming $15 Minimum Wage

BY CLINTON ALEXANDER
unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
In the city of Seattle, Washington, Joe Salvatore runs The Recycling Depot, a recycling business employing about 20 people. Not far away, Bobby Denovski is eking out a living at Padrino’s Pizza and Pasta with a handful of employees, and Remo Borracchini is busy running an Italian Bakery. The story is the same across Washington State and across the nation: Businesses are fighting every day to service customers, treat employees well, and simply stay open.
Unfortunately in the city of Seattle, it is about to get much more difficult for business owners to continue the fight. Pushed forward primarily by socialist city councilwoman Kshama Sawant, the first phase of a new minimum wage law went into effect on April 1, 2015, and the law will eventually bring all businesses to a $15 minimum wage, more than double the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour.
The law is a graduated system with different pay scales and timelines for businesses above and below 500 employees. For businesses with 501 employees or more, the April 1, 2015 minimum wage was set at $11 an hour. For the next two years, on January 1 of each year, the wage increases, rising from the current $11 per hour to $13, reaching $15 an hour on January 1, 2018. For companies paying at least $1.50 per hour toward a silver level medical benefits plan, the minimum wage goes to $12.50 on January 1 of 2016, then $13.50 in 2017, and finally $15 an hour in January of 2018. As stated on Seattle’s website seattle.gov, “Once Seattle’s minimum wage reaches $15.00/hour, payments toward medical benefits no longer impact employees’ minimum wage.”
On April 1, 2015, small-business wages were set at $11 an hour as well. For companies at or below the 500-employee mark, the $15 minimum wage is set to be phased in over the course of the next decade. Again, counting medical benefits and other factors such as tips, the total compensation varies. By the year 2021, the minimum wage will be $15 with tips and health insurance factored in, and in 2025, small businesses must meet the $15 minimum wage without credit for tips or insurance.
President Obama has repeatedly urged Congress to raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $10.10 an hour. For this reason it would behoove those across the nation to pay special attention to the city of Seattle. Seattle is tucked away in the northwestern corner of the nation; however, as the city squeezes its businesses for more and more money, it may become ground zero for the minimum wage fight.
Reasons for the Law
Since being first enacted in 1928, the idea of a “minimum wage” has been sold as a law that will benefit the poorest sectors of our society. According to Cornell Law School, “The minimum wage was designed to create a minimum standard of living to protect the health and well-being of employees.” Likewise, from the city of Seattle’s own website we find, “Citywide minimum wage laws offer local governments a powerful tool for helping low-income workers and families in their communities. Such measures also have significant impact on businesses and how they operate.” Minimum wage advocates have held that it is possible to set a minimum pay scale and have no ill effect on jobs.
Operating under the assumption that simply raising the minimum wage will guarantee said wage, the people pushing for the $15 minimum wage claim that it has the power to lift the poor to that “new standard of living.” Is this true? Will it indeed lift the needy in our communities to another level, or is it a false assumption, one that will cause irreparable damage to business and industry?
Asking the Businesses
Several business owners in Seattle were kind enough to give their own opinions of Seattle’s minimum wage law and explain how it will have a negative impact not only on their businesses, but on those people it was designed to help.
Walter McLaughlin has been in Small Business Administration (SBA) lending for 27 years. He won the Washington State Financial Services Champion award in 2005. Concerning the minimum wage law in Seattle, McLaughlin said in an e-mail statement:
In economics, there is a principal called “zero sum gain” in which an increase is offset by a loss of equal amount. When a small business (and per the SBA’s size standards, over 99% of U.S. companies qualify as small) sees its operating costs increase, it has three options: 1) absorb the cost, 2) raise prices or 3) lower expenses. Since businesses don’t operate with the intention of losing money, the irony of a drastic increase in the minimum wage is that in order for employers to adjust, the net effect may be higher inflation and unemployment, disproportionately hurting the very same group the $15 minimum wage was intended to help.
McLaughlin lays out three ways in which the new Seattle minimum wage law will play out as it’s implemented: a loss to the business owner (absorb the cost), a cost to the general public (raise prices), or a reduction in expenses (possible job loss).
A Loss to the Business Owner
For those people who have never run a business, the absorption of the additional cost may seem to be the easiest and most straightforward solution to the requirement to pay employees more. But contrary to what those who have never had the experience of sitting down with a company’s balance sheets might think, all business owners are not jet-setting CEOs with profits just flowing in.
At The Recycling Depot, general manager Joe Salvatore stated, “What these people don’t take into consideration is that when you raise the wage, you’re raising the Labor and Industries Insurance cost because that amount is affected by the wages. I have already talked to several small businesses in the area and there’s not a single one who is making tons and tons of money where they’re just going to be able to absorb these costs.”
In other words, while the absorption of minor costs may be a normal and constant part of running a business, the bottom line is a major factor. At Padrino’s Pizza and Pasta, Bobby Denovski echoed Salvatore’s sentiment: “We aren’t a large company with huge profits. As a small business the cost of labor is one of the main factors. Fifteen dollars an hour, that’s a lot of money to ask from a small business.” When asked what effect he could foresee the escalating minimum wage law having on his business, Denovski commented, “It could put us all out looking for jobs. We have a couple more years paying on the loan for our restaurant. If we end up paying this $15 an hour, we are honestly in danger of losing it.”
Likewise, The Recycling Depot, as a metals recycling business, is subject to sometimes-dramatic market fluctuations. Metal values can skyrocket, allowing ample room to treat employees well, and values can plummet, leaving the business struggling to survive. Said Salvatore of the times when the market is up, “We do take care of our employees during those times. We give bonuses and things like that. However what about the lean times? This is going to have a dramatic effect on us during the lean times. You can’t just start taking the pay away.”
A Cost to the General Public
If costs cannot be simply absorbed by the company, another option is to raise the price of the product. Bobby Denovski stated, “The only thing I can do is to raise the prices. I worry that the demand for pizza in the community will not support the prices we will have to go to when the wages go up.” How much is a pizza worth to those in his community? How about a gallon of milk? Those claiming the minimum wage will have no ill effect on the community should be asking themselves these questions, because at some point most small business owners such as Denovski must find a way to recoup these costs.
Referring again to fluctuating values in the metals market, Salvatore stated, “We’re very dependent on the global prices of metals. When the metal values drop, we’re making less money and our margins shrink. During times like this there are a lot of businesses just trying to stay afloat.” And so he is forced to try to pass on the costs in another manner.
As a metals recycling business, The Recycling Depot purchases metals from other businesses and from the general public, then sells those metals based on current market prices. Because Salvatore has no control over the sale price (dictated by global supply and demand), the only thing he can do is to drop the prices he is paying the public for those metals, illustrating the second point (a cost to the public) in another light.
Lower Expenses
Absent the ability to absorb the higher wages or pass on the costs to someone else, a third way to compensate is to lower expenses. On the surface this sounds harmless enough. However, it often means the disappearance of jobs.
At Borracchini’s Bakery in Seattle, a business that has been open for 94 years, Remo Borracchini has a long history of hiring youth. “I myself have probably hired 1,500 young people over the years. I have had people come here as teenagers and stay here as much as 25 years, so they came and learned a trade,” said Borracchini.
He has brought in high-school students who have never worked a job and started them washing pots and pans, stocking shelves, and mopping floors. While the wages many of these new hires make is not a large sum, Borracchini sees a bigger picture:
It’s not that we’re just looking for cheap labor. It’s the understanding that you’re doing something for these young people other than sending them out to wander aimlessly through the neighborhoods. You see, I do believe we have a responsibility to our young people. There used to be internships throughout industry. Now that has changed. They used to go into places like print shops, or bakeries and come to begin learning a trade; that was their reimbursement, they were learning something that would benefit them throughout their life. Now they’ve passed a law saying they have to be paid a wage. So what happens? If you’re going to have to pay someone who doesn’t know anything, you might as well pay someone who already knows something.
Continued Borracchini,
Businesses like McDonald’s, they built their empire not on a philosophy of it being a high paying job, but to take kids who have never worked before, teach them a little bit about work ethic and how to perform, and they move on to better opportunities when they have shown they have a bit of ability. You’ll begin to see the order screens in every type of McDonald’s scenario. Look at the jobs they’re eliminating right there. Kids who would be learning to show up for work on time, learning how to interact with the public, how to have a bit of work ethic.
Salvatore echoed Borracchini, stating that in order to recoup labor costs, jobs would almost certainly be cut, “at least cutting hours back if not completely doing away with jobs. The well is not bottomless.”
At Padrino’s, a clearly concerned Denovski stated, “Right now it’s [the minimum wage] at $11 an hour and it is already difficult for me and my partner to keep the bills paid and the employees paid. They’re going to be raising that expense up to $15, but none of our other costs will be going down. I honestly don’t know what we’re going to do.”
Salvatore then commented on a worst-case scenario, “Eventually we have to tighten the ropes, and then what happens when there’s nothing left in the reserve?” Indeed, what does happen? What happens to the low-skill workers looking for a job? Where will the teenager or young adult go for training when McDonald’s has automated order screens? As Borracchini said, “It is the internship and low-skill jobs which will be cut. We will have sent them back out onto the street.”
Help or Harm?
Seattle businesses obviously view the new minimum wage law with quite a bit of trepidation. It is easy to see why. These companies will have to find a way to recuperate the costs one way or another. No matter how it ends up happening, it will be a detriment to the community and the city.
In “The Tax & Budget Bulletin” by The Cato Institute dated March 2014, Joseph J. Sabia, associate professor of economics at San Diego State University, explains how a minimum wage affects the poor’s standard of living and employment opportunities:
The bulletin concludes that minimum wage increases almost always fail to meet proponents’ policy objectives and often hurt precisely the vulnerable populations that advocates wish to help. The weight of the science suggests that policymakers should abandon higher minimum wages as an antiquated anti-poverty tool. Minimum wages deter employment and are poorly targeted to those in need.
His words echo the business owners quoted here. Says Borracchini, “I can sympathize with someone who is trying to raise a family. Fifteen dollars is not a lot of money. It’s very difficult. However, there is an element of society who through laws like this are being denied a great privilege. The opportunity to learn how to work.”
The bottom line is that the minimum wage law was supposedly created to help the poor and needy in our society. However, it is the low-skill and poor who will feel the effect first and foremost, and who will find it much more difficult to acquire the job skills needed to raise the value of their labor to or above the minimum wage.
As voices cry ever louder for an increased federal minimum wage, the stories of small businesses across the nation need to be brought into the spotlight — businesses reaching out to unskilled youth willing to put in time training. Companies managing a tight bottom line can’t handle the extra expense of yet another increase in wages.
The heart of our nation does not lie within the halls of Congress but rather in the bakeries, pizza shops, recycling centers, and myriad other small businesses. It is not in the backroom deals between politicians where the effects of these laws will be felt, but rather in the checking accounts of struggling businesses.




CATHOLIC PAUL RYAN, HOUSE SPEAKER: SHARES HIS RADICAL PRO-AMNESTY IDEOLOGY WITH FELLOW CATHOLIC SOCIALIST

CATHOLIC
LIBERATION THEOLOGY IN ACTION
RYAN, BOEHNER, PELOSI, GUTIERREZ 
SHARE COMMONALITY IN CATHOLIC 
“SOCIAL JUSTICE” CAUSES 
THAT HELP WRECK PROTESTANT AMERICA 
& ITS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
GUTIERREZ QUOTING RYAN 
( FROM MARK LEVIN’S YOUTUBE AUDIO BELOW, AT 11:20 MINUTE MARK):

“YOU AND I ARE CATHOLICS; AND OUR CATHOLIC VALUES DO NOT ALLOW US TO CREATE A PERMANENT UNDERCLASS”
(ALSO KNOWN AS: CATHOLIC SOCIALIST REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH)
PAUL RYAN JUST AS MUCH TREASONOUS 
AS BOEHNER WAS

“In April 2012, after receiving criticism from Georgetown University faculty members on his budget plan, Ryan rejected Rand’s philosophy as an atheistic one, saying it “reduces human interactions down to mere contracts”. He also called the reports of his adherence to Rand’s views an “urban legend” and stated that he was deeply influenced by his Roman Catholic faith and by Thomas Aquinas. Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute, maintains that Ryan is not a Rand disciple, and that some of his proposals do not follow Rand’s philosophy of limited government; Brook refers to Ryan as a “fiscal moderate”. A Catholic, Ryan is a member of St. John Vianney Catholic Church in Janesville, and was an altar boy.”
RYAN’S GUILT BY ASSOCIATION WITH 
GUTIERREZ: El Gallito – 
the little fighting rooster–
FROM SMILES TO VICIOUSNESS 
IN A HEART BEAT
PUERTO RICAN CATHOLIC HISPANIC SOCIALIST & ACTIVIST WITH HISTORY OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE & POLITICAL BRAWLING
Of Puerto Rican descent, he is a supporter of Puerto Rican independence, and the Vieques movement. In the late 1990s and the 2000s, he was a leader in the Vieques movement, which sought to stop the United States military from using the inhabited island as a bomb testing ground. In May 2000, Gutiérrez was one of nearly two hundred people arrested for refusing to leave the natural habitat the US military wished to continue using as a bombing range. (SEE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BobRKQ8ZXtM). Gutiérrez is also an outspoken advocate of workers’ rights, LGBT rights, gender equality, and other liberal and progressive causes. As a member of the Chicago city council, Gutiérrez was a key backer of the 1986 gay rights ordinance. Gutiérrez has been called the “undisputed champion of immigration reform” and “Moses of the Latinos” due to his many years advocating for immigrant rights. In his continued efforts to reform immigration, Gutiérrez has participated in two acts of non-violent civil disobedience outside of the White House. The first took place on May 1, 2010, where, following a speech delivered to hundreds at Lafayette Park, Gutiérrez marched with protesters to the White House and refused to leave until Presidential action was taken on immigration reform or he was arrested. Many of the protesters who joined Gutiérrez had signs that called for a Presidential moratorium on deportation and criticized recent anti-immigrant legislation passed in Arizona – SB 1070. Gutiérrez also joined the protesters in criticizing Arizona Governor Jan Brewer‘s decision to sign the measure allowing racial profiling in the state-level enforcement of immigration laws.
On July 26, 2011, in response to a record-breaking one-million deportations under President Obama, and the President’s continued refusal to stop deportations of DREAM Act eligible youth, Gutiérrez and eleven labor, faith, and civil rights leaders were arrested outside the White House. A crowd of 2,500 came to support Gutiérrez and the eleven other leaders. A day before the arrest, President Obama sent a letter to Gutiérrez in which he stated that he would continue his administration’s deportation policy.
In 2009 and again in 2011, Gutiérrez went on a nationwide tour in support of comprehensive immigration reform and a moratorium on the deportation of families. The tours have received widespread media attention and helped revive the nationwide discussion on immigration reform. Gutiérrez was the main speaker at the historic March 21, 2010, March for America rally at the capitol mall attended by over 200,000 people.
Gutiérrez was the first elected official to sponsor a version of the DREAM Act – legislation to allow undocumented youth brought to the United States as minors a pathway to citizenship – in 2001. In 2009 Gutiérrez introduced CIR-ASAP – Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America’s Security and Prosperity Act. With a background as a community activist and organizer Gutiérrez often uses non-violent civil disobedience when pushing political causes and legislation. 
PAPAL PUPPETS
PAUL RYAN, HOUSE SPEAKER: 
HIS RADICAL PRO-AMNESTY IDEOLOGY
MARK LEVIN EXPOSES RYAN
Published on Oct 21, 2015
The Great One discusses radical ideologue Paul Ryan’s pro Amnesty stance and disturbingly close relationship with far Left, open borders radical Luis Gutierrez.
GUTIERREZ QUOTING RYAN AT 11:20 MINUTE MARK:
“YOU AND I ARE CATHOLICS; AND OUR CATHOLIC VALUES DO NOT ALLOW US TO CREATE A PERMANENT UNDERCLASS”
(ALSO KNOWN AS: CATHOLIC SOCIALIST REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH)

U.S. OPENS FACILITIES IN IRAQ & LEBANON TO INCREASE & SPEED UP SYRIAN REFUGEE PROCESSING~CLOSE THE BORDERS MOVEMENT GROWING IN U.S.

U.S. OPENS FACILITIES IN IRAQ & LEBANON 
TO INCREASE & SPEED UP SYRIAN 
REFUGEE PROCESSING; 
CLOSE THE BORDERS MOVEMENT GROWING IN U.S.


U.S. to Open Facilities in Middle East to Speed Up Processing of Syrian Refugees

EXCERPT: “During a joint press appearance in Berlin on September 20 with German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Secretary of State John Kerry previewed the Obama administration’s plan to drastically increase the flow of refugees into the United States, mentioning specifically refugees from Syria. “I’m pleased to announce today that the United States will significantly increase our numbers for refugee resettlement in the course of this next year and the year after,” Kerry said. “Last year I think we were at 70,000,” he noted, referring to number of refugees the United States accepted from around the world.
“We are now going to go up to 85,000 with at least, and I underscore the ‘at least’ — it is not a ceiling, it’s a floor — of 10,000 over the next year from Syria specifically even as we also receive more refugees from other areas. And in the next fiscal year, we’ll target 100,000, and if it’s possible to do more, we’ll do [more].””
________________________________________________________

‘CLOSE THE BORDERS’ MOVEMENT SWEEPING NATION

Backlash grows against Obama’s migrant resettlement plan

SEE: http://www.infowars.com/close-the-borders-movement-sweeping-nation/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
EXCERPT:
Americans are starting to melt down phone lines in Washington, D.C., as backlash explodes against President Obama’s migrant resettlement program.
People are flooding social media to encourage Americans to call their congressional representatives to stop the resettlement of Middle Eastern migrants after government officials and contractors admitted the migrants cannot be tracked or vetted properly.
“Call your congressperson now and demand defunding Obama’s Syrian refugee plan,” one tweet of many states.
The White House announced it was still accepting at least 10,000 migrants over the next year despite the Paris attacks.

CUBANS SURGE INTO MEXICO TO ENTER SOUTHERN UNITED STATES

Cubans Surge Into Mexico, 

Southern United States

Migrants fear that United States will soon cut off legal residency as Washington normalizes relations with Havana
BY DANIEL WISER
informational, educational, and research purposes:
Cuban migrants are inundating Mexico and southern Texas in order to obtain asylum, an indication that Cubans still desire to flee their country after Havana’s normalization of relations with the United States.
Nearly 30,000 Cubans sought asylum in Texas during a one-year period that ended in September, an increase of 80 percent from the previous year, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday. The migrants fear that, as part of the rapprochement between Washington and Havana, U.S. lawmakers and the Obama administration will soon end a longstanding policy—known as the dry foot provision—that offers Cubans a fast track process to securing legal residency and a green card if they enter the United States by land.
Mexican immigration officials have also reported a surge in Cuban migrants compared with last year. While hundreds of Cubans still attempt to reach South Florida by sea, and are often detained and deported by the U.S. Coast Guard, more and more Cubans are traveling hundreds of miles on land through South and Central America to ender the United States under the dry foot provision.
At the urging of the United States, Mexican authorities have intensified their border enforcement and detained tens of thousands of Central American immigrants this year. Cuban migrants, by contrast, are allowed to proceed to America.
Cubans, who typically begin their attempts in Ecuador and then hop boats, planes, and buses through Central America and Mexico, say that they endure abuses by officials and are forced to pay several bribes along their journey to the United States. Despite the impoverished conditions in many countries along the migrant route, one Cuban engineer told the Journal that, “we have seen many more luxuries than we ever did in Cuba.”
“I don’t need to be rich,” said the migrant engineer who plans to live with his wife in Miami. “I want to live free and feed my family, that is all. In Cuba it’s impossible to aspire to anything.”
Some conservative lawmakers have called for ending the dry foot policy. Rep. Paul Gosar (R., Ariz.) introduced a bill last month that would repeal the provision along with its authorization legislation, the Cuban Adjustment Act. He said the policies “provide amnesty to Cuban aliens and are costing taxpayers billions of dollars.”
“If President Obama has normalized relations with Cuba, why would we treat illegal immigrants from that nation any different than those from other countries?” he said in a statement.
It remains unclear whether Gosar’s bill will garner wider support, though some groups who support stricter U.S. immigration rules have endorsed it.
The Obama administration has so far indicated that it would not scrap the dry foot provision. A State Department spokesperson said that the administration “has no plans to change its immigration policies with regard to Cuba.”
“We continue to encourage all countries to respect the human rights of migrants and to ensure humane treatment of individuals seeking asylum or other forms of protection in accordance with international law and their own national laws,” the spokesperson said.
The surge of Cuban migrants into the United States also raises questions about the results of the administration’s rapprochement with the Castro regime. U.S. officials have said that, through direct engagement with the Cuban government, they can push Havana to protect the rights of its people and move toward democracy.
“I believe that we can do more to support the Cuban people and promote our values through engagement,” said President Obama last year when he announced the normalization policy. “After all, these 50 years have shown that isolation has not worked.”
However, President Raul Castro’s government has continued to jail dissidents on the island. The exodus of Cuban migrants also suggests that civilians are still seeking a better life elsewhere.
Normalization talks between the United States and Cuba have continued in recent months. The two countries held their first law enforcement dialogue earlier this month in Washington, where they discussed “a wide range of areas of cooperation in law enforcement, including counter-terrorism, counter-narcotics, transnational crime, cyber-crime, secure travel and trade, and fugitives.”
“The United States and Cuban governments have begun a process of constructive engagement that is a long-term process,” the State Department spokesperson said. “The situation in Cuba will not change overnight.”

BELOVED PROFESSOR RESIGNS: UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI WITCH HUNT CLAIMS ANOTHER VICTIM

MOB RULE THREATS OF MURDER

CHALLENGING SOCIALIST BULLIES’ THREATS TO KILL FREE SPEECH MET WITH DEATH THREATS

111115mob

PROFESSOR RESIGNS: MISSOURI WITCH HUNT CLAIMS ANOTHER VICTIM

Dr. Dale Brigham hounded out after urging students to stand up to death threats

BY PAUL JOSEPH WATSON
SEE: http://www.infowars.com/beloved-professor-resigns-missouri-witch-hunt-claims-another-victim/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

SEE: http://the-trumpet-online.com/professor-resigns-missouri-witch-hunt-claims-another-victim/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

infowars.com
The witch hunt at the University of Missouri claimed another victim today after Professor Dale Brigham was forced to resign for merely daring to suggest that students should stand up to bullies by attending an exam.
After death threats were made against students by a suspect who was later arrested by police, Brigham sent an email to members of his Nutritional Science 1034 class which stated, “If you don’t feel safe coming to class, then don’t come to class. I will be there, and there will be an exam administered in our class.”
The professor, who is white, urged students to prevent the “bullies” from winning by attending the class. “If you give into bullies, they win. The only way bullies are defeated is by standing up to them. If we cancel the exam, they win; if we go through with it, they lose,” he wrote.
Some students responded to the email by venting on Twitter, accusing Brigham of being a, “failure as a human being,” and calling for him to be fired.
It is important to emphasize that Brigham gave his students the choice to attend the exam or not, he didn’t even insist on their presence, yet was hounded out anyway for disrespecting their “safe space”.
After media reports from the likes of extreme left-wing outlets like Salon amplified the contrived outrage, Brigham sent a subsequent email which stated, “The exam is cancelled. Our students will be able to take the exam at an alternate date with no loss of points. No one will have to come to class today. And, I am resigning my position.”
It also emerged that threats of KKK members on campus throwing bricks were completely erroneous, forcing Missouri Students Association president Payton Head to apologize for circulating the false rumors.
While Brigham has resigned, Melissa Click, the media professor who called for “muscle” and mob violence to silence the media, has only resigned from her “courtesy appointment,” and appears to have kept her office as mass media professor in the Communication Department.
“His class was one of the most popular at Mizzou and he was the friendliest teacher I’ve ever had. It’s a shame that he’s leaving while Melissa Click stays, one student told Campus Reform, adding that Dr. Brigham was “one of the most beloved professors at Mizzou.”
Other students said Brigham was a “the nicest guy” and their “favorite professor”.
Brigham’s resignation is another victory for the Missouri witch hunt hate mob, which claimed the scalp of President Tim Wolfe on Monday, who stepped down ostensibly for failing to acknowledge his “white privilege”.
Meanwhile, it has emerged that Students Association president Payton Head, who whipped up the hysteria by circulating fake threats, met directly with President Obama when he visited the White House in 2011.
____________________________________________________________

Another University of Missouri Professor
Offers Resignation, But Administration Refuses to Accept It; Later, He Apologizes?


BIBLICAL REPROOF: “WHO ARE THE PIRANHAS?”


Who Are the Piranhas?

SEE: http://www.wayoflife.org/index_files/who_are_the_piranhas.html; 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, 
and research purposes:


who_are_the_piranhas

There is a crowd of independent Baptists who despise biblical reproof when it is geared toward prominent preachers, and it is one reason why we say that most independent Baptist churches will be emerging within twenty years. When reproof is maligned, there can be no correction. 
Public reproof toward a fellow Baptist preacher is invariably mischaracterized as cheap gossip, slander, and carnal backbiting, regardless of how true it might be. It is called “shooting the wounded” and is always characterized as a harmful thing. 

You will wait in vain for these men to characterize public reproof of prominent Baptist preachers as a positive, biblical thing that can be done from a sincere, God-led heart or for any encouragement to be given by these men to reprovers. 

The most recent example of the maligning of reproof is an article by Cary Schmidt entitled “What Christians Can Learn from Piranhas” published on the Ministry127.com blog. 

The following excerpt sets the tone for the whole of the blog: “God’s Word warns us repeatedly about devouring each other, but it’s too easy to fall into this trap. We often mask our slander as ‘concern’ or ‘standing for the faith’ but in the presence of Jesus, those flimsy rationalizations will be vaporized, and our true hearts will be revealed. … This thought brought to mind the picture of a piranha–a regular fish that rabidly devours” (“What Christians Can Learn from Piranhas,” Ministry127.com, Sep. 5, 2015).

The author goes on to list the characteristics of the piranha and applies this to “critics.” For example, piranhas “school together … in fear and insecurity” and “attack their weak and often wound each other for dominance.” 

He implies that piranhas are motivated by pride, as are piranha-like critics, and he quotes Romans 12:3 and Galatians 5:26 as a warning in this context. 

This is amazing both from the standpoint of natural science as well as of preaching, since the author can no more know what motivates a fish than he can know what motivates a “critic.” 

I, for one, reject and despise backbiting, gossip, and carnal criticism. It is very harmful to the cause of Christ. Any time I have found myself to be guilty of this, I have repented. The churches we have planted have been hurt by it many times. I have personally been the target of it countless times. Anything that comes of deceit and false speaking and the spirit of James 3:14-16 is wrong and is not of the Spirit of God, and I renounce it most emphatically.

“But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work” (Jas. 3:14-16).

Yet by no means is this what the author of the piranhas article really warning about. When these men speak of piranhas and shooters of the wounded and buzzard chasers, they are talking about much more than the danger of carnal gossip, and IN TRUTH THEY ARE REVEALING A SERIOUS LACK IN THEIR OWN MINISTRIES. 
First, they lack a biblical foundation and spiritual wisdom in this matter.
Though they have a biblical foundation in some areas of their ministries,* in this particular matter they lack one, because Scripture shows us the example of preachers who reprove often and plainly and name names in the process. We see this in Jesus’ ministry with the scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees (Mat. 16:6; 23:13-33). We see it in Paul’s ministry in the case of Hymenaeus and Alexander (1 Tim. 1:20), Phygellus and Hermogenes (2 Tim. 1:15), Hymenaeus and Philetus (2 Tim. 2:17), Demas (2 Tim. 4:10), and Alexander the Coppersmith (2 Tim. 4:14-15). (* For example, the author of the piranhas article has a book entitled Just Friends that is helpful for preparing young people for marriage.)

They lack a biblical foundation, too, because they fail to make a distinction between godly reproof and carnal backbiting. The latter is condemned in Scripture, but the former is most forcefully commended!

“Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; REPROVE, REBUKE, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine” (2 Timothy 4:2).

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, forREPROOF, for CORRECTION, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).

“These things speak, and exhort, and REBUKE with all authority. Let no man despise thee” (Titus 2:15).

“And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather REPROVEthem” (Ephesians 5:11).

“But all things that are REPROVED are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light” (Ephesians 5:13).

“He is in the way of life that keepeth instruction: but he that refuseth REPROOFerreth” (Proverbs 10:17).

“Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth REPROOF is brutish” (Proverbs 12:1).

“Correction is grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: and he that hateth REPROOFshall die” (Proverbs 15:10).

“As an earring of gold, and an ornament of fine gold, so is a wise REPROVER upon an obedient ear” (Proverbs 25:12).

“The ear that heareth the REPROOF of life abideth among the wise. He that refuseth instruction despiseth his own soul: but he that heareth reproof getteth understanding” (Proverbs 15:31-32).

God commends reproof and correction, and if ever there were a time that calls for it among Baptist churches, it is today! Surely God is stirring preachers to reprove, rebuke, and exhort in this day, and nowhere do we find that certain preachers are out of bounds, particularly so if they have large public ministries and thus influence large numbers of people. 
Two, they lack forthright honesty and (possibly) courage. 
I believe that it is dishonest to hide one’s warnings behind generalities, innuendo, and strange metaphors. It is a lack of biblical candor. 

Further, by this tactic, the preacher can always deny whom he is targeting. Is that not cowardly and disingenuous? Third, they lack love.
Those who speak about spiritual dangers in vague generalities lack love for the Lord’s sheep. If there really are piranhas in our midst, we need to know exactly where and who they are! 

By not being specific, the preacher creates carnal suspicion. 

What if the people hear such warnings and mistake a harmless reprover who is a man of God for a hurtful piranha who is an enemy of God, and in their confusion they try to net the man of God and do him harm? 

In truth, and I speak by personal experience, if a preacher warns about the music philosophy or evangelism program or some other thing that pertains to a prominent Baptist leader, he will be the one who is the target of “piranhas” in the form of that preacher’s supporters and apologists! 

______________WHY MOST INDEPENDENT BAPTISTS WILL BE EMERGING WITHIN 20 YEARS. ISBN 978-1-58318-155-3. This book documents the collapse of separatism among fundamental Baptists over the past 20 years and the reasons for it: Biblical shallowness, the maligning of warning and reproof, unquestioning loyalty to man, following the crowd, ignorance about important issues, soft separatism, lack of serious discipleship, carelessness about music, and Quick Prayerism. Available in print and as a free eBook from www.wayoflife.org.
________________________________________________________
PAUL’S REPROOF OF PETER 
(Friday Church News Notes, October 16, 2015,www.wayoflife.org, fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) – I have never seen anything in the Bible that would limit a ministry of biblical reproof so that influential pastors are not subject to it. And I have never seen anything in the Bible that requires that a preacher give reproof only in a private context. The prophets of old reproved even godly kings for their spiritual compromise. “Then Eliezer the son of Dodavah of Mareshah prophesied against Jehoshaphat, saying, Because thou hast joined thyself with Ahaziah, the LORD hath broken thy works. And the ships were broken, that they were not able to go to Tarshish” (2 Chronicles 20:37). Paul publicly reproved Peter for his hypocrisy (Galatians 2:14). If Peter’s friends had been like some independent Baptists, they would have lashed out at Paul for his audacity at reproving the man of God, and especially for reproving him before others. “Why didn’t Paul talk with Peter privately instead of making a public issue of it?” they would ask. “Was he jealous of Peter? Yes, that must be it. Who is Paul compared to Peter? When Paul wins 3,000 to the Lord through one sermon and pastors a church of thousands, then he might be qualified to reprove the great man, but not before. Why, when Paul preached on Mars Hill, only a handful of people responded, probably because he made too much of repentance! And unlike Peter, Paul didn’t walk with Christ through His earthly sojourn and see the miracles firsthand and hear the Master’s teaching with his own ears. Who does he think he is to reprove Peter for hypocrisy? Does he think he is the epitome of Christian perfection? That must be it. He is probably puffed up with pride and besotted with jealousy. Further, Paul is nit-picking. Peter’s little “hypocrisy” is no big deal. Paul needs to stand back and look at the bigger picture of Peter’s fruitful ministry. Why doesn’t Paul aim his guns at real errors instead of shooting the wounded? Doesn’t he realize that it is wrong to be divisive? Further, Paul isn’t even a member of the Jerusalem church, so he needs to mind his own business and respect the autonomy of the church. If he wants to reprove someone, let him reprove the Judaizers and the Gnostics and leave the man of God alone.” This is the thinking of many independent Baptists, but it not scriptural. No preacher is above being tested by God’s Word. Any preacher is liable to compromise and error. And if his compromise and error is public and has a public influence, the reproof should be public. While no man enjoys reproof, a godly man knows that reproof is necessary. “Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth reproof is brutish” (Proverbs 12:1). I’m not talking about a carnal, critical, nit-picking spirit. I’m not talking about cheap gossip. I’m not talking about criticism based on personal opinion. I’m talking about a godly critique issued with spiritual wisdom and based solidly upon the Scripture rightly divided by men who love Christ and have His glory in view. 

F.C. Jennings: “People do not love unpalatable truths, and when they have the alternative of listening to soothing assurance, moving eloquence, pleasing illustrations, and entertaining anecdotes, they not unnaturally avoid and withdraw as far as they can from the scathing rebukes of the prophet” (Jennings, Studies in Isaiah).

R.A. Torrey: “It is clear that there must be difficulties for us in a revelation such as the Bible. If someone were to hand me a book that was as simple to me as the multiplication table, and say, ‘This is the Word of God; in it He has revealed His whole will and wisdom,’ I would shake my head and say, ‘I cannot believe it; that is too easy to be a perfect revelation of infinite wisdom.’ There must be, in any complete revelation of God’s mind and will and character and being, things hard for the beginner to understand; and the wisest and best of us are but beginners” (Torrey,Difficulties in the Bible). 
______________________________________________________


Private Reproof vs. Public


Jun/05/12 13:18

The following is excerpted from the new book The Hyles Effect, which is available in print for purchase or as a free eBook from the Way of Life web site — www.wayoflife.org.
___________________
The very fact that there are still many preachers today who believe a public warning about influential independent Baptist leaders is wrong is evidence that the spirit and error of Jack Hylesism is alive and well.

It is time for this heresy to be buried. 

They say, “Who do you think you are to speak against such men?” 

I can’t answer for others, but my personal answer to that is, “I don’t think I’m anybody at all. I’m just a frail and simple man God saved and called to preach, but I have His authority to speak and so does every other God-called preacher.”

God solemnly charges the preacher to identify false teachers, to exhort, reprove, and rebuke with all authority, to speak as the oracles of God, to earnestly contend for the faith, and even to warn about born-again compromisers (Romans 16:17; 2 Timothy 4:2; Titus 2:15; 1 Peter 4:11; Jude 3; 2 Thess. 3:6; 2 Tim. 4:10). Nowhere in Scripture are these commandments restricted in their scope. Nowhere does God say that a Bible preacher can reprove and rebuke only the members of his own church or that he can reprove and rebuke anyone who errs except an influential Christian leader. 

To reprove public sin and error publicly by the Word of God under the guidance of the Spirit of God and in His wisdom is not slander and is not gossip and is not “throwing rocks” and is not“shooting the wounded” and is not hateful and is not dishonoring to Christ.

Private offenses and private sins need to be dealt with privately, but public errors need to be dealt with publicly. When a man builds an ecclesiastical empire, of sorts, and influences thousands of people beyond the borders of his congregation, his errors are no longer private matters and they are no longer matters pertaining only to his church.

When a man admits and repents of a sin or error, that is one thing and is dealt with in a certain way. But when an influential man covers up sins and errors and lies about them and even goes on the attack against those who try to expose them, that is another matter altogether and is to be dealt with in entirely a different way.
We must be very careful about what we say about men of God. We must be careful not to spread unsubstantiated rumors. We must be careful not to give heed to vindictive, disgruntled, backslidden people who are trying to injure the work of God. We must be very wise in what we say and in how we say it. We must make sure that we are speaking the truth, and we must test our hearts before God to make sure we are speaking the truth in the right spirit and for the right reason.

We don’t publicly reprove every pastor who errs or call out every church that compromises. Contrary to the silly and slanderous accusation that some have made against us, we don’t consider ourselves the “policeman of the IFB movement.” 

The reality is that some men’s influence is much greater than others. Some men’s ministries effect only their own congregation, whereas some men’s affect tens of thousands.

When the sin of hypocrisy and the compromise of the principles of equality under the gospel was spreading in the early churches, the apostle Paul singled out Peter to rebuke before them all, for the simple reason that he was the most influential personality in that mess. “But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I SAID UNTO PETER BEFORE THEM ALL, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified” (Galatians 2:11-16).
We must be wise in speaking, but speak we must when the situation merits it. Let us fear God more than man.“The fear of man bringeth a snare: but whoso putteth his trust in the LORD shall be safe” (Proverbs 29:25).

“Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen” (1 John 5:21).
One can hide in the crowd in this life and take his “stand” with the weak-kneed majority, but no one can hide at the judgment seat of Christ.