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
“Here is the reply of the Hong Kong protesters to Carrie Lam’s statement: they claim the withdrawal has come too late, her concessions are a facade and they won’t back down until all their demands are met equally,” reports journalist Alessandra Bocchi, who has covered the demonstrations from the ground in Hong Kong.
CARRIE LAM ANNOUNCES HONG KONG GOVERNMENT WILL WITHDRAW EXTRADITION BILL & APPEARS WILLING TO LISTEN TO PROTESTORS PROVIDED “VIOLENCE” CEASES
Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam formally withdrew an extradition bill on Wednesday that has sparked months of violent protests and plunged the territory into its biggest political crisis in decades. In a pre-recorded statement, Lam made four proposals to ‘initiate a dialogue’ between the government and Hong Kong residents
HONG KONG LEADER WITHDRAWS EXTRADITION BILL – BUT REBUFFS OTHER PROTESTER DEMANDS
Protesters unimpressed with “too little, too late” move.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Hong Kong’s Chief Executive Carrie Lam finally announced on Wednesday her decision to withdraw the controversial extradition bill that had originally sparked the months-old mass protests engulfing the city. “Incidents over these past two months have shocked and saddened Hong Kong people,” she said in her televised statement. “We are all very anxious about Hong Kong, our home. We all hope to find a way out of the current impasse and unsettling times.” Lam’s concession followed one day after China’s President Xi Jinping signaled a willingness to tolerate a limited measure of compromise. “On matters of principle, not an inch will be yielded,” President Xi said, “but on matters of tactics there can be flexibility.”
China will not yield one bit on the principle of maintaining full Chinese sovereignty over the Hong Kong region and will do whatever it deems necessary to prevent any threat to its control, including preventing bottom-up democratic self-rule. However, after originally rejecting reported requests from Carrie Lam to allow her to formally withdraw the extradition bill, China’s rulers evidently came around to supporting the withdrawal of the bill as a tactical move. By displaying receptiveness to the protesters’ original demand, the withdrawal appears to be a bid to take the sails out of the large peaceful mass demonstrations conducted by the more moderate dissenters, images of which have been broadcast around the world and garnered international support. The tactical end game is to cast the remaining radical protesters who continue to engage in violence or major disruptions of day-to-day life in the city as disgruntled members of a small lawless minority undeserving of broad support.
Keeping a spotlight on the actions of the more radical protesters would make it easier to characterize them as “terrorists” and “criminals,” which the authorities believe would justify invoking existing “emergency” powers. A spokesperson for China’s Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office Tuesday laid down a marker in advance of the withdrawal of the extradition bill in remarks delivered from Beijing. He warned of “no middle ground, no hesitance and no dithering, when it comes to stopping the violence and controlling riots in Hong Kong.” Chinese authorities may also be signaling that it is rapidly losing patience. Aside from conspicuously conducting anti-riot drills on the Chinese mainland near the border with Hong Kong, China in recent days has reportedly off-loaded troops and equipment at a naval base in Hong Kong. It is unclear whether this had to do with the normal rotation of troops around this time of year that China has garrisoned in Hong Kong, or whether there is something more sinister afoot. As Shephard Media observed in its Defense Notes, “Should President Xi Jinping decide enough is enough and that the communist party’s military must take over from Hong Kong’s beleaguered police, such a hidden force could be mobilised to strike hard and decisively.”
Business chambers in Hong Kong welcomed Lam’s announcement of the extradition bill withdrawal, which they hoped would quiet things down and allow the city to return to normal. Joe Chau Kwok-ming, president of the Hong Kong General Chamber of Small and Medium Business, said, for example, "The government has taken the first step in showing its goodwill in resolving the political crisis. On a longer term basis, Lam should float measures to address social issues.” Many protesters, however, do not trust the intentions of the Hong Kong or Chinese authorities. They do not have patience for long term dialogue with Lam or any other Hong Kong officials who answer to Beijing.
A formal withdrawal of the extradition bill might have worked several months ago when the protests first started. But it’s “too little and too late now,” as one pro-democracy protest leader, Joshua Wong, tweeted. “Carrie Lam's response comes after 7 lives sacrificed, more than 1,200 protestors arrested, in which many are mistreated in police station,” Mr. Wong added.
Joshua Wong is no stranger to Hong Kong protests. He played a pivotal role in the 2014 street protests known as the Umbrella Movement, for which he later served some jail time on a sentence handed down years later in May 2019. After being released, Mr. Wong did not remain quiet. He protested the extradition draft law before its formal withdrawal and called for Carrie Lam to resign as chief executive. He was arrested again on August 29th and charged, along with another pro-democracy activist, with unlawfully organizing a rally. They have since been released on bail. But after Lam announced her decision to withdraw the extradition bill while rejecting or sidestepping the protesters’ other four key demands, Mr. Wong expressed his displeasure in a tongue-lashing tweet that listed those additional demands: “Carrie Lam's repeated failure in understanding the situation has made this announcement completely out of touch - She needs to address to ALL Five Demands: STOP PROSECUTION, STOP CALLING US RIOTERS, INDEPENDENT INQUIRY OF POLICE and FREE ELECTION!” Mr. Wong also warned the world “not to be deceived by HK and Beijing Govt. They have conceded nothing in fact, and a full-scale clampdown is on the way.”
It is too early to say whether mass street protests will continue with the same intensity as past protests or if any future protests will remain largely peaceful. Whether those who eschew violence will predominate in future protests will depend on the actions, not just the rhetoric, of pro-democracy leaders who have advocated peaceful protest in the past, such as Joshua Wong.
So far, in the immediate aftermath of the extradition bill withdrawal announcement, more radical elements have already stepped forward to make their voices heard. As reported by South China Morning Post, for example, two masked protesters, claiming to represent the protest movement, organized a press conference Wednesday evening outside the Legislative Council. One of them compared Carrie Lam's withdrawal of the extradition bill to “applying a band-aid to rotting flesh." A speaker at the press conference said that those protesters who engaged in violence and other radical actions did so because they "love Hong Kong." He asked rhetorically, "Is it wrong for them to fight for a free Hong Kong?" This same speaker said that he expected a rally planned for this Saturday at the airport to proceed without characterizing the nature of the rally.
Crowds also gathered Wednesday night at a couple of MTR stations and outside the Mong Kok police station. As of the writing of this article, South China Morning Post was reporting rising tensions outside the police station. Some protesters blocked a road. Some were shining laser beams in a stand-off with police. A few hundred chanted "liberate Hong Kong; revolution of our times." Crowds also caused damage to facilities at one of the MTR stations.
If violence, destruction of property and mass disruptions become the regular pattern of future protests, expect that Lam, or her Chinese-installed replacement, will invoke the Emergency Regulations Ordinance. The ordinance allows the chief executive to “make any regulations whatsoever which [s]he may consider desirable in the public interest” in a situation she considers to be “an occasion of emergency or public danger.” Such measures could include censorship, arbitrary arrest and detention, entry and search of premises, and unlimited control over property. Moreover, under the Garrison Law of The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of The People's Republic of China, China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) garrison stationed in Hong Kong could become directly involved in maintaining law and order. The Hong Kong government could request such assistance. Alternatively, the Chinese central government itself can decide on its own to intervene if it determines there is a state of emergency or “turmoil within the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region which endangers national unity or security and is beyond the control of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.”
Hong Kong is at a critical crossroads, caught in crosscurrents blowing both locally and on the Chinese mainland. China wants nothing to mar its celebration on October 1st of the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China, especially widely broadcasted images of a Tiananmen Square-style crackdown. On the other hand, Chinese authorities cannot appear to back down in the face of chaotic protests demanding freedoms that could set unacceptable precedents in other parts of the country. Above all else, Chinese authorities insist on social order and stability under their ultimate rule. Hong Kong protesters are divided over methods and ultimate objectives, some of which is generational. Meanwhile, Hong Kong’s economy is suffering, causing some Hongkongers to vote with their feet and threatening a dramatic flight of capital. Hong Kong’s “one country, two systems” model is on life support.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Yesterday, Reformation Charlotte reported that Jackie Hill Perry, the woke, feminist Gospel Coalition contributor had endorsed Bethel Church and minimized reduced their egregious heresy of Word of Faith to a minor “error.” Hill Perry has been at the forefront of the social justice movement promoted by The Gospel Coalition (TGC), the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC), and other progressive Christian outlets.
After announcing that she isn’t “tribalistic” when it comes to yoking up, Hill Perry endorsed Jenn Johnson, daughter-in-law of Bethel’s Bill Johnson and stated “when it comes to the [Word of Faith] movement and the Charismatic Movement, they, to me, move more in the realm of teaching that is uninformed and misinformed and needs correction.”
Word of Faith theology, however, has been denounced by every sane, Bible-believing Christian organization in history — and even by the progressive outfits that she aligns herself with such as TGC and the ERLC.
Nancy Leigh Wolgemuth — known formerly as Nancy Leigh DeMoss — is a well-known women’s Bible-study teacher and conference speaker who has been paraded around in conservative Christian circles for as long as she’s been around. Wolgemuth, however, has been engrossed with a number of her own heresies for the last few years. Wolgemuth has embraced a subversive New Age practice that has been popularized in the Emergent Church known as “circle making.” This practice involves a pagan / wiccan / gypsy practice where one makes a circle on the ground, gets in it, and does weird prayer tricks. They consider the circle to have some kind of special power — it’s really weird. You can read more about that here.
Nancy Leigh DeMoss Wolgemuth, Priscilla Shirer, and a gaggle of other compromised Emergent lady-preachers practicing the Wiccan practice of “circle making” prayer.
But now, Leigh DeMoss Wolgemuth has endorsed Jackie Hill Perry’s denial of the importance of sound doctrine and her minimization of egregious doctrinal heresies. In her diatribe against those who hold to the importance of sound biblical doctrine, Hill Perry wrote,
It is in these churches that I’ve learned that the same people that I might find issue with doctrinally can still know God salvifically, … I know that those of us who are on the side of staunch biblical orthodoxy can also lean quite heavily on the side of lovelessness and arrogance. Criticism can be more practiced than love for some of us. It’s become a sport in some ‘discernment’ centric ministries when in some cases it is purely a ministry built on judgment and criticism that’s being masqueraded as obedience to Jude 3.
It is here where Leigh DeMoss Wolgemuth quoted and endorsed Hill Perry’s error.
Again, the context of this statement is those who believe Word of Faith theology to be heresy. The Word of Faith movement has been denounced by orthodox Christianity as another gospel altogether whereby Paul says if they preach it, “let them be anathema.” (Galatians 1:8)
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Last week, Jackie Hill Perry, a woke feminist, spoken word artist, and Gospel Coalition contributor, announced that she was not “tribalistic” in who she associates within Christendom and that she has no problem fellowshipping with even the worst of the worst charismatics — Bethel Church.
“I’m going to be a bit frank so clutch your pearls or grab your tea, whichever suits you best, ” Hill Perry said,
One thing I want you all to know about me is that I’m not tribalistic when it comes to ministry. You might see me on platforms with Reformed folk one day and with non-Reformed folk the next day. You might see me laughing it up with the Southern Baptist’s one moment and being churchy with some Cogic saints the next. Why? Because I believe that God’s church is big and multi-faceted and it’s made up of people that are complicated and nuanced.
She was then seen in a video with Jenn Johnson, daughter-in-law of Bill Johnson of Bethel Church, fully endorsing her saying “she got all the Holy Spirit.”
Now, Hill Perry is doubling down on her endorsement of the false church and false teachers, saying that she doesn’t see those who teach falsely as false teachers. What?
Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? This persuasion cometh
not of him that calleth you. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. I have confidence in you
through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his
judgment, whosoever he be.
1 John 4:1 tells us, “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.”
Labor Day . . . Nancy was born.
Labor Day . . . Nancy's father died of a heart attack.
Nancy shares the deep reality how God is truly good and He can be trusted to write your story . . .
even when the script is different that you would have wished.
Learn more about Nancy and Robert Wolgemuth's new book,
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research
purposes:
so He will always treat you fairly.
"I, the Lord, search all hearts and examine secret motives. I give all people their due rewards, according to what their actions deserve" (Jeremiah 17:10).
God is absolutely just in all His judgments. Because of His holy righteousness, He cannot be bribed or corrupted in any way. God cannot be fooled. Because He is all-knowing and ever-present, He has all the facts at His disposal. He knows the circumstances and motives, so His decisions are always based on absolute truth. God is also a perfect judge because when He pronounces judgment, He has the power and sovereignty to carry out the punishment. "Everything He does is just and fair. He is a faithful God who does no wrong; how just and upright He is!" (Deuteronomy 32:4).
Justice is a pillar of society, ensuring that the innocent are vindicated and the guilty are punished. But all too often, this standard for justice is compromised for personal gain by corrupt judges and unscrupulous lawyers. Consequently, many people mistakenly believe they can manipulate God's system of justice. They think that God is fooled by their excuses and alibis.
But because He is a just God, His verdict will always be right. King David said, "The Lord is righteous, and He loves justice" (Psalm 11:7).
Because God is just, He will always treat you fairly. However, as the holy and righteous sovereign of the universe, God cannot ignore any act of sin. God hates sin with a holy passion. The psalmist writes, "You spread out our sins before You-our secret sins-and You see them all … Who can comprehend the power of Your anger? Your wrath is as awesome as the fear You deserve" (Psalm 90:8, 11).
God's anger over sin should never be underestimated. You need to have a healthy fear of God to help you avoid anything that would violate your relationship with Him.
God also rewards right behavior. Although your salvation is secured by faith in Jesus Christ, your good works confirm that you are a child of God and determine the rewards you will receive from Him. We serve a just God, so what you do in this life will matter for eternity.
"God will judge us for everything we do, including every secret thing, whether good or bad" (Ecclesiastes 12:14).
By Christian Research Network Associate Editor Erin Benziger of Do Not Be Surprised…This is a repost of an original article on Do Not Be Surprised…
The True Woman ’12 conference, scheduled for 20–22 September in Indianapolis, is an event sponsored by popular Bible teacher Nancy Leigh DeMoss and her ministry, Revive Our Hearts. Many women see this as a time to fellowship with old friends and new, as well as an opportunity to hear from some of their favorite trusted and conservative Bible teachers. No doubt that many would place most of the speakers for this year’s event in that category, with one exception:
Priscilla Shirer, friend of SBC Bible teacher Beth Moore and a professed Bible teacher herself, is someone whose teachings ought to be approached with extreme caution.
The charismatic Bible teacher Shirer also participated in the Be Still DVD, which openly promotes contemplative/centering prayer. Ken Silva of Apprising Ministries provides additional thoughts:
I explained further that this Be Still project was openly advocating a form of meditation in an altered state of consciousness known as Contemplative/Centering Prayer (CCP).
And this is easily corroborated, for example, from a pro-contemplative prayer article entitled “Be Still” Invites Viewers to Discover Contemplative Prayer, which was carried by the mainstream evangelical website Crosswalk.com. You also saw that Shirer’s ministry, Going Beyond Ministries (GBM), arose from what Shirer called her “inner revival,” which involved the Lord “speaking” to her:
In her case, God was speaking to her about going to “the place of abundant living–an experiential relationship with God.” “He said: ‘Priscilla, you’ve been at this mountain long enough. There is a new place that I want to take you to,’” Shirer says. In light of God’s challenge, Shirer naturally desired to “go beyond” personally. (Online source)
Like I’ve said before, as soon as you hear someone claiming to teach in the Name of Jesus Christ use the term “go beyond” your discernment radar needs to kick in. The key question to ask is: Go beyond, what? As I’ve pointed out previously, invariably where we’re headed is going beyond Scripture. Again, here’s the bottom line: In the Bible we know we hear God’s Voice; but as soon as we go beyond into “inner,” i.e highly subjective, experiences we then open a door that is leading so many today into such spiritual deception.
In light of Shirer’s praise of solitude and silence, we do well to consider Pastor Gary Gilley’s recent article on the topic:
Of course every mystic’s favorite passage on this subject is Elijah’s “still small voice” (1 Kings 19:12-13). For example, Ruth Haley Barton tells us, “Elijah’s willingness to enter into solitude and silence opened room for God to minister to him in ways he had not yet experienced” (p. 19). Even a cursory reading of the account finds that Elijah had no desire to enter into solitude and silence as Barton describes it. He was running for his life from Jezebel, depressed and ready to entirely give up his life as a prophet. God graciously reached out and restored His man, but Elijah wasn’t looking for an experience with God. Additionally there is no command anywhere in Scripture to try to duplicate Elijah’s example. Simply put, while seeking a quiet place to be alone with God is without question a good idea and is exemplified in Scripture, it is not commanded and is never taught as essential for discipleship.
It is important to understand that in using the discipline of silence/solitude, spiritual formation leaders are looking for something beyond discipleship; they are looking for a personal word, a message, a revelation, from the Lord. This is why Elijah’s experience is so prominent in all contemplative writings. The idea is, if Elijah went alone and heard the “still small voice of God,” then if we follow in his footsteps we will experience the same.
Gilley’s observations will be important to keep in mind throughout the remainder of this article.
It appears from the above that Shirer may be open to direct communication from God to the believer through more than the reading of His Word. In answering another question, “How can I really hear God speak to me personally?” Shirer answered in part:
This response seems to imply that those who are not “hearing” the voice of God are immature and weak in their faith and in their walk with the Lord. It is this type of dangerous teaching that leads so many to feel hopeless and confused when they find that God isn’t “talking” to them in the same way that others claim He speaks.
Now, some may argue that Shirer is not speaking here of an audible or even an inner voice from God, but of His speaking through His Word and through guidance of the Holy Spirit. For further clarification regarding Priscilla Shirer’s thoughts and teachings on this subject, let us turn to one of her own writings.
Is That You, God? is a booklet that contains material from Shirer’s full-length book, Discerning the Voice of God. This booklet is published by and is available for purchase from any SBC Lifeway bookstore.
Only two paragraphs into the introduction of this booklet, Shirer writes:
Before you read any further, let me assure you of an important point. To not speak contradicts God’s nature. The second person of the Trinity, Jesus Christ, is called the Word (see John 1:1). That designation stands at odds with silence. God loved you enough to die for you; He loves you enough to communicate with you. The Lord can and will speak to you if you’ve placed your faith in Jesus. First, however, you must expect and anticipate that the divine voice of God can ring in your ears and heart. (Priscilla Shirer, Is That You, God? [Lifeway Press: 2009], 6).
So, if one is not appropriately “expecting” and “anticipating” God to speak, will He then stay silent? Is God so controlled by the actions of man?
What Shirer fails to acknowledge here is that God has spoken, finally and fully, in His Word.For us to expect additional revelation from Him is to indicate that His Word is not enough. Shirer bases her argument on a misunderstanding of John 10:27, wherein Jesus states, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.” A fuller look at the context of this verse helps one to better understand what our Lord is saying:
So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.” (John 10:24-30)
It is clear that our Lord is teaching here about His Father’s divine, sovereign election, and the assurance of the saints. Christ’s sheep “hear [His] voice,” not in an audible manner, but those who have been elected by God will come to know Christ, be saved by Him and thus be enabled to do His will. Only those who are Christ’s sheep will believe and follow Him, and He alone has the power to keep them safe. Of John 10:27, J. C. Ryle noted,
He says, “They hear my voice.” By this He means that they listen to His invitation, when He calls them to repent, believe, and come to Him. This supposes that Christ first speaks, and then they hear. Grace begins the work: they, through grace, obey His calling, and willingly do as He bids them. The ears of unconverted people are deaf to Christ’s call, but true Christians hear and obey (J.C. Ryle, Expository Thoughts on John, vol. 2 [The Banner of Truth Trust: 2009], 236).
Remember, when Christ first spoke these words, all who were in earshot audibly heard Him. It was only those who had been chosen and effectually called, however, who truly heard Him, and who knew and understood the Truth which He proclaimed.
Shirer continues in this booklet to inform her readers of her own personal experiences of “hearing” God’s voice.
I often wish that a visible sign, like the cloud that led the children of Israel by day or the pillar of fire that led them by night, would supernaturally appear in my life when I need to make a decision. So far, that hasn’t happened. I have, however, heard a still small voice speaking to my heart over various situations.
Interestingly, when God chose to speak in the Bible, those who heard didn’t doubt whether God had spoken or what He was asking them to do. He made His Word clear as He spoke to “our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways” (Heb. 1:1, NIV). Just as He did in times long past, God wants us to hear, recognize, and obey His voice today. We too can walk in the assurance that what we hear comes from Him. But before we can do that, we need to understand the Messenger and the primary method through which He chooses to communicate today: the Holy Spirit.
(Shirer, 12–13, emphasis added).
It is true that God speaks and works today through the Holy Spirit, especially as the Spirit reveals and illumines the Word of God for every Christian. It is unfortunate that Shirer did not choose to quote verse 2 of the first chapter of Hebrews. If she had, she may have come to understand why it is that the canon is closed, and that God has spoken to us fully and finally through His Word and Son, Jesus Christ.
Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. (Hebrews 1:1-2)
Those who believe that God is continuing to offer new revelation today deny the sufficiency of Scripture. Priscilla Shirer does just this in the following quote:
But, as author Dallas Willard said, “Far be it from me to deny that spectacular experiences occur or that they are, sometimes at least, given by God.” I believe as he, however, that “the still small voice–or the interior or inner voice, as it is also called–is the preferred and most valuable form of individualized communication for God’s purposes. (Shirer, 16, emphasis added).
Shirer here not only has undermined the authority and sufficiency of Scripture, but she has begun to tread on dangerous, mystical ground. Throughout her booklet, Is That You, God?, Shirer seems to indicate that the Christian need not fear hearing from anyone or anything other than the Almighty. Yet, how is she to know if she is conversing with God, with herself, or with another spiritual entity? Even those who promote and teach these aberrant ideas of spiritual formation, contemplative prayer and meditation warn about the possibility of hearing from something or someone other than God. Consider the quotes below from contemplative prayer proponents Dallas Willard and Richard Foster, respectively:
There are other ‘spiritual voices,’ too…. Satan … too will speak in our heart once he sees he no longer holds us in his hand. Only if we learn to recognize this voice as well can we … correctly identify and firmly resist him and make him flee from us (1 Pet. 5:9; Eph. 6:11). (Dallas Willard, Hearing God, [InterVarsity Press: 1999], 181).
I also want to give a word of precaution. In the silent contemplation of God we are entering deeply into the spiritual realm, and there is such a thing as a supernatural guidance. While the Bible does not give us a lot of information on that, there are various orders of spiritual beings, and some of them are definitely not in cooperation with God and his way! … But for now I want to encourage you to learn and practice prayers of protection. (Richard Foster, Prayer: Finding the Heart’s True Home [HarperCollins, 1992], 157).
Speaking specifically of Ruth Haley Barton, Gary Gilley draws out a point that nevertheless is applicable to all who would maintain that God speaks in the silence through a “still small voice”:
Therefore, in order to support an unwarranted and biblically indefensible idea that God speaks to us apart from Scripture, and often without words in our inner being, the best that Barton can offer is that eventually we will be able to distinguish God’s voice from our own if we just keep practicing. This is disappointing at best. But to make things worse, apparently God “is speaking to us all the time” and we are obligated to obey what He says. This puts an unsustainable burden on those who accept Barton’s ideas as they must not only hear the inner, wordless voice of God, they must also obey it. If they do not they would of course be in sin. (Source)
Not only must one obey this inner voice so as to not be in sin, but, as we have seen from Shirer’s own words and implications, one may not even be in Christ if he or she is failing to hear and distinguish the voice of God. To hear a “still small voice” never has and never will be a test of genuine faith and salvation. To imply otherwise is exceedingly dangerous.
Perhaps knowing all of this about the teachings of Priscilla Shirer helps to better understand why she calls her ministry Going Beyond. Regardless, those who support the True Woman conference ought to be concerned about Shirer’s appearance at the upcoming event. As was stated at the outset, this does not intend to imply that the other speakers at this conference also would hold to Shirer’s faulty and deceptive teachings. However, Shirer’s mere presence in this speaker lineup will lead many to believe that the other trusted women present might endorse and encourage her teachings.
While sources tell us that the organizers of the event have received concerns and complaints regarding Shirer’s scheduled appearance, it is clear that these concerns were not enough to remove her from the conference lineup for this year. Those who plan to attend this event, then, are to be warned and must pray for wisdom and discernment prior to listening to Priscilla Shirer teach. We most certainly pray that future True Woman conferences will forgo such speakers for those who are biblically strong and faithful.
To conclude this, we turn to Dr. John MacArthur as he aptly answers the question, “Does God give us personal direction through a still small voice?”
Judge upholds charges for dozens arrested during ‘straight-pride’ parade, rally
BOSTON: ‘Squad’ members vow to help pay bail for protesters of ‘Straight Pride’ parade
AOC and “The Squad” raising money for ANTIFA who attacked Boston Police
The so-called “Squad” is raising money for rioters who were jailed when a protest in Boston turned violent after ANTIFA members began attacking police officers. One America’s Jack Posobiec has the details.
ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ PROMOTES ANTIFA PROTESTERS IN PLEA FOR ‘BAIL FUND’
New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been criticized for promoting a fundraiser to cover bail for Antifa affiliated ‘activists’ who were protesting a ‘straight pride’ parade in Boston this past weekend.
Labeling the event a “white supremacist parade,” AOC encouraged her followers to “support the local LGBTQ community” with a contribution “to the Bail Fund for the activists who put themselves on the line protecting the Boston community.”
One way to support the local LGBTQ community impacted by Boston’s white supremacist parade?
Contribute to the Bail Fund for the activists who put themselves on the line protecting the Boston community:https://t.co/z2NRSqHMve
As reported by USA Today and The Boston Herald, those same ‘activists’ touted by AOC identified with Antifa, the far left violent protest group.
“We’re covered in black so when we attack these guys we can’t be prosecuted.” the Herald reported one Antifa thug as saying.
“They are fascists, 100%. How else are you going to get them to shut up?” the thug added.
The Herald also noted that among the 36 arrests were individuals charged with “Assault and battery on a police officer,” and one juvenile arrested for “Assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon.”
Boston PD has released log of arrested individuals from Saturday’s antifa counter-protest against the Straight Pride. They face an array of charges including battery of officers & assault using a dangerous weapon. Congresswomen AOC & A. Pressley expressed support for protesters. pic.twitter.com/OXAiIk2aWK
Way to ‘protect the community’, in the words of AOC.
As for the straight pride event, organizers took serious issue with being called ‘white supremacists’.
In a statement released to the media, the Super Happy Fun America group categorically denied any connections to racist groups.
“Not sure which parade and ceremony she watched over the weekend, but of the 12 speakers on our stage, five were African-American, four were women, and three were African-American women. This was not intentional on our behalf, they reached out to us in support of our movement–it happened organically. If you remove the three main organizers from the lineup, the majority of speakers were African-American.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley also shared a link to a bail fundraiser set up in advance of the parade, which gives people the impression that they condone illegal behavior. This is not a good example for elected officials to set, and contributes to dangers associated with free-speech and activism in general.
The only connections to racism are in the deluded minds of protesters who all repeat the same mantra against those whom they disagree with: Racist, Fascist, Nazi, etc., are what detractors fall back on when their arguments are met with logical and rational push-back. They cannot win on an intellectual level, so they resort to name-calling. Those same people must have missed the Israeli flags and African-American supporters in our group.”
AOC’s office has not responded to queries over why she labeled the group as white supremacists, or as to why she encouraged support for violent protesters.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
In June of this year, an independent tribunal based in London came to a chilling conclusion: detainees in China are being killed, their organs are being harvested and some victims find themselves falsely accused of committing crimes that never occurred.
The China Tribunal, chaired by Sir Geoffrey Nice QC, who was a prosecutor at the international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, determined that:
forced organ harvesting has been committed for years throughout China on a significant scale, [and] the tribunal has had no evidence that the significant infrastructure associated with China’s transplantation industry has been dismantled and absent a satisfactory explanation as to the source of readily available organs concludes that forced organ harvesting continues till today.
Before coming to their damning conclusion, the tribunal members spoke with medical experts and human rights investigators. According to the committee, thousands of people “have died indescribably hideous deaths for no reason.” The committee members warn “that more may suffer in similar ways and that all of us live on a planet where extreme wickedness may be found in the power of those, for the time being, running a country with one of the oldest civilizations known to modern man.”
China, it seems, is a place where “extreme wickedness” reigns supreme. After all, it is not uncommon for individuals who speak out against the government to disappear. However, the scope of the “disappeared” has expanded since President Xi Jinping came to power in 2013. Over the past six years, from prominent celebrities to brave journalists, hundreds of people in China have seemingly vanished into thin air — and yet the international community has remained largely silent. Almost immediately after election, Chinese President Xi introduced new laws that essentially made arbitrary and secret detentions legal under Chinese law. Many of those arrested were never seen again. Were their organs harvested? Sadly, it’s a perfectly reasonable question to ask.
After all, in the words of the aforementioned Geoffrey Nice, “There is no evidence of the practice having been stopped and the tribunal is satisfied that it is continuing.”
Among those killed, according to the committee, are members of religious minorities such as Falun Gong, a religious and spiritual practice that combines meditation and qigong exercises. Members are encouraged to adopt a moral philosophy centered on the tenets of truthfulness, compassion, and forbearance. In China, a country known for silencing “unorthodox” views, truthfulness, compassion, and forbearance are at a premium.
Of course, China’s organ bazaar has been in operation for years. Recently, however, knowledge of the gruesome practice has led to the retraction of fifteen science papers discussing organ transplantation. The retractors fear that the organs were inhumanely and unethically obtained. As the New Scientist’s Clare Wilson writes:
Fifteen studies about transplanted organs by researchers in China have been retracted this month due to concerns the work may have used organs from executed prisoners. Three other papers have been the subject of expressions of concern for the same reason, according to the website Retraction Watch which monitors questions raised over published research.
China’s government said in 2015 that the nation had stopped using organs from executed prisoners, which is illegal according to international conventions. But it is suspected that the practice continues in the country, particularly involving prisoners of conscience.
The retraction of papers is at least a step in the right direction, but obviously more action is needed.
Retracting papers should just be the beginning. Chinese organ-transplant doctors should be barred from international symposia and such events in China should be boycotted, as well as refusing or retracting other honors until the country proves that it no longer countenances kill-and-harvest, whether for sale, research, or otherwise
Investigations have found that British women regularly (and unknowingly) apply the collagen of executed prisoners to their faces . Worryingly, according to Ethan Gutmann, a longtime China analyst and author of the deeply disturbing book, The Slaughter: Mass Killings, Organ Harvesting, and China’s Secret Solution to its Dissident Problem, the realities of the practice are "far more awful” than one can ever imagine. As Gutmann, a human rights activist, affirms, authorities sometimes take the organs from prisoners while they are still alive. Yes, alive.
Though the Chinese government has recently made it illegal to provide transplant organs from executed prisoners to foreign, transplant tourists, there is little reason to believe that this law is in full effect. Moreover, the extremeshortage of transplant organs in the U.S. continues to make organ transplantation in China an appealing option for some patients with life threatening diseases, so desperate Americans still travel to China for surgery.
Although China has emerged as a genuine global power, with a rising and increasingly sophisticated middle class, its wicked practices must be addressed. Haile Selassie, the famous Ethiopian emperor, once said, “it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph.”
The international community must respond. Because, as the situation stands now, the world's silence is deafening. _____________________________________________________________ SEE ALSO: https://christiannews.net/2019/10/09/china-harvesting-organs-from-prisoners-of-conscience-and-religious-minorities-tribunal-tells-u-n/
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
“A Swedish municipality that took in one of the highest numbers of asylum seekers per population faces a crisis as natives move out and decimate the local tax base.” That municipality is Filipstad, and as they drive out locals, migrants have no interest in making up the shortfall in taxes. According to the local municipal manager,Claes Hultgren:
Around 750 adults from Syria, Somalia, Eritrea, Afghanistan and Iraq live in Filipstad…. In this group, unemployment and dependency are very high, while education levels are very low. This group runs the risk of eternal alienation that is already heavily burdening the municipal economy.
Urban Pettersson, a Sweden Democrat and member of the local council in Filipstad, also stated:
Ninety percent of the refugees don’t contribute to society. These people are going to have a lifelong dependence on social welfare. This is a huge problem.
And beyond welfare, Pettersson addressed the general issue of integration that has been a major cause of the exodus of locals out of Filipstad:
These immigrants don’t speak the same language…..They have different religions, different ways of life. If there are too many differences, it’s harder to get along. It’s interesting to meet someone from another country for maybe half an hour, but if you’re going to live together, it’s tough.
The situation in Filipstad is mirrored in other localities that have seen a high Muslim migrant influx. This is happening in the city of Gothenberg, too. The crisis is reminiscent of the situation in France. Due to the Muslim migrant influx there, Jews have been fleeing France in drove. The alarming rise of antisemitism prompted Ricard Abitbol, President of the Confederation of Jews in France, to declare last year that “in a few decades, there will be no Jews in France.”
“Every day we have people who are hurt, every day we have people who are insulted,” Ricard Abitbol, President of The Confederation of Jews in France and Friends of Israel told RT. “We can be hurt by words, but we don’t mind, but when we are hurt by a knife, a gun, you can’t say I don’t mind.”
The safety of native citizens has been threatened, and the quality of life has become intolerable for many locals. The crisis doesn’t look as if it will improve. It is likely to worsen: for example, in mosques across Sweden, Muslim leaders are telling the media that mosques are teaching Swedish values — which is a requirement to receive state funding — but the leaders are mostly lying.
Uppdrag granskning (Assignment Investigate), the investigative current affairs program of Swedish television (SVT) , went undercover with hidden camera to the most influential mosques around the country to find out what the real situation was.
Here is some of what the investigations turned up:
One of Sweden’s most respected, and well-frequented, mosques is located at the heart of Stockholm, at Medborgarplatsen. The government turns to the religious leaders there as beingrepresentative of the Muslim community in Sweden. As recently as February, Minister for Public Administration, Stefan Attefall, attended a Friday prayer service there. The Family Counsellor at this particular mosque replied to the questions presented by Assignment: Investigate undercover associate as follows: Men are allowed to take four wives, as long as he treats them fairly. He went on to say that a wife should never deny her husband sex, not even if he has beaten her, or has taken another wife. In addition to this, he discourages women from contacting the police: “If you do call the police that could cause trouble. Do you know why? Because the police will take him into custody,” the Imam admonished. Only two of the ten religious representatives felt women should go to the police. Two left the decision up to the woman herself…..In Malmö, the beating was even made light of. The man our associates spoke to used his own arm to demonstrate how hard it is okay to hit. “Never, ever even consider going to the police,” was his advice……..At nine of the Muslim congregations, Uppdrag gransknings associates were informed that the Koran, in certain circumstances, gives men the right to take several wives. Six of the representatives were taped as they explained how according to the Koran, a Muslim woman is not allowed to deny her husband sex – it is his right, even against her will.
As a result of the hijrah, it isn’t only Sweden that faces a grim future, economically and otherwise, but other EU countries as well, thanks globalist leaders who abandoned their responsibility to exercise due diligence in screening refugees, and instead welcomed in massive numbers of Muslim migrants. Authorities have lost track of many, and a significant percentage of these migrants have no intention to integrate. Germany recently admitted to losing track of 13,000 migrants.
These migrants have brought no-go zones, sharia patrols, sex attacks, a surge in violent antisemitism, the radicalization of prisons and mosques, threats of jihad attacks, and more to Europe.
“Sweden: Municipality Inundated with Migrants Faces Tax Crisis as Native Swedes Flee,” by Chris Tomlinson, Breitbart, September 1, 2019:
A Swedish municipality that took in one of the highest numbers of asylum seekers per population faces a crisis as natives move out and decimate the local tax base.
The municipality of Filipstad took in many asylum seekers during the migrant crisis of 2015 and now are facing increasing costs as unemployment among migrants has surged and financial assistance rates have tripled, broadcaster SVT reports.
Claes Hultgren, the local municipal manager, described the situation, saying of the migrant population: “In this group, unemployment and dependency are very high, while education levels are very low. This group runs the risk of ending in an eternal alienation that is already heavily burdening the municipal economy.”
“They are too old maybe and are illiterate, or have a very low educational level. We must then accept that there will be some people who will need the support of society for their livelihood,” Hultgren added.
Adding to the burden has been the exodus of native Swedes, with hundreds of natives leaving between 2012 and 2018 and an even higher number of foreigners arriving during the same period. Statistics show the vast majority of natives who left were of working age.
While job vacancies still do exist in the municipality, the jobs require skills in language and training that few of the migrants possess.
According to another report from SVT, the city of Gothenberg is undergoing a similar problem, with working-age native Swedes moving out of the city to nearby municipalities, often to buy a home, and taking their tax money with them…..
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
LewRockwell.com
Recently, the news and opinion site HuffPost removed an article that had been up for more than six years. The piece, titled “Government Concedes Vaccine-Autism Case in Federal Court – Now What?” was published in January of 2013, and dealt with a case in which the US government’s Court of Federal Claims conceded that routine vaccination had aggravated a child’s underlying condition and led to that child developing “features of autism spectrum disorder.”
A previous blog post published on this site has been removed in the interest of public health. The article expressed the sole opinion of its author, who retains the rights to publish it elsewhere. Multiple studies have demonstrated that vaccines are safe and effective. Our letter from the editor has more on this decision.
This retraction did not occur in a vacuum. The first half of 2019 has seen a coordinated effort to scrub the Internet of any information that is critical of the claim that “vaccines are safe and effective.” The push began last fall, but gained momentum in January when the World Health Organization declared “vaccine hesitancy” to be a “global health threat,” placing it alongside Ebola, cancer, war zones, and drug-resistant pathogens.
On March 1st, US Congressman Adam Schiff wrote to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and, after stating that “there is no evidence to suggest that vaccines cause life-threatening or disabling diseases,” expressed his concern that Amazon might be allowing content with “medically inaccurate information.” He asked what action Amazon was taking to address “misinformation about vaccines.”
Later that day, Amazon pulled from its streaming service the documentary “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe,” along with other “anti-vaccine” documentaries including “Man Made Epidemic“ and “The Greater Good,” a film that “…weaves together the stories of families whose lives have been forever changed by vaccination.”
Schiff had written similar letters to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and Google CEO Sundar Pichai. Not long after Amazon pulled the documentaries from its streaming service, other platforms began to follow suit. On March 7, Facebook announced that it would reduce the visibility of groups and pages that “spread misinformation about vaccinations,” and would no longer accept advertisements containing what it deemed to be “misinformation” about vaccines.
Back in August of 2018, Pinterest had already begun removing content (later accounts, and then search results) that it said contained “medical misinformation,” and in February, YouTube demonetized all videos that “promoted anti-vaccination content.” Etsy, Vimeo, MailChimp, and GoFundMe have all joined these other platforms in pledging to either prohibit or demote content deemed to contain “misinformation” about vaccines.
“MISINFORMATION”
So what is the “misinformation” that the WHO, Congressman Schiff, and these social-media giants are so determined to remove from public view? Let’s start with the article mentioned above that was pulled from HuffPost:
The piece—which you can now read here—deals with the case of Hannah Poling, whose family was awarded more than $1.5 million by the US Court of Federal Claims after it acknowledged that her “regressive encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder…” was the result of vaccinations she received at 18 months that aggravated an underlying mitochondrial condition. The article is a fairly straightforward accounting of the case, followed by questions it raises about such issues as research, public health, and the vaccine-autism debate.
HuffPost’s letter from the editor, explaining its reasoning for removing articles like this one, states:
HuffPost has decided to remove dozens of blogs that perpetuate the unfounded opinion that vaccines pose a health risk to the public. Allowing these blogs to remain on our platform does a disservice to our readers that outweighs any ostensible value as part of the public record.
HuffPost’s editors also chose to remove the Federal Claims Court document itself, which had been posted separately. Where that document was once found, there is now the same statement that replaced the above article, along with the assertion that it “…expressed the sole opinion of its author.”
But that is complete nonsense. There is no “author” of this piece (other than for the very brief introduction to the document), and it does not represent anyone’s “opinion.” It is an official record of a concession made by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, submitted to a Federal court. It is indeed a part of the public record—a part that HuffPost’s editorial team doesn’t believe its readers should be able to see.
Other “misinformation” that has been removed from major platforms include this fully referenced article by Anne Mason, on the scare tactics being used to incite fear of measles, taken down by Medium in February, and the Pinterest accounts of both GreenMedInfo and the National Vaccine Information Center, both of which provide well-referenced information on vaccine safety and efficacy.
In June, the email marketing service provider MailChimp announced that it would prohibit “anti-vaccination content.” However, even before announcing this policy change, it had already removed several accounts without warning, according to their owners. Some of these included organizations simply opposed to vaccine mandates, such as Health Choice Vermont, and Colorado Health Choice Alliance, both of which had their accounts closed suddenly in June.
And in May, GoFundMe took down the fundraising campaign for Dr. Kenneth Stoller. Dr. Stoller had been raising money for his legal defense fund after having been served with a subpoena to turn over patient health records by the San Francisco City Attorney as part of a public nuisance investigation regarding his writing of medical exemptions to vaccines.
As these last two examples reveal, this effort aims to suppress not only voices that question the official line on vaccines, but also those that are opposed simply to mandated vaccines, as well as a doctor raising money to defend himself from the threat of state action against himself and his patients.
AND MISINFORMATION
Given the deep concern felt by these media giants for accuracy in coverage of the controversy over vaccines, it is surprising to find that so much misinformation on the topic remains in place on their platforms.
Contrary to the oft-repeated mantra in the mainstream press, the science about vaccines is far from “settled.” There is much that is a fair topic for debate, and there is much research that simply has not been done. There are, however, some easily refuted falsehoods, several of which feature prominently in nearly every story on vaccines that appears in a major media outlet.
Here are a few samples:
“Vaccines are safe and effective.”
How “safe”? How “effective”? Nothing is completely safe, and no medical treatment is completely effective all the time for every person. The only meaningful interpretation of “safe” in this context is that “vaccines are safer than the diseases they prevent.” But that has not been established.
To take just one example, the MMR vaccine, the Cochrane Review found, in its meta-analysis in 2012, that:
The design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies, both pre- and post-marketing, are largely inadequate. The evidence of adverse events following immunisation with the MMR vaccine cannot be separated from its role in preventing the target diseases.
I have written elsewhere about the fact that there is no solid data available to tell us how many vaccinations result in serious injury or death, that vaccineinjuries are badly underreported, and that those who claim that the rate of vaccine injury is “one in a million” are referring only to severe anaphylactic shock, ignoring the multitude of otherpossible injuries. Without this information, there is no way to know whether the risk from vaccines (specific vaccines or all vaccines) is greater or lesser than the risks of contracting and being harmed by the diseases they are meant to prevent.
Likewise, “effective.” The fact that vaccines are not 100% effective is not even remotely controversial. And the degree of effectiveness can vary widely from one vaccine to another. The question is: Given the expected efficacy of a given vaccine, is the protection it offers worth the risk of the harm it may create. We simply do not have the information needed to make that assessment with any certainty.
“Vaccines do not cause autism.”
No matter how many times major media outlets repeat this phrase, it has not been established that vaccines do not cause autism. Indeed, there is evidence that they can, including, but not limited to, the Federal Claims Court’s decision in the case of Hannah Poling that HuffPost is so determined that you not know about.
Those who insist that any connection between vaccines and autism has been discredited like to point to studies like this meta-analysis, or to this more recent Danish studylooking at more than 600,000 children, both of which are used by defenders of vaccines to refute any association between vaccines and autism. However, a closer look reveals not only that these studies fail to do this, but that neither even addresses the question.
As with most studies purporting to refute an association with autism, those in the meta-analysis (all ten of them) look only at a single vaccine (the MMR and/or the monovalent measles vaccine) and/or specific ingredients (cumulative Hg dosage and/or thimerosal exposure), comparing those who have received it/them to those who are otherwise fully or partially vaccinated.
They are also observational studies, which means that they are subject to selection bias, including the risk of “healthy user bias,” which is especially relevant when looking at possible injury from vaccines. This is because families who have experienced a possible injury with one child might be less likely to give that vaccine to their other children. By thus excluding some of those who might be most at risk of vaccine injury, this can artificially skew the results of the vaccinated group toward better health outcomes.
As CDC researchers Dr. Paul Fine and Dr. Robert Chen wrote in their 1992 paper looking at confounding factors in studies of adverse reactions to vaccines:
…individuals predisposed to either SIDS or encephalopathy are relatively unlikely to receive DPT vaccination. Studies that do not control adequately for this form of “confounding by indication” will tend to underestimate any real risks associated with vaccination.
The Danish study by Hviid et al likewise only examines the possible impact of the MMR vaccine. It does also compare rates of autism diagnosis across sub groups, including those who have had some or all of their first-year vaccines and those who have not. However there is no true unvaccinated group (the closest being the group of those who had received no first-year vaccines—a whopping 0.7% of the total cohort). And the authors themselves acknowledge that the study suffers from the risk of healthy user bias.
Meanwhile, there are plenty of studies that do show a possible relationship between autism and vaccines. You just won’t see them splashed across the front pages of major newspapers and magazines.
Moreover, one of the world’s leading experts on vaccines, and former government witness in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVIC)’s “vaccine court”, pediatric neurologist Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, has famously stated that:
…in a subset of children, vaccine-induced fever and immune stimulation did cause regressive brain disease with features of autism spectrum disorder.
Others, including former director of the National Institutes of Health Dr. Bernadine Healyand former CDC director Julie Gerberding, have also acknowledged that some children—particularly those with a mitochondrial disorder—can suffer damage from vaccines that leads to the symptoms associated with autism. In 2008, Gerberding told CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta:
…if a child was immunized, got a fever, had other complications from the vaccines. And if you’re predisposed with the mitochondrial disorder, it can certainly set off some damage. Some of the symptoms can be symptoms that have characteristics of autism.
For the population as a whole, the bottom line is that there are no conclusive studies on either side of the autism-vaccine debate. Having media outlets endlessly repeat the claim that there are, and that the debate is “settled,” doesn’t make that claim any less false.
A DANGEROUS CONVERSATION
Let’s be absolutely clear: The position of the people who pressured Amazon, Facebook, Pinterest, GoFundMe, and other platforms to shut down content critical of vaccines is that ordinary people should not be free to discuss, debate, nor share information about, the safety of vaccines.
The question is: Why?
Those who make and promote vaccines are right to worry about a free and open conversation about the safety of their products. Their strategy to date has been to insist that “there is no debate” about vaccine safety, that “the science is settled.” And for a very long time they have gotten away with simply repeating these mantras. But the more they engage in what can only be described as Orwellian suppression of information, the more people start to wonder what they are afraid we might find out.
Once anyone starts looking closely, it becomes very clear just how mendacious both the industry and the media have been. It quickly becomes apparent that the WHO declaration is a truckload of nonsense; that vaccines have not, in fact, been proven to be “safe and effective”; that the science is not settled with regard to the vaccine-autism connection; and that the illnesses the vaccine proponents want us to be afraid of are in fact, not all that scary—certainly not as scary as a government with the power to force people to inject substances into their bodies against their will.
For those whose livelihoods are tied to an ever-increasing vaccine schedule, and ever-increasing sales of vaccines, this is a very dangerous conversation indeed.
With his Russia-gate conspiracy theory debunked, House Intelligence Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff has turned his attention to demanding that Google, Facebook and Amazon stop carrying certain educational vaccine-related materials. People are now even being banned from “public places” for refusing vaccinations. Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center responds to this “Dark Night of Oppression” that includes “The New Internet Police,” the banning of books and films, and the prospect of a mandatory HIV/AIDS vaccine. Subscribe to the free newsletter at www.nvic.org
Robert F Kennedy Jr REACTS to Adam Schiff’s CENSORSHIP Demand Letter
Satan's Soldiers - Mark Zuckerberg And Adam Schiff - Evil Censorship of Anti-Vaccination Supporters
