VIDEOS: Persians Rebel Against the Islamic Republic of Iran

/in , , , , , /by

Posted by Eeyore

MASS PROTESTS CONTINUE IN IRAN – 67 Demonstrators Killed – Regime Fires on Protesters From the Air 

(Many Twitter videos at link above)

1. Police shooting Protestors

2. Woman stands on bridge over stopped traffic and gives anti-regime rant to applause

3. Clashes Between Protesters & Regime’ Security Forces In Shiraz

4. 16 MILLION people in protests in Iran, some deaths on the regime side.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Video: Woman in Iran tears down “Down with USA” poster

Iran: Demonstrators chant “We don’t want an Islamic Republic, we don’t want it, we don’t want it”

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column with videos is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

VIDEO: The Vortex — Francis HATES America! He has drunk all the Kool-Aid.

/in , , , , , /by

RELATED ARTICLES:

NEW Allegation of Sex Abuse Inside Holy See Seminary

US bishops’ fidelity to Pope Francis challenged.

TRANSCRIPT

It’s become quite apparent that in his admiration for establishing a one-world government administered by a new world order, America is an object of hate for Pope Francis.

The handwriting was on the wall at least two years ago when yet another article from Eugenio Scalfari revealed that the pontiff has so little regard for the United States that he actually thinks we should simply give up our national sovereignty and submit to a new world order.

Maybe the Dems can nominate Pope Francis for their party’s candidate for president. He can assume presidential powers and then dissolve the U.S.A. After all, it seems like he’s got experience doing the same thing with the Church.

The old atheist Italian journalist says that in 2017, Pope Francis called him shortly after the G-20 summit and demanded to see him at four o’clock that afternoon. According to Scalfari, Francis had become agitated about the United States and other nations commanding such power in the world.

Pope Francis told the Italian newspaper La Repubblica that the United States of America has “a distorted vision of the world,” and Americans must be ruled by a world government as soon as possible, “for their own good.”

Now that’s an incredible statement to make, and as the article continued, the disrespect for the idea of national sovereignty mounted. European nations also came under the papal displeasure: “I also thought many times to this problem and came to the conclusion that, not only but also for this reason, Europe must take as soon as possible a federal structure.”

There is without a doubt an extreme dislike with this pope of anything that strikes of nationalism, meaning national sovereignty. Since America seems to lead the world in the area of national pride, the United States is never passed over in the papal condemnations of national sovereignty.

Somewhere, somehow, he has in his head that the idea of individual nations is bad because that translates into immigrants being mistreated, and among rich nations — the First-World nations — poverty escalates and the poor are taken advantage of.

That’s what he thinks, and so the solution for him is to introduce a one-world government, ruled by a single new world order, so all immigrants can get a fair shake out of life.

Last week the reports came out that Pope Francis thinks national pride, touted by political conservatives, is the beginning of Nazism reappearing. He said to an international group of specialists in penal law: “And I must confess to you that when I hear a speech [by] someone responsible for order or for a government, I think of speeches by Hitler in 1934, 1936,” adding, “They are inadmissible behaviors in the rule of law and generally accompany racist prejudices and contempt for socially marginalized groups.”

“It is no coincidence that in these times, emblems and actions typical of Nazism reappear, which, with its persecutions against Jews, gypsies and people of homosexual orientation, represents the negative model par excellence of a culture of waste and hatred,” he continued.

Pope Francis has drunk the Kool-Aid of the Left.

So there it is, perfectly framed by this pontificate: Immigrants and homosexuals need to be protected classes, and sovereign nations must give way to those who do not respect borders and those who reject natural law. And nations, now bordering on embracing Nazism, must surrender their independence because it is the will of God. For their own good, the nations of the world, especially the powerful ones, must pass out of existence, surrender themselves and abolish their borders for their own good.

When Americans are chanting “USA!” at sporting events or political rallies for Republicans, in Pope Francis’ head, that apparently rings as Sieg Heil!

This is dangerous, dangerous stuff. For the occupant of the throne of Peter to be outwardly demonizing nations — especially the leading nation which defeated the Nazis — as Nazis themselves, a line has been crossed from which there is no coming back.

To then turn around and underscore that part of what makes a person a modern-day Nazi is to not go along with the homosexual agenda and resist the evil, this is beyond the pale and must be called out.

Pope Francis has moved into territory that no pope has ever transgressed. He is transferring the mission of the Church from the salvation of souls to the foundation of a one-world government.

What precisely the role of the Church itself would be in that new world order still seems vague, but one thing is clear. Francis never criticizes Islamic nations. He never tells them to clean up their act and stop throwing homosexuals off roofs. He never has a word of criticism for their brutality of FGM (female gential mutilation) or sponsorship of world terror, or torture or forcing people in their nations to convert or have their heads cut off.

Yet he has no problem with hiding behind the Italian military surrounding the walls of the Vatican, protecting him from that same Muslim threat.

This pontificate is a political disaster, one gone completely off the rails.

Serious questions need to be asked about all this: homosexual men, many of whom are either abusers or covered up abuse placed into powerful posts; the theft of hundreds of millions of euros; constant lies and denials of repeated press reports; and multiple appointments of enemies of Christ to high-visibility positions within the Church. And now hurling accusations at political conservatives that their love of country makes them “Nazis,” and opposing the gay agenda means conservatives want homosexuals marched off to gas chambers.

This is outrageous. Francis hates America because America represents everything his twisted political worldview stands in opposition to.

This increased marxist view has been brewing in the Church for decades, and far from being ascendant is now practically the status quo. Love of the homosexual agenda, illegal immigrants, the abolition of nations and Islam’s “favored son” status is what Francis will be remembered for.

The Vatican has yet to comment on the Scalfari interview about Francis reportedly saying America should willingly surrender itself to a one-world government. And actually, no comment is needed. We’ve heard enough.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Could Sweden be turning around? An interview with the Swedish woman who’s rant went viral.

/in , , , /by

Posted by Eeyore

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Beliefs – and Their Political Traps

/in , , /by

Note: The Great Professor Arkes reminds us today of something everyone should understand about the distinction between faith and reason, especially in the public square. Faith is addressed to reason, but reason – right reason – is quite capable on its own of telling us truths about public questions such as the duty to protect the lives of the innocent, particularly in the womb. Therefore, while Catholics are and must be pro-life, you can be rational and pro-life without being Catholic. These and other crucial questions perpetually need sorting out, and are likely to be especially so as we enter the 2020 election campaigns. We will be here to comment on what is coming – if we can have your support now. Many “things” come under our purview at The Catholic Thing. You can be part of that by making your contribution. Today. – Robert Royal

Hadley Arkes: In abortion debates, if “beliefs,” rather than science and logic, are the basis for argument, other “beliefs” may trump faith-based ones.

he scene:  The Washington law firm of Hogan & Hartson, in the late 1970s.  I was invited in to do a debate on abortion with a young woman from the ACLU.   I sought to show, in my usual way, that the argument on abortion could be cast simply in the form of a principled argument, without any appeal to faith or religion.

I drew, as ever, on a fragment that Lincoln wrote for himself in which he imagined himself in a debate with an owner of slaves, and he put the question of why this man was justified in making a slave of the black man.  Was he less intelligent? Then beware, said Lincoln, you may be rightly enslaved by the next white man more intelligent than you.

As the argument moved on in this way, the upshot became clear: there was nothing one could cite to justify the enslavement of the black man that would not apply to many whites as well.

I pointed out then that we simply draw upon the same mode of reasoning when it comes to abortion: why is that offspring in the human womb anything less than human?  Does it not speak?  Neither do deaf mutes.  Does it lack arms or legs?  Well, other people lose arms or legs in the course of their lives without losing anything necessary to their standing as human beings to receive the protections of the law.

I would point out that, at no point in the chain of reasoning, is there an appeal to revelation or faith. This is an argument that can be understood across the religious divisions, by Catholics, Baptists, Muslims, and even atheists.

Hence the bombshell – that one does not have to be Catholic to understand this argument – and that has been precisely the position of the Church:  The argument can be made by drawing on the scientific evidence of embryology, woven with principled reasoning, which is to say, the moral reasoning of the natural law.

The young woman from the ACLU listened to all of this, smiling.  When I was done, she nodded benignly and said, “That is what you believe.”  I had given her a moral argument carried out through reasons that could be assessed and understood by any functional person, regardless of his religion, and yet she reduced everything bearing a moral argument to a matter merely of personal “belief.”

The late John Courtney Murray, S.J. warned about the tendency to libel religion by reducing it merely to “beliefs” having no claim to be true for anyone apart from those who held them.  With that cliché nicely absorbed, the Bidens and Cuomos of the world could affect a high-minded restraint from imposing the “beliefs” of their Church on anyone else.

We fast-forward to our own day, and we encounter the irony of a false idea turning on itself.  In the awful unfolding of the “culture war,” abortion has been deeply planted in the law, along now with same-sex marriage, and the drive toward “transgenderism.”

But with this turn of affairs, we find people in moral opposition seeking a safe harbor from the demands of the law by invoking their claim to religious freedom.  And so the Green family, the owners of the famous Hobby-Lobby craft stores, sought to avoid a demand of the federal government that they cover contraception and abortion in their medical insurance for employees.

In pursuing their argument, the Greens affirmed their “belief” that life begins at conception. Belief?  The point is contained in every textbook on embryology and obstetric gynecology.

And yet, my friends defending religious freedom in the courts have been willing to settle with this mode of argument because it brought at least the right result for the Greens and others.  But there was this point of awkwardness:  We find people who are not Catholic and yet make precisely the same moral argument about abortion that is made by the Church.

How, in any strict reckoning, could we explain why the Catholic businessmen should be exempted from the obligation to support abortions, while the same exemption is not accorded to the man making precisely the same argument made by the Church but who happens not to be Catholic?

That awkwardness becomes the key to the deeper danger. The people who have been content to rest their arguments on “beliefs” earnestly held seem quite oblivious to the unsettling implications arising from the argument they have put in place:  If indeed our moral judgments can be reduced to matters of beliefs, that woman from the ACLU now has the trump card.

Let us say that Roe v. Wade is overturned, and it becomes legitimate once again for the laws to cast protection over the child in the womb.  But if the pro-lifers could invoke their “religious freedom” not to be obliged to perform or fund abortions, should we be astonished if a comparable freedom were claimed by those who profess to believe in the deep rightness of abortion?

Why should they not claim a “religious freedom” to order abortions, even against the laws that now bar them?  There is a path for protecting the doctors, nurses and others who don’t wish to become complicit in abortions.   But to cast their rights on the ground of religious “beliefs” is to lay the ground for undoing those laws on abortion that some of us have sought so long to restore.

COLUMN BY

Hadley Arkes

Hadley Arkes is the Ney Professor of Jurisprudence Emeritus at Amherst College and the Founder/Director of the James Wilson Institute on Natural Rights & the American Founding. His most recent book is Constitutional Illusions & Anchoring Truths: The Touchstone of the Natural Law. Volume II of his audio lectures from The Modern Scholar, First Principles and Natural Law is now available for download.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2019 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Left progressive antisemitism must be a US electoral ‘wedge’ issue

/in , , , , , , , /by

As the Democratic primaries approach, leading candidates seem to be reinforcing their anti-Israel credentials to appease their progressive base. Antisemitism already is a ‘wedge’ issue – although Democrats are urging voters to ignore it.

The left’s anti-Israel agenda has been energized recently by radical politicians using their Congressional visibility to slander the Jewish State and its supporters with classical slurs and stereotypes.  Simultaneously, there has been an increase in antisemitic agitation among progressives invoking blood libel imagery and repugnant myths of disproportionate Jewish wealth, influence, and disloyalty.

Such is the backdrop against which Democrats are urging Jewish voters not to treat Israel as a “wedge issue” during the 2020 election season, though what they are really asking is for Jews to ignore the pro-BDS, anti-Israel, and antisemitic vitriol being spewed by reactionaries who influence party doctrine and to overlook party leadership’s appeasement of the left and disregard of hateful prejudice.

By lamenting the use of Israel as a “wedge issue,” Democrats are acknowledging that it already is and that their base’s hostility towards the Jewish State is motivated not by policy concerns, but by antisemitism.  And just as they did in 2016, they are enlisting Jewish party loyalists to promote the fiction that conservatives pose a more serious threat to fellow Jews, despite public opinion research indicating that antisemitic sentiment is prevalent among radicals, progressives and left-wing Democrats.  The same surveys suggest conservative Republicans are more likely to support Israel and condemn Jew-hatred.

The antisemitic Squad

These trends help explain some recent disturbing Democratic behaviors, including the failure to censure Representatives Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for their inflammatory rhetoric and for validating antisemitic public figures like Louis Farrakhan.  Examples of moral disingenuity abound, as when Democrats criticized the Netanyahu government for blocking Tlaib and Omar from a planned trip to Israel that was to be sponsored by an anti-Israel organization. Supporters of the congresswomen were unconcerned that their proposed visit was neither planned as part of an official Congressional delegation nor intended to serve any legitimate governmental purpose.

The Israeli government had initially agreed to allow Tlaib and Omar entry into the country, but withdrew its approval after determining they would not be part of the scheduled Congressional delegation and that their itinerary was intended to disparage Israel and promote boycotts.  The purpose of the trip was no surprise considering it was to be partially sponsored and coordinated by Miftah, the anti-Israel organization founded by Hanan Ashrawi, a PLO Executive Committee member and outspoken Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions advocate, who was barred by the State Department from entering the United States last May.

It seems incongruous that Democrats who express concern about Jewish voters could defend Tlaib or Omar in light of their aspersions against Israel and sponsorship of House Resolution 496, a bill essentially supporting the antisemitic BDS movement.  Though that bill was defeated in a rare display of bipartisanship, its limited support came mainly from progressive Democrats, including Tlaib, Omar, and Ocasio-Cortez. Liberal support for such politicians – or for any who express contempt for Israel, condone violence against Israelis, or spread loathsome stereotypes – suggests that party loyalty and disdain for President Trump often outweigh any sense of Jewish fealty or recognition of antisemitism on the left.

Despite progressive hostility regarding Jewish national rights and affinity for traditional conspiracy theories, Democrats argue their support for Israel and opposition to prejudice are unshakable; and when mentioning leftist antisemitism at all, they chalk it up to aberration or misunderstanding.

Anti-Jewish bigotry is not limited to the “hard left,” however, but rather has infected the party’s mainstream:

  • Congressman Ted Lieu of California, for example, evoked the ancient canard of Jewish disloyalty with a tweet questioning the allegiance (and demanding the resignation) of David Friedman, US Ambassador to Israel;
  • Democratic presidential hopefuls, including Corey Booker, Elizabeth Warren, and Kamala Harris, implicitly impugned Israel’s integrity when they snubbed last year’s AIPAC conference.
  • Not a single Democrat vying for the party’s nomination criticized Bernie Sanders (who has falsely accused Israel of killing thousands of Palestinian civilians in Gaza) for using Linda Sarsour as a campaign shill
  • None have defended Israel against apartheid claims that are facially absurd.

According to the International Criminal Court’s Rome Statute of 2002, apartheid is a humanitarian crime “committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.”  Considering the freedoms that characterize Israeli society – where Arabs are professionals, judges, and legislators and have a higher standard of living than anywhere in the Arab-Muslim world – it is unconscionable when Democrat politicians refuse to defend Israel against spurious charges of racist oppression.

As the Democratic primaries approach, leading candidates instead seem to be reinforcing their anti-Israel credentials to appease their progressive base.

  • The Warren campaign, for example, brought aboard Max Berger, founder of the liberal group IfNotNow, whose members have attempted to infiltrate Taglit Birthright and Jewish summer camp programs to indoctrinate youth against Israel.
  • And Pete Buttigieg stated his intention to cut aid to Israel (though as a foreign policy neophyte he articulated no credible reason for singling out Israel)
  • Warren, Sanders and other prominent Democrats made similar statements at this year’s J Street conference.

It is important to note that:

  • Whereas most potential nominees did support an anti-BDS resolution in the Senate, they have uniformly failed to sanction antisemites within their party, who have instead been rewarded with prestigious appointments to influential committees.
  • Furthermore, the refusal of House Democrats to pass a resolution specifically condemning antisemitism or sanctioning Omar’s outrageous remarks indicates an odious tolerance for bigotry, as long as it targets Israel and comes from the left.

Discomfort regarding Israel is systemic because most Democrats continue to cling to the two-state paradigm, though it is based on revisionist Palestinian mythology that denies Jewish history and is rejected by most Israelis.

Sadly, Jewish liberals are often willing to ignore progressive antisemitism and instead direct their outrage at Mr. Trump (who despite his foibles is the most pro-Israel president ever to occupy the White House), while criticizing Israel for supposedly occupying “Palestinian” lands and oppressing Palestinian-Arabs.  However, “occupation” exists only in the minds of revisionist zealots and propagandists, who must ignore historical and geopolitical reality to justify their position.

Falsified history and ignorance

Progressives’ knowledge of Israeli history is typically sketchy and exhibits little understanding of (or respect for) the Jews’ unbroken connection to their homeland, which is supported by the historical, archeological, and scriptural records.  Moreover, their anti-Israel criticisms are characterized by a refusal to acknowledge Jewish history or the pedigree of lands comprising the modern Jewish State and territories. Instead, liberal angst focuses on the rights of Palestinian-Arabs, whose history is a contemporary political invention of questionable foundation.  The two-state fantasy seeks to restore Palestinian-Arabs to a country that never existed in a land where they never established cultural institutions, exercised political sovereignty, or exhibited any indicia of nationality or statehood.

This historical awareness is crucial for countering the revisionism embraced by progressives who impute ancient stereotypes to the Jewish State – including modern reworkings of the Blood Libel, classical global conspiracy theories, and the myths of disproportionate Jewish influence, power and perfidy.  It is also necessary for dispelling ridiculous and apocryphal claims that Palestinians are descended from ancient Phoenicians or Canaanites – assertions that are intended to imply aboriginal validity but which crumble under the weight of objective scrutiny.

The role of Jewish progressives

For generations, Americans have been rejecting normative Jewish values in favor of progressive ideals that contravene traditional Judaism.  Though most liberal Jews profess support for Israel, their true feelings should be judged not by self-serving affirmations, but by their political priorities and alliances.  Their proclamations of fidelity to Israel are contradicted by the endorsement of candidates who delegitimize the Jewish State, staff campaigns with anti-Israel activists, or snub Jewish organizations like AIPAC.  Moreover, they cannot claim fairness to Israel if they tolerate BDS, support organizations like J Street, or provide forums in their synagogues for Israel-hating artists, activists, and politicos. Or, if they believe hatred of Jews and Israel is merely a partisan “wedge issue.”  Such thinking betrays the elevation of temporal politics over authentic Judaism and concern for cultural survival.

What would Jewish liberals say if Democratic leaders were to ask African-Americans, feminists, or gay activists to disregard racism, misogyny, or homophobia as “wedge issues”?  Certainly, they would denounce such pleas as offensive and lambaste those with the temerity to make them. And liberal rabbis would be shouting from the rooftops about cultural insensitivity and beseeching their congregants to hit the streets in protest.

So how can they accept Democratic condescension that exhorts them to ignore antisemitism within their party and excuse party leadership for trivializing the problem and protecting the perpetrators?

Whether their obsessive political loyalties arise from ignorance, delusion, or self-rejection, the end result is always the same – the abandonment of Jewish kith and kin, the denial of history and heritage, and the devaluation of the Jewish spirit.

EDITORS NOTE: This Israel National News column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

FBI Data: Anti-Muslim hate crimes under Trump are below Obama levels in 2014

/in , , , , , , , , /by

The media has put out numerous pieces based on bad data and hate crime hoaxes claiming that President Trump was responsible for a rise in anti-Muslim hate crimes. Now the FBI data is out and it actually shows that anti-Muslim hate crimes under Trump are below Obama levels in 2014.

Does that mean that Obama was actually responsible for anti-Muslim hate crimes while Trump is a beacon of tolerance? If the media were logically consistent, instead of narratively consistent, then sure. But since the media is narratively consistent, that’s not the conclusion it will draw.

 By the numbers: Of 4,571 reported attacks the bureau tracked, aggravated assaults were up 4%, simple assaults up 15% and intimidation up 13%. The report also shows that assaults targeting Muslims, Arab Americans and African Americans have gone down, while violence against Latinos has risen.

The report says 485 hate crimes were reported against Latinos in 2018, compared to 43 in 2017.

270 hate crimes were reported against Muslims and Arab Americans — the lowest since 2014.

1,943 hate crimes were reported against African Americans — the lowest since 1992.

Guess which one of those numbers the media will play up and blame on President Trump?

Hint: It’s the negative one of the three.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Inside Mosques: Savannah and Statesboro, Georgia

New York Times called Baghdadi a “terrorist,” but scrubs “terror” from article about killing of “Palestinian” jihadi

RELATED VIDEO: Subtitled video of the Koran burn in Norway.

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

PODCAST: New Program Aims to Help Young Adults Grow in Faith, Maturity Before College

/in , , , , , /by

Should students go straight to college after high school? Tommy Nelson, senior pastor of Denton Bible Church, would argue no. “If they are Christian kids [in college], they are ganged up upon by their seniors and they’re now in a survival mode. I mean, you lose your faith, you lose your virginity, you lose your liver in time, and then you can lose your life,” Nelson says. To combat this problem, the Texas pastor created the GAP Program, a nine-month leadership course where high school graduates can learn theology, life skills, job skills, and more before attending a university.

On today’s podcast, Nelson discusses why he started the leadership program, how it operates, and how we can prepare young people to stand against the rise of secularism on college campuses. Read the lightly edited transcript below or listen to the podcast:

Virginia Allen: I am joined by Tommy Nelson, senior pastor of Denton Bible Church in Denton, Texas, just about 40 miles north of Dallas. Tommy, thank you so much for joining me.

Tommy Nelson: Thank you. Delighted to be with you.

Allen: All right. So, Tommy, you are telling young people not to go to college—or at least not right away.

In fact, your church has created a program called GAP that is specifically for young men who have just graduated from high school. And the GAP Program, as I’ve seen kind of described on your website, is essentially a nine-month leadership training program to teach theology, life skills, job skills, and so forth.

So why do you think that it’s so important for young people to not go straight to college after high school and maybe to consider a program like GAP?

Nelson: Well, I’m now 69 years old and when I was young, college was the ticket. You had to go to college. That was how you were going to rise. Well, college is a lot different now than what it was then. I can never recall in college, I went to North Texas State University, and I can never recall God, my faith, the Bible being attacked. It was considered rude. Maybe they did it at [University of California,] Berkeley, but nobody did it there.

And yet, I have worked with college students for almost 50 years now, and now when a kid goes to college, you have the secular worldview that has set up shop, and secularism says there is no final truth. It is found subjectively within you and how you feel to make you happy and no one can judge you. That’s secularism.

And so, when somebody comes with an uplifted Bible, the response is like Nebuchadnezzar to people who will not bow to his image. And so scientifically, psychologically, morally, that faith is attacked and you just see kids, Virginia, that go to college and if they’re not set up yet, which a lot of 18 [year olds] aren’t, they are swept away.

If they are Christian kids, they are ganged up upon by their seniors and they’re now in a survival mode. I mean, you lose your faith, you lose your virginity, you lose your liver in time, and then you can lose your life.

Congress is moving to impeach the president. But will their plan to remove him from office succeed? Find out more now >>

Colleges now are not simply trying to make you a living but not a life, they’re trying to get you a living and destroy what you thought was life, and the fear of God, the image of God and man, the absoluteness of moral absolutes that they’re out for you.

We don’t try to keep kids out of college, but we say, “Before you go to college, let us take you in a GAP, God’s Alternative Plan, and let’s take you and we’ll teach you Bible. We’ll teach you apologetics. We’ll teach you about where secularism came from.”

America’s gone from Calvinism to Arminianism to liberalism to secularism. Secularism was where nobody cares if there’s a God. Agnosticism doesn’t believe that you can know. Secularism just doesn’t care. And man is now exalted in humanistic secularism.

We just take you and we train you in life skills. We show kids how to dress, how to have etiquette. We show them how to work on their car, how to do blacksmithing. We show you how to do carpentry, we show you how to garden. And you take a college nine months and we bring in people, excellent men from all over, and we just teach it. We’re doing it with men now.

In a couple of years we hope to go to women. We’re kind of building the airplane as we fly it. You know what I’m saying? No one’s ever really done this that I know of, and so we’re kind of building it as we go.

Allen: Oh, it’s so practical to take both that theology side and then just those life skills, those jobs skills.

Nelson: Right, yeah. And a kid today, Virginia, can live in a room with a smartphone and never get out of it. I mean, he’s got access to the Library of Congress. And so a lot of life skills, a lot of people skills, social skills, moral skills, domestic skills, workplace skills. Kids have just so much today that have them removed.

There’s a verse in Proverbs, it says, “An inheritance gained hurriedly at the beginning will not be blessed in the end.” Meaning, when you give a kid too much too quick, it’ll ruin him. It’s not giving him a chance to struggle.

So we’ll take boys, Virginia, we want them to be able to do 50 push-ups, 10 pull-ups, and be able to run a 10K. My son who is in a home, what do they call it? Secret Service, home—

Allen: Homeland Security.

Nelson: Homeland Security. He told me that they’re getting guys now that their femurs give way, their hips give way. Their bones just are not hard because they hadn’t been stressed, they’ve sat around so long.

It’s been found that kids, something like 70% of the kids in the United States, couldn’t get into the military because of their lack of physical fitness. And so, we make them physically fit, socially adept.

… [It’s] like in the South. They would take a kid and put him down, make him eat in the basement until he was instructed by a servant on how to conduct himself and how to be apropos in public. Then they’d let him come up to the adults.

And kids now just don’t have any life skills. As I talk with a lot of them, young guys now, they’re not really interested that much in college, but they are just about learning how to live, how to [develop] life skills.

I think men in our country have been so condescended upon that a man is just afraid to assert himself in a home. They’re all desperately looking for a male figure with authority and love to set up shop and say, “This is the way it is.” It’s kind of like in the Bible when you read the Book of Proverbs.

Solomon will say, “My son,” and he’ll say, “Don’t do that. Be aware of this, do this.” And he’ll give you little two-line sermons over and over and over just to help you make it through life. That’s what we try to do in the GAP Program.

I had more response to it than anything we’ve ever had in 40-some odd years, 47 years of Denton Bible Church. More response by the adults saying, “We want to get behind this and do whatever we can.” I’ve never seen that big a response from kids and from adults saying, “Yes, that’s what we’ve got to have.”

Allen: Wow.

Nelson: We’re going with six [boys], as kind of a trial run. Then next year, we’re going to go to 20. Then we’re going to open it up to girls and go 40. I would like some day, Virginia, to see churches, everywhere there’s an evangelical church, to have part of their staff … do the GAP Program.

I mean, it’s a blinding flash of the obvious. I mean, you, Virginia Allen, you could do it. You could take a bunch of girls that are 18 years old, and you take them and start talking to them about morality, about God, about how to be a daughter, about parents, about authority, about being skilled, and the person you select to look at for your life partner. You can make a whole lot of difference in a young girl’s life.

Well, you just have to get a guy that knows his Bible and that knows how we got from the Puritans to same-sex gender assignment, and how we got from inalienable truths that are self-evident through nature’s God to where a judge can be censored by the ACLU for handing a Bible to a convicted murderer and show him John 3:16, which is what we had just recently in Texas.

How did we get here?

So somebody has to be able to show him [the] Bible, and history, and the devolution of Western philosophy, and get the kid ready for the chipper that he’s about to back into. You know what I mean?

Allen: Yeah, absolutely.

Nelson: When he graduates, he’s backing into a chipper and it’s going to grind him up if he’s not ready.

Allen: And you say that you roughly modeled the program after the L’Abri Fellowship, which was started by Francis and Edith Schaeffer.

Nelson: Yeah, there’s been a lot of places that did this. Princeton University was begun by what was called the Log College of a fellow named William Tennent and it became Princeton, where he took about 18 young guys and just tutored them as young men because he didn’t want to send them to Harvard or Yale that had gone liberal, and so he trained them.

L’Abri means “the shelter” in French, and Francis Schaeffer would take young men and women from Europe that had been devastated through secular humanism that reached Europe ahead of us. He would take them and walk them through it.

In Colorado Springs, the Summit Ministry by David Noble, the same thing. He looked up in ’62 and he says, “We’re sending kids to college to get threshed.” He would take them and train them. So there has been things like this all around the country starting to pop up.

It’s kind of like whenever America pressed to the West in the late 1800s, mid- to late 1800s, and gosh, I guess before because it was realized that we were going to the West, but we had no churches. So we would try to have a courthouse, a school, but there weren’t any churches.

We started what was called the Sunday School Alliance, to where the men and women would go out and on Sunday they would take the children in an hour and they would begin to train them in the Bible because they recognized that there was such a big gap, a big dearth of knowledge.

It got so well-known that pretty soon the Sunday School Association disappeared and local churches took it upon themselves to say, “We can do this.” … All of us grew up in Sunday school to some degree. That’s where it started, was just a bunch of adults said, “We got a problem here. We got kids growing up with no moral guidance.”

And when America was urbanized and industrialized, you had all kids. Daddy would now go to the factory and kids were loose, and you had gangs beginning. And out of that came YMCA, Boys Club, Boy Scouts, things like this, sports, baseball, football, to try to get kids under coaches to try to give them some guidance before the system ground them up.

And so this is an old, old idea. For that matter, heck, Virginia, the synagogue in Israel, when they were surrounded by the pagans, when they were dispersed, they would come together in a common place of instruction, [the] synagogue. They would instruct the kids on how to be Jews in the midst of Rome, and in midst of Greece, in the midst of Persia.

So that’s kind of what this is, it’s an old, old idea that kind of needs to be reborn. Every church can take some guys, some girls, some couple, and take kids and parent them, and get them ready to step into the chipper that has become the American worldview now.

Allen: And you started with six young men in September, correct?

Nelson: Right.

Allen: How’s it going?

Nelson: Like I say, we’re building the plane as we fly.

Allen: OK, great. [Do] those young men seem to be enjoying the program so far?

Nelson: They have said, “I am changed,” and we’ve only been doing it now for two months.

Allen: Wow.

Nelson: They are saying, “My life has changed,” because they were taken from a theological, philosophical, intellectual, physical two and confronted with an eight. …

The guy that I have is called Drew Anderson. He’s a former Midland, Texas, all-state Linebacker and 185 pounds, so you better be tough. A Texas A&M Aggie, a guy who did the stock market and real estate before he went into the ministry. He’s just a man’s man. He loves his wife. He loves his daughters. And he takes these young men four hours a day and he orchestrates people coming in and him instructing them.

So they’re at school, there four hours a day in our own life college. And they’re absolutely loving it because we’re exposing them to financial planners, to bankers, to master gardeners, to military men, to surgeons who are Christians that are showing them the way the big boys do it.

Allen: Yeah.

Nelson: And their lives are being changed.

Allen: Have you received any pushback from parents saying, “No, my child needs to go straight to college after they graduate high school”? And if you do have parents saying that to you, what are you saying to them?

Nelson: I say there’s maybe a few kids that could go straight to college today. There’s maybe a few. I’ve seen a couple that are so grounded by their parents, Bible theology, life, and social skills that they can do it, but very few. And so we have had zero pushback from parents.

We had one kid come in the program because his mother filled out the entrance form unknown to him just to get him in.

All that we ask from a kid, a young man, and [in] two years from a young woman, is that they have a motor, they have to be self-motivated. It’s not a recovery program. We’re not taking drug addicts and trying to rehab them. We’re taking kids. If you’ve been a drug addict, that’s OK, but we’re taking kids that want desperately to be successful in life and are not quite sure how to do it.

We can’t spend our time trying to parent a disobedient child, and so we’ll send them home. If they don’t show up to class, if they can’t show up on time, if they can’t get along with people in it, we’ll have to send them home. It costs like $2,500 a year to do it, which would be the lowest junior college education you could get, and so it’s not a great fee, but we want them to make a commitment and to stay with us.

We have had no pushback. What we have had is we’ll have up to 150 parents come together in a meeting with their particular life skill to say, “I want to be able to be used. If you can use me in any way, use me.”

We’ve had guys that are recovering drug addicts that came to us and said, “Can you can use me?” We said, “Yes we can,” and we get you in there.

We have people that will come and teach them about STDs and say, “This is what you’re looking at if you become immoral, this is going to happen.”

So we have had huge response from the parents.

Allen: And is the program at Denton Bible Church, is it only for your students in your congregation? Or could a young person in Florida apply, for example?

Nelson: Anybody, anybody. Now, if you’re in there, you got to go to Denton Bible Church.

Allen: OK.

Nelson: You go to the first service and you don’t just get to sit, you become a greeter, or you become a usher, or you become someone that serves communion, or you become someone that sits in and helps with the infants and plays with the squalling kids.

We’re not going to let you just sit. You’re going to be in the commons group at our church, and you’re going to be a servant in that group. So it’s not a time that you’re going to sit and vegetate for a year. You’re going to be busy and you’re going to serve within the church.

Allen: Now, if churches want to find out more about duplicating your model, or if students want to apply, how can they find out more?

Nelson: I’m not an expert on a computer machine, but they can just go to Denton Bible on the computer and then look at Denton Bible, and then look for the GAP. … We’ve made a video because we would get a huge number of calls saying, “What are you doing?” And so, we’re having people call and we show them.

And, Virginia, in time, if it works, we got to wait and see if it works—it’s great on paper and it looks great after two months, but we’re waiting to see—we would like in time to write on it and to say, “Here’s how you do it.” Because any church can do this and it’s a blinding flash of the obvious. It’s falling off a log. Young guys are all looking for old guys. Old guys are longing to invest in the next generation.

Psalm 71, “Do not forsake me, O God, until I make thy name known to the generation to come.” All you got to have is an intelligent, loving, communicable person that can be funded by a church to say this is your position, is to develop the GAP Program.

We would like to have, in time, I’d like to have 500 kids a year coming and going in this, to where it becomes something that every evangelical church in our country does—taking the kids in the church and around the church because they’re not just kids in our church. We got a kid from Chicago, we got kids from all over that have come to do this, so we’re thinking any church can do it and every church ought to do it.

Allen: Well, Tommy, thank you so much for your time. We really appreciate it and learning more about the GAP Program. So exciting to hear.

Nelson: Thank you, Virginia.

PODCAST BY

Virginia Allen

Virginia Allen is a contributor to The Daily Signal. Send an email to Virginia. Twitter: @Virginia_Allen5.

RELATED ARTICLE: Today’s youngsters are more conservative than their parents, report says

A Note for our Readers:

As we speak, Congress is moving to impeach the president.

We do not have all the facts yet, but based on what we know now, there does not seem to be an impeachable offense.

The questions stand: In drafting the Constitution, how did America’s founders intend for impeachment to be used? How does the impeachment process work, and what can history tell us about whether or not President Trump faces the real threat of being removed from office?

The Heritage Foundation is making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>

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

Women Priests?

/in , , , /by

Bevil Bramwell OMI: Why is the priesthood male? Because Christ is male, and the men are there to represent Christ, in persona Christi.

The issue of women priests comes up every so often, but the questioner rarely asks simply to know the truth about the matter and then commit his/her mind to it. Instead, it becomes clear that the questioners have a really odd idea of the Church.

They think of the Church the way the Left views social institutions. For the Left, institutions exist mainly to realize political goals. So, for example, a government department exists to help members of the party find employment, to extend the power of the party, and only last to fulfill the department’s stated functions. Is there time for all these things? Similarly, marriage is all about power and so is every other relationship. So, in their eyes, the Catholic priesthood is all about politics and power, not grace and communion.

Clearly, the Left’s power framework offers no way to describe the Catholic priesthood. It is like trying to describe the space shuttle, but only using words that start with the letter A. What the revolutionaries forget is that no human organization – not even an ambitious political party – can design a totally valid religion.

The best that such a party can come up with is the party itself (and in many countries their secret police). For example, when Martin Luther designed a new religion, he took pieces of Catholicism, violated others, e.g., his vows; married a nun; dropped tradition; dropped the priesthood, etc. What he created was very much a political entity – he chose popular teachings and was protected by the emperor against the pope.

A better explanation about the why’s of the male priesthood, one that is true, comes from what God has done, and is doing in our history. We learn what religion is from God. We do not instruct God on what religion we will tolerate.

After all, God reminds us, “as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, my thoughts higher than your thoughts.” (Isaiah 55:9) God does not say that once you have joined the “right” political party you can dispense with my ways. The party may think that way, but that is because it’s just a political party.

Our terms come from the Scriptures and the tradition, where God reveals himself to us and interprets what he is saying and doing. The terms come to us. We cannot “re-imagine” them or subject them to “paradigm shifts.” We do not have that kind of standing.

Vatican II taught that: “The Lord established ministers among his faithful to unite them together in one body in which, ‘not all the members have the same function’ (Rom 12:4).” Jesus chose his ministers – the apostles. They were all men even though there were dozens of religions with priestesses at the time of Christ.

Yet Jesus did change other, merely cultural things like eating on the sabbath, eating with sinners, having women among his followers, etc. So the old chestnut that Jesus was bound by the culture of his time simply does not wash.

*

The punch line is that “Jesus chose his ministers. They were men.” There you have it in a nutshell. There is a male priesthood because Christ did it that way. Jesus is God and so does nothing accidental or based on a prejudice. Not allowing him the sovereign freedom of God means your Christology is off. When Jesus walked the earth, there was no debate about political correctness. There was no polling of believers.

Moreover, “the Sacred Council teaches that bishops by divine institution have succeeded to the place of the apostles as shepherds of the Church, and he who hears them, hears Christ, and he who rejects them, rejects Christ and Him who sent Christ.” (Vatican II)

By these words, the Council fathers meant a particular kind of personal presence, an embodied presence – otherwise there would have been no hearing of the Word – and that means a gendered presence. In this case, a male presence.

It is male because Christ is male, and the men are there to represent Christ. The priest’s natural imaging of the male Christ through embodied interaction is used by Christ’s supernatural power and the priest becomes the instrument of the Lord.

This is so because “only God can offer worthy sacrifice to God,” in the brilliant formulation of the priest/philosopher Robert Sokolowski. By ordination, male priests participate in his crucified and glorified presence, so that they can act in persona Christi (in the person of Christ), within his Bride the Church, as the perfect sacrifice is offered to God.

As St. Thomas Aquinas explained: “[Holy] Orders are about relationship.” So we have what is spiritually “spousal” in nature where the spiritual takes up the temporal for its purposes. Highlighting the marital language of the Scriptures, the Council said Jesus “unceasingly ‘nourishes and cherishes’ [the Church] whom, once purified, he willed to be cleansed and joined to himself, subject to him in love and fidelity, and whom, finally, he filled with heavenly gifts for all eternity.”

Not a word about political power anywhere in sight. Lots of mention of Jesus and his spousal relation with his spiritually feminine Church community.

Welcome to God’s religion.

COLUMN  BY

Bevil Bramwell, OMI

Fr. Bevil Bramwell, OMI, PhD is the former Undergraduate Dean at Catholic Distance University. His books are: Laity: Beautiful, Good and True; The World of the Sacraments; Catholics Read the Scriptures: Commentary on Benedict XVI’s Verbum Domini, and, most recently, John Paul II’s Ex Corde Ecclesiae: The Gift of Catholic Universities to the World.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2019 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Inside Mosques: Arlington, Texas and Tampa, Florida

/in , , , , , /by

INSIDE MOSQUES

INVESTIGATING AND EVALUATING THREAT LEVELS

INTRODUCTION:

Dave Gaubatz is a former U.S. Federal Agent with Top Secret/SCI clearance, expert in counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism on national security issues, highly trained in Islamic ideology and tactics, Arab linguist, author of Muslim Mafia, has investigated over 300 mosques/Islamic Centers in the USA and 150 outside USA, and after leaving his position in the government continued this work as a Civilian Agent. Using firsthand investigation, he then evaluates Risk/Threat Levels based on multiple factors including Materials on Premises and What They Advocate, Ties to Muslim Terrorists, and Sharia Adherence. Mr. Gaubatz estimates that 80% of mosques in America recruit and train in jihad (violent & civilization). Finally, he makes Recommendations to protect America, our citizens, our children. He asks about each mosque: Would ISIS be proud?

NOTE: Several Reports/Affidavits will be published. When you read one from earlier dates, note that Dave Gaubatz issued Risk/Danger warnings ahead, but in some cases, violence occurred later from a member of one of those reported mosques (ex: Trolley Square, Salt Lake City, Utah shooting; child abuse Nashville, TN). When you read a report that came after an attack (Ex: Report 2017, Boston Marathon Bombing by the Tsarnaev brothers in 2013), note that violence had already occurred, Mr. Gaubatz reported continued Risk/Danger years later from the same mosques terrorists had attended.  Reading professionally investigated and evaluated Reports/Affidavits from various years is important so the American public is aware of new or continuing Risk/Danger and can demand protection from all levels of government officials and law enforcement that they are sworn to provide.

Significant Incident Report #3 (SIR)

Location: Arlington, TX (TX17) and Tampa Florida

Date of Significant Incident: 28 Dec 2007 — 17 Jan 2008

Synopsis: During the above period Field Researcher (FR) met with four Imams from TX#17. FR spent several days with the Imams to include some in Arlington, TX, Austin, TX, and Tampa, FL. In addition FR had numerous telephone conversations with the Imams. FR also had the opportunity to meet with many worshippers and Imams from the areas they traveled to.

FR opines based on the below information and his continuous interaction with the Imams that he considers them to be dangerous. Since they are leading Islamic scholars and many worshippers follow the advice they are given, it is likely the worshippers will follow the violent Wahhabi ideology of the Imams.

Listed below are some of the significant events during this time period:

  • There are four Imams at TX#17. Jordan and Palestine.
  • “Osama” Imam from Jordan, informed FR he should not accept any gifts from Shia, Christian, or Jewish people because it is haram.
  • Osama said it is normally haram (illegal) to commit suicide bombings like it is being done in Iraq, but the /Iraqi situation is a gray area. The Iraqi people are being killed, and it is justified to explode yourself, because you are defending yourself.
  • Imam Mohammad Shakib and Shaykh Hassan are the primary fundraisers for TX17.
  • Imam Shakib subsequently introduced an administrative assistant at TX17. The man had a long beard and is from Jordan (according to both the imam and the man)
  • The Jordanian (Imam in Texas) told FR he is originally from Jordan and he had a very close relationship with Tarik Aziz (close friend of Saddam Hussein and former Deputy Prime Minister from 1979 — 2003). The Jordanian further informed FR that Tarik Aziz (before 2003) would often travel to Jordan from Iraq. When Aziz would come to Jordan he would always visit him at his home. FR opines it is likely the Jordanian had other ties to senior Baath Party members.
  • FR advised the Imams collected money from many worshippers in Arlington, TX, Austin, TX, and Tampa, FL. Most of the time the money was provided in cash. The worshippers would not provide checks, but subsequently Shaykh Mohammad would tell them he knows “Ghassan” and has his contact information.
  • FR was invited to the homes of the Imams, travel to Austin, TX, and for a 3 day visit in Tampa, FL. The purpose of the trip was for fundraising for the mosque, but FR opines based on his discussions with the Imams that money was being used for other purposes. The Imams themselves would argue amongst themselves.
  • A Florida Imam (Ibriham Aboamer, from Egypt) was observed by FR as having a book, “Down to the United States.” He also had a collection of Siraj Wahhaj CDs. When the Imam saw FR looking at the book, he hid it in his desk drawer.
  • A man “named” Ghassan who is from Jordan or Palestine, was mentioned by the Imams. They advised he is either wanted or been questioned by the FBI for terrorism related charges. The Imams were evasive about Ghassan. They did state Ghassan had traveled from mosque to mosque in various states hiding from authorities. He had been an Imam in Chicago, IL.

Director Gaubatz comments: Concur with reporting to law enforcement. The individuals mentioned above are highly likely to be involved in supporting terrorist organizations and it is probable they are linked to additional “sleeper cell” activity.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Utah: Imam loses appeal to be removed from terrorism watchlist

Federal judge rules that Alabama Muslima who joined the Islamic State is not a citizen and can’t come back

RELATED VIDEO: Taqiyya in Dearborn Heights

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

Iranian Engineer in US Sent Tech Secrets Back to Iran: FBI

/in , , , , , /by

An Iranian visiting scholar at the University of Michigan is in FBI custody after being charged with stealing and sending tech secrets back to Iran.

Amin Hasanzadeh, the accused, is an electrical engineer and Iranian military veteran who worked at a company linked to the Iranian government’s Cruise Division of Air & Space Organization. Hasanzadeh is also a permanent resident of the U.S.

He is accused of sending the sensitive information to his brother who worked at a number of companies connected to Iran’s military programs, including one that “contributes to Iran’s proliferation-sensitive nuclear activities.”

Hasanzadeh started working as a defense contractor in Florida in 2011 developing power electronics computer designs. He worked in a similar job in Maryland before landing a job in Michigan in January 2015.

The FBI says Hasanzadeh stole the information from the company in Michigan over the period of a year and a half and began sending sensitive information to his brother in Iran just six days into the job.

The information was covered by a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) he had signed.

According to an FBI affidavit, “A senior company official advised that any unauthorized disclosure or theft of partner company documents and information protected under an NDA could be ‘catastrophic.’”

The information he stole and sent to his brother included information about the company’s products, including trade secrets, and a prototype for a part of one of the company’s “important products,” stated the FBI complaint.

“Iran certainly does have as a goal improving its military capabilities and uses espionage as a means at its disposal to acquire information and technology it would have a hard time developing indigenously,” said Eric Brewer, deputy director and fellow with the Project on Nuclear Issues at the Center for Strategic & International Studies, speaking to The Jerusalem Post.

Brewer said the theft is part of Iran’s strategy to steal trade secrets from the West to improve their military and defense systems.

Hasanzadeh is charged with interstate transportation of stolen property and fraud (for not disclosing he had been in the Iranian military).

Last week, two Iranians pleaded guilty to acting as illegal agents of the Iranian government in the U.S.

Ahmadreza Mohammadi-Doostdar, 39, an Iranian with dual U.S. citizenship, and Majid Ghorbani, 60, were caught running surveillance on Jewish facilities and events in the U.S. in support of the Mujahdein-e Khalq (MEK), an exiled Iranian resistance group that advocates for the complete overthrow of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and his Islamist regime.

According to an FBI affidavit, the two Iranian agents were also preparing “target packages” – i.e., attacks — on individuals who posed threats to the Iranian regime on American soil.

RELATED STORIES:

Trump Bars Iranian Gov’t Officials & Relatives From US 

Iranian Agents in US Plead Guilty; Saudi Agents Arrested

LOL: Europe ‘Comes Out’ Against Iran for Attack on Saudis

EDITORS NOTE: This Clarion Project column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

VIDEO: The Vortex — In Bed with Abortion. Rome and the UN.

/in , , , , , , /by

TRANSCRIPT

Doesn’t matter how you slice it, an absolute hallmark of a hierarchy gone off the rails is its refusal to denounce abortion. And the modernist gang of wicked prelates — from those attending the semi-annual U.S. bishops’ meeting this week in Baltimore to those running the Vatican — refuse to address this evil head-on.

They talk about the poor and immigrants but say nothing about the unborn. In fact, they hop in the sack with abortionists every chance they get when it advances their twisted worldview, and it’s disgusting. True, most of them probably don’t applaud abortion, but that only makes their silence more galling.

A couple weeks back, the Vatican signed a joint document with South American government leaders modeled after a U.N. population plan which includes abortion and contraception. It was done in the wake of the notorious Amazon Synod — which, for the record, some future pope needs to completely disavow and toss into the Tiber — and the United Nations plan talks about how to fight poverty.

It’s called the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The plan talks about all kinds of noble-sounding things, based on a lot of fake or exaggerated data passed off as science, but is little else than warmed-over, repackaged Socialism, with population reduction through either abortion or contraception, or both, near the top of the list.

And it’s little else than a giant game of pretend, where marxists pretend to care about the earth and the poor and the environment — which tickles the ears of Team Francis in Rome — but then brings along population control in the same shopping cart. And the Vatican simply overlooks that.

The average Catholic in the pews needs to understand what’s going on here. Is the Vatican opposed to abortion? Well, sure — at least in principle. But when there are other issues on the opposite side of the moral ledger, like climate change, immigration, death penalty and all that — well, what’s a few million abortions here or there?

But that’s exactly the calculus of these crazed clerics. But no Catholic, certainly in America, could possibly be surprised by this. Our very own bishops, for decades, have kept their mouths shut and refused to excommunicate fake Catholic pro-abort politicos because those same politicos buy their silence with hundreds of millions for immigration programs.

The U.S. bishops, and their counterparts in Rome, all of them who participate in this evil are going to have hell to pay when they die if they do not change their ways. They have lied to themselves and created an official informal policy that they just won’t take any action on this issue.

They think going to sleep at night privately being opposed to the most public slaughter in the history of humanity is somehow a moral stand, that they are basically good men, and will waltz into Heaven because they thought abortion was bad.

They rationalize, no doubt encouraged by the taxpayer windfall they receive, that abortion is bad — but equally so is being unemployed, or scurrying along the U.S. border on the Mexican side.

Horrible clerics like New York’s Cdl. Timothy Dolan — a walking disgrace of a man — not only refuses to excommunicate the fake Catholic governor who signed into law the most murderous piece of legislation in the history of the world, but also tries to have his cake and eat it as well when he says he supports the South Carolina priest who refused Holy Communion to Joe Biden, but says he would not have done it.

So a question for Cdl. Bravo (a nickname he earned by saying “Bravo” when questioned about a gay wannabe NFL player who announced he was homosexual): In what manner do you actually “support” the priest when you wouldn’t do what he did?

Dolan acts like Canon 915 — which demands Holy Communion be refused in these circumstances — is just a suggestion.

No, Cdl. Bravo. It’s called canon law.

It’s revolting, these men and their duplicitous doublespeak, all the while children are being scissored up, cut to ribbons and sucked through a vacuum into a canister — and yes, Bravo, that’s what you are keeping quiet about.

You and the rest of your lot are revolting. No wonder the Church is shrinking, shriveling into nothing on your watch.

And the same goes for the corrupt homomafia in Rome. Who can even stomach to look at these clerics anymore? The very sight of them parading around, socializing with modern-day Nazis — who, for the record, couldn’t hold a candle to the killing machine of Planned Parenthood or Maria Stopes International — the sight of it turns your stomach.

And for those weak-minded, zombie Catholics out there who think it’s bad form to speak of members of the hierarchy as being revolting, well, which of these pictures do you think is more revolting?

Exposing the truth of these men in clear terms, or this — because this is what they never protest, or seldom do.

And they are silent because they are bought and paid for and have no supernatural faith.

Little else on earth could be more revolting than a cleric having fallen from grace, other than a cleric who has fallen from grace and does nothing about the butchering of hundreds of millions of children.

They can issue the ocassional statemnt all they want about abortion being bad in an attempt to try and pull the wool over people’s eyes. But to phrase it as Cdl. Bravo did, they support the actions of the pro-life movement; they just wouldn’t do it themselves.

Wicked, horrible, filthy disgusting lot. Good choice for them to side up with the U.N. They deserve each other.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Is America Moving Toward the ‘Upper House’ of Islam?

/in , , , , , , /by

Former Muslim and Christian convert, Pastor Shahram Hadian, who was born in Iran and came to the United States as a youngster, regularly tours the country warning about jihad in America. In 2013, he founded his Truth in Love Christian Fellowship near Spokane, Washington, as a “free church,” meaning it rejected a religious tax exemption in order to spread his crucial, political message without restrictions.  That message is that our country has precipitously moved from the Dar al-Harb (lower house of Islam), or “world of war,” and is now dangerously close to the Dar al-Islam (upper house) or “world of submission.” He warns that Americans must preserve our way of life by eschewing political correctness and speaking out about this threat.

The threat arises from the obligation on every Muslim to bring all non-Muslim territory under Islamic rule.  Islamic believers declare war against a non-Muslim region which becomes enemy territory and part of the “lower house” of Islam, called the Dar al-Harb or “world of war.”  During this lower-house period, deception, taqiyya, is freely used. Islamic canonical law, shariah, a totalitarian doctrine with hudud punishments, such as stoning or amputation, is also sanitized or denied.  Muslims living in the region follow its secular laws, even though they ardently believe in the supremacy and eventual victory of shariah over all man-made laws.

Non-Muslims living under Dar al-Harb may be unaware of their plight as devout Muslims pursue their duty to declare jihad on all infidels and secure the entire world for Islam.  In the “lower house” phase, Islam is presented as a peaceful and tolerant faith.  The Koranic verses, suras, from Mohammed’s Meccan period, before he amassed power as a warlord, are emphasized as “true” Islamic beliefs.  The voiding and replacement of these verses by the later Medinan suras of violence and conquest is denied.  For example, an early sura 2:256 states, “there is no compulsion in religion,” but its replacement, sura 9:5, commands Muslims to fight unbelievers until they submit to Islam.

Muslims in the Dar al-Harb typically accentuate their victimization, calling attention to alleged “Islamophobia” and anti-Muslim bias.  Yet, attacks against Muslims are frequently revealed as self-perpetuated.  For example, Ahmed Mohamed, the Clock Boy, became an example of Islamophobia after the then-14-year-old brought to school a beeping device resembling a bomb with a timer and was questioned by police. The incident generated Twitter tweets, death threats against police and school officials, extensive media coverage and a White House visit by the student. Following multiple failed lawsuits against the school, the city and FOX news, the Mohamed family was ordered to pay court costs and subsequently moved to Qatar.

In a region under the “lower house” of Islam, resident Muslims typically declare shariah as unfit for democratic societies and applicable only to Muslim countries or communities.  They may, however, defend shariah used in a strictly Muslim context and cite religious freedom as in a stunning 2018 court verdict. In that instance, a Detroit federal judge dismissed charges against two Michigan doctors accused of genital mutilation of at least nine minor girls.  The doctors’ lawyers argued that laws against genital mutilation violate religious freedom after one doctor maintained she merely performed a religious custom.

Also, during the lower-house period, Muslims begin politically organizing, building a Muslim power base.  In 2014, the executive leadership of eight Muslim Brotherhood organizations announced formation of the United States Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO) at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.  The USCMO, a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity, is the first religion-based political party in U.S. history.  One of the founding members, Nihad Awad, is the executive director of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism funding trial in U.S. history, the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial.  His statement at the event was particularly alarming:  “This is the dream of every American Muslim, to unify the approach, agenda and vision of the Muslim community.”

U.S. political parties have never exclusively served one religious group. Yet, the USCMO endeavors to increase political participation of Muslim voters, support Muslim-friendly politicians and encourage more Muslims to run for office at all levels of government.  In 2020, an unprecedented 500 Muslims are expected to run in local, state and federal races.

During Dar al-Harb, Muslims also become involved in other critical sectors of society, including law enforcement, intelligence, national security, education, media and non-Muslim religious communities.  They push to purge counter-terrorism programs, thwarting attempts to apprehend Islamic terrorists.  They demand elimination of negative portrayals of Muslims in popular culture and ask for positive, abridged or even apocryphal versions of Islamic doctrine.  In 2011, the Obama administration expunged training materials deemed offensive by Islamist organizations.  In 2015, Obama instituted the Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) program which focused on “right-wing extremists” and white supremacists.

In education, publicly-funded programs and textbooks promoting Islam and denigrating other faiths appear and proliferate as part of curriculums that include Muslim prayers.  Alleged and often fictional Muslim participation in history, scientific discoveries or other fields of study is emphasized to establish a false sense of Muslim supremacy.  Despite the first amendment and its non-establishment clause and the 1969 decision to remove prayer from schools, the Supreme Court recently refused to rule on a public school curriculum that promotes Islam and allows Islamic prayer in school.

During Dar al-Harb, worldwide acts of terrorism are portrayed as “un-Islamic” activities and the perpetrators as those who have “misinterpreted” Islamic doctrine.  Further, jihadist attacks, a key requirement for Muslims, are used as opportunities to advance the “Islamophobia” or “Muslims qua victims” narrative, as in the aftermath of the 2015 San Bernardino attacks.  In that instance, jihadists Tashfeen Malik and Syed Farook murdered 14 people and wounded 21 at a county holiday party.  But Muslim spokesmen expressed concern that the shooting might “embolden Trump supporters” and that Muslims would be punished for actions by bad actors not representative of bona fide Muslims.

During Dar al-Harb, interfaith activities, portrayed as attempts to reach out to other religious communities, are actually all one-way, with accommodations and compromises favoring Muslims. They serve as intelligence-gathering missions. They also seek to develop trust to soften non-Muslims for dawah efforts, the required “welcoming” to Islam, that precedes complete submission required by the “upper house” period.

When Pastor Hadian warns of our descent into the upper house, he is describing the obliteration of our constitutional republic and all the protections and freedoms it guarantees.  He is talking about the near future that will soon see the impact of significant increases in the Islamic population and their efforts to transform America.  Hadian sees the targeting of “right-wing extremists” and white supremacy as attempts to keep Americans in the dark about the Islamist Trojan horse. These tactics are effectively designed to make it more difficult to expose the truth about the Koranic-mandated war to overtake the non-Muslim world.

Indeed, according to Hadian, current practices validate his premise that the U.S. is transitioning to a period of shariah promotion, a definitive characteristic of the “upper house.”  Noteworthy are the shariah patrols with look-alike NYPD vehicles that regulate neighborhood behavior in Brooklyn, as well as an increasing number of spontaneous, New York City street closings for Islamic prayer that inconvenience non-Muslims.  An ear-piercing, five-times-daily call to prayer occurs in Hamtramck, Michigan.  Workplaces have seen increased demands for special accommodations exclusively for Muslims, like prayer breaks and prayer facilities, and halal products in school cafeterias and in the general food supply.  The political elite, especially Democrats, now accept radical anti-Semitic positions from two Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated members of the so-called “Squad” – Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib – and are unwilling to censure them or investigate Omar’s alleged illegal activities.

Tellingly, a recent White House meeting with Vice President Mike Pence on our nation’s “safety and security” included Muslim Brotherhood members, including USCMO head, Ousamma Jammal. Muslim Brotherhood attendees presented Pence with the American Muslim Agenda, citing Muslim contributions to “Making America Great Again” and spoke of their aspirations for a Muslim female president in 2036.

All this points to undeniable progress toward the American Muslim community securing the  “upper house” in the United States and makes Pastor Hadian’s warning even more serious.  Once the Dar al-Islam is firmly in place, it will be too late to wage an effective defense to preserve our way of life.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Muslim Brotherhood’s Info Op Against Trump.

INTEL REPORT: Libya, Syria, ISIS, Iran and Analysis

/in , , , , /by

LIBYA

The war in Libya, after months of stalemate, has heated up again.  There is some evidence that the troops led by Gen. Haftar have been gaining some ground in Tripoli and other areas held by the Tripoli government.  The reason for this turn of events appears to be Russia.

The civil war in Syria was going rapidly south for Assad’s Damascus government and their Iranian allies–until Russia stepped in and turned the tide.  So, it appears that this is what Russia is now doing in Libya.  A week ago there were reports that Russian special forces were aiding Haftar’s troops probably as advisors embedded within Haftar’s units.

Al-jazeera has reported on the morning of 11 November that Haftar’s forces are now being trained by Russians in Egypt on an Egyptian military base.  They have also reported that Sudanese units have now been aiding Haftar’s troops as well, though the Sudanese government has denied it.

ANALYSIS:

Why is Russia taking an interest in Libya?  And why did they choose Haftar’s side?

First of all, we should review for readers the who is who in the Libyan debacle.  The government based in Tripoli, in the far west of the country that Gen. Haftar is fighting against, is the “official” Libyan government as recognized by the EU and the UN.  As can be expected by any side of a dispute favored by the EU and the UN, it hosts a who’s who of international terrorism, including al-Qaeda lynchpin Saif al-‘Adel, the mastermind of the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in east Africa.  The Tripoli government is essentially a creature of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB).

Most of Tripoli’s fighting forces are composed of militia’s made-up of ISIS, al-Qaeda, Ansar ash-Shari’a, and MB types.  It is supported militarily and financially by two of the world’s top three terrorism sponsoring states #1 Turkey, and #3 Qatar.  Even #2 Iran has chipped in a little with some weapons deliveries.

Gen. Haftar’s group, based in Libya’s second largest city, Benghazi, located in the far eastern part of the country near the Egyptian border, is supported by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.  The French (to the chagrin of their EU neighbors) have also chipped in with a small number of advisors embedded into Gen. Haftar’s forces.

Russia, though it sells weapons to terror-sponsoring state Iran, considered Sunni terrorism to be the greater threat since most of the Muslims in the Caucasus and Russia’s soft underbelly are Sunnis.  This was one of the reasons why they entered the war against ISIS in Syria.  For example ISIS fighters of Caucasus origin went to Syria and Iraq to gain battle experience, then returned to join Ukraine’s war against Russian-speaking separatists in Eastern Ukraine.

Libya is also rich in oil.  Russia is one of the world’s leading exporters of oil and gas and doesn’t need that resource for themselves, but Putin appears to trying to gain as much of a choke hold over that resource as possible having recently gained control of most of Iran’s oil assets, in addition to the right to build a pair of massive naval bases and an airbase in Iran.  Also, as a price for aiding Assad in his war, he forced Assad to grant Russia rights to all Syrian oil rights off its Mediterranean coast.  Putin’s venture in Libya might be more of the same.  There is also the possibility of gaining military bases there as well, once the civil war is over.

Russia could possibly have gained these goodies regardless of which side it supported, but its dislike of Sunni terrorism, and its new-found friendship with “moderate” Arab countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia may have pushed it to support Haftar.

The Egyptian angle is interesting and raises two interesting points.  After Obama helped place an MB government in power in Cairo, then after it was deposed, attempted to undermine the post-MB government down, so as to bring the MB back to power.  Part of Obama’s efforts included withholding arms shipments as a quid pro quo.

The Obama experience taught the Egyptians that they could not depend exclusively on the United States for their arms purchases.  So, they began to diversify, not just from the usual European suppliers, but also Russia.  Trump’s recent betrayal of the Kurds scared the living devil out of all of the West-leaning countries in the Middle East, from Israel to Egypt to Saudi Arabia.  It delivered a message that America just cannot be relied on in a pinch, so best to begin looking elsewhere for support and arms purchases.

Saudi Arabia has also recently grown closer to Russia in the wake of Trump’s perceived weakness vis-à-vis Iran, and his seemingly irrational, and constant, flip-flopping on Middle East issues.  During the Cold War, Saudi Arabia, as a “religious” nation, considered the officially athiest Soviet Union to be enemy #1.  They never recognized the USSR, and always considered it, and its representatives, to be “untouchables.”  Even after the end of the Cold War and the break-up of the USSR, Saudi Arabia continued to keep Russia at arms length.  This feeling of hostility has been maintained by Russia’s support of Iran.

However, Trump’s recent irrational behaviors (particularly his invitation to Turkey to invade Syria and ethnic cleanse the place) have terrified the Saudis and resulted in the aged, bent-over King Salman making a recent trip to Moscow to signify their improved relations.  It was shortly after that trip that the reports of active Russian military help to Gen. Haftar began to appear in the Arabic media.

We may be seeing Saudi Arabia also begin to diversify their arms purchases to include Russia, among others.

One more interesting tidbit about the Libyan thing:  Russia and Turkey, pretend allies in Syria, are openly supporting opposing sides in the Libyan war.  I predict that this will soon become a more intense “proxy war” between the two.  Unfortunately though, it will never escalate to the point of a full scale, direct, nation-to-nation war between Russia and Turkey as long as we are stupid enough to keep Turkey in NATO.

SYRIA

The Syrian Democratic Forces (composed of Kurds, Christians, and other minorities) whom we turned our backs on and which then allied with Assad’s Damascus Forces) have, in conjunction with Assad’s forces, retaken some areas in Hasaka, in eastern Syria, after defeating Turkish-supported terrorist groups.  There have been other scattered reports of Turks and regular Syrian army units firing upon each other.

This puts Putin in a difficult position because he is allied to the Assad government, but has also made an agreement with Erdogan for joint Russian and Turkish patrols in eastern Syria.  This has infuriated Assad who considered that to be a Turkish invasion of Syrian territory and a Russian surrender to Erdogan’s imperial dreams similar to Trump’s.

To further strain matters between Moscow and Damascus, Putin has also floated ideas on a new constitution for Syria which includes greater autonomy for the regions, and giving the regions more say in the Damascus government.  There are rumors floating in the Middle East that Putin might be ready to offer (as part of this over all deal) a Damascus government sans Assad (the number one demand of all rebel groups) in turn for the removal of Turkish and Iranian forces.

One is tempted to see Saudi and Egyptian (and possibly Israeli) hands in that proposal, coming in the wake of Egypt and Saudi Arabia stepping up their relations with Moscow. Unfortunately, the primary stumbling block to any such “federated Syria” solution giving the regions more autonomy, and driving Iranians and Turks out, is Trump’s bromance with Erdogan and his acceptance of Turkey’s aggression and occupation of Syrian territory.

ISIS

ISIS, currently enjoying a recruiting and donations boom thanks to Trump’s irrational Syria behavior, has redefined itself as a “decentralized” organization as opposed to the “centralized” state organization it pursued as a “Caliphate.”  As one of the features of the next phase ISIS has called upon its supporters in America and Europe to set forest fires where ever they can as a way to weaken the enemy’s economy.

IRAN

Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the head of the IRGC’s al-quds division, and perhaps the most powerful man in Iran outside of the Mullah’s clique, recently contributed the laugher of the week.  Soleimani claimed that Iran defeated ISIS won the Syrian war single handedly and that Iran has established stable states in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.

The facts:  As the anti-Assad revolution gained ground and looked like it was on the verge of collapse, and after Obama’s redline was crossed with no reaction from the U.S., Iran stepped in to save its ally.  But even with the help of Iran’s puppet Hizbollah next door in Lebanon, and the help of Iran-subservient Shi’a militia from Iraq, Iran was totally incapable of stemming the tide.

So, it is rich to hear Soleimani talk like that when it was he who (when the Damascus government was hanging on the barest of threads) rushed off to Moscow to beg Putin to come to the rescue.  It was Putin’s entry into the war, and the Russian airforce’s bombing of the ISIS oil assets (that Obama refused to touch) that turned the tide in the war.  Then it was Trump’s turning General Mattis loose, and the latter’s close cooperation with the Kurd-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces that put the finishing touches on the Caliphate.

As for the “stable” governments in Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria . . . as I write this the Arab Spring 2.0 is going full blast in Iraq and Lebanon with country-wide demonstrations, riots, and outright revolt taking place.  The demonstrations in both countries have a decided anti-Iran flavor as the people there have grown tired of Iranian hegemony, and control of their affairs–even the Shi’as in southern Iraq.  In fact, it is among the Shi’a of southern Iraq where we see the most virulent anti-Iranian protests with the protestors burning pictures of Khamenei and Khomeini.

Iran has given orders to its clients in Iraq and Lebanon to put a stop to the demonstrations at all costs.  Iranian stooges in both countries have used live rounds to break-up otherwise peaceful demonstrations which has led to increased anger by the populace and violence by them in turn.

As for Syria, well there are still thousands of active ISIS fighters left in the country, and Turkey is committing genocide and demographic replacements in the parts of the country nearest to its border, with more demands for ever more territory to be forthcoming from Erdogan, the 21st century’s Hitler.

Robert Spencer: The Palestinian Delusion

/in , , , /by

Robert Spencer’s new book, The Palestinian Delusion, under the “light of reason” is an invaluable accurate account that ranks as a most worthy scholarly work on the subject by a man of outstanding credentials, impeccable integrity, and unsurpassed qualifications. This meticulously documented and comprehensive book is a treasure for anyone wishing to learn the truth of the Palestinian and Israeli conflict.

Spencer methodically demonstrates time after time that the Jews conclusively, not only have the right to live in their ancestral homeland, but the term “Palestinian” has been invented. “Invented people” may sound disturbing to some who have not taken the time to study historical facts. However, truth is the best weapon against falsehood. Spencer has carefully tied various historical origins with current events that provide facts and understanding about what is happening in our present time.

Spencer states:

“Another familiar theme of pro-Palestinian literature today is that the State of Israel exists on “stolen land”— stolen, of course, from the indigenous people of Palestine. In reality, the land is no more stolen than the Palestinian Arabs are its indigenous inhabitants.”

He continues:

“Nonetheless, the myth has taken hold, and it is now widely taken for granted, in our age that has little historical memory and scant interest in gaining more, that the Palestinians are a genuine nationality and are the indigenous people of the land that Israel illegally occupies.”

As a Persian who grew up with the Jews in Iran, I would like to add to Spencer’s insight of birth and rebirth of the State of Israel. In 539 BC, King Cyrus the Great of Persia liberated Babylon, decreed the freedom the Jews from captivity and enabled them to return to their “Promised Land” to rebuild the Solomon Temple. For his benevolent act, Cyrus the Great in the book of Isaiah 45:1-3, was referred to as “mashiach,” the anointed one or “messiah.” He was undeniably Zionist. Despite the worldwide spread of anti-Semitism, true Iranians have remained friends of the Jews by both belief as well as deeds.

May 14, 1948, is the rebirth of one of the oldest civilizations in history, the State of Israel. Israel with Judaism as its religion has historical continuity spanning more than 3,000 years. It is one of the oldest monotheistic religions and the oldest to survive into the present day.

In Palestinian Delusion, Spencer gets to the root of anti-Semitism. From Islamic sources to other sources “Anti-Semitism on campus, the virus continues to spread.”  Spencer in this new jewel has illustrated a long conflict that no one has been able to solve or simply come to a peaceful agreement. Palestinian Arabs refuse to compromise. Even after Israelis gave them Gaza (which I disagreed), this did not bring peace to the region. In fact, Hamas terrorists never stopped launching rockets and mortar attacks to Israel from Gaza. That is precisely why the ‘two-state’ solution will never work.

“The two-state solution was born out of the British duplicity regarding the Arabs and Jews in Palestine. The Balfour Declaration had called for the establishment of a “Jewish national home” in Palestine, an ambiguous phrase that may or may not have meant a Jewish state. But then Colonel Bertie Harry Waters-Taylor encouraged the grand mufti al-Husseini to incite the Muslim Arabs to riot in 1920, and helped pave the way by withdrawing British troops and the Jewish police from Jerusalem.”

In this book, Spencer gets into the details of the Camp David Accords. An agreement between Israel and Egypt was signed in 1978, the first such accord between Israel and its Arab neighbor. Forty-two years have passed and no such agreement has ever been signed again.

The situation in the Middle East is very intense and dangerous. The conditions for an all-out war in that region are greater than at any time in recent history.

In short, Robert Spencer has indeed put together a highly educational book about the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian that is easy to read and understand. I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in understanding the root and the foundation of this conflict, a conflict that has lasted so long, generated so many global headlines, and created so much controversy surrounding Israeli-Palestinian relations.

© All rights reserved.

Was Virginia Doctor Performing a Kind of Demographic Jihad?

/in , , , , , , , /by

Helping turn Virginia blue?

Because so many readers sent the news about a Pakistani doctor in Virginia under arrest for performing unwanted and unneeded medical procedures on women in his care, I need to post the news.

Even if there weren’t questions about why some women were unknowingly (allegedly) made infertile, Dr Perwaiz would have come to our attention, joining a growing list of ‘new American’ doctors who are busy committing Medicaid/Medicare fraud one of the interests highlighted here at ‘Frauds and Crooks.‘

Here is Robert Spencer’s (Jihad Watch) take on the incredible news at PJ Media: 

Demographic Jihad? Virginia Muslim Doctor Tied Women’s Tubes Without Their Consent

The details of this case are simply horrifying. One woman tried for years to conceive a child, but couldn’t. When she finally consulted a fertility specialist, she discovered, according to the Virginian-Pilot, that her “Fallopian tubes had been burned down to nubs, making it impossible to conceive naturally.” It turned out that her physician, Dr. Javaid Perwaiz of Chesapeake, Virginia, had tied her tubes without telling her was doing it or obtaining her consent. And she was by no means the only woman whom Dr. Perwaiz victimized in this way.

[….]

About the good doctor we are told that he was “educated abroad,” with no hint as to where – it was actually in his native Pakistan, as the Virginian-Pilot notes: “Perwaiz has had a medical license since at least 1980, according to state records, having attended medical school in his native Pakistan and completed a residency at Charleston Area Medical Center.”

Read the Virginian-Pilot story to see what Perwaiz is being charged with.

Spencer wraps with this after telling us what Muslim leaders have said in the past about demographic jihad:

Is it possible that Javaid Perwaiz has the same kind of mindset, believing that he is performing an Islamic duty by preventing infidel women from having children? It cannot be discounted, but of course the possibility will never be investigated; to do so would be “Islamophobic.”

Continue reading here.

One reader who sent me the story remarked that any woman who goes to a Muslim doctor is foolish (harsher words than that).  However, I will bet most American women have no clue if their ‘new American’ doctor is a Muslim and if they do they don’t know any basic tenets of Islam.

Changing America by changing the people!

Don’t miss my RRW story about how Muslims are winning big in local elections. Virginia was a big winner for them on election day 2019.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.