A WordPress Blog-THE CHURCH MILITANT Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse. ALL CONTENT FROM HTTPS://RATHEREXPOSETHEM.BLOGSPOT.COM MOVED TO THIS NEW BLOG, MAY 2020
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
The abuse of children for the sake of jihad is nothing new. They too are considered to be useful for jihadi ambitions. Consider:
Palestinian Authority TV teaches children that Jews are “the most evil among creations” while “Palestinian jihadists using children as human shields”.
Teachers at UNRWA summer camps have been caught on film, “declaring ‘Jews are the wolf’,” and that the children “will one day conquer Israeli cities by force.” Palestinian childrenhave been attending jihad summer camps while Hamas has been teaching the murder of Jews for ages.
Even away in New Mexico, “a federal grand jury indicted five Muslims who allegedly trained children to carry out school massacres on terrorism-related offenses, conspiracy to commit murder and kidnapping.”
Now being reported…..
The Gaza TV Media YouTube account posted a video of a small Jordanian boy volunteering to go to Jerusalem and die as a martyr. In the video, the boy, Amir Al-Khasawne, is seen marching with a slingshot and a toy rifle. When his mother asks him where he is going, he says: “I’m going on a journey far away. I might not come back.”
This presents another reason why Islamic State jihadi brides and their children are a risk to infidel countries.
“Children’s Indoctrination: Jordanian Boy Pledges to Be Martyred for Jerusalem In Viral Video”, MEMRI, April 7, 2019:
On April 7, 2019, the Gaza TV Media YouTube account posted a video of a small Jordanian boy volunteering to go to Jerusalem and die as a martyr. In the video, the boy, Amir Al-Khasawne, is seen marching with a slingshot and a toy rifle. When his mother asks him where he is going, he says: “I’m going on a journey far away. I might not come back.” Later in the video Amir tells his mother that he is going to Jerusalem, to “the martyr Omar Abu Laila and his friends.” On March 19, 2019, Omar Abu Laila, fatally stabbed Sgt. Gal Keidan, grabbed his gun and shot to death Rabbi Achiad Ettinger. The boy Al-Khasawne continued: “I will shoot the Jews who shot Omar.” When his mother warns him that he would be killed, the boy says: “It’s no big deal, mommy. I will die for the sake of Jerusalem. Isn’t Jerusalem worth dying for? Isn’t Al-Aqsa worth dying for?” In tears, Amir calls out: “For the sake of Allah, oh Arabs! This is Jerusalem! It is the destination of the Prophet’s Night Journey! They sold out Jerusalem!” He concluded by calling upon Saladin to “wake up.” The video was produced by Mays Alreem for Television Photography.
Amir’s mother: My darling Amir, where are you going?
Amir Al-Khasawneh: I’m going on a journey far away. I might not come back.
Amir’s mother: My darling, your father has been looking for you.
Amir Al-Khasawneh: Send him my regards, ask him to forgive me, and pray for me.
Amir’s mother: You are frightening me. Where are you going?
Amir Al-Khasawneh: To Jerusalem.
Amir’s mother: But it is far away, Amir…
Amir Al-Khasawneh: No, it is behind that mountain. You can go. Don’t worry.
Amir’s mother: Who are you going to?
Amir Al-Khasawneh: I’m going to the martyr Omar Abu Laila and his friends. I will shoot the Jews who shot Omar. I’m going to Omar’s mother, to kiss her head, and say to her: I’m like Omar! We are all like Omar! We are all your children!
Amir’s mother: But the Jews will shoot you and you will die, Amir.
Amir Al-Khasawneh: It’s no big deal, mommy. I will die for the sake of Jerusalem…
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
“The Hungarian government has pledged an initial 9 million forints (roughly $31,000 U.S.) in emergency aid to the survivors of the recent attacks on Christians and Christian churches in Sri Lanka” and Hungary is considering an even larger donation. That’s in addition to millions spent on other aid projects to help persecuted Christians and victims of jihad.
Hungary has been presented in the media as “far right” and “racist”for seeking to maintain the country’s Christian identity–built on peace and free of jihad attacks and Islamic supremacist incursions and doctrines which erode Judea-Christian democracies. There is no tolerance, freedom and human rights in sharia law, which is barbarous as reflected across Islamic states, and now in areas of the West where it’s proponents have settled in large numbers, thanks to reckless immigration policy.
“The Hungary Helps Agency” has now been set up to aid persecuted Christians who have been mostly abandoned by Western countries and even deceived about the jihad by their own denominations at the highest levels. The Catholic archbishop of Sri Lanka met with purveyors of the Islamic Jihad — ambassadors from the worst countries which fund and support jihad and persecution — and believed them when they told him that the Sri Lankan attacks had nothing to do with Islam.
In Hungary, there is also the Hungary Helps initiative which is “providing nearly $1.7 million to a project aimed at supporting [Christian] hospitals in Syria”, which offers medical care to all faiths.
Hungary is also helping the persecuted Christian Copts in Egypt, Kurds, Christians savagely persecuted by Boko Harem and has donated nearly 1.7 million to renovate Churches in Lebanon.
Kudos to Hungary – the so-called “racist” state —for protecting its country from Islamization while aiding visible minority Christians and Kurds who are suffering under the jihad and daily persecution by Islamic supremacists.
“‘HUNGARY HELPS’ PERSECUTED CHRISTIANS WORLDWIDE”, by Martina Moyski, Church Militant, April 25, 2019:
The Hungarian government has pledged an initial 9 million forints (roughly $31,000 U.S.) in emergency aid to the survivors of the recent attacks on Christians and Christian churches in Sri Lanka.
“We’re considering a larger donation to the Christian churches targeted by these horrific acts of terror,” tweeted Tristan Azbej, deputy secretary of state for the assistance to persecuted Christians.
Tuned into the alarming numbers that, on average, 345 Christians are killed every month throughout the world, Hungary has taken a leadership role in establishing the State Secretariat for the Aid of Persecuted Christians and Hungary Helps, “unique in the Western World.”
During a press conference in Budapest on April 16, Azbej announced the establishment of “The Hungary Helps Agency.”
“The task of the new agency, which will be operating within the framework of the State Secretariat for the Aid of Persecuted Christians and the Realization of the Hungary Helps Program, will be to coordinate programs to help persecuted Christians,” Azbej said.
The Hungary Helps initiative is providing nearly $1.7 million to a project aimed at supporting hospitals in Syria. Working alongside the AVSI Foundation in partnership with the Gemelli Foundation and the pontifical charity branch “Cor Unum,” Hungary Helps supports the three Catholic hospitals in Syria (St. Louis Hospital in Aleppo, a French hospital and an Italian hospital, both in Damascus) which offer free medical care to the poor regardless of religious affiliation.
Azbej also told the press that the Hungarian government is “running programs in five Middle Eastern and two sub-Saharan countries” with “one of the most extensive programs[being] the reconstruction of the city of Tel Askuf in Northern Iraq.”
In 2014, several hundred Christian families fled from Tel Askuf and many of the settlement’s buildings were damaged or destroyed as a result of ISIS attacks. Azbej reported to the press that “the 580 million-forint donation provided by the Hungary government was enough to enable the Chaldean Catholic Church to rebuild the city, allowing families to return home” — in an albeit currently tenuous situation.
Hungary Helps and the Secretariat for the Aid of Persecuted Christians are also assisting Coptic Christians in Egypt, Christians in northeast Nigeria who have been savaged by Boko Haram groups…
With illegal immigration hitting peaks not seen in over a decade, thousands of migrants are arriving in the U.S. infected with highly contagious diseases. One America’s Pearson Sharp has more on the situation as hundreds of university students are now quarantined after a measles outbreak in L.A.
On this new Jamie Glazov Video, I focus on After The Jihadist Psychopath Seduces You, and I explain how the Islamic Supremacist sulks in the corner after punching you in the face — and you apologize.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
During his speech April 26 to the NRA-ILA Leadership Forum at Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis, President Donald Trump revealed that he will end the participation of the United States in the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).
“Today, I’m proud to announce another historic step to protect your Second Amendment rights,” the president told those gathered to discuss the future of the right to keep and bear arms.
Then, after informing the audience that he had not informed the NRA-ILA leadership in advance that he intended to make this praiseworthy parting of ways with the UN, President Trump spelled out his motivation for abandoning the ATT:
So, in the last administration, President Obama signed the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty. And in his waning days in office, he sent the treaty to the Senate to begin the ratification process.
This treaty threatened to subjugate — and you know exactly what’s going on here — your rights and your constitutional and international rules and restrictions and regulations.
Under my administration, we will never surrender American sovereignty to anyone. We will never allow foreign bureaucrats to trample on your Second Amendment freedom. And that is why my administration will never ratify the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty. I hope you’re happy.
Just in case anyone didn’t hear the president clearly, or for those who were worried that he would do the tyranny two-step after he wasn’t surrounded by hundreds of card-carrying NRA members, President Trump put a fine point on his policy and his philosophy:
I am officially announcing today that the United States will be revoking the effect of America’s signature from this badly misguided agreement. We’re taking our signature back. The United Nations will soon receive a formal notice that America is rejecting this treaty.
As part of this decision, I will sign right now, in front of a lot of witnesses — a lot — it’s a lot of witnesses — a message asking the Senate to discontinue the treaty ratification process and to return the now-rejected treaty right back to me, in the Oval Office, where I will dispose of it. [The photo above shows the president holding up the message after he signed it.]
Here’s hoping that as soon as the motorcade pulled into the White House, the call went out from the Oval Office to the UN and the U.S. Secretary of State’s office, informing them that the UN would have to come up with a new plan for disarming American civilians and for using a treaty to repeal the Second Amendment.
I am especially pleased by the president’s announcement, as I was there in the United Nations — speaking in favor of the Second Amendment — when the call came from then-President Obama ordering the U.S. delegation to vote in favor of the Arms Trade Treaty.
Later, on September 25, 2013, then-Secretary of State John Kerry signed the Arms Trade Treaty "on behalf of the president and the people of the United States."
For readers requiring a little refresher, here are a few provisions in the now-futile Arms Trade Treaty.
Article 2 of the treaty defines the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions. The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, is denied to civilians by this section of the Arms Trade Treaty.
Article 3 places the “ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2” within the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions, as well.
Article 4 rounds out the regulations, also placing all “parts and components” of weapons within the scheme.
Perhaps the most immediate threat to the rights of gun owners in the Arms Trade Treaty is found in Article 5. Under the title of “General Implementation,” Article 5 mandates that all countries participating in the treaty “shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list.” This list should “apply the provisions of this Treaty to the broadest range of conventional arms.”
Article 12 adds to the record-keeping requirement, mandating that the list include “the quantity, value, model/type, authorized international transfers of conventional arms,” as well as the identity of the “end users” of these items.
Finally, the agreement demands that national governments take “appropriate measures” to enforce the terms of the treaty, including civilian disarmament. If these countries can’t get this done on their own, however, Article 16 provides for UN assistance, specifically including help with the enforcement of “stockpile management, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes.” In fact, a “voluntary trust fund” will be established to assist those countries that need help from UN peacekeepers or other regional forces to disarm their citizens.
With that brief sketch of the agreement’s provisions, it is obvious why the government of the United States should never have signed on to that clear and present threat to the natural right of the people to protect their persons, their property, and — should the government take a tyrannical bent — to alter and abolish it, by force of arms, if necessary.
“By taking these actions, we are reaffirming that American liberty is sacred and that American citizens live by American laws, not the laws of foreign countries,” President Trump told those attending the conference.
In the coming days, Americans determined to defend their right to keep and bear arms should pay close attention to the news, hoping to hear that the president has taken the necessary steps to fulfill his promise and to withdraw completely and permanently from the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty and from any and all agreements that would infringe on the rights protected by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. _____________________________________________________________ SEE ALSO: https://www.ammoland.com/2019/05/what-unsigning-the-arms-trade-treaty-means-for-american-gun-owners-video/
Over the weekend the Vatican announced it would donate $500,000 to migrants traveling to Mexico to reach the US.
“The money is specifically meant to aid the 75,000 migrants who arrived in Mexico in 2018 as part of six caravans, according to a press release from Peter’s Pence,” reported ABC News.
While the money will be spread among various projects and congregations, one can’t help notice the math ($500,000 divided by 75 thousand migrants) derives the number $6.66 – a number associated with Satan in the bible and Christianity.
The number was also adopted by satanic pervert Aleister Crowley, who called himself “The Great Beast 666.”
Pope Francis has donated $500,000 to assist 75,000 Mexican migrants in their attempt to enter the US illegally.
Speaking exclusively to Infowars, Vatican researcher and Illuminati insider Leo Zagami commented the number’s emergence may not be coincidental.
“I believe it could also be a case of diabolical synchronicity not of this world and possibly articulated by the divine to send us a clear message,” Zagami noted. “The alternative instead is a totally evil move by the Holy See that confirms once again the diabolical nature of Pope Francis.”
“I denounced the matter in an article I published a couple of days ago also as a complete propaganda stunt crafted by the Vatican:
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
This compilation video highlights mainstream media’s outrage over the Democratic Party’s overwhelming masculine whiteness, as four of the top seven 2020 Democrat presidential candidates are white males.
“Women have become somewhat overshadowed by white, male candidates,” said one MSNBC anchor.
Another MSNBC host added, “It bothers me a little bit that those are three white males, we need to talk about more diversity.”
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. —Well-known Christian-identified foster and adoption agency Bethany Christian Services has agreed to abide by the requirements of its contract with the State of Michigan and allow placement in homosexual homes in order to continue serving children in government custody.
The decision comes following word that Attorney General Dana Nessel had reached a settlement with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), agreeing to enforce current terms that prohibit State-contracted foster care and adoption agencies from discriminating against prospective parents, which includes turning down same-sex households.
While Bethany Christian Services says that it was not pleased with the outcome, it will comply in order to continue participating in the state program.
“We are disappointed with how this settlement agreement has been implemented by the state government. Nonetheless, Bethany will continue operations in Michigan, in compliance with our legal contract requirements,” it said in a statement.
The organization added that the “mission and beliefs of Bethany Christian Services have not changed.”
According to the Detroit Free Press, Bethany’s national board of directors voted on April 11 to adjust the policy for its Michigan office. The change will not apply to private adoptions.
As previously reported, on a corporate level, Bethany Christian Services is led by Chris Palusky, who formerly served in a leadership capacity at World Vision, and also has been involved with Samaritan’s Purse, CARE and World Relief.
Palusky began serving as president of Bethany Christian Services in January 2018, a position that according to a 990 form posted online, paid his predecessor over $230,000 a year. He lists Rob Bell, Rick Warren, Coldplay, The Police, Sting and U2 among his likes on social media. Under his “religious views” section, he provides a link to a message from Rob Bell. Palusky also characterizes his political views as being in the “center.”
The organization similarly agreed last year to allow placements with homosexuals in order to retain its contract with the City of Philadelphia.
Attorney General Nessel applauded the latest move, writing on Twitter, “Having more adoption agencies which don’t discriminate =s more children adopted into loving, nurturing “forever” homes. Thank you to Bethany Christian Services!”
As previously reported, in 2017, the ACLU filed suit against the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services and the Michigan Children’s Services Agency on behalf of four lesbian women who contacted St. Vincent’s Catholic Charities and Bethany Christian Services in an effort to adopt a child.
Because both organizations operate in accordance with their religious beliefs, they do not place children in homes where there is not both a mother and a father.
“When somebody calls in with interest to become a foster parent or adoptive parent … if they let us know they’re unmarried, or if they’re gay or lesbian, we immediately recommend, make a referral to another agency … for other agencies that provide that service,” Jose Carrera, director of clinical services for St. Vincent Catholic Charities, told legislators in 2015.
Representatives therefore told the women that the agencies could not be of assistance, or that “same-sex couples aren’t our area of expertise.”
The lesbian women stated in their lawsuit that they “object to the use of taxpayer funds to underwrite and endorse religious beliefs to which they do not subscribe.” They also contended that allowing State-hired religious adoption agencies to decline to place children with homosexuals deprives homosexuals “of their rights protected by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
“There is no legitimate government interest served by denying children access to potentially qualified families based on a religious exclusion,” the complaint asserted.
The ACLU consequently sought an injunction to prevent the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services and the Michigan Children’s Services Agency from contracting with, or providing taxpayer funding to, any child placement agency that “employ religious criteria in decisions regarding the screening of prospective foster and adoptive parents.”
After Nessel, a lesbian, took office in January, she reviewed the case and determined that the agency could be held legally liable. She decided to reach a settlement with the ACLU, which resulted in a voluntary dismissal of the case.
“Discrimination in the provision of foster care case management and adoption services is illegal, no matter the rationale,” Nessel said in a statement. “Limiting the opportunity for a child to be adopted or fostered by a loving home not only goes against the state’s goal of finding a home for every child, it is a direct violation of the contract every child placing agency enters into with the state.”
A summary of the settlement outlines that Michigan will enforce its current contract language prohibiting discrimination, which it says is consistent with both federal and state law.
Examples of discrimination outlined in the document include “turning away or referring to another contracted agency an otherwise potentially qualified LGBTQ individual or same-sex couple that may be a suitable foster or adoptive family for any child accepted by the agency for contracted services,” and “refusing to place a child accepted by the agency for contracted services with an otherwise qualified LGBTQ individual or same-sex couple suitable as a foster or adoptive family for the child.”
Organizations that commit these delineated violations may have their contract with the State terminated.
While Bethany Christian Services decided to comply with the contract terms that will now be enforced under the settlement, St. Vincent Catholic Charities rather chose to fight the matter. It has now filed a lawsuit, stating that the requirement violates its sincerely-held religious convictions, and thus its First Amendment rights.
“St. Vincent would be forced to close down both its foster care and adoption programs if the state follows through on their threats,” Becket attorney Nick Reaves told the Detroit Free Press. “The vast majority of the work St. Vincent is doing is through its contracts with the state.”
“This means that adoptive parents will have fewer choices and foster children will face longer waits to find permanent homes,” the formal complaint reads.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
TOPEKA, Kan. —The Supreme Court of Kansas has ruled that the rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” in the state Constitution’s Bill of Rights encompass a woman’s “right” to an abortion.
“We conclude that, through the language in section 1, the state’s founders acknowledged that the people had rights that pre-existed the formation of the Kansas government. There they listed several of these natural, inalienable rights …,” the court wrote in its opinion, released on Friday. “Included in that limited category is the right of personal autonomy, which includes the ability to control one’s own body, to assert bodily integrity, and to exercise self-determination.”
“This right allows a woman to make her own decisions regarding her body, health, family formation, and family life — decisions that can include whether to continue a pregnancy. Although not absolute, this right is fundamental,” it asserted. “Accordingly, the State is prohibited from restricting this right unless it is doing so to further a compelling government interest and in a way that is narrowly tailored to that interest.”
As previously reported, in 2015, then-Gov. Sam Brownback signed Senate Bill 95 into law, banning what is termed as “dismemberment abortions.” The bill passed the Senate 31-9 and moved to the House where it likewise was approved 98-26.
The law prohibits “knowingly dismembering a living unborn child and extracting such unborn child one piece at a time from the uterus through the use of clamps, grasping forceps, tongs, scissors or similar instruments that, through the convergence of two rigid levers, slice, crush or grasp a portion of the unborn child’s body in order to cut or rip it off.”
The prohibition was challenged by abortionist Herbert Hodes and his daughter, Traci Nauser, who argued that it placed a burden on their “right” to perform second trimester abortions.
In court, the state defended the ban, in part, by presenting other options for ending the lives of the unborn.
“The state has offered three alternatives to the standard D & E procedure: labor-induced abortion, inducing fetal demise with digoxin injections, and inducing fetal demise by cutting the umbilical cord (also known as transection),” an appeals court ruling outlines.
In June 2015, Shawnee County District Judge Larry Hendricks placed an injunction on the enforcement of the law while the constitutionality of the legislation is decided in full in court.
“The alternatives do not appear to be medically necessary or reasonable,” he said. “[P]atients’ fundamental right to terminate a pregnancy will be unduly burdened if SB 95 goes into effect.”
The state then filed an appeal, and in January 2016, the Kansas Court of Appeals announced that it was was evenly split over the matter.
The half that favored the injunction pointed to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex “marriage,” stating that the courts seem to find “rights” in the law that aren’t expressly written in the Constitution. It used the example and others to conclude that Kansas must include the “right” to abortion.
But the other seven justices that favored the law said that they weren’t convinced that abortion has ever been considered a right, nor should it be.
“Simply put, there is nothing within the text or history of §§ 1 and 2 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights to lead this court to conclude that these provisions were intended to guarantee a right to abortion,” they wrote. “Our state’s founders held sacred the basic concepts of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and they expressed those sentiments in that order in § 1 of our Bill of Rights.”
“Even if Kansas courts were to find substantive due process rights under § 1, as opposed to a mere expression of traditional beliefs, we would not find a substantive due process right to abortion,” they continued. “The subject of abortion places the pregnant woman’s liberty interest directly at odds with the unborn child’s right to life.”
In April 2016, the Kansas Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal of the case. It took three years to issue a ruling, and now has concluded that inherent in the constitutional rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness is the “natural right to make decisions about parenting and procreation.”
It pointed to other cases nationwide that have upheld the right to control one’s own body, and also noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has found that “to marry, establish a home and bring up children” are “long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.”
The court then concluded that Section 1 of the Kansas Bill of Rights “protects an inalienable natural right of personal autonomy, which today we hold to be fundamental. Presuming that any state action alleged to infringe that right is constitutional dilutes the protections established by our Constitution.”
“[A] woman has a federal constitutional right to access an abortion, including whenever it is necessary to protect her health,” it also said. “A regulation that prevents her from accessing the safest method of abortion for her places an undue burden on that right. These holdings have particular significance in this case, where the trial court found that S.B. 95 has removed access to the method for performing a second-trimester abortion that is the safest in most cases.”
One justice, Caleb Stegall, issued a sharp and lengthy dissent, calling the conclusion of his peers “far reaching.”
“Perhaps it is apropos — though macabre — that while reviewing a prohibition against human dismemberment we have fashioned a 20th century jurisprudence of fundamental rights and tiered scrutiny into a procrustean bed upon which we now force the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights to lie,” he wrote.
“[T]he majority abandons the original public meaning of section 1 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights and paints the interest in unborn life championed by millions of Kansans as rooted in an ugly prejudice,” Stegall said.
He stated that by the way his fellow justices framed their decision, it would seem that “all the luminaries of the western legal tradition — from Sir Edward Coke and William Blackstone to Edmund Burke and Thomas Jefferson — would celebrate and enshrine a right to nearly unfettered abortion access. In this imagined world, the Liberty Bell rings every time a baby in utero loses her arm.”
Stegall also found it ironic that while the court found a “fundamental right” to abortion, Kansas simultaneously “criminalizes homicides of the unborn; refuses to execute pregnant convicts; permits wrongful death actions for the unborn; gives no effect to a living will when the patient is pregnant; and provides for the representation of the unborn in trust and probate proceedings.”
“Abortion has become the judicially preferred policy tail wagging the structure of government dog,” he lamented. “For the majority, the settled and carefully calibrated republican structure of our government must give way, at every turn, to the favored policy. But in my considered judgment, constitutional structure is the very thing securing and guaranteeing the full range of human liberty.”
“History and reason suggest that those who, in the name of liberty, tear down that edifice will wind up out in the political elements, unsheltered and exposed to the cold wind of every arbitrary power.”
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
At the “She the People” presidential forum in Houston, Cory Booker defended Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s “anti-Semitic comments about AIPAC,” stating that “the criticisms of Congresswoman Omar, what Donald Trump has been saying about her is reprehensible, it is trafficking in Islamophobia.”
“Islamophobia” is nothing more than a buzzword used to beat down critics. It has become the fastest way to silence real dialogue and discussion about the global jihad. If you criticize hateful and violent Islamic doctrine, which jihadis refer to as their justification for murder and myriad other abuses and atrocities, you’re branded “Islamophobic” and “racist,” even though most of these atrocities are committed against visible minorities and women — a fact Democrats do not care about even amid their manipulation of racism and sexism charges to court votes.
Those who have called out the anti-Semitic words of Muslim Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and have shed light on her alliance with Hamas-linked CAIR stand accused by Booker of “trafficking in Islamophobia.” Identity politics is in full swing among Democrats. It’s their primary playing card, and they will continue to play it even if it means aiding the jihad by defending those who ally with Muslim Brotherhood interests and maintaining their own alliance with degenerates like Louis Farrakhan. Farrakhan sent a message to Omar about her disingenuous apology for her anti-Semitic comment: “Sweetheart, don’t do that….Pardon me for calling you sweetheart, but you do have a sweet heart. You sure are using it to shake the government up, but you have nothing to apologize for.” Booker agrees.
“Booker Defends Omar: Criticism of Her Is ‘Reprehensible,’ ‘Trafficking in Islamophobia,’” by Pam Key, Breitbart, April 24, 2019:
Wednesday at the “She the People” presidential forum in Houston, Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) defended Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) anti-Semitic comments about AIPAC.
The moderator asked, “My question is about Ilhan Omar. She was recently critical of the outside influence of AIPAC in determining U.S. foreign policy, including funding of Israel. Subsequently, she has received condemnation from the President and members of her own party, as well as death threats. What will you do as president to protect the right of courageous women of color to criticize U.S. policy even when directed at allies?”
Booker answered, “Thank you for your question. The criticisms of Congresswoman Omar, what Donald Trump has been saying about her is reprehensible, it is trafficking in Islamophobia,
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
France flagged “more than 78,000 people” as jihadist security threats in 2017; three churches a day are attacked there; anti-Semitism is so prevalent (and violent) in France that it prompted the President of the Confederation of Jews in France to conclude that “in a few decades, there will be no Jews in France.”
But none of these facts have troubled globalist Emanuel Macron (and company), whose focus is on making everyone feel welcome in France, no matter what. Never mind those who choose not to integrate. This can be partially explained due to the fact that Macron does not believe that there is anything substantial to integrate into. He once declared that there is “no such thing” as a true Frenchman or true Dane. So it follows that Macron has a few ideas of his own about the rebuilding of the Notre Dame cathedral that would reflect his undying commitment to “diversity,” even if they are callous toward Christians and those who respect France’s heritage. Macron does not believe that the rebuilding of the Notre Dame should be intended to restore the glory of the ancient Gothic cathedral (with the painstaking labor that went into it); instead, Macron wants it to be recreated to be “consistent with our modern, diverse nation.”
Now what might that mean? Here’s an indicator: an architect has proposed that the new structure include a minaret. A minaret is a type of tower built into mosques as a visual focal point and used for the Islamic call to prayer. The architect sees fit to “memorialize Algerians who protested the French government in the 1960s” since “these victims of the state could be memorialized by replacing the spire with – why not? – a graceful minaret.” Given the obscene insensitivity displayed by Macron and others, it would come as no surprise if indeed a minaret were installed at Notre Dame, as a declaration of victory over France’s history and democracy.
Macron undoubtedly knows that Islamic countries — among others — value their own history and culture, but he has no such respect for French culture, and so it would follow that he would believe that there is no culture in France to protect. The burning down of Notre Dame was symbolic of the steady burn of French culture, as the country’s globalist leaders continue to bow to everything multiculturalism has to offer.
“Macron says Notre Dame should be rebuilt consistent with the modern, diverse France – and architects suggest a glass roof, steel spire and minaret,” Voice of Europe, April 23, 2019:
Macron’s initial promise to restore the magnificent cathedral to its former glory has been shoved aside. Now he says it will be rebuilt “consistent with our modern, diverse nation”, and at the same time the French Government has announced an international competition to redesign the Notre Dame spire.
After the announcement designers haven’t missed the opportunity to respond with their ideas, proposing that it should not be faithfully restored, but rebuilt with “contemporary” features such as a glass roof, steel spire, or even a minaret.
The Telegraph published an article claiming it would be a “travesty” to restore Notre Dame, while Rolling Stone quoted a Harvard architecture historian as saying that the burning of a building “so overburdened with meaning… feels like an act of liberation.”
Lord Norman Foster, arguably Britain’s most famous modern architect, has unveiled a design topping the ancient cathedral with a glass and steel canopy with a featureless glass and steel spire, which he describes as “a work of art about light” which would be “contemporary and very spiritual and capture the confident spirit of the time”.
Ian Ritchie, a modern architect most famous for the so-called Spire of Dublin – a metal spike erected in the Irish capital – is mulling a proposal along similar lines, which he describes as “a refracting, super-slender reflecting crystal to heaven” or a “beautiful contemporary tracery of glass crystals and stainless steel” – i.e. a featureless glass and steel spire.
Perhaps most controversial is a proposal in Domus, the architecture magazine, by Tom Wilkinson, for the fallen spire to be replaced with an Islamic minaret….
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Franklin Graham, evangelical Christian leader and son of the most widely known evangelist of the 20th century — the late Billy Graham — took issue Wednesday with South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, a Democratic presidential candidate who has publicly attacked Vice President Mike Pence, a former Indiana governor, on the issue of homosexuality and its relationship to Christianity.
Graham said in a tweet, “Mayor Buttigieg says he’s a gay Christian. As a Christian I believe the Bible defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized. The Bible says marriage is between a man and a woman — not two men, not two women.”
During the CNN-sponsored “Town Hall” event in Manchester, New Hampshire, Buttigieg defended his homosexuality: “I get that one of the things about Scripture is different people see different things in it. At the very least we should be able to establish that God does not have a political party.”
But Buttigieg was the one who first interjected his status as a gay man into the contest, and opted to attack Vice President Pence’s Christian faith in relationship to that status. He recently questioned Pence’s Christianity for serving with President Donald Trump, and said that Pence (who had said nothing publicly about Buttigieg’s homosexuality) and those who think like him should understand that if they have a problem with Buttigieg’s sexual orientation, then they should take it up with God.
What Buttigieg was saying was not really a political statement, per se, because Pence has proposed no laws inhibiting the mayor’s homosexual lifestyle, but rather a religious statement. When Buttigieg said at the CNN event, “It can be challenging to be a person of faith who’s also part of the LGBTQ community and yet, to me, the core of faith is regard for one another,” adding, “And part of how God’s love is experienced, according to my faith tradition, is in the way that we support one another and, in particular, support the least among us,” he was stating religious beliefs.
Buttigieg has every right to express whatever religious belief he wants, but by the same reasoning, so does Mike Pence, and so does Franklin Graham. And when a public figure such as Buttigieg chooses to use his position as a public figure to advance a religious viewpoint, others have not only a right, but a duty, to defend their own religious viewpoint.
But what has happened in American society in recent years is that Christians who accept the authority of Scripture are expected to just shut up and not assert their view that homosexuality, adultery, and other sexual sins are sins.
The truth is that public figures have been using their public platforms to attack evangelical and Roman Catholic Christianity more and more, in increasingly strident tones. When Amy Comey Barrett, a Catholic, was up for confirmation to a federal circuit court judge position, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) actually told Barrett that she did not like her Catholic “dogma.” Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) told Russell Vought, a nominee for a post in the Office of Management and Budget, that he was going to vote against him simply because Voight holds to the position that salvation is only through faith in Jesus Christ.
And, incredibly enough, former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, the 2016 candidate of the Libertarian Party — a party supposedly dedicated to the concept of “liberty” — dismissed the concept of religious liberty as a “black hole.”
Buttigieg, during his unprovoked assault upon Pence’s Christian faith, said, “My understanding of Scripture, it’s about protecting the stranger and the prisoner and the poor person and that idea of welcome. That’s what I get in the gospel when I’m in church.”
For years, liberals have cited Scripture (wrongly, many say) to argue that Jesus was some sort of progressive who advocated the redistribution of wealth, but when someone else would quote the Bible to defend a conservative position, they would shout that such quotations are “mixing politics and religion.”
We can expect that Graham will be told that he should not have called homosexual behavior a sin — after all, only liberals are allowed to use religion in a political context. But Graham is not even making a political point. On the contrary, Graham is defending his Christian faith from what he believes is a public and deliberate distortion by a politician.
Of course, politicians have never really cared for preachers calling them out for sexual sins. King Herod wasn’t too happy about it when John the Baptist publicly condemned him for taking his own brother’s wife away from him. John the Baptist called it what it was — adultery — and a sin. At the angry wife’s urging, Herod had John beheaded.
Franklin Graham doesn’t face decapitation — we haven’t degenerated that far, yet — but he will no doubt face the wrath of the elites who control academia, Hollywood, and the secular media. He should also receive the support of fellow Christians for bravely defending the faith from distortion.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
The question isn’t just whether Joe Biden, who announced his candidacy for president yesterday, can defeat Donald Trump. It isn’t even whether he can win the nomination — an increasingly doubtful proposition in a party that is openly hostile to white men.
The question is whether Biden can overcome his past. His nickname is Creepy Joe because he has a bad habit of grabbing, hugging, and kissing any woman who gets within arm’s length.
But the Biden résumé also includes plagiarism, a fight against forced busing (a position liberals in the Democrat Party would take issue with), silly racial gaffes that would have ended the career of any Republican, and what the hard Left and sisterhood claim is his betrayal of sex-harassment hoaxer Anita Hill during the confirmation hearings of U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas.
Nonetheless, Biden is in. The polling shows he is the heavy favorite among rank-and-file Democratic voters, but again, the radicals who control the party might stymie his third try for the White House.
Mendacious Video
Biden didn’t bother contesting or challenging President Trump’s foreign, economic, or other policies in his opening video. Instead, he adopted the Left’s usual tactic: name-calling. Albeit without name-calling.
“Charlottesville is also home to a defining moment for this nation in the last few years,” Biden intoned. “It was there on August of 2017 we saw Klansmen and white supremacists and neo-Nazis come out in the open, their crazed faces illuminated by torches, veins bulging, and bearing the fangs of racism. Chanting the same anti-Semitic bile heard across Europe in the ’30s. And they were met by a courageous group of Americans, and a violent clash ensued and a brave young woman lost her life.”
Then Biden said the president’s remarks on the riot “stunned the world and shocked the conscience of this nation. He said there were ‘some very fine people on both sides.’ Very fine people on both sides?”
Trump also said “we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides,” but ignoring that, Biden claimed the president “assigned a moral equivalence between those spreading hate and those with the courage to stand against it. And in that moment, I knew the threat to this nation was unlike any I had ever seen in my lifetime.”
Those remarks, Biden said, were an afflatus. “I wrote at the time that we’re in the battle for the soul of this nation. Well, that’s even more true today. We are in the battle for the soul of this nation.”
If Trump is reelected, Biden said, “he will forever and fundamentally alter the character of this nation — who we are — and I cannot stand by and watch that happen.”
Thus, Biden is running. To save us from Trump.
Biden’s Past
Awaiting this moment were moderate Democrats who fear a repeat of 1972, when Democrats went off the deep end, nominated hard-left George McGovern, and handed Nixon the presidency.
Problem is, moderate Democrats don’t control the party. Radicals do, which is why Biden’s most disqualifying attribute might be his sex and race. The New York Timesfrankly asked whether a white man could "be the face of the Democratic Party in 2020,” an explicit recognition that the party is, as columnist Pat Buchanan wrote, “no party for old white men.”
That said, as The New American has reported, the Real Clear Politics polling average shows that Biden holds a comfortable lead over his closest rival, communist apologist Bernie Sanders, and a commanding lead over the rest of the field.
The latest voter polls from RCP put Biden over Sanders, 29.3 percent to 23 percent. Harris sits at 8.3, 21 points behind, followed by media darling Pete Buttigieg at 7.5 percent, the leftist media’s only hope they’ll be reporting about a homosexual and his “husband” in the White House.
But that’s the RCP average. A Morning Consult poll conducted among nearly 15,000 registered voters from April 15 through 21 showed Biden ahead of Sanders 30-24, with the rest no closer than Buttigieg at nine, a whopping 21 points behind Biden and 15 behind socialist Sanders.
A Monmouth University poll of 330 registered voters 10 days ago showed Biden ahead of Sanders, 27-20, with Harris and Buttigieg at eight percent.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Robert Francis "Beto" O'Rourke's campaign may be losing steam, so this is an important reminder that he truly is Kennedyesque.
The former police officer who arrested Beto O’Rourke for driving drunk in 1998, along with the sergeant who signed the incident report, both say they believe now what they reported at the time: that O’Rourke tried to leave the scene of the wreck he caused.
O’Rourke admits he was intoxicated and says there is no justification for his actions, but he has denied that he tried to flee.
Neither the investigating officer, Richard Carrera, nor his former supervisor, Gary Hargrove, specifically recalls the events of that night more than 20 years ago. But both of the former Anthony Police Department officers told The Texas Tribune they have no doubt the report they compiled and signed is accurate.
“I believe we have contradicting stories here,” said Carrera, who arrested the 26-year-old O’Rourke and took him to a police station to undergo a breath test. “I stand by my report.”
Carrera, 49, said after reading the police report, in which an unnamed witness claimed O’Rourke tried to flee in his Volvo, he has “no doubt that he tried to leave the scene.”
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
COLOMBO —Eight of the nine Islamic suicide bombers responsible for the deadly blasts that killed more than 300 people in Sri Lanki on Sunday, including at two Roman Catholic assemblies and an evangelical charismatic church, have now been identified by officials.
According to reports, most were middle to upper class citizens, with some holding degrees from foreign universities.
“They’re quite well-educated people,” Junior Defense Minister Ruwan Wijewardene said during a press conference on Wednesday, according to ABC News. “We believe one of the suicide bombers studied in the U.K. and then later on did his postgraduate in Australia before coming back to settle in Sri Lanka.”
Names of the bombers include Abdul Lathief Jameel Mohamed and brothers Inshaf Ibrahim and Ilham Ibrahim.
Wijewardene outlined that the assailants were those that had affiliations with the local Muslim group National Towheed Jamaar. The philosophy of the attackers, he said, is that “Islam can be the only religion in this country.”
The barbaric Islamic group ISIS had also claimed responsibility for the deadly bombings, releasing a photograph of eight of the individuals — most of whom had their face covered — as well as a video of the men pledging allegiance to ISIS.
Sri Lanka is largely a Buddhist nation — an estimated 70 percent of residents identify as Buddhist, followed by 12 percent Hindu. Less than 10 percent identify as Catholic or evangelical, and likewise fewer than 10 percent identify as Muslim.
According to reports, the attackers at the three houses of worship targeted all Catholic facilities: St. Sebastian’s Church in Katuwapitiya; St. Anthony’s Church in Colombo; and St. Mary’s Cathedral in Batticaloa.
The Daily Mirror reports that a suspicious male went to St. Mary’s Cathedral at approximately 8:30 a.m. and began to inquire about mass. However, as the service had begun early that morning, most of the attendees had left the premises.
The attacker consequently left and went down the road to Zion Church, a charismatic congregation, where he similarly began to make inquiries about the meeting.
Contrary to reports from The Times of India and other outlets, which characterized the service as a “mass” and the leaders as “father” or “priests,” Zion Church is evangelical and not Catholic. It identifies itself on social media as “A Charismatic church, situated in Batticaloa, Sri Lanka. A branch church of Lighthouse Church, Kandy, Sri Lanka. A member of the Fellowship Of Free Churches of Sri Lanka.”
Ganeshamoorthy Thirukumaran, one of the pastors of the church, says that he spoke to the man and invited him inside.
“I noticed a person standing near the pastor’s office with a bag on his shoulder and clutching another bag to his chest. I asked him who he was and why he was standing there,” he recalled to the Daily Mirror. “He replied that he had just come to observe what was happening at the church and asked me details about the church.”
Thirukumaran asked another church member to tend to the inquirer, and the member became uncomfortable with the visitor’s suspicious demeanor and questions. He began to lead him off the premises. While standing just outside the building, the man detonated a bomb, killing a number of children who were playing and/or eating a snack nearby.
Caroline Mahendran, one of the Sunday School teachers at Zion Church, said that the children had just been asked during class if they were willing to die for Christ, and minutes later, a dozen of them lost their lives.
“Today was an Easter Sunday School at the church and we asked the children, ‘How many of you [are] willing to die for Christ?’ Everyone raised their hands,” Israeli reporter Hananya Naftali posted to social media in sharing Mehendran’s recollection. “Minutes later, they came down to the main service and the blast happened. Half of the children died on the spot.”
Thirukumaran’s 14-year-old son was among those who died in the blast.
Messages of condolence have poured in from around the world.
“Our deepest condolences with sympathy for church members who lost their loved ones. Our thoughts and prayers go out to all those affected,” one commenter wrote.
“Terribly sorry to hear of your tragic and violent loss. May God’s Holy Spirit comfort you all in the years ahead and grant you the grace necessary to lead in these dangerous times, in Jesus’ name,” another posted.
“We are with you pastor and congregation of Zion Church. May the Lord comfort you all and give you strength to face this pain. We uphold you in our prayers,” a third stated.
In addition to the three houses of worship, suicide bombers also targeted three luxury hotels — the Shangri-La, Kingsbury and Cinnamon Grand hotels — and an explosion additionally occurred at the mansion of attacker Ilham Ibrahim, as his pregnant wife blew herself up when police arrived on the scene, killing the officers and her three additional children.
Surveillance footage from the hotels has been located, showing men with backpacks walking the premises.
A pipe bomb was also found on a road near the Colombo airport. It was safely detonated by authorities.
359 people were killed in the various blasts at the seven locations, and an estimated 500 injured. Four Americans died in the attacks and nearly 50 Sri Lankan children.
Some residents are further upset now that it has emerged that the government reportedly had been warned about potential violence from Islamists.
“We were told that ten minutes before the blast, Indian intelligence had said that this is going to happen,” Hilmy Ahmed, vice president of Sri Lanka’s Muslim Association, told CBS News. “The churches could have been evacuated and at least the number of casualties could have been reduced.”
He noted that one of the men shown in the video released by ISIS, Moulavi Zahran Hashem, had been reported to intelligence officials three years ago.
“I don’t think they took this threat seriously enough, to put enough manpower [into it] to track him down,” Ahmed said.
The Daily Mail reports that dozens have either been arrested or questioned in the aftermath of the coordinated terror attacks.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Editor's note: Below is Sean Fitzgerald's new video, "How the Chinese Government Infiltrates Our Schools." The video was created in conjunction with the Freedom Center's Stop K-12 Indoctrination campaign. To read our new pamphlet on this issue, "Leftist Indoctrination in Our K-12 Public Schools," click here or order your own copy here.
In this video I talk about a recent Senate investigation into the Chinese government's activities in American education. I discuss how they Chinese government uses front groups with mundane objectives as a means to push pro-Chinese Anti-American propaganda in our public schools
My Playlist:
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism
In 2002, Shmuel Waldman, an American from New Jersey, was shot while boarding a bus in Israel. The terrorist attack killed 2 people and left 40 injured. Among that 40 was Shmuel whose leg was blown apart, forcing him to undergo multiple surgical procedures, and leaving him suffering from PTSD.
The terrorist who shot him was Said Ramadan, a “police officer” working for the terrorists who run the Palestinian Authority. The attack had been planned by senior Palestinian Authority officials and the Palestinian Authority viewed Ramadan as a hero. Waldman joined other victims of terrorism in a lawsuit against the terrorist group, which is funded by American taxpayers, under the Antiterrorism Act.
Waldman v. PLO resulted in a record award of $655 million in damages against the Palestinian Authority terror network. But the verdict was thrown out because an American court lacked jurisdiction over the terrorist group even though the United States provides much of the cash flow that its terrorists rely on.
The Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act was introduced and approved to make it clear that accepting security assistance for its "police force" would place the Palestinian Authority under judicial jurisdiction for lawsuits such as these. The PA could stop funding terrorism or face lawsuits from its victims.
A ruthless battle was waged against ATCA by a variety of groups which understood that the Palestinian Authority would not stop funding and promoting terrorism under any circumstances. These groups falsely claimed that ATCA would undermine American and Israeli security. That was a blatant lie.
The only thing that ATCA would undermine was the flow of tax dollars to Islamic terrorists.
Last year, the Palestinian Authority informed the United States that the terror group would no longer accept any aid from the United States that would expose it to ATCA lawsuits. The terror group’s letter suggested that it might revisit its refusal if the law were changed. That’s just what 6 Democrat senators, led by Senator Dianne Feinstein have set out to do, using the false claim of a humanitarian disaster.
“President Trump’s refusal to provide humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people is a strategic mistake,” Senator Feinstein claimed, accusing him of "denying funding for clean water, health care and schools in the West Bank and Gaza."
Senator Chris Coons urged that, “It is critical that we restore lifesaving aid to the West Bank and Gaza.” Senator Jeff Merkley insisted that, “Aid to innocent civilians should not be caught up in broader geopolitical battles. We can and should restore aid to children and other vulnerable populations at the same time as we stand steadfastly by Israel’s security.”
But the real agenda revealed by their resolution shows that it’s not about humanitarian aid, but about restoring funding to the Islamic terrorists of the Palestinian Authority.
While Feinstein claims that Trump is preventing “clean water” and “health care” aid, her own resolution actually begins by admitting that, “the Palestinian Authority’s interpretation of the Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act… led the Palestinian Authority to reject all forms of United States assistance.”
The problem isn’t Trump. It isn’t the United States. It’s that the Palestinian Authority is a terror group.
The Palestinian Authority, on whose behalf Senator Feinstein is advocating, rejected the money that Dianne wants to give the terror group, because it doesn’t want to face American terror victims in court.
Rather than telling the truth about that, Senator Feinstein and her five accomplices start out by lying about the problem, and about what they want to accomplish, while assuming that the media will never report the truth. They are almost certainly right about that. But wrong about everything else.
The resolution, “Expressing the sense of Congress regarding restoring United States bilateral assistance to the West Bank and Gaza”, specifically demands $196 million for the Economic Support Fund, $60 million for International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement; and another million for anti-terrorism.
But the Palestinian Authority is a terrorist coalition. Some of its components, such as the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, are even officially listed as terrorist groups by the United States. Palestinian Authority “police” deserve the name the same way that ISIS cops did. They’re armed members of a terrorist network with a history of participating in terrorist attacks. This network was set up with United States aid in the Clinton era. Senator Feinstein is vocally insisting that we continue funding terrorists.
If Feinstein, Coons and Merkley were really just concerned about humanitarian assistance, they would not have pushed for funds for the armed components of a terrorist network. This is not about “clean water”, it’s about dirty cash flowing to the enforcers for a terrorist group while leaving their victims out in the cold.
The six senators want the PA’s thugs to get paid, while their victims are left unable to sue them.
Feinstein is joined in this charade by Senator Patrick Leahy, Senator Chris Coons, Senator Chris Van Hollen, and Senator Catherine Cortez Masto, and Senator Jeff Merkely.
Senator Van Hollen claims that he wants to help “millions of children” with this resolution.
“There are thousands of children and families in the West Bank and Gaza who need the aid the United States has historically provided," Cortez Masto appealed.
Is it thousands or millions? Since it’s not about the children, the fake numbers don’t actually matter.
If the senators read their own resolution, they would see that it frees terrorists from being sued for the foreign aid they receive from American taxpayers by their American victims in United States courts.
No wonder that Feinstein, Coons, Van Hollen, Cortez Masto and Merkely keep talking about children. Caring about children sounds a lot better than trying to help terrorists defraud terror victims.
A number of the Dem senators invoke Trump, attacking and blaming him, but as their own resolution concedes, it was the Palestinian Authority that turned down ATCA aid. How is that Trump’s fault?
Why blame President Trump when your own terrorists would rather kill Jews than take your money?
Senator Feinstein is broadcasting support for her resolution from a variety of “humanitarian” groups. A number of these groups, such as Churches for Middle East Peace, are involved in BDS and other anti-Israel activities. Islamic Relief has been accused of supporting Hamas. As has another NGO on the list.
Feinstein, Van Hollen, Merkley, Coons and Cortez Masto are touting support for their “humanitarian” effort that respects “Israeli security” from Islamic USA whose chair, Khaled Lamada, has allegedly praised Hamas, and distributed conspiracy theories which claim that, the Jews are causing Egyptian Muslims to have sex, plan to invade the Nile Valley and that the Egyptian president is a secret Jew.
Democrats are using support from BDS, anti-Israel and anti-Semitic groups to back this resolution. And they are doing so while lying and misleading about the resolution, its aims and its purpose.
Senator Feinstein and her allies have failed to explain what ATCA is or what “legal liabilities” the Palestinian Authority is attempting to evade. That’s because the plain truth is that the six Senate Democrats are trying to defraud terror victims like Shmuel Waldman under the guise of helping children.
But the “children” they’re helping are grown men who need our money for their guns.
Officially, the United States doesn’t buy guns or bullets for the terrorist police forces. But money is obviously fungible. The funds that the United States puts into terror groups frees them to buy weapons.
It is ironic that Senator Dianne Feinstein, who has been known for her militant opposition to Americans owning firearms, and for holding firearms manufacturers liable for gun violence, wants to force those same Americans to pay for guns for terrorists while exempting those same terrorists from liability.
Palestinian “security officials” don’t just carry pistols, but Kalashnikov rifles. Those aren’t the weapons of law enforcement, but of a terrorist and guerrilla organization. They’re not meant to police, but to war.
Senator Feinstein hates “assault rifles” when Americans have them, not when Islamic terrorists do.
The resolution isn’t really about humanitarian aid. It’s about allowing terrorists to get away with murder. It’s about stealing money from their victims. And about weakening America’s negotiating position with a terrorist group by exempting it from accountability to the courts, to its victims and to our government.
“MARRIES” PARTNER CHASEN GLEZMAN AS “HUSBAND”, AFTER DATING FOR THREE YEARS
LESBIAN ELLEN DEGENERES PUSHES BUTTIGIEG TO FORMALLY ANNOUNCE RUN FOR PRESIDENCY
Mayor Pete Buttigieg has yet to officially announce his run for president, so Ellen encouraged him to share the big news on the show. Plus, the Indiana politician explained why it’s good to have a lot of Democratic candidates running for office, and how his husband of one year, Chasten, feels about possibly becoming the first First Gentleman in the White House.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Mayor Pete Buttigieg, the media, and academia are all fouled up about what perversion is! Since the mayor is an admitted homosexual with a “husband” no less, he obviously feels he must justify his choice of walking in the dark world of perversion. And make no mistake, homosexuality is perversion. If not, then all religions and denominations down through the ages have been wrong.
A serious person will not try to overturn civilization’s morals, manners, and mores of thousands of years without very thoughtful consideration.
Evidently, Pete cannot be trusted to make decisions since he chose a degrading, dangerous, even deadly lifestyle. Such a person should not be in charge of the national budget, foreign policy, or have his finger on the button.
People who are soft on perversion don’t know the difference between right and wrong, up and down, black and white, good and bad, or normal and abnormal. The Hebrew prophet Amoscommanded us to “Hate the evil and love the good.” (We are commanded to hate evil but never persons.) However, most people relegate Amos to the ash heap and suggest that what is evil for one person may be good for another. Afraid not. While there can be some honest disagreement about some things, when God speaks about an issue, that settles it. God has spoken clearly about perversion. And that settles it!
Most homosexuals, rather than deal with our objections and criticisms, resort to the embarrassing and humiliating ploy of screaming, “hate,” “bigotry,” and “intolerance.” That is much easier than speaking to the real issue. Even if some “traditional marriage” proponents are haters, that does not mean homosexuality is right and good for society.
Pete has aggressively gone after Vice President Pence because Pence believes in “traditional marriage.” I wonder how he would respond if Pence said, “I believe in the biblical truth that homosexuality is perversion and is an abomination to God and man.” You see, that is exactly what Pence and others are really saying when they speak of “traditional marriage” and that is more pleasant to hear.
Pete, rather than accepting responsibility of willingly living a homosexual lifestyle, tried to blame his sexual choice on God. He said to Pence, “Your quarrel is with my Creator.” No, it is not the Creator’s fault because Christ said in Matthew 19:4-5, “Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?”
Obviously, Pete chose not to obey his Creator’s command and plan for the human race. The mayor has that legal right but it is folly for him to suggest that his lifestyle choice is moral or to suggest it is wrong for decent people to question his wisdom or to even bring up the issue.
Just because the mayor has desires for his “husband” does not mean he was created homosexual and because Pete reacts to that desire does not make him a homosexual. It only means he is a stupid sinner, like all of us. Practicing homosexuals are people who were born heterosexual and are rebelling against the God-ordained plan for his or her life. Homosexual is simply a term given to heterosexuals who rebel against God’s plan for mankind.
Absent accidental birth defects, a person is born with male or female equipment and the use of such equipment is normal, obvious, and desirable under circumstances planned by a gracious God. To use that “equipment” wrongly (which is abnormal) is detrimental to the individuals involved and a threat to God’s plan for society. However, sin-cursed mankind always seeks to get out of life what God never intended to be in it. Disobedient men take the good and make it bad.
One does not have to react to every desire. One may be naturally lazy but he still gets up each day and goes to work. One has a natural and driving desire for chocolate but he doesn’t eat a dozen Snickers each day. Even if an alcohol gene were found, it would not justify a person becoming a drunk. Nothing and no one forces a man to slip between the sheets with another man and to do so is abnormal, aberrant, and abominable.
People change all the time so the counselors should not tell people they cannot change their sexual desires and practices. Of course, they can change. I know former practicing homosexuals who have changed and are living normal, happy, productive lives—with a houseful of children. If homosexuals cannot change then there is no hope for the pedophile. Moreover, if the pedophile is “born that way” and cannot change his behavior then how can prison be justified?
A black sports figure, Chris Broussard, announcer for ESPN, expressed a politically incorrect opinion for which he was symbolically drawn and quartered by the “tolerant” left. Chris said, “I’m a Christian. I don’t agree with homosexuality. I think it’s a sin, as I think all sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is. If you’re openly living in unrepentant sin…that’s walking in open rebellion to God and to Jesus Christ.”
All informed and honest Christians will agree with his incredibly courageous statement; however, those on the left who make decisions based on their “feelings” frothed at the mouth for Chris’ courage, commitment, and convictions. He was reprimanded by the channel and is no longer with them. I wonder why. After all, doesn’t everyone want diversity; doesn’t tolerance extend to Christian conservatives? I suppose not.
The fact that ESPN apologized for its announcer is positive proof that the main stream media are master hypocrites when they speak of diversity, fairness, and equality. When a man like Chris expresses historic, sensible, and biblical views, his employer should proudly say, “See, we really believe in diversity. We believe everyone has a right to express his views even if some people are offended. We are proud him for having the courage to express his views so eloquently.”
Yea, sure.
Pete and other homosexuals who came out of the closet are called “a hero,” “brave,” and “courageous” but that might be a little hyperbolic. It used to be that a hero was someone who risked his life dragging a fellow soldier out of danger at the risk of life or a firefighter who carries a child from a burning building. Not only is the world changing, it seems words are also changing.
The fact is homosexuals don’t exist but there are heterosexuals who choose a life of perversion and rebellion against God. Let me make it clear: homosexuals, as a group, do not exist but homosexuality does exist as it is a choice made by weak, warped, willful, and wicked people.
Growing Up Straight,a book recommended by the National Institute of Mental Health, reveals, “Scientific consensus holds that homosexuality is very largely conditioned by the environment and childhood and most particularly by parental influence in the home.” No gay gene, no excuse.
Two researchers Bearman and Bruckner in the March, 2002 American Journal of Sociology concluded, “[O]ur results support the hypothesis that less gendered socialization in early childhood and preadolescence shapes subsequent same-sex romantic preferences.” The Yale/Columbia professors are saying that DNA does not determine same sex preferences. It is life experience that shapes sexual preferences. No one is born gay. No one.
Bryan Fischer quoted ScienceDaily as saying, “[N]o major gene for homosexuality has been found despite numerous studies searching for a genetic connection.” No one is born gay.
Dr. Lisa Diamond, a lesbian feminist psychologist who is also a highly respected member of the American Psychological Association, has spent years refuting the idea that homosexuality is innate and immutable. As stated by clinical psychologist Dr. Laura A. Haynes, through her publications, Diamond is declaring that, “The battle to disprove ‘Born that way and can’t change’ is now over, and (Diamond) is telling LGBT activists to stop promoting the myth.”
Whenever some Tom, Dick, or Pete comes out of the closet, everyone speaks of “celebrating diversity” and promoting toleration; however, no one celebrates me for being a white, pro-gun, conservative, young earth creationist, straight Christian. What am I? Chopped liver? Are we to be tolerant of leftist loonies but critical of those who lean toward right?
Some naïve Americans think Pete has a chance to become President of the United States, but they also believe Taiwan will retake Red China; Pepsi will sell for a nickel again and any day they’ll find Jimmy Hoffa, Judge Parker and Amelia Earhart playing checkers in a Mexican bar with Elvis Presley.
Don’t bet the farm on it.
Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives, who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for eight years. Boys’ book, Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! is available here. Follow Dr. Boys on Facebook at Don Boys, Ph.D. and TheGodHaters, Twitter, and visit his blog. ____________________________________________________________
Anyone around her in Wisconsin who might have raised suspicions would have been derided as a racist, bigoted “Islamophobe.”
“Wisconsin mother-of-seven agrees to plead guilty to trying to plot ISIS terror attacks by instructing recruits on how to build bombs and poison reservoirs on hacked Facebook accounts,” by Jennifer Smith, Dailymail.com, April 22, 2019:
A Wisconsin mother-of-seven has agreed to plead guilty to trying to plan ISIS terror attacks.
Waheba Issa Dais, 45, has agreed to plead guilty to one count of providing material to support a terrorist group in exchange for another being dropped.
The Israeli native, who called herself a ‘housewife’ on her visa application to the US, plotted attacks such as poisoning a reservoir with Ricin.
She was arrested last year after trying to use social media to recruit other terrorists.
She hacked other people’s accounts and also operated her own.
Prosecutors say she tried to explain to them how to use explosives and poisons.
Dais was born in Jerusalem but came to the US with her husband in 1992. She settled in Chicago but has since moved to Milwaukee, Wisconsin….
On Monday, as the plea deal was announced, it was revealed that she is in fact a mother-of-seven.
In her attempts to unleash terror on the group’s behalf, she discussed bombing street festivals as well as poisoning government water supplies….
In one Facebook post in February, she pledged her support for IS, according to the FBI’s report.
‘#Caution. When I publish any statement I completely believe in it. I was and I continue to be on the doctrine of the Islamic State,’ the post read.
In one online exchange, Dais told a potential recruit to ‘act like an ordinary person’ and that complete secrecy was needed to carry out attacks, the FBI said.
An FBI confidential informant told investigators that Dais is unemployed and that her ‘Islamic husband’ paid the bills.
The informant also reported that Dais was ‘constantly on social media promoting ISIS’ and that her accounts were frequently shut down for that reason….
He had the black flag of jihad on his wall and posed for a picture with one finger raised — the sign that the Islamic State and other jihad groups use to signify the absolute Islamic monotheism for which they are doing violence.
Whose interests would his vote serve? Not those of Americans.
“Sanders & Harris Think Boston Marathon Bomber Should Be Allowed to Vote While in Prison,” by Corwin Parks, MRC TV, April 23, 2019
Dems Snub Sri Lankan Christians Murdered By Muslims As ‘Easter Worshippers’
Killed By ‘Radicals’
Democrats have no problem empathizing with the “global Muslim community.” So why is it that leftists can’t seem to say the word “Christian”?
REPORT BY MRCTV
Terror in Sri Lanka: Jihadis Target Christians and Tourists in Easter Sunday Bombings
On Easter Sunday of 2019, Christians in Sri Lanka gathered to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Muslim suicide bombers from the terrorist group National Thowheeth Jama’ath saw this as an opportunity to kill as many Christians as possible, so they bombed St. Anthony’s Shrine in Colombo, St. Sebastian’s Church in Negombo, and Zion Church in Batticaloa. In an effort to disrupt the island nation’s tourist industry, jihadis also targeted three hotels.
In the past, we’ve been told not to associate terrorist attacks with the ideology of the terrorists. However, following the New Zealand mosque shootings, we saw leftists and Muslims using the attacks to smear anyone who has ever criticized Islam. Given the rule changes after the Christchurch Mosque Massacre, how should we respond to the church bombings in Sri Lanka? David Wood discusses the issue.
MEDIA WORRIES ABOUT “RIGHT WING ANGER” & “VIOLENCE AGAINST MUSLIMS” FOLLOWING ISLAMIC TERROR ATTACK IN SRI LANKA
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Following the slaughter of nearly 300 people, many of them Christians, by Islamic terrorists in Sri Lanka, the mainstream media is worried about ‘right-wing anger’ and “violence against Muslims”.
Yes, really.
The Washington Post published a story entitled Christianity under attack? Sri Lanka church bombings stoke far-right anger in the West.
The article downplays the notion of Christianity being under attack as merely a “theme” for right-wing activists.
Analysis: Sri Lanka church bombings stoke far-right anger in the West https://t.co/seWuJwgzwG
In reality, there are 105 churches and/or Christian buildings burned or attacked every month. An average of 345 Christians are also killed for faith-related reasons every single month.
Another article published by UK outlet LBC cites an analyst who worries that the Sri Lanka massacre “may lead to further violence against Muslims”.
This has become par for the course. After every single Islamic terror attack, the media either victim blames or runs defense for Islam.
The alternative, that Islam has an implicit problem with violence because of what is written in the Koran and needs to be reformed, is too difficult to stomach.
Next time a right-wing lunatic shoots up a mosque, is the media going to publish stories hand-wringing with concern about the threat to white people or conservatives?
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Following the deadly attacks in Sri Lanka which killed 290 people, including many Catholics, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton refused to refer to the victims as Christians, preferring instead to call them “Easter worshippers”.
The attacks, which were likely carried out by a local Islamist group with international support, targeted three churches in Negombo, Batticaloa and Colombo’s Kochchikade district during Easter services. Luxury hotels were also targeted.
Barack Obama reacted to the attacks by tweeting, “The attacks on tourists and Easter worshippers in Sri Lanka are an attack on humanity.”
This is in stark contrast to Obama’s reaction to the New Zealand mosque massacre, when Obama specifically made reference to “the Muslim community”.
Hillary Clinton also directly spoke of “the global Muslim community” following the Christchurch mosque massacre. She also called out “Islamophobia”.
However, like Obama, Hillary referred to Christian victims in Sri Lanka as “Easter worshippers”.
Given that Christians are the most persecuted religious group on the planet, with vast numbers more Christians being killed by Islamists than vice-versa, why are global leaders afraid to even use the word “Christian” in their condolences?
This bizarre trend of the word “Christian” being somehow taboo has also infected the media. The Associated Press also referred to Christians as “Easter worshippers” in the context of Notre Dame being closed.
Notice AP had same set phrase for Notre Dame “tourists and Easter worshippers” pic.twitter.com/iPciSsXq0O
Obama and Hillary’s choice of words did not go unnoticed.
"Easter worshippers" – Clinton and Obama seem to be finding it awfully difficult to just come out and say the victims are "Christians". 🤔 pic.twitter.com/5Tt7tyGsEu
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
How are we supposed to get to the bottom of the massive scale of bombings in Sri Lanka if we can’t even report on who is responsible?
It’s obvious, in the Negombo, Batticaloa and Colombo districts of Sri Lanka, nearly 300 people were killed and over 500 wounded and it was Christians and foreigners that were targeted on Easter Sunday.
Add to that, a hidden intelligence warning of the attacks.
Meanwhile, no one has taken responsibility as 24 suspects have been arrested, but all of this is being reported generically.
