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 & research purposes:
(Natural News) Leave it to the left-wing extremists who inhabit and run the Democratic Party: They have reacted to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Friday, June 24, overturning Roe v. Wade by forming an “alliance” to continue providing an “out” to irresponsible women who become pregnant by ensuring they can murder their unborn child.
The alliance was immediately announced by California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who no doubt thanks his lucky stars each and every day that his own mother chose to have him.
“The Supreme Court has stripped women of their liberty and let red states replace it with mandated birth. This is an attack on American freedom. CA, OR and WA are creating the West Coast offensive. A road map for other states to stand up for women. Time to fight like hell,” he said — not seeming to realize that there is nothing left to “fight” since the Supreme Court is the highest in the land and, like Roe was the “law of the land” for more than 50 years thanks to an earlier court.
The Supreme Court has stripped women of their liberty and let red states replace it with mandated birth.
This is an attack on American freedom.
CA, OR and WA are creating the West Coast offensive. A road map for other states to stand up for women.
“Abortion is health care, and no matter who you are or where you come from, Oregon doesn’t turn away anyone seeking health care,” the Orwellian moron governor of Oregon, Kate Brown, tweeted. “This disgraceful Supreme Court decision will put lives at risk and strips away a constitutional right that has been settled law for most of our lifetimes.”
What happened to the Left’s call for conservatives to “respect our institutions?”
“For all the Americans today feeling scared, angry, and disappointed — for everyone who needs an abortion and does not know where they can access safe reproductive health care — please know you are not alone, and the fight is not over,” she claimed, though the fight is over. There is nothing left to fight.
For all the Americans today feeling scared, angry and disappointed — for everyone who needs an abortion and does not know where they can access safe reproductive health care –– please know you are not alone, and the fight is not over.
— Governor Kate Brown (@OregonGovBrown) June 24, 2022
“The law remains unchanged in Washington state, but the threat to patient access and privacy has never been more dangerous. Even in Washington state, Republicans have introduced about 40 bills in the past six years to roll back abortion rights and access to reproductive care,” Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, another far-left pro-abortion fanatic whose state is a member of the ‘alliance,’ added.
The law remains unchanged in Washington state, but the threat to patient access and privacy has never been more dangerous. Even in Washington state, Republicans have introduced about 40 bills in the past six years to roll back abortion rights and access to reproductive care.
“The right of choice should not depend on which party holds the majority, but that’s where we find ourselves. More than half the nation’s population now lacks safe access to a medical procedure that only a patient and their doctor can and should make for themselves,” he added.
The right of choice should not depend on which party holds the majority, but that’s where we find ourselves. More than half the nation’s population now lacks safe access to a medical procedure that only a patient and their doctor can and should make for themselves.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
The transformation of the Catholic Church into a Church that reflects and teaches the mores of secular society is happening faster than what some doomsayers say is the melting of the polar ice caps.
Recently, Pope Francis named 21 new cardinals, the majority of whom are liberal “company men” who are unlikely to rock the Roman progressivist establishment, unlike the heroic Salvatore Cordileone, Archbishop of San Francisco, who banned Speaker Nancy Pelosi from receiving Holy Communion in any parish in the Archdiocese there.
Many of Francis’ cardinal appointees are liturgical liberals or radicals, like Blasé Cardinal Cupich, who has severely restricted the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass and promotes bizarre liturgical innovation.
In December 2021, Cupich said Mass in an Illinois high school where he blessed a Chinese lion-shaped puppet after the idol performed a dance around the altar. With an almost perverted, menacing authoritarianism, Francis appointed Cupich to head the Vatican Liturgy office. This is somewhat like making Liz Cheney the head of the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
Pope Francis’ most egregious “red hat” choice is Robert McElroy, bishop of San Diego, who seems to have swapped the Catholic Catechism for the Catechism of climate change, racism, and the “immorality” of placing limits on immigration from third world countries. McElroy loves to boast how the “sins” of climate change and racism (not real racism but the fake racism that describes everything as “racist”) are of far greater importance than the sin of abortion.
McElroy might be described as a mirror-image of Wilton Cardinal Gregory, the Archbishop of Washington, or the (affable) religious jester in the Court of President Biden and House Speaker Pelosi. Both McElroy and Gregory believe that Catholics who support abortion rights should not be denied communion. McElroy believes that denying pro-choice politicians communion is nothing less than a political tactic, or “the weaponization of the Eucharist."
Under Pope Francis’s direction, a growing and lethal form of progressivism has now formed irreversible tidal pools in the world of Catholicism.
Consider the case of the Nativity School of Worcester, Massachusetts, a free tuition, Jesuit boys school.
In January 2021, the students at Nativity (all boys of color) presented school president Thomas McKenney with a petition calling on the school to be “inclusive” (red flag #1). McKenney, whose career in education began with teaching Catholic school in India, and who was educated at Harvard (red flag #2), agreed with the students and began flying the Black Lives Matter and the LGBTQ flag under the United States flag on school property.
McKenney’s Harvard connection is a red flag in the Nativity case because, as The Harvard Crimson reported in its 2022 survey of graduate students, only 6.4% of the responders considered themselves conservative after attending the school.
As for Jesuits and Jesuit-controlled institutions, they have become synonymous with the Catechism of Radical Social Change. This became apparent in the 1960s when Jesuit priests began shifting their expression of the Catholic faith away from liturgical expression and toward a social justice view of the Church. (Almost as soon as they were founded by Ignatius Loyola in 1540, the Jesuits became known for their dislike of "the established order of things" and for their submersion in politics.)
The flying of the BLM and LGBTQ rainbow flags under the U.S. flag at Nativity attracted the attention of Bishop Robert J. McManus of the Diocese of Worcester, who demanded that the school take the flags down because they "embody specific agendas or ideologies that contradict Catholic teaching.”
McKenney ignored the request, just as Nancy Pelosi ignored the directive of Archbishop Cordileone’s communion ban. (Pelosi went to communion at Washington’s Holy Trinity Catholic Church the Sunday following Cordileone’s letter, rushing up to the altar in an orange jumpsuit to receive the Host (in hand) from a lay female Eucharistic Minister).
Bishop McManus gave Nativity plenty of time to comply with his request, but when McKenney still refused, he informed Nativity that it was being stripped of its Catholic status and identity. He forbade Mass and the sacraments from being celebrated on school premises and he removed the school’s name from Diocesan records.
In an open letter, he stated:
“Despite my insistence that the school administration remove these flags because of the confusion and the properly theological scandal that they do and can promote, they refuse to do so. This leaves me no other option but to take canonical action,” Bishop McManus wrote in an open letter to the people of his diocese.”
I have little doubt that Bishop McManus’ action was inspired by the actions of Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone in the Pelosi case.
In his letter to the community of Worcester, the bishop elaborated:
If a Catholic institution had signs out front offering abortion services or family planning, I doubt anyone would be surprised when the local bishop cried “foul” and said it could no longer be identified as a Catholic institution because they performed elective abortions.
No one would question his intervening. For that matter, most people would say, correctly, that the bishop is simply doing his job. Abortion may be legal but the Catholic Church teaches consistently that it is morally wrong to deliberately take an innocent human life.
McManus said that BLM contradicts Catholic social teaching on the role of the family. “To Catholics, the Holy Family is not just a quaint image. God the Son chose to enter the world as a child and be raised by a mother and a father (the Nativity). The BLM movement in its own words is 'committed to disrupting the Western prescribed nuclear family structure requirement,' which is another clear example of an ideological principle that conflicts the BLM movement with Catholic teaching.”
The bishop reminded McKenney that the Church “stands unequivocally behind the phrase ‘black lives matter’ and strongly affirms that all lives matter.”
Social radical McKenney, feeling smug that the Jesuit institution was backing him, wrote:
Nativity will seek to appeal the decision of the Diocese to remove our Catholic identity through the appropriate channels provided by the Church in circumstances like this., Nativity will continue to display the flags in question to give visible witness to the school’s solidarity with our students, families, and their communities.
Of course, far too many liberals (and cafeteria Catholics) have deluded themselves into thinking that the BLM flag stands for "equality for people of color" and that black lives are just as valuable as white lives—or any life—and should not be considered less so. They won’t look beneath the surface in order to learn that BLM welcomes gender confusion, seeks to dismantle so-called "cis-gender privilege," the end of the nuclear family, celebrates defunding the police, an end to the arrest of black people, an end to jails, detention centers, youth facilities, and prisons.
In the early 1990s, I flew a large Rainbow flag from the window of my second-story apartment near Philadelphia’s Rittenhouse Square. The reasons for my doing so at that time had everything to do with basic human rights issues—the right to rent an apartment and not be fired from a job because of sexual orientation. It had nothing to do with the rights of so-called transgender children or trans male athletes to compete in women’s sports. It had nothing to do with the use of multiple pronouns and prefix labels like "cis" to describe a "natural" man or woman. It had nothing to do with the invention of new genders.
The "meaning" of the Rainbow flag changed after same-sex marriage was legalized in 2015. At that point, the movement joined forces with the gender and identity politics movement. The movement became all about “queer” and transgender rights, drag queen story hours, and anything else you might want to add here in the form of a plus sign or an et cetera that stretches into infinity.
Bishop McManus has already suffered for his stand against the Nativity School. In April, when he was due to address the 173rd Commencement of the College of the Holy Cross, there were large protests—and a petition—requesting that he be disinvited.
“As a community that welcomes members of every gender, race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation, we find it inappropriate to have Bishop McManus present at this year’s graduation ceremony for the Class of 2022, and thus request that he be disinvited from attendance,” the statement read.
The bishop excused himself before any action could be taken, and did not attend.
It is unknown whether Bishop McManus realized that the College of the Holy Cross, a Jesuit institution, is the home of the world’s first Digital Transgender Archive, or an online clearinghouse for transgender history.
Thom Nickels is a Philadelphia-based journalist/columnist and the 2005 recipient of the AIA Lewis Mumford Award for Architectural Journalism. He writes for City Journal, New York, Frontpage Magazine, Broad and Liberty, and the Philadelphia Irish Edition. He is the author of fifteen books, including ”Literary Philadelphia” and ”From Mother Divine to the Corner Swami: Religious Cults in Philadelphia.” “Death in Philadelphia: The Murder of Kimberly Ernest” will be published in 2023.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
The U.S. Supreme Court has issued several momentous decisions in the past week. One of the rulings struck down Maine's state tuition subsidy program as a violation of the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religious beliefs. Another ruling struck down New York’s law strictly limiting the carrying of concealed guns for self-defense outside of the home as a violation of the Second Amendment. On June 24th, the Supreme Court overturned the fifty-year Roe v. Wade precedent that had created a constitutional “right” to an abortion out of whole cloth.
Looking at these decisions in a broader context, they evidence a consistent strict constructionist approach to interpreting the Constitution. The Supreme Court’s conservative majority looks to what is actually written in the Constitution’s text and its history, where relevant, rather than trying to impose the justices' own policy views on what they think the Constitution should say. The religious freedom and gun rights decisions are rooted in the explicit provisions of the First Amendment and the Second Amendment, respectively. Roe v. Wade, on the other hand, grafted a manufactured “right” onto the Constitution without any clear textual or relevant historical foundation.
This article will focus on the Supreme Court’s religious freedom decision in Carson v. Makin. The decision reinforced the enumerated constitutional right to the free exercise of religious beliefs, which is explicitly set forth in the text of the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court ruled on June 21st that Maine’s tuition subsidy program for students in school districts that neither operate a secondary public school of their own nor contract with a particular school in another district is unconstitutional. By a 6-3 vote, the conservative majority held that the program violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. The program denies parents who send their children living in these districts to private religious schools the same financial benefits that parents who send their children to private secular schools are entitled to receive.
In short, the state of Maine stacked the deck against families of faith.
“The State pays tuition for certain students at private schools—so long as the schools are not religious,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in his majority opinion. “That is discrimination against religion.”
Chief Justice Roberts concluded his opinion by writing that “Maine’s ‘nonsectarian’ requirement for its otherwise generally available tuition assistance payments violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Regardless of how the benefit and restriction are described, the program operates to identify and exclude otherwise eligible schools on the basis of their religious exercise.”
The Supreme Court majority decision dismissed the notion that honoring parental school choice in the use of Maine’s tuition funding to pay the cost of sending their children to private religious schools violates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.
Chief Justice Roberts wrote that “a neutral benefit program in which public funds flow to religious organizations through the independent choices of private benefit recipients does not offend the Establishment Clause.”
The three liberal justices - Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan – not surprisingly dissented.
In his dissenting opinion, Justice Breyer disagreed with how the majority interpreted the application of the Establishment Clause to this case.
According to Justice Breyer, “state neutrality in respect to the teaching of the practice of religion lies at the heart” of the Establishment Clause. “The Establishment Clause was intended to keep the State out of this area,” he wrote.
Justice Breyer objected to the majority’s reliance on the Free Exercise Clause to strike down Maine’s decision to deny state funding to those parents who want to send their children to private religious schools, not private secular schools.
“Nothing in our Free Exercise Clause cases compels Maine to give tuition aid to private schools that will use the funds to provide a religious education,” Justice Breyer wrote.
Justice Sotomayor wrote in her dissenting opinion that “it is irrational for this Court to hold that the Free Exercise Clause bars Maine from giving money to parents to fund the only type of education the State may provide consistent with the Establishment Clause: a religiously neutral one.”
The dissenters have it wrong. While the Establishment Clause prohibits governments from compelling or endorsing a religious belief, preferring one religion over another, or entangling themselves unduly in religious matters, the Establishment Clause does not mandate that governments be hostile to people of faith in the public domain.
If parents can choose whether to send their children to a public school in their own school district or to a private school, the parents should bear the financial consequences of choosing a private school. That would be true whether the private school provides religious instruction or not.
This case is different, however. Maine’s government officials have deprived parents of the opportunity to send their children to public schools in certain districts where they live because, as a result of governmental decisions, there are no suitable public schools in those districts. Maine tried to solve this problem with a workaround – a tuition taxpayer-funded subsidy program that pays the tuition of the private school chosen by the parents for their children.
The constitutional problem with Maine’s tuition program is that it was not neutral either in its design or implementation. Not all parents needing financial help to send their children to private schools as a result of the failure of Maine’s government officials to build any age-appropriate public schools in the children’s districts have been treated the same. Maine’s tuition program discriminated against parents of faith by precluding them from receiving any public subsidies altogether if they chose a private religious school for their children’s education instead of a private secular school.
As Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “there is nothing neutral about Maine’s program.” Quoting from a prior Supreme Court opinion, he explained that “a state need not subsidize private education” but “once a state decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious.”
With her usual hyperbole, Justice Sotomayor wrote that the Court’s majority “continues to dismantle the wall of separation between church and state that the Framers fought to build.”
President Thomas Jefferson is often quoted by those who want to build an impenetrable wall between church and state. He wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptists dated January 1, 1802, in which he said, “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”
The expression “building a wall of separation between Church & State” appears nowhere in the Constitution itself. To use it for the purpose of interpreting the Establishment Clause, the expression needs to be examined in its historical context to understand what President Jefferson was talking about.
The Danbury Baptists had written to President Jefferson expressing their concern that “religion is considered as the first object of legislation; and therefore what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the state) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights.”
The Congregational Church was the established church in Connecticut at the time. Other denominations, including the Baptists, could only set up their own churches with the approval of a justice of the peace. The Congregational Church basically ran Connecticut’s educational system.
President Jefferson sought to assure the Danbury Baptists that he would not do anything as president to impose his will on how the Danbury Baptists or any other religious sect decided to practice their religious beliefs. That was the purpose of his letter.
In an earlier draft of the letter, President Jefferson was even more explicit as to his intentions. He first wrote that "confining myself therefore to the duties of my station, which are merely temporal, be assured that your religious rights shall never be infringed by any act of mine.” After reflection, he wrote in the final version of the letter simply that he would adhere to the “expression of the supreme will of the nation on behalf of the rights of conscience…”
In short, Thomas Jefferson’s wall of separation between church and state was meant to prevent government control of religious beliefs or religious control of governments' decisions and actions. It was not meant to be used as a pretext for governmental hostility to all religions and people of faith in administering what are supposed to be generally available government benefit programs.
The Constitution’s text and historical underpinnings are what matters when interpreting the Constitution, not what a justice would like it to say based on the justice’s own personal value preferences and desired public policy outcomes. Today’s Supreme Court majority is adhering to this fundamental principle.
CALL FOR CIVIL WAR? Pelosi Calls on Abortion Supporters to 'RISE UP,' Make Republicans 'REGRET what they’ve done'
“Or we can RISE UP, meet this ONCE-IN-A-GENERATION moment, and marshal a response so HISTORIC that we make every last anti-choice Republican REGRET what they’ve done.”
DAY THREE OF PROTESTS AT SUPREME COURT AND MANY OTHER STATE CAPITOLS
Jun 26, 2022'The Big Sunday Show' panelists weigh in on the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and discuss the impact it has on the pro-choice and pro-life movements.
AOC calls for impeachment of SCOTUS justices over Roe v Wade decision
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
The Dobbs v. Jackson decision doesn’t make abortion illegal; it just sends the decision as to whether or not to outlaw it back to the states. But that isn’t good enough for the totalitarian Left, which has to be able to sacrifice children to Moloch everywhere, without any hindrance, or all the fun goes out of the whole thing. And so Leftists are reacting to the decision with their predictable rage and hysteria; Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-Space Cadet) demanded that pro-abortionists go “into the streets,” and Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Rage) declared, “The hell with the Supreme Court. We will defy them!” And now House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Stolichnaya) has, with all of the Left’s characteristic unapologetic gaucherie, used the decision as the basis for a fundraising appeal, during which she called upon her followers to “rise up.” Insurrection? Count on it.
Pelosi’s crass fundraising email stated: “Trump’s Supreme Court just ruled to rip reproductive rights away from every single woman in this country.” The choice of words here was unfortunate, to put it mildly, in light of the fact that Pelosi was raising money for the cause of maintaining the legality of ripping children limb from limb in their mother’s womb, but the message only got worse from there. “I don’t say this lightly,” Pelosi’s fundraising writer continued with all the portentous solemnity he or she could muster: “How we act TODAY will decide the future of reproductive rights.”
Yeah, sure. Pelosi has earned millions upon millions while acting as a servant of the people, but she still has the lack of self-awareness and no-holds-barred gall to ask her Leftist followers, who are no doubt struggling to make ends meet on their latest welfare check or government subsidy, to kick in a few bucks to help her ensure that no one, but no one, is prevented from killing a baby should he or she or xe choose to do so. It all depends on the Leftist little guy. Pelosi’s email warns, “We can either sit back and admit defeat to these far-right extremists…,” and then comes the red type in bold and underlined:
“Or we can RISE UP, meet this ONCE-IN-A-GENERATION moment, and marshal a response so HISTORIC that we make every last anti-choice Republican REGRET what they’ve done.”
What an interesting choice of words, Madame Speaker! What exactly do you mean by making pro-lifers “regret” what they’ve done? To be sure, Pelosi’s fundraising wonk could simply mean that the Republicans should be made to suffer a defeat at the ballot box that is so resounding and catastrophic that their miserable, beaten remnant will never dare to oppose abortion again. Or the email could mean that Republicans should be brutalized and subjected to violence until they are too frightened to oppose abortion.
Pelosi couldn’t possibly mean that, could she? The door is definitely left open to that idea in the email, which continues: “Please, [name], I’ve never needed your support more than today. Can you chip in $15 so we can WIN these midterms and finally codify reproductive rights into law?” Ah, so it is all about the elections, and working peacefully and legally for change. But read on: “[Name], this isn’t a normal fundraising email. And a normal response won’t suffice.”
Now, wait a minute. A normal response won’t suffice? If Pelosi’s hapless mark duly kicks in fifteen bucks for the murder of children, wouldn’t that be a normal response to a fundraising email? But a normal response won’t suffice. Pelosi’s email here, with its “RISE UP” and “REGRET what they’ve done” and “a normal response won’t suffice,” definitely leaves the door open to being read as a call for violence. Although the boss frequently appears to be alcohol-addled, Pelosi’s office isn’t stupid and likely meant it to be capable of being read in this way. Even if they didn’t, imagine if a conservative Republican representative sent out the identical email: there would be furious calls for his or her resignation and dark warnings about elected officials encouraging “white supremacist violence.”
What’s more, it’s not in the least farfetched that Pelosi would be calling for violence. In 2018, speaking about the separation of migrant children from their putative parents at the Southern border, Pelosi said, “I just don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country. And maybe there will be when people realize that this is a policy that they defend.”
Maybe she’ll get her uprisings now. But Pelosi, because she is part of the Leftist elite that is above the law in America today, will face no consequences for this email. Consequences, my friend, are for conservatives.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
In a June 14, 2022 op-ed in the Washington Post, Corey Saylor, the Director of Research and Advocacy at the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), issued a demand to the administration of newly-elected Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin and Lieutenant Governor Winsome Earle-Sears. CAIR, which was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation terror funding trial, wants the Youngkin administration to “reject [Brigitte] Gabriel and ACT for America.” A May 20, 2022 photo posted on @ACTBrigitte’s Twitter page showed Lieutenant Governor Sears posing with Gabriel. Displaying that photo, CAIR issued a May 27, 2022 press release calling Gabriel a “[n]otorious racist and anti-Muslim bigot” and calling on Sears to “repudiate her alleged ties with a notorious anti-Muslim hate group leader.” CAIR’s more recent Washington Post article then made reference to that photo of Gabriel with Sears and claimed that ACT for America is an “anti-Islam extremist group” whose leadership should be ostracized and rejected.
It would seem a bit rich that an organization such as CAIR, which itself has been named specifically in the legal documents of a terror-financing trial, should be providing advice on professional associations to anyone, much less the government of the Commonwealth of Virginia.Ronald Weich, Assistant Attorney General of the United States Department of Justice, wrote a letter to then-U.S. Congresswoman Sue Myrick dated February 12, 2010, in which he responded to her about how CAIR came to be named an unindicted co-conspirator of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development in the United States v. Holy Land Foundation et al. (CR. No. 3:04-240-P N.D.TX.) case. In that letter, Assistant Attorney General Weich provided official trial testimony and other evidence introduced in that trial “which demonstrated a relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders, and the Palestine Committee. Evidence was also introduced that demonstrated a relationship between the Palestine Committee and HAMAS, which was designated as a terrorist organization in 1995.”
To be clear, this was not mere guilt by association, a scenario that Saylor attempts to portray for Gabriel and ACT for America in his Washington Post piece, in which he cites alleged statements of various individuals who may have been present at an ACT event sometime in the past. Citing the Southern Poverty Law Center doesn’t help his case, either.
It may be noted that this would not be the first time that CAIR has attempted to insert itself into the associations, businesses, and presentations of others it accuses of “anti-Muslim bigotry.” In 2015, Brandeis University withdrew plans to bestow an honorary degree on Ayaan Hirsi Ali (a Somali-born apostate from Islam), just a day after protests from groups that included CAIR. In August 2019, the Norwich Bulletin attacked E. Miles Prentice, the owner of the Connecticut Tigers (farm team of the Detroit Tigers Major League Baseball team), citing criticism of the Center for Security Policy (CSP), a Washington, DC think tank by Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR’s communications director. At the time, Prentice served as CSP’s Board Chairman. Prentice reportedly wound up losing the team. The Pentagon itself has been intimidated by CAIR regarding anti-terror training reportedly termed “anti-Islamic.” And in 2020, a student at Scottsdale Community College was joined by CAIR’s Arizona chapter in filing suit against Professor Nicholas Damask over some quiz questions they alleged condemned Islam for justifying terrorism. Initially, the college chastised Professor Damask, but later apologized to him and cleared him of any wrongdoing. The lawsuit itself was thrown out of court, and the Scottsdale Community College agreed to pay a $155,000 settlement to Professor Damask.
This list could go on, but you get the idea. As for CAIR, though, asked to condemn Hamas by name, well, not so much.
At its official website, ACT for America – which is a non-profit grassroots movement – declares that its mission is “to educate, engage, train, and mobilize citizens to ensure the safety and security of Americans against all threats foreign and domestic while preserving civil liberties guaranteed by the US Constitution.” ACT for America works especially in the public policy arena to provide informative input for bills introduced at the state and federal levels, with an emphasis on preserving civil liberties protected by the U.S. Constitution.
For their part, during the 2020 campaign as well as in the months since taking office, both Governor Youngkin and Lieutenant Governor Sears have made a point of emphasizing their commitment to championing the civil rights and welfare of all Virginians, in policy areas including antisemitism, criminal justice, the economy and job creation, education, and health.
CAIR, on the other hand, apparently would rather forget all about the Holy Land Foundation trial and focus instead on disparaging a 20-year friendship with mean-spirited barbs about the Virginia Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and an American citizen of immigrant background who leads one of the largest and most patriotic-minded organizations in the country. Expect Governor Youngkin, Lieutenant Governor Sears, and most Virginians to see straight through that.
Clare M. Lopez is the Founder/President of Lopez Liberty LLC.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
At the end of last summer, as the Texas heartbeat bill took effect, corporations began to assure their affected employees that travel expenses incurred while procuring abortions would be covered. This trend accelerated after the May leak of the draft SCOTUS opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson. Now, you get to pay an abortion subsidy “tax” every time you shop for many goods and services.
I’ve been irked since the ’90s, when Big PR decided consumers preferred to spend their money at companies that undertook “social responsibility.” Not me — I’d rather pay five bucks less for that dress than bask in the virtuous glow of knowing I’d been coerced into funding the purchase and planting of a sapling or the rehabilitation of a gimpy sea turtle, or whatever. When I want to shop, I want to shop; when I want to donate to charity, I want to donate to a charity that I choose. Why should corporations force me to subsidize their favorite woke causes every time I do business with them?
But after the Dobbs decision, companies are in a lather to promote abortion — and consequently, there’s an employee abortion-travel premium built into their pricing.
Here at PJ Media, we offer quality reporting that you can use. If you are averse to subsidizing abortion tourism (and sometimes other gnarly things as well, such as “transgender” quackery for employees or their dependent children), scroll through this alphabetical list before you decide where to spend your hard-earned money!
Airbnb Airbnb first offered explicit support to abortion-minded employees last September. It also took the extra step of offering to help Airbnb “hosts” fight legal problems from breaking the Texas heartbeat law, and it offers up to 20 days of paid bereavement leave for pregnancy loss — even if it was elective.
Amazon Amazon will cover up to $4,000 of employees’ travel expenses for abortion or any other medical procedure only available 100 miles or more away.
Amalgamated Bank Amalgamated will pay for airfare, gasoline, hotel, and meals, as well as childcare, for employees and dependents to get “reproductive health care.” The bank also launched an abortion-travel fundraiser called Critical Reproductive Access Fund (CRAF).
Apple Reliably liberal Apple will pay for employees’ abortions as well as related travel expenses.
Box.com Same as Apple (above).
Bumble “Bumble is women-founded and women-led, and from day one we’ve stood up for the most vulnerable,” said Bumble, in a breath-taking failure of self-awareness. The dating company set up an employee abortion expenses fund in response to Texas’s heartbeat bill. Nothing says “romance” like consequence-free animalistic rutting!
Chobani Covers travel, hotel, and childcare as well as the procedure.
Citigroup Citigroup provides travel expenses for employees seeking abortions.
Comcast-NBC Universal Reimburses up to $4,000 per trip, up to three per year, with an annual cap of $10,000. (Note: this covers all medical procedures, not just abortions. If someone is having three a year, then pray as hard as you can for her.)
Condé Nast The media company covers travel expenses for abortion and gender “care.”
Dick’s Sporting Goods Dicks will pay up to $4,000 in travel expenses for any employee or covered family member along with one support person.
Disney In its quest to become the Least Wholesome Place on Earth, the Walt Disney Company provides a travel benefit for employees seeking “care” not available in their own state.
DoorDash DooDash will cover some travel expenses for employees or family members.
Goldman Sachs Goldman Sachs will reimburse travel expenses to “include all medical procedures, treatments, and evaluations, including abortion services and gender-affirming care” beginning July 1.
Hims & Hers When it’s not selling birth control and boner pills, the internet health company will reimburse up to $6,000 in travel expenses and pay for two weeks of leave for employees and their partners.
Interpublic Group, Publicis Groupe, and WPP These three parent groups comprise a massive number of ad agencies and PR companies, and will pay employees’ abortion travel expenses.
JPMorgan Chase Covers travel of over 50 miles to obtain healthcare.
Kroger The supermarket company will cover up to $4,000 in abortion travel expenses.
Levi Strauss & Co. Reimburses healthcare-related travel expenses for both full-time and part-time employees.
Lyft Covers travel over 100 miles.
Mastercard Pays out-of-state travel expenses.
Match Group Dating app Match set up a fund to assist employees affected by Texas law.
Meta Meta will reimburse out-of-state travel “to the extent permitted by law.”
Microsoft In May, Microsoft confirmed it would cover travel expenses for abortion and “gender-affirming care.”
Netflix Reimburses travel for healthcare, including abortion and gender flimflammery, up to $10,000 lifetime total per employee.
Nike Nike covers expenses for employees who must travel to abort.
Patagonia Pays all abortion-related travel expenses; Patagonia also posts bail for employees who get arrested while protesting. Do not subsidize.
Power Home Remodeling Lifetime reimbursement of expenses up to $5,000 per employee or $10,000 per family for travel over 100 miles.
Reddit Reddit pays a travel stipend and grants unlimited PTO (paid time off) for abortion jaunts.
Salesforce This software company offered to relocate workers and their families who wished to emigrate from Texas or any state that gave them “concerns about access to reproductive healthcare.”
Starbucks After the leaked Dobbs opinion, Starbucks offered to reimburse expenses for travel over 100 miles to get an abortion or gender-swap treatment.
Tesla Tesla pays for employees to travel out of state for procedures not available where they live. We know what that means.
Uber Uber will pay employee travel expenses for abortion trips and also reimburse the legal fees of drivers who get sued under state laws for providing transportation to clinics.
United Talent Agency Who’s surprised that a Hollywood talent agency pays for starlets to discard the fruits of the casting couch? The last thing they want to do is ruin their figure — and their chances at making it big.
Yelp Yelp pays for abortions and travel, and it is doubling employee donations to pro-abortion orgs throughout this month.
Zillow The real estate shopping site reimburses employees up to $7,500 for travel to get an abortion or gender-bender treatments.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
This has been going on for years; nevertheless, Biden’s handlers are cheerfully sending your taxpayer dollars to the UN to fund it.
“UN agency teachers urge terrorism and murder of Jews, report claims,” by Benjamin Weinthal, Fox News, June 24, 2022:
JERUSALEM, Israel – A shocking report by a watchdog organization on Thursday revealed that a UN agency tasked with, among other things, educating Palestinian students in places such as Lebanon, the West Bank and Jordan, employs teachers who promote terrorism and the murder of Jews.
UN Watch, a Geneva-based NGO, uncovered in its 49-page report that United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) computer teacher Nihaya Awad, who works in the West Bank, supported Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli civilians after last year’s war. The U.S. and the European Union classified Hamas—the Sunni jihadi organization that controls the Gaza Strip—as a terrorist entity.
In one internet post, Awad wrote: “Greetings to the people of Gaza, Blessed victory.” A second post Awad wrote said “In the name of Allah, one victory after the other, Palestine will be fully liberated.”
Awad “encouraged Palestinian terrorists’ exploitation of child soldiers, in a May 21, 2021 post on Facebook,” UN Watch reported.
Awad posted the entries two months after a UNRWA director, Gwyn Lewis, praised Awad in a certificate of appreciation for her “fantastic efforts” as a “best performer” in UNRWA education, according to the report.
“We are proud that you are part of the UNRWA team,” Lewis wrote on March 23, 2021….
An example from Lebanon, where the U.S.-designated terrorist movement Hezbollah has great control over the state, showed UNRWA Lebanon teacher Elham Mansour posting on Facebook on May 11, 2022: “By Allah, anyone who can kill and slaughter any Zionist and Israeli criminal, and doesn’t do so, doesn’t deserve to live. Kill them and pursue them everywhere, they are the greatest enemy….All Israel deserves is death.”…
The U.S. and other predominantly Western states that fund UNRWA met Thursday at the United Nations with Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. They are expected to promise additional monies to fund UNRWA….
Pro-Life activist and podcast host Christine Yeargin joined "In Focus with Addison Smith" to discuss Biden's response to the Supreme Court's decision overturning Roe v Wade, as well as the 13 states with "trigger laws" that banned abortions after the decision was released.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
The Arizona State Senate was going about routine business on Friday evening, voting on a water bill and another bill to expand the state’s private school voucher system when the pro-abortion zealots arrived. “While working inside,” Arizona state representative Sarah Liguori recounted, “we were interrupted by the sound of bangs and smell of tear gas. Protestors cleared from the Capitol.” Ironically, Liguori herself is pro-abortion; earlier Friday she tweeted, “I’ve been talking to confused and scared physicians, nurses, and women this morning. Our Supreme Court has failed us all by dismantling a human healthcare right in favor of religious extremism.” But when her more violent compatriots attacked, Liguori was trapped inside with everyone else targeted in this — what’s the word for it again? Ah, yes — insurrection.
— Michelle Ugenti-RITA (@MichelleUgenti) June 25, 2022
The scene was harrowing. At 11:56 p.m. Friday night, Arizona state senator Kelly Townsend tweeted, “We are currently there being held hostage inside the Senate building due to members of the public trying to breach our security. We smell tear gas and the children of one of the members are in the office sobbing with fear.” A half-hour later, she added that some of her Democrat colleagues were pleased as punch that it was all happening: “Appalling to hear some Democrats defending those outside trying to break the glass and breach security. ‘This is a public building, and they wouldn’t let them in.’” At least the rejoicing in chaos and violence wasn’t unanimous: “However another Democrat mad as heck for them scaring the children in the building.”
Three minutes after midnight on Saturday, another Arizona state senator, Wendy Rogers, tweeted, “Education protesters threatened to break the AZ Senate entryway glass. We assembled to take the tunnel to the House. The crowd was dispersed w/ tear gas. Went back up into the Senate.” At 12:41 a.m., she clarified, “Protesters are a mix of anti-life protesters, anti-education choice protestors, and Antifa. MANY DPS officers on the scene taking care of business.” She also noted, “DPS [Department of Public Safety] is working to get the situation under control outside. Sergeant at Arms says the mob is spray painting monuments and lighting fires. We are headed to a secure room to go vote. Very dangerous outside.”
Townsend also tweeted, no doubt with tongue firmly in cheek, “I expect a J24 committee to be created immediately.” In a truly just and equitable society, there would be such a committee, but in America today, there is one set of rules for Leftists and another one for those who dissent from the Left’s agenda, and nothing is more certain than that these violent thugs will face no consequences whatsoever for their actions.
Kim Quintero of the Arizona State Senate Republican Caucus released a statement saying, “Violent pro-abortion protestors’ attempts of an insurrection at the Arizona State Senate were thwarted Friday night, thanks to the swift actions from local and state law enforcement. While Arizona State Senate members were wrapping up passing important legislation for the session extremist demonstrators made their way to the entrance of the Senate building and began forcibly trying to make entry by breaking windows and pushing down doors.” Welcome to politics as usual in the United States, 2022.
The overturning of Roe v. Wade has been illuminating on numerous levels. One is that it demonstrates yet again how Leftists and conservatives operate in America today. Leftists suffered a defeat with the Dobbs decision, and the calls for violence have begun. Conservatives suffered a defeat back in 1973 with the Roe v. Wade decision and worked patiently and persistently to bring about the overturn of that decision by peaceful and legal means.
The besieging of the Arizona Capitol was likely only the beginning. The Left is itching for violence after being told that the federal government can’t require states to keep the murder of children legal. AOC (D-Ditz) shouted Friday that the Dobbs decision is “illegitimate” and led pro-abortion activists in chants of “into the streets.” Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Hate) has proclaimed, “The hell with the Supreme Court. We will defy them!” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Smirnoff) has now called upon her followers to “rise up.” Will all this result in violence? Almost certainly. And just as certain is the fact that the political and media elites will then attempt to distract the American public with a new round of twaddle about how “white supremacists” constitute the greatest terror threat to the nation today. It’s a propaganda show that they will find increasingly difficult to maintain.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Fifty people on the terror watch list have been apprehended at the Southern border so far this year, and there is no telling how many got across without being caught. And now Old Joe Biden’s handlers have opened up a new way for terrorists to get into the United States: Iran International English reported late Friday that “the Biden admin has decided to lift a controversial ban on the entry into US of Iranian men who’d been conscripted into IRGC, a Foreign Terrorist Organization, as part of their compulsory military service, as they don’t ‘pose a national security or public safety risk.’” The IRGC is Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, which the Trump administration designated a terrorist organization in 2019. In their avidity to roll back every last thing that Trump did, Biden’s handlers are once again actively endangering Americans.
This decision to allow certain IRGC members into the country is a compromise move designed to get the Iran nuclear deal negotiations moving again. Those negotiations were galloping forward, with the Biden team bent on appeasement and the Iranians getting all they wanted and then some. But then the Iranians, dizzy with success, got a little greedy and demanded that as a condition of the deal, the United States remove the Foreign Terrorist Organization designation from the IRGC. In a stunning and inexplicable development after an unbroken record of appeasement, the Biden team balked, and the negotiations stalled. Now, the United States is trying to get them going by allowing low-level IRGC members into the country while maintaining the terrorist designation.
This is, unsurprisingly, unwise. The IRGC was designated a terrorist organization with good reason. Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Foreign Minister Yair Lapid issued a joint statement on March 18, declaring that the IRGC is “a terrorist organization that has murdered thousands of people, including Americans. We refuse to believe that the United States would remove its designation as a terrorist organization.” You refuse to believe that the United States would do such a thing? Gentlemen, Joe Biden is in the Oval Office.
Lapid and Bennett also noted that the IRGC “directs and instructs Hezbollah in Lebanon, Islamic Jihad in Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen and militias in Iraq, and that the body is responsible for attacks against American civilians and American forces throughout the Middle East, including in the past year.” They added, “They kill Jews because they are Jews, Christians because they are Christians, and Muslims because they refuse to surrender to them.”
Iran International added that “Secretary of Homeland Security and Secretary of State, in consultation with US Attorney General, concluded that the ban shall not apply with respect to an individual who provided insignificant or limited material support to an FTO (like IRGC) under routine social transactions.” So you see, all is well. Biden’s handlers are only allowing in IRGC members who were “conscripted” into the organization, and who didn’t help it all that much. So what could possibly go wrong?
Plenty. The fact that a man was forced into an organization doesn’t automatically mean that he dissents from its agenda and goals, and the fact that he provided it only “insignificant” support in the past is no indication of what he might do in the future. To prevent actual jihad terrorists from entering the country, American officials would have to question IRGC members closely and intelligently, with full awareness of the nature and activities of the IRGC itself, and a full and honest understanding of Islamic jihad in general, uninfluenced by political correctness and wokeness. How likely is it that American officials in the Biden administration, which doesn’t acknowledge that there is such a thing as Islamic jihad at all and insists that Islam is a religion of peace, will be capable of carrying out such questioning? About nil.
The hostility of the Iranian regime to the United States is abundantly established. Under this new arrangement, what would prevent the mullahs from sending IRGC terrorists into the country? They would, of course, be carefully vetted on the Iranian side, so as to ensure that they had been conscripted into the organization and had previously provided it with only “insignificant” support.
Those who assume that the mullahs would never do that because they want the nuclear deal are naïve. Back in 2015, as Obama’s original nuke deal was being concluded, 192 members of Iran’s 290-seat parliament declared, “The martyr-nurturing nation of Iran is not at all prepared to abandon the slogan of ‘Death to America’ under the pretext of a nuclear agreement.” This slogan, they said, had “turned into the symbol of the Islamic republic and all struggling nations.”
This aggressive stance has not changed. Just days ago, the IRGC resumed its Obama-era practice of harassing U.S. Navy ships in the Strait of Hormuz. And now Biden’s manifest weakness will only invite more Iranian aggression.
"U.S. embassies are required to serve Americans visiting or living in the host country without discrimination. Ms. Frawley’s remarks raise serious, disqualifying concerns about how she will treat Jewish Americans visiting or living in Brazil. Moreover, Brazil has a significant Jewish community of over 120,000 people, well-integrated into all aspects of Brazilian society. It would be deeply insulting and distressing to this community to send a U.S. Ambassador to Brazil who has Bagley’s history of using ugly antisemitic tropes."
WIKIPEDIA QUOTES:
"Elizabeth Frawley Bagley (born July 13, 1952) is an American diplomat, attorney, political activist and philanthropistwho is the nominee to serve as the next United States Ambassador to Brazil in the Biden administration."
"Bagley is a major political donor and fundraiser who "over the years [has] raised millions of dollars for Democratic candidates.""
"She resides in Washington, D.C. She also owns a house in Nantucket."
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Bagley will fit right in on Biden’s team of Leftist anti-Semites: Hady Amr, Robert Malley and so many others.
“‘The Jewish Factor, It’s Money’: Biden Ambassador Pick Under Fire for Anti-Semitic Tirade,” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, June 22, 2022 5:45 pm
The Biden administration’s nominee to serve as the U.S. ambassador to Brazil spoke at length about the influence of Jewish money in politics, claiming the “Jewish lobby” exerts undue influence over the Democratic Party with its “major money.”
Elizabeth Frawley Bagley, a longtime diplomat and Democratic Party insider, is scheduled on Thursday to have her nomination advanced to the full Senate by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. But Bagley’s comments about Jewish money in politics—tropes long considered anti-Semitic in nature—are raising red flags among Democratic and Republican members of the committee, senior congressional sources told the Washington Free Beacon.
Bagley, in a 1998 interview, a full copy of which was obtained by the Free Beacon, bemoaned “the influence of the Jewish lobby because there is major money involved.” She went on to claim “the Democrats always tend to go with the Jewish constituency on Israel and say stupid things, like moving the capital to Jerusalem always comes up.” Support for these Israel-related issues are due to “the Jewish factor, it’s money.” The interview was conducted by a historian at the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training for an oral history project….
Bagley opened up about the “Jewish lobby” and its impact on Democratic Party politics in the 1998 interview. She was asked about “the Israeli influence” on the Clinton administration, where Bagley served as the ambassador to Portugal.
“There is always the influence of the Jewish lobby because there is major money involved,” Bagley said. “But, I don’t remember any major issues coming out on that, besides the usual ‘make Jerusalem the capital of Israel,’ which is always an issue in the campaign.”
Democrats, she said, “always tend to go with the Jewish constituency on Israel and say stupid things, like moving the capital to Jerusalem always comes up. Things that we shouldn’t even touch.”
“Jewish Democrats,” she continued, “were going to give their money to Clinton anyway and Jews are mostly Democrats on social issues.”
The “Jewish factor” is not about the raw number of electors who care about these issues, Bagley said, “it’s money.”
When questioned about these remarks during a May 18 confirmation hearing with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Bagley claimed they were the result of a “free-flowing discussion” with the interviewer.
“The language you used in regard to the Jewish community, Israel’s influence on our election, and Jewish money have me concerned,” Sen. Ben Cardin (D., Md.) said during the hearing. “The choice of words was fit into the traditional tropes of anti-Semitism.”
“I regret that you would think that it was a problem,” Bagley told Cardin. “I certainly didn’t mean anything by it. It was a poor choice of words, but it was something that the interviewer had asked me, prompted by something about politics.”
Bagley added that she is “very sorry about that choice of words.”…
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
New York – -(AmmoLand.com)- The Supreme Court Has Spoken on This and In the Clearest Language yet seen to date.
The long-awaited and highly anticipated Bruen case decision is out! It is better—much better—than we had anticipated.
Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the Opinion. Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett joined him. Justice Alito filed a concurring opinion. Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett also filed concurring opinions.
Justice Breyer, who filed an extensive dissenting opinion in Heller, filed a dissenting opinion in Bruen. The two other liberal wing Justices, Sotomayor and Kagan, joined him.
So that there would be no mistake, Justice Thomas provided, for the Nation, the Bruen Holding upfront in the first paragraph of the detailed majority opinion. He said,
“In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570 (2008), and McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742 (2010), we recognized that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right of an ordinary, law-abiding citizen to possess a handgun in the home for self-defense. In this case, petitioners and respondents agree that ordinary, law-abiding citizens have a similar right to carry handguns publicly for their self-defense.”
“We too agree, and now hold, consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.”
How Important Is Bruen——
Bruen now joins, in the clearest language possible, the distinguished pantheon of seminal Second Amendment cases that, together, make categorically clear that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
It is much more concerning and disconcerting to the Nation’s Destructors than a High Court decision in the Dobbs abortion case—a leaked version of which created a furor among the Nation’s Neo-Marxist and Anarchist malcontents.
Bruen is at the apex of critically important High Court cases defending our Country as a free Constitutional Republic and establishing our people as Sole Sovereign over Government.
Unrestrained exercise of this Fundamental God-Given Right by the people goes to the heart of our Nation’s history, heritage, traditions, ethos, culture, and ethical and legal foundation.
The Nation’s enemies, both inside it and outside it, detest America’s armed citizenry. They hate the Nation’s freedoms and liberties. They disdain the Nation’s belief and faith in Divine Natural Law.
— Southern With Sass (@LilSouthernSass) June 23, 2022
The Bruen decision won’t change the attitudes of the would-be killers of the one, true free Republic on the face of the Earth. The naysayers will become only more hardened, more entrenched. But, in that fact, even the most naïve of Americans must now come to know the danger that the treacherous creatures among us pose to the preservation of a free Republic and to the continued sovereignty of the American people, over their Government.
The abhorrence of this Nation’s Obstructors and Destructors toward our Armed Citizenry isn’t grounded on more than mere aesthetics or even on ethical concerns.
It is based on frustration, rage, and fear. After all, the Bill of Rights prevents America’s domestic and foreign enemies from taking control over the Nation and its people. And, at least one branch of our Government, the U.S. Supreme Court—it is now clear—is intent on defending, rather than denigrating and revoking, our most cherished and sacred Rights and Liberties, without which, a powerful Nation-State and a Sovereign People cannot continue to exist.
An armed citizenry of 100 million people or more can never be vanquished; the Republic can never be undone; the sovereignty of the American people can never be effectively usurped, and the will of the American people can never be undermined. Americans can now gain further encouragement from the fact that the Third Branch of Government has its back.
The fundamental Right of Armed Self-Defense is our Birthright. The Court’s Majority knows that and they asserted that now in no uncertain terms.
Armed Self-Defense As A Fundamental Right Cannot Be Rationally Denied
The fundamental right of Armed Self-Defense is subsumed in the more general natural law right of Self-Survival which is itself subsumed in the supernal Right of one’s Self-hood: The sanctity and inviolability of one’s immortal Soul, Spirit, and Psyche. It is Man’s greatest gift—an eternal gift—bestowed on and in Man by the Divine Creator. It is that gift which the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists deny and abhor and therefore intend to destroy, but which they cannot touch as long as Americans remain armed—and armed to the hilt.
Yet, when speaking of this elemental, immutable, illimitable, and eternal natural law Right, the publishers, editors, reporters, and commentators of the seditious New York Times, cannot even bring themselves to mention the right of the people to keep and bear arms as a Right at all, whether fundamental and unalienable or not.
A Fundamental Right is Not to be Mistaken for Mere Privilege Contrary to What Malefactors and Imbeciles Maintain!
To the Disrupters and Destroyers of a free Republic, the Right of armed self-defense is nothing more than a privilege—a privilege that, from the Times’ perspective, too many Americans cherish and endorse and too many exercise.
In colorful language, The NYTimes explains its frustration, rage, and fear over armed self-defense—frustration, rage, and fear borne of Americans’ insistent adoration for its Bill of Rights, and especially for the fundamental right of armed self-defense.
A few weeks ago, the Times said this about “‘the privilege’ of the people to keep and bear arms”:
“Most Republicans in the Senate represent deeply conservative states where gun ownership is treated as a sacred privilege enshrined in the Constitution, a privilege not to be infringed upon no matter how much blood is spilled in classrooms and school hallways around the country.” ~ from an article in The New York Times, May 26, 2022, by Carl Hulse, Chief D.C. correspondent for the NYTimes.
This substitution of words here is no small thing. It isn’t a careless misuse of words. It isn’t a benign, innocuous, trivial slip-up.
It is no accident at all that the people at the Times would use the word, ‘privilege,’ in lieu of ‘right’ when referencing the language of the Second Amendment. Buts this word choice is one the author of the article, Carl Hulse, didn’t even come up with.
An attorney, Warren Freedman, an outspoken critic of the Second Amendment wrote a reference book titled, “The Privilege to Keep and Bear Arms: The Second Amendment and Its Interpretation,” in 1989, nineteen years before Heller; thirty-three years before the publication of the Times/Hulse article and the Bruen case decision.
The writer of the afore-referenced NYTimes Article, Carl Hulse, must have known this. Yet he never credited Freedman; odd that!
The Framers of the Constitution, no less than, and probably a good deal more astute than Hulse, Freedman, and Walker, were meticulous in their choice of words when drafting the Constitution, especially when drafting the words to the Bill of Rights. Nowhere in the BOR does the term, ‘privilege,’ appear.
Yet the Destroyers of our Nation don’t deign to call gun possession a Basic Right—the most basic of Rights: one grounded on personal survival, be it from a predatory creature, predatory man, or predatory Government. Rather, they prefer to utilize the word, ‘privilege,’ in lieu of ‘right,’ to describe those who seek to exercise it.
Tacit in the word, ‘privilege,’ is the idea of something beneficial that some people obtain by dint of special birth, advantage, or by connection whether made or acquired—and that, by implication, most do not.
The words, ‘right’ and ‘privilege,’ are often conflated. And that is dangerous. For, once the public adopts language that the propagandists intentionally and diabolically propagate through the media, that verbiage becomes a viral meme. As a viral meme, the verbiage lodges in one’s mind. It infuses one’s speech. It suffuses and litters one’s thought processes, embedding itself inextricably in the public’s psyche, replicating itself a million-fold into every corner of one’s being and outward to every individual in the Country.
One must always be vigilant to avoid being misled by terminology utilized by nefarious forces to control one’s thought processes, one’s belief systems, and one’s actions.
Consider the subtle distinction between the two words in a common dictionary definition.
In the Merriam-Webster dictionary, one sees——
“A privilege is a right or advantage gained by birth, social position, effort, or concession.”
Note, in that definition, the word, ‘right’ qua ‘privilege’ denotes a thing with parameters. The term ‘right,’ in the colloquial definition, clearly means something less than a ‘fundamental right.’
A “Right” qua “Fundamental God-Bestowed Right” is something beyond mere “Privilege.” It is a thing intrinsic to a person—derived from natural law and it has no limit or boundary. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy elaborates on this:
“To have a right is to have a ‘valid claim.’”
“‘In the strictest sense’ all rights are claims.”
“A right, in the most important sense, is the conjunction of a [privilege] and a claim-right.”
“All rights are essentially property rights.”
“Rights are themselves property, things we own.”
A critical distinction in meaning between ‘fundamental right’ and ‘privilege’ rests at the heart of Bruen, whether one knows this or not.
The Bruen case has more impact on the preservation of a free Constitutional Republic than many Americans can appreciate or that the legacy Press and Government will let on.
In its Brief supporting the writ for certiorari, filed on December 17, 2020, the Petitioners presented the issue thus:
“Whether the Second Amendment allows the government to prohibit ordinary law-abiding citizens from carrying handguns outside the home for self-defense.”
The issue as stated goes to the heart of the import of the Second Amendment. Do Americans have a fundamental, unalienable right to keep and bear arms, or not? Petitioners meant to bring that salient issue front and center for High Court review.
Heller ruled that a person has the inalienable right to keep and bear arms in defense of hearth and home. But the underlying basis for that ruling and the substructure of it is this—
The right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right. Bruen emphatically reasserts this.
This means, by logical implication, that the right doesn’t reside only within the confines of one’s home, stopping at the doorstep once one ventures outside his home. It exists everywhere. Bruen now, correctly interpreting the language of the Second Amendment, explicitly asserts this.
And the tacit implication of that pronouncement is this: the exercise of that right is grounded on natural law, and beyond the power of the State to meddle in it, i.e., the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms is God-bestowed, and, therefore, Absolute. The Bruen Court has issued a warning to the First and Second Branches of Government and to the State Governments as well: Don’t meddle with the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms.
Roberts And the Liberal Wing Of The Court Had Hoped To Lessen The Impact Of An Expected Strong Ruling In Bruen By Reconfiguring The Issue, But, Fortunately, To No Avail.
To lessen the impact of a ruling expected to favor the Petitioners, the Roberts’ Court limited the issue on review to consideration of the Constitutionality of the NYPD’s procedures for issuing concealed handgun carry licenses. The High Court redrafted the issue on review to this:
“Whether the state of New York’s denial of petitioners’ applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment.”
Chief Justice Roberts and the liberal wing of the Court attempted, through reconfiguration, to chop the legs of Bruen off at the knee, to reduce the reviewable issue to one merely looking at the propriety of NYPD procedures for issuing concealed handgun carry licenses. The aim was to prevent the Court from reviewing the basic constitutionality of Government licensing of/meddling in the exercise of a fundamental, God-Given Right.
Justices Thomas and Alito would have none of that. They stuck by their guns.
The New York City Gun Transport case fiasco was in their mind.
Rather than be caught on the losing side of one of the most important case decisions in our Nation’s history, which would diminish his influence as Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Roberts joined the Court’s majority, however, apparently reluctantly.
Chief Justice Roberts had to accept the majority’s holding and tacit reasoning that the God-Given right of armed self-defense is the most important Right that any human can exercise if he is to retain his sacred and inviolate Right of Selfhood and Free Will against the tyranny of Government.
Thus, despite the drastic whittling down of the Bruen issue for review, the arch concern we originally had, that concern is fortunately laid to rest.
The Bruen case holding isn’t lame and feeble. Justice Thomas and the Court’s majority responded to those lunatics that sought to intimidate them, in the furor made over Dobbs.
The U.S. Supreme Court, unlike the First Two Branches, is not, in its present arrangement will not be intimidated, and that frustrates the Biden Administration and the Democrat Party-Controlled Congress.
Unlike the first Two Branches of Government, the Third Branch is determined to do its duty to defend God, Constitution, the Country, and the Sovereign American People.
How will the Malcontents and Miscreants Respond to the Bruen Decision?
The High Court has thrown down the Gauntlet to the Obstructors and Destructors intent on dismantling our Republic and subjugating our people.
How will the corrupt, seditious legacy media respond? How will New York State Governor Hochul and New York City Mayor Adams respond? How will their counterparts in other affected jurisdictions respond?
Also, how will the corrupt Biden Administration respond? How will the poisonous vipers in the Democrat Party in Congress respond? And last, how will the effete Eunuchs in the Republican Party respond?
We will discuss these questions and issues and analyze Bruen and its impact on Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist influences and responses to Bruen in upcoming Arbalest Quarrel articles.
For the moment, at least, the Nation can breathe a shared sigh of relief, and the late eminent Justice Antonin Scalia can smile down upon both our Nation and its people from Heaven above and lay serenely at rest.
Here is the recent court opinion in full for your reading pleasure.
Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel’ website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Roe v. Wade has at long last been overturned, and the Left’s response has been predictable: Leftists are pounding the walls and gnashing their teeth with rage and hatred. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-Make Mine a Double) has shouted that the decision is “illegitimate” and led pro-abortion activists in chants of “into the streets.” Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Unhinged) has proclaimed, “The hell with the Supreme Court. We will defy them!” But no one expects the supporters of Antifa and Black Lives Matter to confine their rage to words alone: even Old Joe Biden’s Department of Homeland Security paused from hunting for “white supremacists” on Friday to warn Catholic churches to prepare for a “night of rage.”
If there is violence at churches, it certainly won’t be anything new. Live Action’s Lila Rose pointed out Thursday that “Since the Dobbs v Jackson draft was leaked, pro-abortion activists have: -Vandalized 16 churches -Vandalized at least 16 pro-life pregnancy centers -Firebombed 4 pro-life pregnancy centers and offices -Attempted to assassinate a Supreme Court Justice Where’s the outrage?”
Where indeed? We can only imagine what would be happening now on CNN and in The New York Times if 16 abortion clinics had been vandalized, but the guardians of acceptable opinion can’t be bothered to deplore violence in the service of their pet causes.
Pro-abortion activists have been threatening violence if Roe was overturned for quite some time. It would be more surprising at this point if Leftists remained calm and vowed to work peacefully and within the bounds of the law than if they started howling with irrational rage and burning things down, as they sought to forbid states from outlawing the murder of children.
Accordingly, the DHS has told churches to be ready for “extreme violence.” This is striking in itself. Considering that Biden’s handlers’ Justice Department has taken the unprecedented step of publicly dissenting from the Supreme Court’s decision and that the Biden administration refused to condemn the illegal protests at the homes of the Justices who were seen as likely to vote to overturn Roe (and did so), it’s nothing short of astonishing that this warning was issued at all. After all, the Biden Department of Homeland Security was only recently setting up a Disinformation Governance Board to monitor and control Americans’ speech. Now it cares if Catholic churches are targeted for being pro-life? It’s intriguing that DHS apparently believes it has to keep up appearances in this regard. Is the DHS aware that the cultural momentum is swinging away from the hard Left that has dominated American society for so long?
And so, the DHS warned Catholic Churches that pro-abortion terrorists, including the Antifa-linked Jane’s Revenge, are planning a “Night of Rage” for Friday night, with churches and pregnancy centers as their primary targets. Jane’s Revenge fulminated, “We have agonized over this apparent absence of indignation. Why is it that we are so afraid to unleash hell upon those who are destroying us? Fear of state repression is valid, but this goes deeper than that.”
The Roman Catholic Diocese of Stockton, Calif., accordingly issued an “urgent memo” to its clergy and parishes. It explained that a DHS agent, Jesse Rangel, had informed diocesan officials that an “extremist group” had issued a “manifesto” calling for attacks on churches beginning at 8 p.m. on the night that the Dobbs decision was issued, which would of course be Friday night.
According to Newsweek, “the memo does not describe the specific threats facing churches, but states that Rangel told the diocese that ‘large groups with cells nationwide have already been discovered ‘casing’ parishes, including here in California.'” Accordingly, the Stockton diocese issued a “critical notice” for clergy and parish officials to “develop a plan should you see or hear anything suspicious.”
The memo told the churches, “Make sure you have ushers and or security available during your services and perhaps identify who among your volunteers and parishioners are law enforcement. Suspicious activity would include someone asking out-of-place questions (Largest Mass times? Doors always open? Do you have security?, looking around church property, protestors, and general disturbances.”
That’s fine, but it also underscores the apparent fact that the churches are on their own. All the DHS did was issue a warning? Imagine if a militant pro-life group had announced plans to “unleash hell” on abortion centers. Do you think in that case that DHS would have limited itself to sending out a warning? The National Guard would be posted at every abortion center in the country. But when it comes to churches — well, there’s that two-tiered justice system again.
A new executive order signed by the Resident-in-Chief himself massively expands access to so-called “gender-affirming” care, particularly in more conservative-leaning states where laws currently exist to protect children from the Baphomet cult.
“The order aims to use the muscle of the federal government to push back on laws in states like Texas and Florida that have restricted access to health care for transgender youth and barred discussion in elementary schools about gender and sexual orientation,” reported The Hill about Biden’s executive order.
What Biden has basically announced to the entire country is that he does not care what you or anyone else thinks about protecting childhood innocence. He wants zero restrictions on filling school classrooms with degenerate curricula and transforming America’s youth into gender-deranged perverts.
Not only that, but Biden also wants your child’s genitals to be altered or removed in the name of “medicine” and “health care.” This is what your tax dollars are going towards paying for, by the way.
Decent Americans must fight back against the trannification of the country
As of now, the Republican Party has done almost nothing to try to stop the Biden regime’s transgender agenda. Fearing backlash, many conservative politicians and leaders are remaining silent in the hopes of not being “canceled,” but at what cost?
If nothing is said or done about the trannification of the country due to cowardice, then America is done. Future generations will have no grasp on human biology, and drag queens will eventually occupy every crevice of this once great land.
“This fear must be banished,” Revolver says.
“The Democratic campaign to abolish male and female and trannify America is something worth fighting against, and worth doing so loudly and energetically. To downplay the issue is to decide that it is politically impossible to defeat.”
Take Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, for instance. This openly lesbian “mom” recently stated that she would like to see drag queens present at every school across the country because they are “fun.”
“A drag queen for every school,” Nessel said with a laugh at a civil rights conference in Lansing.
If decent Americans fail to speak up about this kind of thing, they can also kiss gender-specific sports goodbye. Men will continue playing on women’s teams, and possibly vice versa depending on the sport, and there will be nothing anyone can do to stop it once it becomes the norm.
“… focusing so much on girls’ sports is a distraction,” Revolver contends about this particular issue.
“The worst part of the transgender mania isn’t that girls face unfair competition. The worst part of this insidious ideology is that it is an assault on the good and the true. It is a radical campaign to deny all physical, biological, and even spiritual differences between ‘male’ and ‘female’ which have been acknowledged and recognized in every human culture and religious tradition for all of human history.”
There is also a profound cost to society from all this transgenderism, which mainly affects developing children who are being exposed to such perversions at an age so young that they will be forever damaged by it.
Many of them will be groomed into believing that they exist in the “wrong” body and that the only way to become their “true selves” is to take pharmaceutical gender-benders and lob off their genitals. The profoundly irreversible and lifelong harms of all this cannot be overstated.
“The chief victims are the mentally vulnerable people suffering from gender dysphoria who are being ‘transitioned,’ mutilated every which way; physically, psychologically, and spiritually, and manipulated into extreme, harmful, and irreversible life choices.”
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
(Natural News) The Supreme Court has struck down a longtime gun control law that barred most people from carrying a firearm concealed. And MSNBC talking-head Keith Olbermann is enraged.
On Twitter, Olbermann called for an insurrection against the Supreme Court, including its total abolishment. If that does not work, then Olbermann wants people to just ignore the court entirely and pretend as though it does not exist.
“It has become necessary to dissolve the Supreme Court of the United States,” Olbermann declared on Twitter with about 2,700 “likes,” as of this writing. “The first step is for a state the ‘court’ has now forced guns upon, to ignore this ruling.”
In other words, Olbermann wants law enforcement to continue prosecuting anyone in New York who is caught with a concealed firearm, even though the Supreme Court has decided that carrying concealed in New York is fully constitutional and in alignment with the Second Amendment.
“Great. You’re a court? Why and how do you think you can enforce your rulings?” Olbermann further added, along with the hashtag #IgnoreTheCourt.
Olbermann curses every Supreme Court justice who ruled in favor of the Second Amendment
Olbermann did not stop there, though. In two additional tweets, he taunted SCOTUS over the decision, mocking the court’s apparent inability, according to him, to actually enforce the new ruling.
“Hey SCOTUS, send the SCOTUS army here to enforce your ruling, you House of Lords radicals pretending to be a court,” Olbermann jested, unable to see the irony in his own statement.
The irony, in case you missed it too, is that it will be much harder to continue enforcing the concealed carry ban than it will be to just let it go. Perhaps Olbermann is planning to walk around the Big Apple strip-searching people himself in pursuit of hidden guns?
In a third tweet, Olbermann resorted to a foul-mouthed curse on Supreme Court Justices Alito, Thomas, Roberts, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, “and the paralegal Coney Barrett” for voting to restore New Yorkers’ Second Amendment rights.
The 6-3 decision will also reportedly allow more people in other states to legally carry guns on the streets, including in larger cities such as Los Angeles and Boston where similar gun control measures were enacted.
“The Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home,” said Justice Thomas about the decision.
Olbermann obviously disagrees and wants a full insurrection on the highest court in the land in order to remedy the situation to his liking. Remember, this is the same guy who repeatedly condemned the “insurrectionists” for entering the Capitol building through the velvet ropes and wide-open doors on Jan. 6, 2021.
“I think it’s time for the dissolution of Keith Olbermann!” joked one commenter.
“This sounds kind of … seditious?” wrote another.
Someone else pointed out that at no point has the Supreme Court decided to “force guns” onto anyone, as Olbermann falsely suggested in his deranged rant.
“Holy howitzers and bazookas, Batman!” this person wrote.
“As for Twitter, it’s revealing about the people who have been thrown off of the platform, including President Trump. But it’s even MORE revealing about those whom Twitter has allowed to remain on it, in good standing.”
Others pointed out the hypocrisy of the Left in simultaneously demanding the “right” to murder unborn and even newborn children while also demanding an end to the Second Amendment because think of the children!
“Look at all the stories with the same bu****it talking point: ‘Supreme Court expands gun rights’ … more like restored a constitutional right,” added another.
More related news coverage about the war on guns can be found at SecondAmendment.news.
The Supreme Court's outrageous Roe v Wade decision purporting to allow the mass slaughter of babies has been overturned, but this is merely a baby step in the right direction, said The New American magazine's Senior Editor Alex Newman in this brief news update. He warned that terror attacks by pro-abortion forces are likely to continue and that advocates for unborn children must now go on offense to stop the slaughter. Alex also discusses the constitutional issues at play here.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
(Natural News) Although the biggest news of the week is undoubtedly the US Supreme Court overturning Roe vs. Wade, there’s another bombshell that quietly broke two days ago — one that will have vastly more profound devastating consequences on the world than any decision coming from SCOTUS.
Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that BRICS nations are going to roll out a new alternative to the US dollar’s global reserve currency status. As reported by IndiaTimes.com:
According to the Russian president, the member states are also developing reliable alternative mechanisms for international payments. Earlier, the group said it was working on setting up a joint payment network to cut reliance on the Western financial system. The BRICS countries have been also boosting the use of local currencies in mutual trade.
But this is only the beginning of the bombshell here.
We also know from industry sources that “Project Sandman” refers to a group of over 100 countries that plan to simultaneously denounce the US dollar as a global reserve currency. This will likely take place on a Sunday evening, USA time, says Andy Schectman, the CEO of Miles Franklin (a gold and silver dealer). He told me this in an interview recorded yesterday, to be aired soon.
The new replacement currency will be powered by blockchain and backed by gold, which is why member nations have been rapidly stockpiling gold supplies in anticipation of the big announcement. When that announcement comes, nations that represent nearly 75% of the world’s population will simultaneously denounce the US dollar and roll out a gold-backed, blockchain-audited international currency system that will instantly become the world’s currency choice for free trade and a store of value.
The dollar, backed by nothing but more money printing and incompetent political leadership, will collapse toward zero. Virtually overnight, goods and services sold in America will increase in price by 1000%. And that’s only the beginning: The dollar will continue to lose value by the hour as the world’s holders of US Treasury debt and dollar currency dump it all at any price.
Those holding dollars will lose everything.
The United States government will quickly collapse in parallel with the collapse of the dollar and the US central bank. There will be no money to pay military troops or pay off corrupt government officials. All government salaries and pensions will be effectively halted. The great neocon empire of debt, lies, and death will implode so rapidly that people will be psychically shocked and physically unprepared.
Russia, China, and India will emerge as the economic leaders of the world, and the US empire will cease to exist. The former United States of America will be broken into regional nation-states, divided largely among political lines with the satanic, anti-American Left seizing control of the coasts, and conservative, pro-America, pro-liberty, pro-Constitution groups dominating the rest of the country. Expect a very real civil war to ensue, with massive casualties.
Russia knows that it can defeat America simply by joining the world’s efforts to declare America’s dollar currency to be null and void. No nuclear war is necessary. America it already highly vulnerable to this sort of collapse due to the nation’s massive debt and spending addictions. Russia and China are merely sucking the air out of America’s collapsing currency, knowing that economic gravity will do the rest.
The Belt and Road Initiative – the future of world trade WITHOUT America and Western Europe
Examine the following map, depicting China’s Belt and Road Initiative, consisting of protected, high-efficiency trade routes among countries representing about 75% of the world’s population:
This Belt and Road Initiative will speed trade among member nations, and it will use China’s new “digital yuan” currency backed by gold and audited by blockchain technology. (Please watch my upcoming interview with Andy Schectman for a lot more on this, as Andy has been following the topic quite extensively.)
Notice what’s missing from this map? America and Western Europe.
That’s because America — the military and economic bully of the world — isn’t welcomed by other nations. America doesn’t play nice. America bombs anyone it wants while weaponizing the SWIFT system to punish its political enemies, and now that the world has come to realize the dollar is a weapon rather than a free trade currency, nobody wants anything to do with America from here forward.
The economic sanctions against Russia were the last straw for the dollar, it turns out. And the USA has nothing left to back its currency: Not manufacturing, not labor, not agricultural output, and not even gold in the vaults. The USA no longer has fair and free elections and no longer has freedom of speech. On top of that, the USA has political prisoners rotting in jails in DC while the FDA harvests organs from aborted human babies to use for medical experiments. In other words, the USA occupying an illegitimate government, under demonic influence, has become a great evil in the world.
Western Europe is run by lunatics and “woke” propagandists who are committing economic suicide by outlawing every form of energy that matters. The EU is disintegrating, and the Euro currency likely will collapse within the next year. Western Europe is on a suicide mission, both economically and culturally, as the nations of Europe can’t even protect their own borders from mass migration. (Nor can the USA, for that matter.)
America as you know it will soon cease to exist
The era of Western Civilization is coming to an end. It will be characterized by the collapse of the dollar, a global repudiation of the petrodollar status, a collapse of the rule of law across the United States, a collapse of the stock market, pensions, bond market, and crypto markets, a collapse of the food supply chain, and a collapse of the fuel and transportation infrastructure. This will, in turn, take down the power grid in many areas, leading to a Mad Max-style scenario from which a few capable survivors will attempt to flee.
Before the end of 2025, as I have publicly predicted for at least the last five years — America as you know it will cease to exist. This has been the plan all along from Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and plenty of RINO neocons, too (the Cheneys, Bushes, etc.). They needed to take down America in order to achieve a one-world government under the fascist United Nations, with universal gun control, universal vaccine mandates, abortion “rights,” engineered global starvation, and total control over all speech and elections.
Their agenda is failing at many levels, however. Roe vs. Wade was just struck down by the US Supreme Court, for example, and there are elements at work that are looking likely to achieve key indictments against deep state players. However, any state that wants to exist after the dollar collapses must be ready to roll out its own gold-backed currency on an emergency basis. Texas is largely prepared to do this, but few other states are ready. The re-establishment of trade and commerce (following the dollar collapse) is going to be the key to surviving the demise of the dollar.
Texas is America’s No. 1 exporter of goods, by the way, and the Texas economy is larger than most nations on the planet. So is the economy of California. But California is run by child-murdering, demonic fascists while Texas has the world’s best Attorney General (Paxton) and a strong contingent of pro-human, pro-liberty, pro-Constitution Americans who are ready and willing to relaunch the spirit of America in the new Republic of Texas, when necessary. #TEXIT
But no matter what happens domestically, America’s days of being able to run around the world, threatening everybody with military strikes and dollar weaponization will soon be over. And without the ability to print money and defraud the world into buying soon-to-be-worthless US debt instruments, the United States military will have no funding to continue operations or build new weapons. It will eventually be disbanded.
What happened to the former Soviet Union in 1991 is about to happen to the United States of America: A collapse of the ability to continue to fund the bureaucracy and military that propped up the system the entire time. The USA has sadly devolved into an empire of debt, lies, and death. The country is currently ruled by an actual death cult, but those days are fast coming to an end with the imminent collapse of the demonic dollar and all the evil that money printing has enabled since 1971.
When this evil is finally brought to an end, all those who value life, liberty, and happiness will rejoice (and rebuild).
Get prepared, for that today is coming soon. And from what I’ve concluded, the only way to avoid the financial collapse that’s coming is to hold your assets in physical goods such as gold and silver, land, agricultural equipment, ammunition, industrial buildings (factories, for example), and other “real” things that don’t vanish in a currency collapse.
Discover more details in my Situation Update podcast:
That’s a bit reminiscent of the scene in Casablanca when Captain Renault professes that he is “shocked, shocked “to discover gambling in Rick’s Café--moments before the croupier hands him his winnings.
I say this because Bishop Napolioni is not a strait-laced defender of the Church’s teachings, but an LGBTQ+ advocate who oversees a group for the “pastoral accompaniment of homosexuals.” If Bishop Napolioni is so well-acquainted with the LGBTQ+ movement how come he doesn’t know that blasphemy and mockery of Christian beliefs are a regular feature of pride marches.
Moreover, over-the-top religious parodies are not a new development in the LGBTQ+ movement. Has the bishop never heard of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence—a group of gay men in San Francisco who dressed in nun’s clothing and entertained crowds with bawdy behavior? The “sisters” introduced their act more than 40 years ago and have become an international organization with chapters all over the world.
Perhaps we can give Bishop Napolioni the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he’s one of those super-naïve individuals who can’t see what’s right in front of his face because he believes the propaganda about the gay lifestyle is only slightly different from the straight variety.
But how about Fr. James Martin, S.J? He’s the foremost Catholic advocate for the LGBTQ+ movement. Yet his ministry is not to reconcile gay, lesbian, and trans people to the teachings of the Catholic Church, but to reconcile the Catholic Church to the LGBTQ+ ideology
In a recent article, Martin argued that Catholics can and should celebrate “Pride Month.” Many Catholics, writes Martin, misunderstand LGBT pride to be about vanity, but it’s really about dignity—“a consciousness of one’s own dignity.” I had to smile when I read this because it reminded me of a scene from another old movie—the opening scene from Singing in the Rain in which a reporter asks Gene Kelly if he has any advice for aspiring actors, and is met with the answer, “dignity—always dignity.” Meanwhile, while Kelly goes on about his dignity, we see scenes from his career which show that Kelly and his partner sacrifice their dignity at every turn in order to get ahead.
I’m sure that Fr. Martin is no stranger to pride parades, drag queen entertainments, and so forth. To the naked eye (if you’ll pardon the expression) these displays do look like vanity or, more accurately, like narcissistic exhibitionism. Yet Fr, Martin would have us believe that Pride Month is really about a “consciousness of one’s own dignity”—as though the tattooed, half-naked exhibitionists should be compared to civil rights marchers in Selma.
In fact, the gay rights movement which later morphed into the LGBTQ/Pride movement has often been compared by its advocates to the Civil Rights Movement of the sixties. But that claim won’t wash. The Civil Rights Movement actually was about human dignity—a dignity that derives from the fact that we are all made in the image of God.
Consequently, the civil rights marches were conducted with great dignity. When blacks marched through the streets of Southern cities, they wore their Sunday best and they held their heads high. Though they were jeered and spat on by bigots and bludgeoned by police, they did not respond in kind. They were conscious of their God-given dignity and acted accordingly.
By contrast, Pride events often seem like mockeries of human dignity—attempts to blot out the image of God. This is evident not only in the blasphemous use of religious objects and symbols, but in the entertainments—bawdy drag queens in exaggerated costumes, marchers in skimpy costumes, and nearly naked exhibitionists performing pantomimes of sex acts.
Like Gene Kelly’s character, Fr. Martin tells us it’s all about “dignity,” but these Mardi Gras-like displays concentrate on what is debased in human nature rather than what is noble. More often than not, they mock notions of nobility, virtue, and fidelity. Beyond that, they are also self-mocking. “Yes,” they seem to be saying, “this is only shallow entertainment, but it makes me the center of attention and that’s what I crave.”
The comparison to the Civil Rights marches is, in short, a stretch. It’s as though the Civil Rights marchers had decided that the best way to gain respect was to put on minstrel clothes and sing “Mammy” while tap-dancing down the street.
Fr. Martin urges Catholics to celebrate Pride Month, but judging by the usual celebrations—exhibitionist pride parades, drag queen shows targeted at children, and lots of sexually explicit content—Catholics would have to jettison much of their faith in order to join in the celebration.
The meaning of life according to Christian teaching is to be found in a relationship with God. According to LGBTQ ideology, however, the meaning of life has to do with experiencing and expressing one’s sexuality. At least, that is the impression conveyed by the narcissistic entertainments favored by the LGBTQ crowd. All in all, it’s a very shallow and self-obsessed vision of life. If that’s all that the LGBTQ movement has to offer, why should we celebrate it? And why should we pay any attention to a pied-piper priest who seems more committed to the latest lifestyles than to the truths of his faith?
Unfortunately, one of the reasons we can’t entirely ignore Fr. Martin is that he has the full backing of Pope Francis. Francis has encouraged Fr. Martin’s LGBTQ ministry both by writing to him and by receiving him in a private audience—a significant public gesture of support. In the letter, which Martin made public, Francis writes, “I pray for you to continue in this way, being close, compassionate and with great tenderness.”
Does this mean that Francis is just another starry-eyed idealist who is not aware of the excesses of the LGBTQ “community,” and would be “shocked, shocked” to find out about those excesses?
It’s difficult to know for sure, but there is plenty of evidence that Francis is not only aware of the LGBTQ demi-monde, but is unconcerned by it. He seems to have spent a good part of his papacy trying to extricate homosexualist friends from awkward and even criminal situations. When, for example, Vatican police discovered Cardinal Francesco Cocopalmerio presiding over a drug-fueled homosexual orgy in a Vatican apartment, the Cardinal was allowed to leave before the arrests began.
Aside from the various scandals, however, the clearest indication that Francis is in “the know” can be deduced from his appointments to high office. His appointments are almost exclusively pro-LGBT, and Francis, who has a reputation for being canny and crafty, would almost certainly know that about them.
I know some traditional Catholics who think that Francis is naïve and not too bright—that his advisors deceive and manipulate him. The increasing permissiveness in the Church, they say, is due to others, not to Francis. From this perspective, Francis would be shocked to discover what goes on in Pride events and in bawdy drag queens' story hours for children.
But I doubt that he would be either surprised or shocked. Francis himself uses bawdy and scatological language. And according to one biographer, Francis delighted in teaching dirty words to his young nephew. On Easter Sunday, Francis gave a sermon to 80,000 young people in St. Peter’s Square. Was he unaware that the “warmup” for his appearance was a performance by “Blanco,” a soft-porn singer who is a favorite of LGBT fans?
The only thing that seems to shock Francis is that traditional Catholics are still hindering the forward movement of Church “progressives.”. In a recent talk at an educational conference, he scolded traditionalists for guarding “dead traditions.” On other occasions, he has castigated traditional Catholics for their “rigid fundamentalism” and “scrupulosity.”
No one, of course, could accuse Francis of being scrupulous. He is notoriously non-judgmental except when it comes to sins against the earth and the climate. Under Francis, the Church is in no danger of encouraging scrupulosity. It is, however, in danger of encouraging a novel view of life that is shallow, self-absorbed, and reproductive-adverse.
It's strange and ironic that Church leaders would fall for this sideshow when they should be passing on the message that they were commissioned to pass on—namely, the most profound, most powerful, and most meaningful vision of life ever set before the world.
Contrary to Fr. Martin, giving support to an LGBT person does not, from a Christian perspective, mean celebrating his lifestyle, but helping him instead to lift himself out of it.
The Department of Defense did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment New documents exclusively obtained by Fox News Digital reveal that the U.S. Army is teaching West Point cadets critical race theory (CRT), including addressing "whiteness."
Fox News Digital exclusively obtained the documents from government watchdog group Judicial Watch, which had to sue the military twice under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to get the information.
"Our military is under attack – from within," Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said in the press release. "These documents show racist, anti-American CRT propaganda is being used to try to radicalize our rising generation of Army leadership at West Point."
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
What could possibly go wrong with any country teaching its army hatred and shame for its own history and heritage? Under the woke blokes of the American Left, that’s exactly what’s happening, with no recognition of the evolution of the country from black slavery to voting in a black president.
What West Point cadets are now being taught is cringeworthy. It is guaranteed that Western enemies including China, Russia, and Iran are teaching national pride, despite the human rights abuse of each regime governing those countries.
America is being slowly destroyed from within as Critical Race Theory, extreme Green lunacy, and gender madness indoctrinate a whole generation, with too few willing to resist.
“US Army teaching Critical Race Theory to West Point cadets: report,” by David Propper, New York Post, June 20, 2022:
The US Army has introduced Critical Race Theory to West Point cadets, new documents show, according to Fox News Digital.
The “woke” lessons ask cadets about whiteness while encouraging them to apply Critical Race Theory to their answers, according to documents obtained by Judicial Watch and given to Fox News.
The more than 600 documents were only handed over to Judicial Watch after the conservative organization sued the Department of Defense….
According to Fox News, a slide that delved into “Whiteness” states: “In order to understand racial inequality and slavery, it is first necessary to address whiteness” and the “Take-for-grantedness of whiteness.”
The slide also claims whiteness “is a location of structural advantage, of race privilege,” is “a standpoint or place from which white people look at themselves and the rest of society” and “refers to a set of cultural practices that are usually unmarked and unnamed.”
Another slide addresses affirmative action and asks “Do you think Affirmative Action creates an environment for ‘reverse discrimination? Use CRT to support your answer.”
A slide also poses the question “how would you apply a tenant [sic] of CRT to this idea,” referring to the difference between desegregation and integration.
In another slide, under Critical Race Theory, it states, “racism is ordinary” and “White Americans have primarily benefited from civil rights legislation.”…
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
(Natural News) One of the largest operators of liquefied natural gas export terminals in the United States suffered a massive blow last week that will leave its main plant fully offline through September, and only partially operational after that through year’s end.
Freeport Liquefied Natural Gas says damage from a mysterious fire and explosion that took place at its Texas facility was so severe that it is simply not possible to get things back up and running as quickly as some may have hoped.
This is really bad news for Europe, which is already short on natural gas due to the war in Ukraine. Natural gas prices immediately jumped in Europe following the news, while slumping in the United States.
Freeport LNG’s plant singlehandedly accounts for about 20 percent of all U.S. natural gas exports, and was, up until the fire and explosion, a major supplier to European suppliers seeking alternatives to Russian gas since the February invasion.
According to the company, its Quintana, Tex.-based plant caught fire and exploded when an over-pressurized pipeline ruptured. Processing operations were not damaged, however.
The Rystad Energy consulting group says that Freeport LNG can process 2.1 billion cubic feet per day (bcfd) of natural gas into a supercooled liquid suitable for shipping. Up until the incident, it had been running near capacity.
Roughly 1.17 bcfd of Freeport LNG’s output had been going to Europe as of May, up from 0.81 bcfd in March.
“It’s very serious,” said Alex Munton, director of natural gas and LNG at Rapidan Energy, another energy consulting group.
“We now have a much larger and much more extensive outage at Freeport LNG that will remove more supply from the market than was anticipated last week.”
This unexpected disaster is actually good news for the US natural gas market
A prolonged outage, Freeport indicated, will reduce exports by 40 “cargoes” — LNG container ships — from annual export volume, up sharply from an earlier estimate of a three-week outage that would have reduced exports by just 13 cargoes. The 100-million-ton-per-year market for LNG is now expected to lose between four and five million tons.
“We expect Europe will be the region most impacted by this incident,” Rystad analysts said.
Roughly 70 percent of Freeport’s exports in the past few months have been to the European Union and Great Britain, the biggest importers this year being France, Turkey, and The Netherlands.
None of the liquefaction trains that chill the gas were damaged, nor were any of the processing areas, storage tanks, or docks. Freeport is still investigating the situation and has not yet commented on whether or not investigators are looking into potential design or structural flaws.
“There is a lot of analysis to understand the problem, put in measures of safety and operational regime to make sure it doesn’t happen again,” Rapidan’s Munton said.
While this is bad news for Europe and Great Britain, it is good news for the U.S., which has been in a natural gas storage deficit. Inventories have hovered around 300 bcf below the five-year average, according to Al Salazar, a senior vice president at Enverus Intelligence Research.
“It should be alarming to federal policymakers that the Freeport LNG terminal only exports 2 Bcfd, yet it is having such a significant impact to prices,” said Paul Cicio, chief executive of the Industrial Energy Consumers of America, a trade group that has been calling on Congress to limit expanded LNG export permits.
The outage, this group added, highlights the negative impact that exports of natural gas have had on U.S. consumers and the prices they pay domestically for natural gas.
More related news coverage about the falling dominoes of the global economy can be found at Collapse.news.
