Gallup Poll: America Is Still a Christian Nation

Reports of American Christianity’s death are wildly exaggerated, according to a new Gallup poll.

Despite years of coverage that Americans have lost their faith, three out of four Americans not only believe in God but belong to a specific religion, according to a Gallup poll released on Good Friday. “By far the largest proportion, 68%, identify with a Christian religion, including 33% who are Protestant, 22% Catholic and 13% who identify with another Christian religion or simply as a ‘Christian,’” Gallup reported on March 29. Another seven percent “identify with a non-Christian religion, including 2% who are Jewish, 1% Muslim and 1% Buddhist, among others.” Only 22% said they did not identify with any religion.

Moreover, faith exercises a pivotal role in most Americans’ lives, with 71% saying that religion is “very important” (45%) or “fairly important” (26%) to them. The share of Americans who placed a high premium on their faith fell below a majority for the first time in U.S. history in 2019.

That does not mean that church membership has rebounded completely: 45% of Americans formally belong to a church, synagogue, or religious congregation. That number fell below a majority during 2020. “Slightly more than one-third of U.S. young adults have no religious affiliation. Further, many young adults who do identify with a religion do not belong to a church,” noted Gallup. “But even older adults who have a religious preference are less likely to belong to a church today than in the past.”

Yet even these numbers may overstate the number of unbelievers, as 69% of Nones (people who do not identify with any particular faith) believe in God, according to a Pew Research Center poll. Still, a separate poll from the left-leaning Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) released March 27, found, “While the percentage of Americans who describe themselves as ‘nothing in particular’ is similar to a decade ago (16% in 2013 to 17% in 2023), the numbers of both atheists and agnostics have doubled since 2013 (from 2% to 4% and from 2% to 5%, respectively).”

Overall, the new Gallup poll revealed that one out of three Americans (32%) have attended a church or other religious service in the last week. That represents a modest increase from the historic low of 29% in 2021 during the wake of the COVID-19 lockdowns. About the same percentage say they attend church weekly (21%) or “almost every week” (9%). Larger shares say they attend church monthly (11%) and seldomly (26%). Another 31% say they “never” take part in religious services.

The most liberal churches have experienced the steepest losses in membership, numerous reports found. Ryan Burge, research director at Faith Counts, tracked the membership of numerous U.S. denominations between 1987 and 2021. “The mainline is just a bloodbath,” wrote Burge last June. “Five traditions are down by at least 30%. The ELCA is down 41%. The United Church of Christ is less than half the size it was in the late 1980s. The United Methodists are already down 31%, but with over 15% of their churches disaffiliating just this year, I wouldn’t be surprised in membership is down 40% or more by this time next year.”

Southern Baptists have also lost 4% of their membership, but the decline began only recently, Burge said.

The overall decline in church attendance stems not just from those leaving Protestant congregations but also “decreasing weekly attendance among U.S. Catholics,” Gallup relayed last week. PRRI stated that “Catholics continue to lose more members than they gain, though the retention rate for Hispanic Catholics (68%) is somewhat higher than for white Catholics (62%). White mainline/non-evangelical Protestants also continue losing more members than they replace and at higher rates than other Protestants.” Black Protestants (82%), Jews (77%), and white evangelicals (76%) have the highest retention rates, per PRRI.

Yet more conservative churches continue to grow. “The Assemblies of God has grown by over 50% in the 35 years,” wrote Burge. The Presbyterian Church in America “has doubled in size, as well.” Oriental Orthodox churches such as the Coptic church reported a 67% membership surge between 2010 and 2020, nearly all due to increased immigration from northern Africa and India.

Overall, the data paint a complicated picture. “The trends are clear that we are secularizing in some sense. There is a decline in participation in organized religion and in belief in God, but those are not necessarily the same thing,” Joseph Backholm, senior fellow for Biblical Worldview and Strategic Engagement at Family Research Council, told The Washington Stand. “The one clear thing is that some belief in a higher power is persistent. People can’t shake the idea that the universe didn’t create itself.”

“That may be where the consensus ends,” he added. “Even within Christianity, we see such radically different opinions about what that means that it’s difficult to believe everyone identifying as a Christian shares the same faith.”

David Closson, director of the Center for Biblical Worldview at FRC, agreed. “What we’ve learned from FRC’s own research, as well as George Barna’s research with the Cultural Research Center, is that the percentage of those who hold a consistent biblical worldview is around 6%,” Closson told TWS. “Thus, it is probably more accurate to say that Gallup is helpfully illustrating the loss of cultural Christianity. But this is an important observation in itself; the percentage of Americans who identify as Christian is decreasing rapidly, which means that basic Christian beliefs will increasingly be seen not only as outdated or old-school but dangerous and subversive. We are still living on the fumes of a post-Christian culture, and this is reflected in the large percentages of Americans who still identify as Christian even though many of them don’t go to church or profess any specific theological viewpoints.”

All parties conceded that America’s religious atrophy and eroding biblical worldview will likely impact the policies enacted at a national and local level. “Compared with all Americans, the unaffiliated are notably more likely to identify as Democrats (35% vs. 29%) and independents (38% vs. 30%), and substantially less likely to identify as Republican (12% vs. 29%),” PRRI noted.

The declining share of Americans who hold a worldview “shouldn’t matter” when it comes to public policy, but it “ultimately will,” said Backholm. “The First Amendment requires that we treat small groups of religious individuals the same as big groups, but in reality cultural dominance, or the lack thereof, matters. That’s why we see pro-life activists being punished for public speech and business owners repeatedly sued for behavior that was uncontroversial 20 years ago.”

“Being a minority religion has always come with challenges, even in America,” Backholm told TWS. “The politically dominant religion in America is becoming a hybrid of secularism and progressive Christianity defined by the belief that people should be free to do whatever makes them happy.”

“Those who don’t embrace those creeds are going to have problems,” he warned.

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Cafeteria Catholic’: Cardinal Says Biden Rejects Catholic Teachings

The Korbin Albert Incident Reminds Us That Believers Are Called to Be Unashamed

Idaho Legislature Bans Public Funding for Gender Transition Procedures

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Defending John Eastman — Part 3

Bad news, but it’s not a surprise anymore…


To assist late arrivers in getting up-to-speed on this matter, please read my prior commentaries: Defending John Eastman Part 1 and Part 2.

After several months of hearings, etc. last week, the judge rendered her decision and declared that John should lose his law license for a potpourri of “reasons.” Based on my involvement (and 12± hours of testimony), I politely disagree. But I digress…

I had to wade through over 50 one-sided media articles (like the prejudicial and inaccurate recounting by the NYT) before I came to a competent one: “The regime has lost all perspective and decency in its war on its perceived enemies.

After further digging, I also found this excellent commentary: The Heroic Sacrifice of John Eastman.

In my view (as a non-attorney) the two issues that were debated in this case:

  1. Did John Eastman have a reasonable basis to believe that the certified 2020 Presidential election results of some states, were likely very inaccurate?
  2. If yes, what should have been his legal advice to VP Mike Pence regarding how to treat certain state certifications of likely very inaccurate results?

John Eastman said YES to the first question. As an election integrity expert (e.g., see here), I also said definitely YES to the first question. (Since I’m not a lawyer or a Constitutional expert, I can’t speak to the second question.)

For a sample of the evidence as to why I say YES, see here.

The California prosecutor, and now the judge, said NO to the first question, which meant that the second one was legally moot anyway.

Dr. Eastman is not only a respected Constitutional expert, but he was Dean of the Claremont Law School for over ten years. In other words, he is no ambulance chaser.

If you’d like to follow the next developments of this saga, please go to John Eastman’s relatively new Substack column, for his own commentary!

We are in very dangerous waters when the judicial system misinterprets (or misapplies) the law, for political reasons. That’s how third-world countries have been known to operate.

Yet again we are dependent on Critically Thinking citizens who can see through the blatant bias of the media, as well as the politicization of the judicial system.

If you are wondering what you can do to meaningfully help the victim of this travesty, consider making a donation to John’s Defense Fund.

©2024.  All rights reserved.


Here are other materials by this scientist that you might find interesting:

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.orgdiscusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.infocovers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.infomultiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2023 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

PODCAST: Has America’s Decline Suddenly Become Precipitous

Our Pulse guest began by telling us about a man who was asked, “How did you go bankrupt?” His answer was “very slowly, and then all of a sudden.” She fears America has reached “all of a sudden.”

Her name is Cherie Zaslawsky. She is a freelance writer, editor, educator, and confirmed Constitutionalist. Cherie has an amazing way of grasping and explaining the tragedy befalling America and the world and why and how it is happening. She calls it the takedown of America.

Several times during our interview, she explained things in ways that seemed uniquely understandable, to the point, and true to the facts of the crises being forced on us by global predators.

If you’ve been looking for a video to give to a progressive friend or to someone who thinks that global predation is a conspiracy theory or simply to perk someone up, this might be a perfect interview to share with them.

You will definitely enjoy meeting Cherie and will most likely be as captivated by her presentation as we were by it. Her Substack is Cherie Z’s Truth be Told.

HOSTS

Peter Breggin MD and Ginger Ross Breggin have been married and working together for almost 40 years. Peter is known as “The Conscience of Psychiatry” for his many decades of successful reform work in mental health. He has published more than 20 medical and popular books, several coedited or coauthored by Ginger, including the huge bestseller Talking Back to Prozac. He has written more than 70 peer-reviewed publications and testified in court more than 100 times with many cases related to drug company and medical malfeasance. The couple has now turned their attention to the misuse of science and the suppression of freedoms surrounding COVID-19 and its origins by those they identify as “global predators.”   Peter and Ginger have written the bestselling new book, COVID-19 and the Global Predators: We are the Prey with introductions by top COVID-19 scientists and physicians, Peter A. McCullough MD, MPH; Elizabeth Lee Vliet MD; and Vladimir “Zev” Zelenko. The book is available everywhere.

POST ON X:


Join us on weekdays at 5 pm ET weekdays on America Out Loud Talk RadioListen on iHeart Radio, our world-class media player, or our free apps on AppleAndroid, or Alexa. Discover all the episodes on podcast networks, i.e., Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Pandora, TuneIn, Stitcher, and iHeart. You’ll find them the day after they air on talk radio, available on podcast. Extraordinary voices for extraordinary times.

EDITORS NOTE: This PULSE podcast is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna Slams Biden Admin, Says Hispanic Voters Are Leaving Dems ‘In Droves’

Republican Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna slammed the Biden administration Monday on Fox News over their attempts to gain back Hispanic voters, stating that they’re leaving the Democrat Party “in droves.”

Luna appeared on “The Ingraham Angle” and host Laura Ingraham asked Luna why she thought the White House social media page had left off a Spanish translation for the administration’s post regarding International Transgender Day of Visibility.

“No, not at all – in fact it was intentional,” Luna said. “This administration has been angling to get back the Hispanic voting block, which Laura I’ll remind you that Hispanic Americans, specifically of Mexican descent, are now the largest voting minority in the country. This whole issue of Trans Awareness Day over Easter would not bode well, especially in the community, of which I so proudly represent – which is largely Catholic and Christian. So when they do this, it’s intentional. Laura, they are losing the Hispanic American vote in droves. I’m happy to say, because of that I do believe Trump will be winning in November.”

Luna went on to say the incident is not the “first time” the administration has “disrespected” Hispanic Americans, reminding the Fox host of when First Lady Jill Biden stated that Hispanics were as “unique” as tacos and when President Joe Biden played Spanish-hit song “Despacito” while speaking at a Hispanic Heritage Month event.

“It’s not the first time – remember we had Jill Biden calling us breakfast tacos. You had President Biden during his election playing ‘Despacito.’ So it’s not the first time this administration, and this president, have really disrespected Hispanic Americans. But, again, the top three issues are inflation, jobs, and the economy and so really when voters are faced with this in November they’re going to be looking at the message of the Republican Party and of President Trump versus this administration,” Luna stated.

“Frankly, they are, and by they I mean this administration, is working with Big Tech to censor that message to Hispanic Americans,” she continued. “Remember, only a few months back they actually purchased up a majority of conservative Spanish media and radio in an effort to push this and sway this election.”

In 2022, Republican lawmakers attempted to block a Soros-funded news company led by former Democratic staffers called the Latino Media Network from purchasing 18 Spanish-language radio stations for roughly $60 million. They were unsuccessful and the purchase later went through.

Former President Donald Trump has been gaining on key Democrat voting blocs, including the Hispanic vote, according to polls. In a recent New York Times/Siena College poll, Trump showed a six-point lead over Biden among Hispanic voters, sitting at 46% of the vote. While the margin of error for the poll is 10 percentage points due to the sample size not being “large enough to assess small differences reliably,” other polls have also indicated Hispanic support leaning towards the former president for 2024.

AUTHOR

HAILEY GOMEZ

General assignment reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Doocy Presses KJP On Release Of Migrants Who Allegedly Beat Texas National Guardsman

CNN Data Analyst Says Hispanic Voters ‘Overwhelmingly Trust’ Trump On Border Security, Immigration

In Biden’s America, You Have To Be Rich To Shop At The Dollar Store

Victor Davis Hanson Rips Biden’s Campaign Messaging, Reveals How Trump Can ‘Win Big’

Al Sharpton Calls Out Biden For Attending ‘Ritzy’ Fundraiser With Ex-Presidents, Snubbing Working Class

Biden’s Nightmare Scenario For Key Battleground State Is One Step Closer To Reality

POSTS ON X:

Anyone Who Can’t Recognize Flaws In 2020 Is Unfit To Help Republicans Win

Going into 2024, all the known skullduggery and criminal election fraud activity aside, upwards of20% registered Voters in twenty six States either DO NOT EXIST or reside at an address that DOES NOT EXIST.

The fix is in.

The RNC Is Right: Anyone Who Can’t Recognize Flaws In 2020 Is Unfit To Help Republicans Win

By: Brianna Lyman, The Federalist, March 28, 2024

Winning requires first acknowledging past and existing problems.

The Republican National Committee (RNC) is reportedly asking prospective employees what they think about the 2020 election — as they should.

Citing unnamed sources, The Washington Post reported that job applicants at the RNC have been asked about whether they believe the 2020 election was “stolen,” although the Post acknowledged the questions were “open-ended.”

The Post tried to spin the story as the RNC “demanding fealty” to former President Donald Trump, using the words of President Joe Biden’s rapid response director. But beating Democrats — who showed in 2020 that they are willing to ignore the rule of law in order to change how elections are fundamentally run, to their advantage — starts by acknowledging what happened in 2020.

“Potential staffers who worked on the front line in battleground states or are currently in states where fraud allegations have been prevalent were asked about their work experience,” RNC and Trump spokeswoman Danielle Alvarez said in a statement to The Federalist. “We want experienced staff with meaningful views on how elections are won and lost and real experience-based opinions about what happens in the trenches.”

So what did happen in the “trenches”?

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden Moves To Grant Amnesty, Hand Out Green Cards To Illegals: REPORT

Wisconsin Investigators: Illegals Flooding the Voter Rolls in Swing States

Nevada Hit With GOP Lawsuit Over ‘Impossibly High’ Voter Registration

Foregone Conclusion

Republican Lawmakers in Pennsylvania Sue Biden and Democrat Governor For Unconstitutional Seizure of Election Powers, Removal of Voting Rules

Democrats Say They Won’t Certify 2024 Election Results If Trump Wins: Report

Democratic City Council President Arrested on Mail-In Ballot Fraud Scheme, “Procuring, Casting and Tabulating Fraudulent Mail-in Ballots”

Ballots Cast Without Proof Of Citizenship ‘Exploded’ After Lawfare Crippled Arizona Election Laws

In GA Federal Court, Engineering Professor Hacks Dominion Voting machine Using Only a Pen to Change Vote Totals in Front of U.S. District Judge

Bombshell Emails: US Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Wife Questioned INTEGRITY OF VOTING MACHINES with Maryland election officials

Voting Company Smartmatic Banned From Philippines’ Elections

Voting American Style: Machines Down in Several Districts in Pennsylvania Due to “Votes Getting Flipped”

KNOWiNK Voting Systems Allow Election Staff to Override Election Results

Republicans Must Fight Tooth And Nail To Reverse Dems’ Assault On Election Integrity

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

80% of Americans Support Israel Over Hamas

We hear constantly that Israel is losing the information war, that the nightly scenes of buildings reduced to rubble in Gaza, and the latest Hamas-concocted numbers of “dead civilians” or, alternatively, and even more misleading, of “women and children killed,” are leading to a significant loss of support for the Jewish state.

This turns out to be false.

Israel is doing the very best it can to reduce civilian casualties in Gaza. It continues to warn civilians away from targets the IDF is about to hit, through leafleting, messaging, and telephoning. So far the IDF has dropped six million leaflets, made 14 million prerecorded phone calls, and 72,000 personal calls. Those warnings, of course, reach not only civilians but also Hamas operatives. No other army in the history of the world has warned its enemy of exactly where impending attacks will take place. It is this practice, among others, that led British Colonel Richard Kemp to describe the IDF as “the most moral army in the world.”

These concerns [about civilian casualties in Gaza] are fueled by Biden’s low approval rating on the issue — as only 39% of voters say that they approve of his handling of the war — along with large-scale anti-Israel protests across the country and pressure from within the administration.

However, that number is primarily driven by Republican opposition to Biden, as only 19% of Republicans say they approve of his handling of the war and 61% of Democrats approve. Additionally, New York Times polling from December found that among those who disapprove of Biden’s handling of the war, nearly as many say it is due to being too pro-Palestinian as it is due to be too pro-Israel (16% vs 19%).

So much for all the talk of a groundswell of opposition to Biden for not doing enough to pressure Israel into accepting a ceasefire. In fact, Israel has just offered Hamas a two-month ceasefire, in exchange for the release of all the hostages. Hamas turned the offer down flat.

Meanwhile, all the claims that Israel has been engaging in “genocide” have not done a great deal to lessen support for Israel among Americans. The Jewish state has never engaged in “genocide,” so the International Court of Justice (ICJ), where South Africa preposterously opened a case against Israel on this charge, need not worry on that score. The ruling handed down by the ICJ in The Hague on January 26 could have been much worse. The Court might have agreed with South Africa’s contention that in Gaza the Jewish state is engaged in “ethnic cleansing” or in “genocide.” It might have ordered an “immediate ceasefire” or, still worse, a complete withdrawal of the IDF from Gaza. The ICJ did none of those things. Israel has not been told to pull out of Gaza; the ICJ recognized the atrocities of October 7 and the right of Israel to self-defense. It also spoke of the need for Hamas to free the hostages. Nor did the ICJ seek to impose a ceasefire, of any length, on the Jewish state. For those decisions by the ICJ, just announced, as to what it condemns and what it condones, Israel should now breathe a sigh of great relief.

More on the latest opinion poll on Israel and Hamas can be found here:

Poll: 80 Percent of Voters Support Israel Over Hamas

by Jack Elbaum, Algemeiner, January 23, 2024:

A new Harvard CAPS-Harris poll shows the vast majority of Americans still support Israel over Hamas, suggesting concerns about the electoral impact of President Joe Biden’s decision to stand with Israel may be overblown.

The poll found that 80 percent of respondents said they support Israel over Hamas in the current war, while only 20 percent support Hamas over Israel. The majority of every sub-group polled supports Israel more than Hamas — including those aged 18-24, where the split is 57% support of Israel and 43% support of Hamas.

These numbers are released within the context of mounting concern in recent months that young people, Muslim voters, and the progressive wing of the Democratic party may be so upset with Biden over his support of Israel that it will reconsider their support for him in the 2024 election and thus put his chances for re-election in jeopardy.

US President Joe Biden has fully supported Israel and its military campaign to destroy Hamas and rescue the hostages since Hamas’s October 7th terrorist attack, but has also pressured Israel to take additional humanitarian measures in Gaza to reduce civilian casualties.

[ … ]

This suggests that while there is a minority of the Democratic party that substantially disagrees with Biden’s approach to Israel, it is much smaller than metrics such as issue approval rating let on. At the same time, a small number of votes can be a deciding factor in an election.

The Harvard CAPS-Harris poll was conducted online between Jan. 17-18 and garnered responses from 2,346 registered voters.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

When Feminists Stand for Hamas, You Know the West Is Over

The Biden administration’s outright war against the government of Israel

IDF Kills Top Iranian General in Embassy Strike

Israel’s Parliament Passed Bill to Shut Down Al Jazeera In The Country

Strict Islamic Sharia Law in Scotland: New Speech Laws Comes Into Force Today, Free Speakers Face Seven Years in Prison

RELATED VIDEO: Barry Shaw reporting to us live from Israel on DISSENT Television

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Muhammad — A Critical Biography: ‘A groundbreaking work that will revolutionize the popular understanding of Muhammad’

Muhammad: What can we really know about him?

We know a great deal about Muhammad—or so it seems. Islamic tradition contains an astonishing wealth of information about the founding figure of the Islamic faith, and most historians take for granted that this material is generally reliable.

In his latest book, historian and Islamic scholar Robert Spencer shows that there is no agreement in the earliest Islamic sources about the most fundamental details of this towering figure’s life. There are conflicting accounts of key details of his life, including the circumstances and contents of the first revelation he claimed to have received from Allah; the year of his birth; the length of his prophetic career; the name of the angel who supposedly appeared to him; and even his own name.

Muhammad: A Critical Biography takes a detailed look at the Islamic traditions regarding Muhammad and lays bare their contradictions, inconsistences, and incoherence. Spencer continues the groundbreaking research he began in The Truth About Muhammad and Did Muhammad Exist?, exposing the shocking reality of how shaky Islam’s foundations really are. He meticulously explains why competing traditions may have been invented and definitively demonstrates that, contrary to the complacency of establishment historians, the Muhammad of Islam is more legend than history, more fable than fact.

Muhammad: A Critical Biography does the work that mainstream academics—who are either bought by Saudi Arabia or Qatar, or too afraid to depart from the herd—should have done long ago. Not for the faint-hearted, this book will do nothing less than rock the Islamic world to its very core.

“Ernest Renan famously claimed that Islam emerged in the ‘full light of history.’ Spencer’s startling non-biography biography finds quite the reverse. When it comes to Muhammad’s life, ‘we appear to have precise and detailed historical information, but what we actually have is myth, fable, folk tales, sermonizing, factionalism, and guesswork.’ This fascinating book by an accomplished scholar establishes that, in place of Muhammad’s supposedly minutely detailed biography, from birth to death ‘what he said and did, and who he really was, is … thoroughly lost in the mists of time.’ This has immense implications for Islam – and the world.” (Daniel Pipes, Middle East Forum)

“Robert Spencer’s Muhammad: A Critical Biography offers not just an overview of the singular life of the founder of the Islamic religion; it is also a unique evaluation of the historical value of the traditions regarding Muhammad’s life that most historians take for granted as being historically accurate. Spencer demonstrates that virtually every aspect of what Islamic tradition teaches about Muhammad, including the circumstances of his first revelation, the identity of the being who appeared to him, and even the Islamic prophet’s very name, is controverted by other Islamic traditions. He proves definitively that the accounts of Muhammad’s life, which he examines in detail, are not historical records, but the product of mythical and legendary development, with the renowned aspects of Muhammad’s biography being the result of selection from a great mass of material rather than of remembrance by his contemporaries. This is a groundbreaking work that will revolutionize the popular understanding of the figure of Muhammad and the circumstances of Islam’s origins.” (Ibn Warraq, author, The Quest for the Historical Muhammad)

“The always brave Robert Spencer offers his readers once again an amazing opportunity to look at the history of Muhammad — and the stories that have been told about him — in a thought-provoking manner. Spencer is a genius and this book historical. What is simply accepted by many as the historical truth, deserves further consideration. How trustworthy can a narrative be that was written decades and sometimes even centuries later? This paragon of critical literature shows that not everything always has to be accepted at face value, especially when the consequences of what is said and written can be disastrous. This book a must read for anyone interested in the truth.” (Geert Wilders, Party for Freedom, Netherlands)

“What an amazing book! This was such a joy to read, and with all the ‘marking-up’ I’ve done with it, I’ll be using it for decades to come. This latest book studies the biography of Muhammad’s life through the prism of historical criticism, something which has never really been done adequately before, possibly due to the controversy such an endeavor will cause any author who dares take on such a task (something Spencer is well accustomed to and refers to in his closing statements). Yet because this book is so unique, it will, I believe, be foundational for anyone who wants to really understand who this man Muhammad was (or was not), and why so many millions in the world today choose to follow him. This is certainly a ‘must have’ book for your library, not only because it is so interesting and readable, but because Spencer has taken the time to amalgamate the best research by the best scholars, and put them all into one book.” (Dr. Jay Smith, Pfander Films)

“Robert Spencer has once again produced a scholarly tour de force. Muhammad: A Critical Biography is a searching enquiry of the earliest islamic texts pertaining to the ostensible prophet of Islam, demonstrating that these are not and cannot be viewed as first-hand historical sources, but at best as posterior apocryphal hagiography. He perspicuously shows their many contradictions, disparities, and sundry inconsistencies. This book is an accessible yet thorough and comprehensive introduction to the overwhelming difficulties that the early Islamic literary traditions present to those wishing to discover the authentic words and deeds of this towering yet mysterious persona who even so remains firmly enshrouded in the shadows of lore.” (Prof. Robert M. Kerr, Research Director, Inârah Institute for Research on Early Islamic History and the Qur’an, Saarbrücken, Germany)


Muhammad: A Critical Biography, will be out October 22, and is available for preorder now: click here.


AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

France: Cross that mayor said was ‘the soul of our village’ broken in four places

In Jordan, Pro-Hamas Rioters Threaten the Stability of the State

Turkey: Erdoğan suffers historic setback in crucial mayoral elections as secular party surges in popularity

Released Hostage Describes the Sexual Abuse She Endured

Nigeria: Muslims murder Christian pastor and five other Christians in Nasawara state

Kenya: Muslims murder Christian preacher who was convert from Islam

NPR Reporter Wants to Make Hostage Freed by IDF on Feb. 12 Feel Guilty About Gazan Deaths That Day

California: Pro-Hamas demonstrators at Berkeley City Council denounce ‘Zionist pigs’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Climate change increases female genital mutilation. True or false?

Female genital cutting is a barbarous practice that should have been consigned to the ash-heap of history long before this world experienced the pleasure of beholding my angelic baby face. Unfortunately, however, for the first time after a steady decline over two decades, it is now on the rise worldwide.

Sadly, the biggest contributors to this increase are a few African countries where the custom has never been sufficiently stigmatised. And the main factor behind it is rapid population growth. In other words, more women are now living in countries where the practice persists, which means more women, in absolute terms, are getting cut.

This is according an analysis by UNICEF, which was published this past International Women’s Day (March 8), The New York Times reporter who covered it clearly knew this, given that she’s covered the subject for two decades, and even referenced the report. And yet, somehow, she still managed to drag in climate change as a major factor behind the resurgence of the practice.

Weather disasters linked to climate change, so her argument goes, make “people increasingly vulnerable and more reliant on traditional community structures.” The implication is that, in places where those traditional structures include female cutting, climate change drives up the practice.

Upon sober examination, this reasoning makes very little sense. For one, erratic weather has been a constant feature in Africa forever. Additionally, multiple extreme weather events occurred during the two decades in which female cutting declined precipitously. Furthermore, even those countries and regions where female cutting has been effectively eradicated often experience extreme weather events.

In short, there is no evidence that climate change has anything to do with the recent resurgence of female cutting. The spurious attempt to link them is just the latest instalment in an absurd trend by pundits and commentators to pin the blame for age-old African maladies to climate change.

It’s not limited to Africa, of course, but it is particularly notable in contemporary foreign media coverage of the continent.

Consider the movement – about which we wrote recently – to eradicate food insecurity on the continent by promoting the cultivation of neglected traditional crops. This scheme is motivated, in part, by the conviction that the effects of climate change will make it increasingly difficult to grow introduced crops – like rice, maize and wheat – on the continent.

But there are two major problems with this position.

The first is that it is self-defeating. Traditional crops grow better, not because they are immune to climate change, but rather because they’ve been cultivated on the continent for longer, and so are better adapted. There is no reason to believe that drastic weather events, caused by climate change, wouldn’t affect them as much as introduced crops.

The second problem, which is more important, is that climate change is in fact a minor factor behind food insecurity in Africa (if at all); food insecurity has been a problem for decades but has improved tremendously in the last few decades. Where it persists, it’s often because of conflict or other forms of instability. Even the snobs at the World Economic Forum know enough to acknowledge this.

But doesn’t climate change at least drive conflict as well, so that it drives up food insecurity, at least indirectly?

Well, not really. Most of the armed conflicts in Africa have complex roots, few of which can be convincingly traced back to the changing climate. One would need to be decidedly quixotic to assert that, hadn’t the climate changed, Somalia wouldn’t have spiralled into its eternal civil war.

Likewise, any sensible betting man (if that isn’t an oxymoron), would be wise to put their odds squarely on the likelihood that the two military thugs currently tearing up Sudan would still be doing so even if the temperatures in Khartoum had remained at their pre-industrial levels. Ditto Mr Kagame’s marauding mercenaries in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Now, that the climate has been changing lately isn’t in question. And though the degree to which human activity is driving that change is debatable, it is obvious that it has played a meaningful role. It therefore makes sense that, in so far as climate change is bad for us and the planet, and to the extent that we can do something about it, we should do something about it.

Moreover, those who care deeply about this issue are perfectly within their rights to campaign for such action. But that doesn’t mean they get to shoehorn it into every conversation about human suffering and social ills. It isn’t that climate change is irrelevant; the climate is, after all, all-encompassing. But so is oxygen, and yet we never blame oxygen as for murders, though all murderers live on it.

Seeing all tragedies as functions of climate change smacks of desperation and elite snobbery. And, what’s worse, it is likely to do more harm than good, especially in Africa. For it is with regard to this continent that we most need to be serious when diagnosing the root causes of developmental and social ills, given that so few of them have been solved here.

Blaming genuinely horrific occurrences, such as the resurgence of female genital cutting, on climate change effectively obviates the efficacy of any potential attempts to tackle them in the near term, since the climate is unlikely to stop changing any time soon, even if humans stopped contributing to it immediately.

It may very well be that the motivations of those who do so are humanitarian, but I despair of the righteousness of anyone who would so casually condemn millions more women and girls to this barbarity until China stops burning coal.


Is climate change being blamed for too many planetary problems? Leave your comments below.  


AUTHOR

Mathew Otieno is a Kenyan writer, blogger and dilettante farmer. Until 2022, he was a research communications coordinator at a university in Nairobi, Kenya. He now lives in rural western Kenya, near the shores of Lake Victoria, from where he’s pursuing a career as a full-time writer while concluding his dissertation for a master’s degree. His first novel is due out this year.

EDITORS NOTE: This Mercator column is republished with permission. ©2024. All rights reserved.

THEOLOGICAL BUTCHERS: John Calvin

“After the Holocaust we need God more than ever. For there is no limit to the evil men may do when they no longer believe that anything is sacred.” —  Rabbi Jonathan Sachs

“Monsters exist, but they are too few in number to be truly dangerous. More dangerous are the common men, the functionaries ready to believe and to act without asking questions.” —  Primo Levi, Auschwitz Survivor

“He could be vain of himself and not be ashamed of it.  Yes, he could be excused for it.  The Egyptian, the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, then faded to dream-stuff and passed away.  The Greek and the Roman followed and made a vast noise.  They are gone.  Other peoples have sprung up and held the torch high for a time, but it burned out, and they sit in twilight or have vanished.  The Jew saw them all, beat them all and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmities of age, no dulling of his alert, aggressive mind.  All things are mortal but the Jew.  All other forces pass, but he remains.  What is the secret of his immortality?” —  Mark Twain


Mark Twain fell in love with Joan of Arc and wrote a beautiful book about her.  Did he come to faith?  We don’t really know, but his statement about the Jewish people stands the test of time and truth.  The secret of Israel’s mortality is the Lord God and His love for His chosen people.

  • The king of Egypt could not diminish him.
  • The waters of the Red Sea could not drown him.
  • Balaam could not curse him.
  • The great fish could not digest him.
  • The fiery furnace could not devour him.
  • The nations of the world could not assimilate him.
  • The dictators cannot annihilate him.

It is interesting that a minority group like this retained its identity for 2,500 years without a flag and without a government.  No other ethnic group has remained intact that long.  Israelites stand as a miracle people throughout the world today.

God had made it very clear that they would survive:

“For I am with thee, saith the Lord, to save thee: though I make a full end of all nations whither I have scattered thee, yet will I not make a full end of thee: but I will correct thee in measure, and will not leave thee altogether unpunished.”  Jeremiah 30:11

The Lord will not allow them to be destroyed.  And his original promises from the unconditional Abrahamic Covenant are still at work today.

Author Oliver Melnick, in his book, They Have Conspired Against You, writes, “Jewish suffering is not a new concept.  While it is true that anti-Semitism hasn’t remained the same over the centuries and has morphed from theological anti-Judaism in theory to racial anti-Semitism in practice, it is still a tragic witness of Jewish suffering.  An unfortunate factor in this suffering has been the wrong interpretation of the Scriptures as they pertain to Israel.  It has led to an exponential increase in hatred of the Jewish people and the passing of many anti-Jewish laws.”

Another early church father who failed to follow the Golden Rule of Interpretation was John Calvin.

John Calvin

Calvin was born in Noyan, France in 1509 and died in Geneva, Switzerland in 1564.  He was a pupil of Augustine, who tortured the text of the Bible “to confess that which was never in it.”  Like Augustine, who in matters of church discipline, was a totalitarian, and hardly a benevolent father, Calvin ordered brutal methods in sixteenth century Geneva, even to the point of sanctioning the death penalty for “heretics.”  Chrysostom and Augustine still speak through the replacement sentiments of Calvin with their prejudicial Christian attitudes to the Hebrew Scriptures and the Jewish people.

John Calvin was the man who did more than any other to ensure that no vestige of premillennial truth made its way into the emerging theology of the Reformation.  He was a formidable amillennial champion who for nearly five hundred years, has commanded obeisance across the entire spectrum of the Christian church.

For those who believe in Calvin’s doctrine, I have no desire to alienate or be confrontational, but the truth must out.  The theological and historical facts where they have a bearing on the development of replacement theology are littered throughout Calvin’s doctrine.  He did more than probably any other Reformer to further the predatory doctrine of “replacementism” that has so mercilessly targeted the Jewish people throughout the ages.

Calvin was the most prolific and influential writer of his day.  He dominated the theological landscape of Reformation Europe, and his works are available in many languages.  His doctrine has had a huge resurgence in the evangelical church and points to the antisemitism of today.  His amillennial views are widely disseminated, not only through his writings and sermons, but also through the marginal notes in the Geneva Bible, and catechisms and confessions of the Protestant church.

The Geneva Bible is often promoted by those within the Dominion/Reconstructionist Christian heresy.  Dominion is seen as the right to dominate and to possess absolute control over the entire earth.  One of the original authors of Dominion heresy was Dr. Gary North and his Holocaust denying father-in-law, Rousas Rushdoony, the author of Reconstructionism.  The latter wrote the following, “The fall of Jerusalem, and the public rejection of physical Israel as the chosen people of God, meant also the deliverance of the true people of God, the church of Christ, the elect, out of the bondage to Israel and Jerusalem.”

The origins of the Presbyterian Church descend from Scottish Calvinism.  Extreme Calvinism slithers over into the full-blown heresy of Dominionism/Reconstructionism.

As the major architect of Reformed amillennialism, Calvin’s belief in a future thousand-year reign of Messiah on earth was, “a fiction too foolish to need or deserve refutation.” There is no doubt that Augustine’s “concept of the kingdom,” in which the Roman Catholic Church ruled triumphant upon the earth, is firmly rooted in replacement theology.  He was steeped in humanistic scholarship, which formed the basis for his biblical exegesis.  He drew from the poisoned wells of Plato, Cicero, and Aristotle.  Calvin’s lifelong favorite was John Chrysostom, the “Golden Mouth” master of anti-Jewish invective.

Calvin firmly believed that by applying “methods of humanistic scholarship to the Bible,” he would discover “the exact meaning of a text and the circumstances of the history involved.”  The term for this form of exegesis is “accommodation,” from classical Greek rhetorical theory.  Origen used it, and his influence on Calvin’s own system of interpretation is beyond question.

John Calvin spiritualized everything in the Bible, from creation to the thousand-year reign of Messiah, twisting and replacing the truth of the Lord’s Word to His people, both Jew and Gentile.  The end result is a catastrophic teaching of hatred for God’s chosen people.

Like Luther, a similar mixture of innovation and hatred toward the Jews marked Calvin’s doctrine.  His use of anti-Jewish invective was clear in his sermon on 2 Samuel 24:24 where he declared: “Now the Jews are cut off like rotten limbs.  We have taken their place.”  He repeatedly referred to the Jewish people as “profane unholy sacrilegious dogs,” describing them as a “barbarous nation,” and “the people of Israel rejected by God.”

Like his mentor and teacher, Calvin imitated Augustine’s totalitarian style of government and advocated the use of military force to compel church attendance.  He not only believed in Augustine’s philosophical doctrine, but adopted the same brutal methods as his mentor, even to the point of sanctioning the death penalty or exile for heretics.

This was particularly true of his treatment of Michael (Miquel) Servetus (1511-1553), who Calvin denounced to the civic authorities, signing Servetus’ death warrant.  The Spaniard was condemned by the ecclesiastical court and burned at the stake in Geneva.  The murder of Servetus exposes the vindictive streak which disgraced the Reformer.  The cruelty of Calvin was condemned by Protestant circles and opened the door for greater religious freedom which also applied to the Jewish people.

“Calvin was the man most responsible for the preservation and propagation of the Augustinian doctrine of the Kingdom of God, upon which the amillennial pulpits of Reformed Europe were erected and from which Jewish hopes of national restoration have been so relentlessly and cruelly dashed.”  (Andrew Robinson, Israel Betrayed, Volume I: The History of Replacement Theology.)

The perpetuation of amillennialism was a feature of John Calvin’s doctrine.  He believed society should be constructed in line with the Mosaic Law, which “he tried to imitate as much as possible in his new Christian republic in Geneva. (Encyclopaedia Judaica, Vol. 5, 66.)  His autocratic and unbending policy censured all doctrinal opposition, disciplined the profligate and punished the “heretic” who disagreed with Calvin’s authoritative and totalitarian doctrine.  He used the ecclesiastical court to discipline.  Calvin’s handiwork can also be seen in the ecclesiastical court sessions of the Scottish Presbyterian Church.  Calvin repeatedly demanded assent and threatened banishment to the unyielding.

The chilling declarations and harshness against anyone who was not conscripted to Calvin’s doctrine and who might believe in free will or adult baptism, were anathema to Calvin.  Calvinists have more than proved the point that they “are the most violent and intolerant of all the Protestant Christians.” (“An Attempt to Shew the Folly and Danger of Methodism in a Series of Essays,” The Examiner, No 22, London, May 29, 1808, 349.)

Many scholars conclude that Hitler’s violent antisemitism was enabled by a wake of anti-Jewish theologies of church heroes like Calvin and Luther, but as we’ve seen, it goes back to the second and third centuries with Origen and Tertullian.

It is difficult for modern Christians to believe that antisemitism was flowing in the lifeblood of the Church for thousands of years, but John Calvin stated, “Their rotten and unbending stiff-neckedness deserves that they be oppressed unendingly and without measure or end and that they die in their misery without the pity of anyone.”

Can you imagine a pastor uttering these words from the pulpit today?

This age-old heretical doctrine of Replacement theology has spawned numerous offshoots, but all are equally destructive and unbiblical.  This heresy turns Israel and the Jewish people into “God’s ex-wife.”  God chose one group of people, the Jewish people, and made an eternal covenant with them.

He said, “And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.” (Genesis 17:7)

If the Lord were to simply change His mind due to shortcomings on the part of His “wife” (Israel), and then takes a new covenantal partner (the gentile church), it is an absolute assassination of His faithful character.

We have been warned by the Lord’s solemn Word in Romans 11:18, “Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.”

The olive tree is the place of privilege that was first occupied by the natural branches (the Jews).  The wild branches are Gentiles.  The root of the tree is the Abrahamic Covenant that promised blessings to both Jew and Gentile.  “And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.”

Far too many who call themselves Christians, are not blessing the Lord’s people, Israel.

The Golden Rule of Interpretation

The church fathers in this series have failed to follow the Golden Rule of Interpretation.

David L. Cooper (1886-1965), one of the greatest conservative theologians and Bible scholars who ever lived, left a legacy of Bible teaching that to this day is helping many understand and apply God’s Word to their lives.  In his attempt to understand Scripture the way it was meant to be understood, Cooper came to the conclusion that in light of past prophecies fulfilled, only a literal approach to the Bible would be appropriate to understand God and His plan for mankind.  He eventually came up with a rule of interpretation still used by many Biblical scholars today, known as “The Golden Rule of Interpretation.”

“When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.  Moreover, one must be guided by the principle thus stated: ‘A text apart from its context is a pretext.’”

Conclusion

This abridged history in a few short articles has told the tragic story of the church and the Jewish people.

Truly, our hands are stained with blood.

 Lagniappe

On Saturday of Holy Week, I received an email from a Jewish friend.  He basically wrote that he hated Christ.  I was stunned at his insensitivity and hurt at his lack of empathy.  Yet, by Sunday evening, I understood.

I remember listening to one of my favorite teachers, Mottel Baleston, lecturing on the Holocaust, and he mentioned that his great-grandparents had lived in a Jewish village earlier in their marriage, but had moved.  A year later, the entire village was murdered.  Mottel told us that his grandfather said never to touch a Bible; it would burn him.

The Jewish people have lived with hatred, not only from Ishmael and Esau, but by those calling themselves Christians throughout the Middle Ages and the crusades.

The twentieth century recorded the worst genocide of European Jews in modern history. It started in Germany, a nation of Catholic and Lutheran Christians.

Today that age old satanic evil has raised its ugly head once again. The horror we’re seeing throughout America is reminiscent of 1933 Nazi Germany.

With this history, is it any wonder that our Jewish brethren would mistrust and detest Christians, and the Christ we call our Savior?  Many Crusaders left in their wake the bodies of hundreds of Jews as they made their way to the Holy Land. Jews lost their homes, families, property, and lives in a frenzy of anti-Jewish feeling among many European Christians.

This evil isn’t from the Jewish Savior we worship; it is the work of men throughout history who have come against the Lord’s people. Their allegorizing of Scripture to fit their own desires has produced demonic hatred and jealousy of the Jewish people.

Replacement theology is a lie from the very pit of hell.

The Lord told us He will bless those who bless them and curse those who curse them.

Which will you choose?

As for me and mine, we choose the blessing of loving the Lord’s people.

©2024. Kelleigh Nelson. All rights reserved.

Trump Posts $175 Million Bond In Civil Fraud Case

Former President Donald Trump on Monday submitted a $175 million bond as part of his appeal against a civil fraud judgment in New York, according to a filing by his attorneys with the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division.

Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee in the 2024 election, was ordered to pay $464 million to the State of New York in a civil fraud action commenced by Democratic Attorney General Letitia James of New York. In his effort to appeal the trial division’s judgment, Trump was granted a reprieve by the appellate division to submit a smaller $175 million bond due to difficulties in obtaining a bond to cover the whole judgment outright. Trump’s lawyers submitted the bond Monday.

The bond means that the trial judgment cannot be enforced against Trump until the conclusion of his appeal, which prevents James from seizing Trump’s assets in New York — such as Trump Tower in New York City and his other commercial properties. It also clears the way for Trump’s appeal to proceed in the case, against both the conclusions and size of the initial penalty imposed by Justice Arthur Engoron during the trial.

This is a breaking news story and will be updated.

AUTHOR

ARJUN SINGH

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Posts $91 Million Bond As He Appeals E. Jean Carroll Verdict

Trump Ruling Chills Americans

Florida Supreme Court Allows Heartbeat Law to Take Effect, Protecting Babies From Abortion

Joe Biden Banned Kids From Using Christian Themes in the Easter Egg Contest

RELATED VIDEO: Jonathan Turley reacts to Trump posting bond in civil trial

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Georgia Adopts Legislation to Strengthen Anti-Sanctuary Laws in Wake of Laken Riley’s Murder

The Georgia Legislature took a significant step towards improving public safety last week by passing the Georgia Criminal Alien Track and Report Act of 2024 (HB 1105) and sending it to Governor Brian Kemp’s desk. If signed into law, HB 1105 will put teeth into Georgia’s anti-sanctuary law to ensure criminal aliens operating in Georgia communities are not shielded from immigration enforcement.

HB 1105 requires Georgia’s local law enforcement agencies to cooperate in the enforcement of federal immigration laws by honoring of detainer requests. The bill also imposes penalties for sheriff’s offices and jailers who refuse to participate in ICE’s 287(g) program. If found violating HB 1105, the locality will lose state and federal funding.

The Senate chamber was filled with drama as debate on the bill came to a close. Laken Riley’s parents entered the Senate chamber for the final vote and her father, Jason Riley, stepped towards the podium to speak. Mr. Riley urged Senators take action. “God gave me a beautiful daughter to father, protect, provide for, and nurture. A man with an evil heart stole her life. He was in this country and in this state illegally. My vision for every senator in this chamber is that you protect citizens from this illegal invasion.”

Despite being considered a common-sense measure by most, some Georgia lawmakers opposed the bill. Senator Nabilah Islam Parkes, (D-Duluth), suggested the bill will negatively impact all immigrants. She suggested the bill was designed to punish victims of crimes “whose only connection to the crime is share[ing] the [same] immigration status of the perpetrator,” rendering them “collateral damage” to immigration enforcement efforts.

However, Senator John Albers (R), the bill’s sponsor, spoke on the tragic nature of Laken’s death, saying, “This could have been prevented. I hope laws like this and other things that are happening will prevent future tragedies from happening.”

Tragically, Laken Riley became the collateral damage of the Biden administration’s open-border policies and Athens-Clarke County’s sanctuary policies. And it took Laken’s murder to focus Georgia lawmakers on the dangerous impact open borders and sanctuary policies have on public safety. Equally distressing is the fact that Laken’s death isn’t an isolated incident but rather one of a few that has garnered national media attention. According to Representative Jesse Petrea (R-166), a co-sponsor of HB 1105, nearly 200 convicted murderers are classified as illegal aliens within Georgia’s prison system. “There’s 182 today, so my point is to say Laken Riley wasn’t the first. it’s high-profile. It’s horrible. Remember this: Every single violent crime committed against someone by someone illegally in the country was and is an avoidable crime.”

While HB 1105 cannot undo the tragic loss of Laken and the other victims of illegal alien crime, it stands as a crucial measure in condemning the actions of her murderer and safeguarding the community against future acts of violence. This bill is expected to be signed by Governor Kemp. When remarking on Laken’s death, Governor Kemp said, “This is a failure of our system on multiple levels, and at multiple times, and it has resulted in a young woman’s death. That is inexcusable.”

AUTHOR

Hannah Davis joined FAIR in 2023 as a State and Local Analyst. She brings prior experience in tracking, researching, and writing on evolving immigration trends. Her professional portfolio includes published articles and a passion for distilling complex immigration data into tangible visualizations for the public. Hannah exemplifies a deep commitment to FAIR’s mission of driving immigration reform. Hannah obtained her Bachelor’s degree in Homeland Security from Campbell University and her Master’s degree in Security Studies from East Carolina University. These qualifications underscore her dedication and knowledge surrounding the topic of immigration.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Doocy Presses KJP On Release Of Migrants Who Allegedly Beat Texas National Guardsman

House to Send Mayorkas Impeachment Articles to Senate

In Wake of Large-Scale Immigration Bust, ICE Officials Ask Local Jurisdictions to Honor Detainers

Mexico’s $20 Billion Shakedown

Al Sharpton Calls Out Biden For Attending ‘Ritzy’ Fundraiser With Ex-Presidents, Snubbing Working Class

POSTS ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This FAIR column is republished with permission. © COPYRIGHT 2024 FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

New Protests in Cuba Against an Old and Destructive Socialist Tyranny

In October 1868 in the Cuban city of Bayamo, the notes of the National Anthem were heard for the first time — a call for the independence war against the Spanish empire. On March 17, 2023 — 155 years later — hundreds of Cubans walked the streets of Bayamo singing against socialist totalitarianism.

If the former did it with lit torches, the latter carried fire in their voices. They walked through a city in darkness, overwhelmed by blackouts of up to 20 hours a day, without food or medicine, and with the liberticidal boot of the Communist Party of Cuba (PCC) on their necks.

That day, coded in the media and popularly known as 17M, peaceful protests were replicated in other cities and towns on the island. El Cobre, in the Santiago de Cuba province, Sancti Spíritus in the center of the country, and Santa Marta, Matanzas, were some of those that remained in the national memory thanks to live broadcasts and images that Cubans took with their cell phones.

“Freedom,” “No to violence,” “We are hungry,” “Down with Díaz-Canel,” and “Homeland and Life” were some of the cries that were heard in the videos. The regime shut down the flow of information almost immediately with local blackouts of the internet, a service it dominates through the state telecommunications monopoly ETECSA. The protests lasted for two days.

In Bayamo, a city where there are reports and graphic testimony of violence by the National Revolutionary Police (PNR), there is still enthusiastic talk about the demonstrations today. The popular adrenaline shot of doing what is prohibited, demonstrating against the State, will remain in the memory of the people of Bayamo.

A pastor from a local church, who has requested anonymity, shared the images that lead this article. People crowded in the area known as the Figueredo Cruise, and a police unit attempted to contain their advance. Someone from his church, who participated in the protests, sent him the photos. Videos and graphic content were shared in WhatsApp and Telegram groups with equal doses of pride and fear.

In Cuba there is a tyranny, but not just any tyranny. Socialist tyrannies are the worst thing that can happen to a country.

Popular exhibitions against Castroism are not new. Two days before the 17M protests, in a peripheral neighborhood of Santiago de Cuba, after a whole day without electricity, several Cubans went out to the balconies of their apartments to shout “Freedom!” Pastor Alain Toledano mentioned the event as “a cry for hope and reform.”

Among those who screamed was a member of his congregation and his young mother, Ruth. On March 16, the political police arrested her and transferred her to the Versailles Operations Unit, a known torture center in the eastern city.

Although at first the military planned to arrest Ruth’s father as well, they opened the handcuffs that they had already put on him so that he could carry his grandson, a baby who looked bewildered at that group of uniformed men in his house who took his mother away as if she were a criminal. The young Christian was interrogated, threatened, and then held incommunicado in a cell.

On March 17, her father and her husband, with the baby in their arms, stood at the station asking for her release.

Hours later, in the nearby town of El Cobre, a concentration of residents broke out in the streets due to the lack of food and electricity, which soon escalated to shouts against the Marxist system and the ruling leadership. PNR officials climbed on a roof and tried to appease the protesters, who expressed their disapproval and even questioned the legitimacy of their positions, including to the highest representative of totalitarianism in the province, Beatriz Jhonson, Secretary of the PCC.

The spark, thanks to the interconnection fostered by the internet, was spread in Guantánamo city, where a group of people chanted phrases against the municipal government. Another protest reached the town of Los Mangos, in the province of Matanzas.

The regime’s anger was unleashed with the arrests of several participants. On March 18, there was a considerable concentration outside the PNR Station in El Cobre. In front of a line of police officers who looked on in bewilderment, the jilted people questioned why their neighbors, friends, and family had been locked up the night before for “public disorder.”

“People get tired,” the grandparents said in my house when the situation was at its limit. The promise that unbearable fatigue would come in the form of massive public protests was passed from generation to generation without being fulfilled, thanks to the refined national panopticon — the relentless repressive system of indoctrination that increases the feeling of being imprisoned in Cuba.

Since 2021, with the demonstrations of July 11 and 12, it seems that the old saying is beginning to come true. It can be catalyzed by, among others, a mother separated from her baby, punishments for those who ask for the freedom of the island, prolonged blackouts that return the country to pre-Columbian times, and zero milk for children. That is to say: Socialism’s own inhumanity and ineptitude is its own enemy.

AUTHOR

Yoe Suarez

RELATED ARTICLE: My Visit to Cuba — An American in Havana

POSTS ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

What Do RFK Jr. and Ronna McDaniel Have in Common? Cancel Culture

After several commentators on MSNBC displayed public outrage on Monday and Tuesday about their employer, NBC, hiring former Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel to be a paid contributor, NBC abruptly fired her after less than one week on the job.

MSNBC hosts claimed that McDaniel was an “election denier” because she initially questioned the outcome of the 2020 elections. Yet McDaniel said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday that President Biden won the 2020 election “fair and square” and that he’s “the legitimate president.”

However, that didn’t stop MSNBC hosts on Monday from piling attacks on McDaniel and insisting that their employer fire her immediately so that she could not share their “sacred airwaves” as “one of us,” a “badge-carrying employee of NBC News.”

Rachel Maddow said, “And so I want to associate myself with all my colleagues at MSNBC and NBC News who have voiced loud and principled objections to our company for putting on the payroll someone who hasn’t just attacked us as journalists, but someone who is part of an ongoing project to get rid of our system of government. Someone who is still trying to convince Americans that this election stuff doesn’t really work. That this last election wasn’t a real result. That American elections are fraudulent.”

As a result of this immense internal pressure, NBC caved to its employees — many of whom are biased former Democratic operatives. McDaniel herself did not find out that she was fired by NBC executives directly, but by hearing about it in the news.

This decision reveals what many already knew: the mainstream media has a deep left-wing bias, and they have no tolerance for those that disagree with them.

The new chairman of the RNC, Michael Whatley, discussed this on Wednesday’s “Washington Watch” with Family Research Council President Tony Perkins. “[… The legacy media] really, truly wants to make sure that their viewers are only getting one side of any given debate, which is really unfortunate. You know, when the American voters are informed voters, they make better decisions.”

Sadly, McDaniel’s firing reflects a deeper problem that has spread throughout our country: cancel culture. Just ask presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. who has continuously been canceled by the Democratic Party and social media. Both have tried to delegitimize Kennedy because he disagrees with the Left’s base about how to address issues such as mandatory COVID-19 vaccines, open borders, the Israeli-Hamas war, and environmental policies.

And although Kennedy still holds liberal positions on many issues, the Democratic Party would not tolerate dissent from their base or even allow him to debate Joe Biden during the Democratic primary race. This ultimately led Kennedy to leave the party and become an Independent candidate.

Democrats and Republicans alike used to care deeply about free speech and defend that right — even for those they disagree with. After all, free speech is a fundamental right protected by our Constitution’s First Amendment and essential to a functioning democratic republic. However, more Democrats are realizing that the base of their party has dropped their belief in the freedom of speech. Because now, if you’re like RFK Jr. and you disagree with the socialist wing of the Democratic Party or if you are a conservative Republican like Ronna McDaniel, they believe you do not have a right to express your thoughts on television or debate your point of view in a presidential debate. Such silencing of opposing views is dangerous not only because it disregards political leaders, but it can lead to a disregard for voters.

As Whatley explained, “When you think about where the Left is coming from — and I don’t even say Democrats, I say the Left — where they’re coming [from] is they want to dismantle the family. They want to dismantle America. What they want to do is make everybody dependent on the government for everything,” he argued. “They want to really kind of take this country down a road where the American people do not want to go. And a key component for them is to be able to stifle that debate and put their message out.”

This is why it is essential for Americans to teach accurate history and civics and make sure we are using reliable news sources. As Tony Perkins pointed out on “Washington Watch” Monday, “We all come at this with different perspectives. In fact, up until about 15 years ago, it’s what made America strong: we came together, we had different views, but we would arrive at a consensus. Why? Because we had conversations. …This is what is so dangerous about the Left,” he pointed out. “They want to shut down our conversations. They want to silence. They want to cancel any voice that runs counter to theirs. Ultimately, they’re going to silence you. That’s why we can’t let them.”

AUTHOR

Kathy Athearn

RELATED ARTICLE: Roger Stone on RFK Jr.’s VP choice: What you need to know about Nicole Shanahan

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Roger Stone on RFK Jr.’s VP choice: What you need to know about Nicole Shanahan

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. took the health freedom world by storm with his eye-opening and masterful book The Real Anthony Fauci, as well as his many eloquent speeches passionately advocating for freedom and calling out corporate corruption.

So when he tossed his hat in the ring for the presidency, running as a Democrat, many jumped on his bandwagon. Then he shifted gears, changing his party affiliation to Independent. This quickly raised the “spoiler” specter among both Dems and Republicans, as there’s no clear path for a third-party candidate—especially in this high-stakes race.

In a recent NewsNation interview quoted by CNN, Kennedy said this: “I would never choose a vice presidential candidate based on how much money they have.”

Roger Stone, for one, is wondering how that squares with Bobby’s choice of uber-wealthy Nicole Shanahan, former wife of Google’s Sergei Brin, as his running mate.

On March 26th in Oakland, Kennedy announced his VP choice this way: “I’m confident that there is no American more qualified than Nicole Shanahan to play this role.” Hmmm…

Stone has a lot to say about Shanahan’s politics, including the following:

Although she was far from a well-known public figure before RFK Jr.’s announcement, Shanahan was no stranger to the world of effete liberal politics living in Silicon Valley and rubbing elbows with tech magnates. She has an appalling record of supporting far-left causes that have turned California into a national laughingstock, saying nary a peep from her privileged perch as the policies she helped to engineer have backfired spectacularly and hurt the people immensely.

Shanahan has overseen $10 million in donations to the Silicon Valley Community Foundation (SVCF), an organization that gets violent felons back onto the streets and helps illegal invaders circumvent immigration law. The SVCF has an incredible $14 billion in assets, exploiting liberal guilt to amass largesse from some of the world’s richest individuals and corporations, and putting those funds toward the advancement of “gender, racial and economic justice.”

Shanahan gave a six-figure donation to Los Angeles County district attorney George Gascon, a Soros favorite who is radically anti-police to the point of where even the New York Times is raising questions. Gascon is sitting on a case backlog of 10,000 as his office atrophies due to extreme discontentment over his stubborn willingness to coddle criminals. 120 prosecutors have quit in disgust as crime and degeneracy rise to third-world levels in Gascon’s Los Angeles. This is the type of criminal justice policy that an RFK/Shanahan ticket will promote across America if they win election.

The pick of Shanahan ends the delusions that RFK Jr. is some sort of moderate worthy of consideration from anti-establishment conservatives and independents. RFK Jr. has been a staunch liberal his entire life and deviates from the Democrat orthodoxy in a real way on only the issue of health freedom. He has pushed back against the Big Pharma establishment, but his policies would destroy America just as quickly as those of Joe Biden.

You can read the rest on Stone’s Substack.

©2024. Cherie Zaslawsky. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: What Do RFK Jr. and Ronna McDaniel Have in Common? Cancel Culture

Al-Jazeera’s Gaza Script Sabotaged By Their Ally Hamas

QatarPalestinians | MEMRI Daily Brief No. 587

One way of telling the difference between a credible news outlet and a propaganda source is the subservience of news coverage to an ideological narrative. Given the dynamic nature of news, coverage would flow in all sorts of directions, a propaganda narrative only flows in one direction. In a normal, free media environment, the misdeeds of the offspring of the powerful are an irresistible topic. And yet in 2020 (and beyond) we saw the dominant news media outlets and social media companies in the United States intentionally suppress reporting on Democratic candidate Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden. The “Biden Laptop” scandal is a signal example of the triumph of narrative over journalism, the narrative in this case being Joe Biden’s rise to the presidency.

Narrative beating out journalism used to be a staple of foreign authoritarian regimes, and it still is. It now often flourishes in the West. But nowhere has narrative reigned over journalism more completely – propaganda over actual news – than in the Middle East, especially in Arabic-language media. Almost all outlets do it, but if there was a champion in the narrative business, it would be Qatar’s Al-Jazeera Arabic Satellite Channel. This makes sense because everything Al-Jazeera disseminates or produces is seen through an ideological framework, an Islamist lens, and serves Islamist causes, including the agenda of terrorist groups like Hamas.[1]

On March 23, 2024, Al-Jazeera ran a report alleging that Israeli soldiers had raped Palestinian women during an Israeli attack on Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) fighters holed up at the Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City. The report ran for more than 24 hours before it unraveled. The network then quietly deleted the content with no explanation given.[2]

Additional detail on the incident came from an interesting source – Jordanian journalist Yasser Abu Hilaleh, who had been Al-Jazeera Arabic’s general manager from 2014 to 2018 and before that had served as the channel’s bureau chief in Amman for many years. Abu Hilaleh noted on Twitter in Arabic (in a tweet with almost two million views) that the news was fabricated, according to an investigation conducted by Hamas.[3]

Abu Hilaleh, a veteran journalist who is also a strong supporter of the Palestinian cause and opponent of Israel, explained that “the woman who spoke about rape justified her exaggeration and incorrect talk by saying that the goal was to arouse the nation’s fervor and brotherhood!”[4]

Of course, Al-Jazeera has circulated false or exaggerated information before, information that has served an ideological agenda. It has continued to serve up propaganda throughout this entire Hamas-Israel War as both the channel and Qatar who funds it play a key role in the war as banker, host and propagandist for Hamas.[5] Early on in the war both Al-Jazeera and much of the world’s press (including the BBC and the New York Times) promoted and amplified a lie, that Israel had intentional struck a hospital in Gaza and killed hundreds of people.[6] It turned out that not only had Israel not struck the building, a PIJ rocket struck nearby, but hundreds had not been killed in the blast.

In this particular case, an accusation of rape is powerful because it would have served as a perfect riposte to multiple claims by Israeli eyewitnesses and victims of rape and sexual assault carried out by Hamas both on October 7 and afterward against female Israeli hostages. It would have served the narrative by, at the very least, “muddying the waters” by implying that either both sides do such things, or that the side – Israel – complaining vociferously about rapes, was actually the real rapist.

While such charges would have been useful in the larger context of the propaganda war being waged in both the Middle East and the West (where the extent of how much rape occurred on October 7 has become a controversy),[7] the initial false charge, which went viral on social media – that Israel was raping women in a hospital and burning families alive – had unintended “ripple effects” leading many Gazans to flee the northern part of the Gaza Strip and head south, a result that Hamas definitely does not want to see. An emptier northern Gaza is one that is easier for Israel to control and more difficult for Hamas cadres to hide in.

This is always the danger in propaganda. The narrative can turn out to have unexpected consequences.[8] So pro-Hamas protesters worldwide call for a Gaza ceasefire while Hamas actually rejects ceasefires that do not meet its demands. The thrust of Al-Jazeera’s narrative on Hamas and Gaza is built on conflicting claims that must be passed over to avoid any sort of real critical scrutiny: the war launched on October 7 is both a disaster for Gaza and a great victory for Hamas, Israel has been fatally weakened and is destroying Gaza with impunity, the Arab and Islamic masses are with Gaza and yet no one will help them. A war that began gleefully with the parading of dead Israeli bodies by gloating Gazans now seeks to parade dead Palestinian bodies in Gaza to gain the world’s sympathy.

As Ilan Benatar has noted, Hamas mastermind Yahya Sinwar has written a script where Israel is the villain and the goal was to “harness the entire world as a force multiplier to fight Israel on Hamas’s behalf.”[9] The fuel for such a scenario is Palestinian suffering – real or imagined – in Gaza (and anywhere else that serves the narrative).

If you thought that Al-Jazeera had learned anything from this latest embarrassing debacle, you would be mistaken. On March 28 the channel headlined “Israeli settlers storm Al-Aqsa under the protection of the Israeli police” while the television footage actually showed an Israeli man being forcibly removed, dragged away, by the Israeli police from the premises of Al-Aqsa.[10] The narrative, above all else, must be served and burnished.

AUTHOR

Amb. Alberto M. Fernandez

Alberto M. Fernandez is Vice President of MEMRI.


 [1] See MEMRI Inquiry And Analysis Series No. 1751, Al-Jazeera Arabic: The Qatari-Owned TV Channel That Promotes Islamist Terrorism Worldwide, February 29, 2024.

[2] Jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-793560, March 25, 2024.

[3] Twitter.com/abuhilalah/status/1771996521312973088, March 24, 2024.

[4] Twitter.com/abuhilalah/status/1771996521312973088, March 24, 2024.

[5] See MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 10872, Qatar Enabling Hamas’ War Against Israel, October 15, 2023.

[6] Theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/gaza-hospital-explosion-misinformation-reporting/675719, October 23, 2023.

[7] Msn.com/en-us/news/world/squad-member-bowman-backtracks-comment-calling-accounts-of-rape-in-israel-on-oct-7-propaganda/ar-BB1kzUM9, March 26, 2024.

[9] Medium.com/@ilanbenatar/the-story-is-the-war-f6482ab94c1f, March 17, 2024.

[10] Twitter.com/hahussain/status/1773336199026860253, March 28, 2024.

EDITORS NOTE: This MEMRI column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.