You can see from the impressive zebiba on Maurice Hill’s forehead that he is a devout Muslim; the zebiba is a bruise that forms from the fact that Muslims in their five daily prayers perform numerous prostrations, pressing their foreheads to the ground. The zebiba is seen as a mark of intense piety. That in itself doesn’t make this a jihad attack, but the teachings of the mosque, from the looks of this report, are clearly suspect; the mosque should be investigated. If Maurice Hill were a white supremacist neo-Nazi, would the establishment media be as indifferent to that detail as it is to Hill’s mosque membership? What do you think?
“Clarion Intel Exclusive: Philadelphia Shooter Attended Radical Mosque,” Clarion Project, August 16, 2019:
Maurice Hill, the criminal who wounded six police officers in a shootout in Philadelphia and was arrested after a seven-hour standoff, attended a radical mosque.
The mosque, called Masjid Ahlil Hadith Wal Athar, is known for preaching the Islamist ideology promoted by Saudi Arabia referred to as “Wahhabism.”
Clarion Intelligence Network has been aware through its sources that the area where the shootings took place is known for trafficking in guns, drugs and counterfeit items. This criminal market has a strong Islamist element that includes extremist gangs.
Hill’s older sister said he “occasionally attended” an unnamed mosque, confirming initial reports from our sources that Hill is a Muslim. The sources do not yet have first-hand evidence of the shooter being personally involved in Islamist extremism.
Clarion Intel’s sources report that Masjid Ahlil Hadith Wal Athar is a Salafi mosque which follows the theocratic teachings of Saudi Arabia’s top Wahhabist scholars.
At this point, there is no indication that Hill’s shooting of police officers was motivated by Islamism or anything other than a desire to resist arrest.
However, Islamism’s inherent hostility towards Western governments and values fuels anti-police bigotry that can justify violence against law enforcement. Clarion’s sources stated that many of the mosque’s attendees view the police as oppressors of Muslims….
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2019-08-17 05:24:392019-08-17 17:40:46Philadelphia: Maurice Hill, who wounded six cops in shootout, is devout Muslim who attended jihadi mosque
A little background about CNN’s Jake Tapper: CNN was “slammed as ‘disgraceful’” after Jake Tapper remained silent when a guest accused Trump radicalizing “more people than ISIS.” Mark Levin has also stated of Tapper: “Now, keep in mind, it’s about Epstein’s apparent suicide, but Jake Tapper wants you to believe it’s about Trump.” Levin also said: “Jake Tapper’s a leftist. He’s demonstrated that time and again. Even though some fools out there are convinced otherwise, he’s fairly consistent.”
Despite his problematic past, Jake Tapper is now being defended by the more reasonable elements of society after he “made a passing reference to Palestinian incitement.”
If Saturday’s horrifying terrorist attack in an El Paso Walmart had taken place in Jerusalem, leaving 22 Israelis dead, the killer would rot in jail knowing his family would be taken care of, paid every month by his government. He might one day have a park, or a school, or a street named in his honor. He would be held up as a hero and used to inspire more killing. Children would be encouraged to follow his lead.
It’s a stark truth, along with the Palestinian Pay for Slay program, which pays jihadists and their families for the murder of Israelis.
But for a mere passing remark about Palestinian incitement, Tapper has committed a cardinal sin in the eyes of jihadists, stealth jihadists, and Leftist dhimmis (such as Jewish Voice for Peace). The frenzied onslaught against Tapper “seems to have started with Sana Saeed, a host and producer with Al-Jazeera’s online arm.” This is what she tweeted; take note, as it is the same tired intimidation strategy used by all Islamic supremacists. And Westerners just keep falling for it.
Then U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib jumped in. She “accused Tapper of “comparing Palestinian human rights activists to terrorist white nationalists.”
The gang-up continued, and now Tapper’s passing statement has morphed into something unrecognizable:
MPower Change, run by Tlaib ally and Israel-basher Linda Sarsour, then launched a campaign demanding Tapper’s firing. In addition to rejecting the very idea of a Jewish state as “creepy,” Sarsour spreads a blood libel that holds American Jews liable for police shootings of unarmed black people.
From a mild but truthful passing statement by Tapper to American Jews being held “liable for police shootings of unarmed black people.” Whenever any Westerner says something offensive to Islamic supremacists about their abuses or about their religion, that person will be dragged off to the woodshed and mercilessly flogged with the “Islamophobia” cane. It is an inescapable rule of thumb.
“Blind Hate Drives Campaign to Fire Jake Tapper,” by Steven Emerson, IPT News, August 7, 2019:
If Saturday’s horrifying terrorist attack in an El Paso Walmart had taken place in Jerusalem, leaving 22 Israelis dead, the killer would rot in jail knowing his family would be taken care of, paid every month by his government.
He might one day have a park, or a school, or a street named in his honor. He would be held up as a hero and used to inspire more killing. Children would be encouraged to follow his lead.
This is by no means an exhaustive list of how the Palestinian Authority and others incite violence against Israeli civilians. But it’s why, in the wake of discussions about the role political rhetoric plays in attacks like the El Paso massacre, CNN anchor Jake Tapper made a passing reference to Palestinian incitement.
For the sin of invoking a real thing, Israel-haters are demanding Tapper be fired.
It seems to have started with Sana Saeed, a host and producer with Al-Jazeera’s online arm, AJ+.
“Collect your man, CNN,” she wrote Sunday after calling Tapper’s remarks “the height of unethical journalism.” That’s a charge on a scale with plagiarizing, lying or stealing information. What, exactly, did Tapper say to generate such an accusation?
“You hear conservatives talk all the time—rightly, in my view—about the tone set by, well, the Arab world,” Tapper said. “The Palestinians and the way they talk about Israelis, justifying … no direct link between what the leader says and the violence to some poor Israeli girl in a pizzeria—but the idea you’re validating this hatred.”
“You can’t compare the ideology of Hamas with anything else,” Tapper said, “but at the same time, either tone matters or it doesn’t.”
Sober viewers might note that Tapper is using the example of Palestinian incitement to ask whether people are being inconsistent in minimizing political rhetoric in the El Paso shooting. But Palestinian advocates blinded by a hatred for Israel are not sober viewers.
U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., accused Tapper of “[c]omparing Palestinian human rights activists to terrorist white nationalists,” and dismissing it as a lie. It is a lie, Tapper replied, because that’s not at all what he said.
He invoked a dead Israeli girl in a pizzeria – if Tlaib wants to argue the suicide bomber was a “human rights advocate,” let her do it on the House floor.
MPower Change, run by Tlaib ally and Israel-basher Linda Sarsour, then launched a campaign demanding Tapper’s firing. In addition to rejecting the very idea of a Jewish state as “creepy,” Sarsour spreads a blood libel that holds American Jews liable for police shootings of unarmed black people.
“Tapper distorted the violence in El Paso by invoking occupied Palestinians and Arabs out of nowhere and comparing them to the white nationalist shooter,” an MPower Change statement said. “… By inserting Palestinians and Arabs in a conversation about white supremacist violence, Tapper pushed the Islamophobic ‘terrorist’ narrative about Muslims and Arabs that’s been mainstreamed over the past few decades.”….
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2019-08-16 18:54:202019-08-16 19:01:16CNN’s Jake Tapper attacked by the ‘Islamophobia’ brigade; Leftist/Islamic campaign calls for his firing
President Trump has done it once again. He has put the Democrats in the position of defending two of the most anti-Semitic and anti-Israel members of their party. He has done this because he knows that shedding light on extremists positions is what no Republican President has had the courage to do. President Trump used his Twitter account, Excalibur with magical powers, to point out the obvious:
Representatives Omar and Tlaib are the face of the Democrat Party, and they HATE Israel!
Senator Chuck Schumer, a Jew, was the first to tweet this about Israel’s decision:
Denying entry to members of the United States Congress is a sign of weakness, not strength. It will only hurt the U.S.-Israel relationship and support for Israel in America.
There is a legal basis for the Israeli Foreign Minister to deny access to Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Talib. According to The Jerusalem Post:
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel received the planned itineraries of the freshmen congresswomen a few days ago, and said it became clear that they were “planning a campaign whose sole purpose was to strengthen the boycott and to undermine Israel’s legitimacy.”
Both Tlaib and Omar support a resolution affirming the right of Americans to participate in boycotts and have expressed support for the BDS movement.
In 2017 the Knesset passed an anti-BDS [Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions] law that blocks foreign BDS activists from gaining entry to Israel.
Democrats Defend the Indefensible
Here is a Jew and U.S. Senator defending anti-Semitism and clearly threatening the state of Israel.
A week ago, Israel warmly welcomed some 70 Democratic and Republican members of Congress, who expressed broad bipartisan support for Israel, which was also demonstrated a month ago in a resounding bipartisan vote against BDS in Congress.
Only a few days ago, we received their itinerary for their visit in Israel, which revealed that they planned a visit whose sole objective is to strengthen the boycott against us and deny Israel’s legitimacy.
However, the itinerary of the two Congresswomen reveals that the sole purpose of their visit is to harm Israel and increase incitement against it.
In addition, the organization that is funding their trip is Miftah, which is an avid supporter of BDS, and among whose members are those who have expressed support for terrorism against Israel.
For instance: they listed the destination of their trip as Palestine and not Israel, and unlike all Democratic and Republican members of Congress who have visited Israel, they did not request to meet any Israeli officials, either from the government or the opposition.
What Omar gets so very wrong
Rep. Ilhan Omar issued statement, posted on Twitter, on being denied entrance:
“It is an affront that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, under pressure from President Trump, would deny entry to representatives of the U.S. government. Trump’s Muslim ban is what Israel is implementing, this time against two duly elected members of Congress. Denying entry into Israel not only limits our ability to learn from Israelis, but also to enter the Palestinian territories. Sadly, this is not a surprise given the public positions of Prime Minister Netanyahu, who has consistently resisted peace efforts, restricted the freedom of movement of Palestinians, limited public knowledge of the brutal realities of the occupation and aligned himself with Islamophobes like Donald Trump.
“As a member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, it is my job to conduct oversight of foreign aid from the United States of America and to legislate on human rights practices around the world. The irony of the ‘only democracy’ in the Middle East making such a decision is that it is both an insult to democratic values and a chilling response to a visit by government officials from an allied nation.”
The lies in Omar’s statement include:
Denying entry into Israel not only limits our ability to learn from Israelis. Omar and Talib had no intention of learning from Israelis as they did not schedule any meetings with Israeli officials.
Enter the Palestinian territories. This was the purpose of the visit by Omar and Talib. To give credibility to the Palestinian cause by two Muslim members of the U.S. Congress. To support the BDS movement.
Prime Minister Netanyahu, who has consistently resisted peace efforts. This is patently false. The Likud Party had on five occasions traded land for peace. Netanyahu is the longest serving Prime Minister of Israel and has worked on many different peace plans with many different U.S. Presidents and the PLO. All to no avail.
The irony of the ‘only democracy’ in the Middle East making such a decision. The irony is that Democracies around the world do the same thing daily. Allowing people to enter a country with the sole purpose of undermining it is cultural suicide.
Islamophobes like Donald Trump. This is the standard response from Muslims globally when any nation state, political party or individual points out the truth about the radical nature of some who are the followers of Mohammed. Name calling has become the primary weapon of the Democratic Party.
What is most interesting is that several Jewish pro-Israel groups have sided with Omar and Tlaib. AIPAC tweeted:
“We disagree with Reps. Omar and Tlaib’s support for the anti-Israel and anti-peace BDS movement, along with Rep. Tlaib’s calls for a one-state solution. We also believe every member of Congress should be able to visit and experience our democratic ally Israel firsthand.”
Don’t forget that Reps. Omar and Tlaib were invited to be part of the 70 member congressional delegation hosted by AIPAC and they both refused.
Remember not a single Democrat attended the opening ceremony of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem.
Never forget that Rashida Tlaib said that the Holocaust gives her a ‘calming feeling’ knowing her Palestinian ancestors gave up ‘lands and lives’ for Jews. Listen:
The big lie in AIPAC’s statement is that Omar and Tlaib never intended to visit Israel, their trip was designed to have a political platform for the Palestinian cause. Dear AIPAC, you can’t have it both ways.
Conclusion
Omar and Tlaib, along with AOC and Pressley, have become the faces of the Democratic Party. This so called “Squad” is driving the agenda of the Democratic Progressive caucus. Their agenda is to declare a holy war, jihad, against Israel. They are following in the footsteps of former President Barrack Obama who, while in office, consistently sided with the enemies of America, the American people and those working to undermine American interests domestically and globally.
While this decision by Israel is not historic, it stands as a warning to those in positions of power that words have consequences. Actions have an equal and opposite reaction. And more prophetically as pointed out in Galatians 6:7, “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2019-08-16 05:40:222019-08-21 16:54:32The boycott, divestment and sanctioning of Omar and Talib — Democrats once again defend the indefensible
It’s a little hard to believe actually, but faithful Catholics are growing more and more concerned that Pope Francis’ Vatican is on some kind of tear to advance globalism, and there’s not only a lot of evidence to support the notion, there is, at the same time, not a lot of evidence to dispute the idea.
Globalism is, in short, a governing system whereby individual nations cede, or hand over, some of their national sovereignty to a kind of collective government.
So by definition, globalism and nationalism are pretty much in opposition. And faithful Catholics should not let their eyes glaze over on this, but remain, at least for the time being, up at the 60,000-foot level.
This whole issue is being played out in U.S. politics right now among the Democrats, and so naturally, the U.S. bishops have gotten involved in all this as well.
Here is the extremely critical gigantic point to remember: Globalism would usher in one supranational governing authority that would have complete control as though every current nation were just a single state in the worldwide nation.
If any Catholic — orthodox, or even dissenting — can’t see the immediate theological, political and cultural problems with that, then they have no pulse, brain or both.
The globalists have been running wild for the past few decades, extolling what they say are the “advantages” of globalism. Indeed, the very concept of the European Union is a regionalized stab at globalism, despite its difficulties.
Pope Francis and his globalist cheerleader crowd in Rome are posturing that the very foundational concept of individual nations are now little else than nostalgic entities which have become overrun by giant transnational corporations.
To carry the thought further, these corporations are all greedy, exploit the poor of the earth, poison the environment and are able to get away with all of it because they get to hide behind and operate through the laws of individual nations.
So for the Pope, there is only one solution to all this: abolish nations, make one-world government and reign in these greedy businesses with fines, penalties and jail time if necessary.
So, some problems:
First, this is little else than high-minded-sounding wealth redistribution, a favorite dream of political liberals — remember the encounter between Obama and Joe the Plumber on the 2008 campaign trail.
Obama and liberals are all about taking the money of industrious hard workers and giving it to people who don’t work hard or aren’t as industrious — they call that “spreading the wealth.”
Of course, Obama, Hillary and the 240,000 other Democrats running for president this year never include their own wealth in that equation; it’s just your wealth that needs to be spread around.
Second, the entire notion of such a one-world government is the ideal of Marxist communism. Even though Obama said spread the wealth, he was not the first guy with the idea. Karl Marx was.
Third, the key question: Exactly who would be the ruling class making the new laws to impose on the entire human race, and, more to the point, what if the “people” wanted to throw off this one-world government down the road, what mechanism would be in place?
Fourth, what laws precisely would be imposed, say, for example, about abortion, sodomite marriage, taxation, private property and so on?
Fifth, and when it comes to the specific area of religion, if there is one world governing body, then it stands to reason that there would have to, eventually, be one world religion — or no world religion.
Sixth, the Vatican City state is its own national sovereignty. What would happen to it as it would be absorbed into the great universal governmental bureaucratic collective?
Seventh, these liberal ideas are all the rage and have been in the West for decades, and political, theological and social atheists have sought furiously to destroy Catholic-established Western civilization. But can anyone seriously think that the Chinese Communists are going to just hand over their power to “the people”? The Chinese Commies kill people who propose those ideas.
A few days ago, in his bid to dress up one-world government, Pope Francis suggested that the very concept of nationalism had within itself “echoes of Hitler.” Them there are fightin’ words.
Their purpose is to re-awaken in Europeans the fear of National Socialism and that we should run away from that as fast as our little liberal, right-thinking feet can carry us. It’s practically a scare tactic.
So the supranational question for the supranational proposal. Hitler and company of the Third Reich were all about world domination.
That they were able to use an immoral appeal to the concept of nationalism as a springboard to world domination should be thought of.
The goal was world domination — period. So to make an appeal to the concept of nationalism as a kind of emotional blackmail to usher in what would, in the end, be world domination, is either massively uninformed or incredibly disingenuous.
And for the record, it was American nationalism during World War II — all our wealth and resources and industrial might — that proved to be the decisive factor in crushing the Nazis and then the Japanese warlords; so nationalism isn’t a bad thing after all.
Throughout history, nations have oftentimes worked as a kind of counter-balance to each other. Whether in warfare or trade or politics — whatever arena — the friction between individual national interests does oftentimes resort in overall good, even if people do tend to dwell on friction more than the good — thoughts of the space race of the 1960s between the United States and the Soviet Union come to mind.
But the discerning Catholic should keep this in mind: None of this is happening in a vacuum. It has invaded and seized control of an entire political party in the United States — guess which one.
Every major candidate for that party’s upcoming nomination has touted this concept either explicitly or in their foundational principles.
To wit, open borders; canceling all — yep, every single private health insurance plan; using U.S. tax dollars to pay for health care for illegal immigrants; using U.S. tax dollars to pay for education for illegal immigrants.
And mind you, much of that is already in place as we speak, they just want to formalize it.
Ignoring borders and border security isn’t really about economics and helping the poor, immigrants and asylum seekers. It’s really about destroying national sovereignty — which is why Pope Francis keeps bashing the idea of a wall and slamming any politically conservative American he can.
However, something the Holy Father should stop and consider as he makes these ideological pronouncements from behind the safety of his own Vatican walls, a one-world government, once installed, would very likely have high on its list the pulling down of those same walls surrounding the city-state of the Vatican.
Limousine liberals might have in mind some Marxist utopia, but the true author behind such a notion only has one goal in mind: the obliteration of the Catholic Church.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Church Militanthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngChurch Militant2019-08-13 18:00:242019-08-13 18:01:49VIDEO: The Vortex — The Pope’s New World Order
Hadley Arkes on a fair trade: The Church will not instruct a Biden or a Cuomo about politics, if they’ll stop misleading Catholics about Church teaching.
William Blackstone, that venerable commentator on the English law, remarked that it was a contradiction in terms to suggest that the law may recognize a principle of revolution. And yet, James Wilson, one of the premier minds among the American Founders, insisted that the law in America could indeed encompass a principle of revolution.
For the law in America began with the recognition that there could be an unjust law – a measure passed with all of the trappings of legality and yet wanting in the very substance of justice. Americans could readily grasp that point because they began with an understanding of moral truths and natural rights quite apart from the laws that were “posited” or enacted in any place. And that body of natural law would supply the standards for judging the rightness or justice of the things enacted as law.
But by the end of the 19th century, the natural law had become an object of derision among lawyers. In our own time, conservatives sharpened the reaction against natural law as they recoiled from liberal judges, moving outside the text of the Constitution, inventing new rights to contraception and abortion. They were false constructions of natural right, but they had to be met by showing what was false in the reasoning.
The conservatives, however, were losing their confidence in moral reasoning, and so their ingenious strategy was to avoid any hint of moral reasoning altogether.
When Robert Bork was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1987, he had shaped a remarkable record as a professor and a wise jurist, but with a deep dubiety about the natural law. At the infamous hearings over his confirmation, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, was the redoubtable Joseph Biden. Faced with a legal “positivist,” Biden thought he would embarrass Bork by staking out a strong position in natural law:
As a child of God, I believe my rights are not derived from the Constitution. My rights are not derived from any government. My rights are not derived from any majority. My rights are because I exist. They were given to me and each of my fellow citizens by our creator and they represent the essence of human dignity.
Biden was striking this posture because Bork would have been a likely vote in overturning Roe v. Wade. That right to abortion was being treated now by the Left as a species of “natural right.” And yet, James Wilson had raised the question: If we have natural rights as human beings, when do they begin? The answer: as soon as we begin to be. Which was why, as Wilson said, the common law cast its protection over human beings “when the infant is first able to stir in the womb.”
Despite his Catholic background Joe Biden was, and remains today, a firm defender of a right to abortion. And yet, if I have those rights, “as a child of God . . . because I exist,” the child in the womb must be the bearer of those rights. How could a pregnant woman have a right then to sweep away the natural rights of the child by the simple expedient of removing, in a stroke, the bearer of those rights?
Biden’s position might have been salvaged, I guess, if he just didn’t consider the child in the womb a human being on the same plane as any other human. But if our rights do not depend on the votes of majorities, could it be that our very standing as human beings could be left in the hands of majorities, in legislatures or courts? Or worse: that the decision could be left to the woman and man who have already found an interest in killing the child?
But four years later Biden found himself delivered from his problem. He now had before his Committee, for hearings, Clarence Thomas, who was charged with the offense of taking natural law seriously at times. That new threat to Roe v. Wade marked a change of 180 degrees.
In an op-ed in the Washington Post, Biden warned that if we had judges again who took natural law seriously, we would have a throwback to those reactionary judges who resisted the New Deal in the 1930s, with its regulation of business. We would go back, he said, to the kinds of teachings offered by this Professor Arkes in this preposterous book, First Things.
The years would roll on and Joe Biden would settle in with the clichés offered by the Cuomos and Pelosis: He would not impose, through the laws, the “personal” “beliefs” he had absorbed through his religion. But the Church, on abortion, has never appealed to “beliefs.” The teaching has drawn on the facts of embryology, woven with principled reasoning.
Since they were moral teachings, made communal, they had never been merely “personal.” We’ve come to see the deep reluctance of bishops to challenge the leading Catholic politicians who have offered this oh-so-familiar evasion, for they don’t want those politicians charged with the offense of taking orders from their Church.
And yet, one wonders why something as simple as this may not be said: The Church would not tell the Bidens and Cuomos what to say as they make their careers in politics, but they surely would have no moral right to mislead a wide audience of Catholics about the teachings of their own Church.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Catholic Thinghttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Catholic Thing2019-08-13 06:23:172019-08-13 06:27:41Joe Biden’s Adventures in the Natural Law
The political season hasn’t really even gotten into gear yet, but the political posturing and positioning certainly has — and Catholics, in particular, should be paying close attention.
First, last week, The New York Times published a pre-election analysis that pointed to the fact that millions of Americans who back in 2016 said they didn’t like [President Donald] Trump, have now changed their minds and come aboard the Trump train.
While his overall favorability rating is still below 50%, it has increased 10 points since 2016, and that news sent the loony left into a social media meltdown from which they haven’t yet recovered; some even demanding The New York Times take the story down.
Now the news — specifically Catholic — Trump won the Catholic vote in 2016 52%-48% over the wicked Hillary Clinton.
This year, it appears right now, although nothing is ever certain in politics, that Joe Biden, a Catholic — although in name only — is in the lead among the 245,000 other Democrats running for the nomination.
If he were to win, that would set up quite the clash of orthodoxies for U.S. bishops, who almost to a man hate Trump and never miss an opportunity to strike out at him to cover their own multitude of sins.
The clash would be how they could publicly get behind a Biden presidential run when Biden is an avowed, committed, never-look-back supporter of child murder.
This very topic was homed in on on Fox News last week by Martha MacCallum, a devout Catholic, during an interview with Cdl. Raymond Burke.
Burke flat-out laid it out.
[Transcript unavailable]
Not just the Catholic vote, but actual Catholic involvement in next year’s election here in the United States could be the pivotal deciding point for who wins.
It’s one reason, not the main one, but an important one nonetheless that Church Militant is retooling and equipping our studios here in Ferndale to be the source of news and information for Catholics during the upcoming campaign season.
One very important fact that has largely gone under the radar so far is the importance of Texas, once considered impenetrable by Democrats, a virtual lock for the GOP.
If the Party of Death could capture the Lone Star State in 2020, that would almost completely guarantee a defeat for Trump.
Texas has 38 Electoral College votes, absolutely critical to the Trump campaign. If Texas went blue, even by a whisker, the Democrats would seize the White House.
So how possible is it that Texas could turn? According to the phony Hispanic candidate Robert O’Rourke — who goes by the name “Beto” to pull an Elizabeth Warren on Hispanic voters — he says Texas is in play this year.
He made the claim in one of the debates a couple of weeks ago and has some history to back it up.
He came pretty darn close to upsetting Republican incumbent senator Ted Cruz in 2016, a lot closer than most people thought heading into election day.
Prior to Church Militant’s recent Strength and Honor Conference, we had an opportunity to sit down with the president of Texas Right to Life, Jim Graham, who was up for the conference.
Graham has his pulse on Texas politics perhaps better than any other person in the state, and he sees dark clouds on the political horizon.
But most troubling for Graham, and especially related to the all-important Catholic vote in Texas, which is much more so Hispanic than most other red states, he says too many of the state’s Catholic bishops are working behind the scenes for the Democrats, even down to how they personally vote.
With potentially one-third of Texas bishops, perhaps even more, actually casting votes for the Party of Death, the state must now become a focal point, perhaps more than any other in the country, when assessing Trump’s re-election campaign and the Catholic vote.
Cardinal Burke has been down this road before. In 2004, as archbishop of St. Louis, he created a major controversy when he said then-Democratic presidential candidate, Catholic-in-name-only John Kerry, could not receive Holy Communion owing to his obstinate support of abortion.
Burke was plotted against by serial homopredator Theodore McCarrick and Donald Wuerl, who covered up for and lied about McCarrick’s filth, something he still does to this day.
McCarrick lied to the bishops, with Wuerl’s knowledge, about a Vatican answer to the U.S. bishops question about whether Holy Communion should be denied to pro-abort Catholic politicians.
The Vatican had answered in the affirmative, saying, yes, such child killers were not to be admitted to Holy Communion.
But McCarrick, who was still sexually assaulting seminarians in the Jersey Shore beach house, simply lied and said the Vatican has said no, it was OK for them to receive.
He had deliberately quoted from an only semi-related footnote, which made it appear it was OK, but the footnote had nothing to do with the question about actual pro-abort politician themselves.
Regarding them specifically, the Vatican’s Cdl. Joseph Ratzinger, who wrote the decision for the U.S. bishops, has flat-out, unambiguously declared, no they cannot receive.
So when Cdl. Burke goes on Fox News and says Biden should not be given Holy Communion, he’s right. This all matters, both spiritually and politically.
The positions of the Luciferian Left, like their father, are all built on lies, be those lies political or theological.
The father of lies has been actively trying to corrupt the Catholic Church since the days of Our Lord’s earthly mission — remember Judas. In that regard, only the cast of characters has changed, not the war itself.
Much is at stake next year, mostly the truth, and Catholics can expect a major assault against the truths of the Church not only around the nation, but squarely in Texas, and like the case with McCarrick and Wuerl and the rest of them, they can expect the assault to come from various Catholic prelates.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Church Militanthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngChurch Militant2019-08-12 13:37:202019-08-12 13:39:43VIDEO: The Vortex — Catholic AND Democrat? Not possible.
What leads a person to become an Islamist extremist? For one immigrant, it was not fitting in with his American classmates.
Mohammed Khalid, a former Islamist extremist, described what drew him to the radical ideology and why he left it at an event last month at The Heritage Foundation.
Khalid, now a scholar in cybersecurity studies at the University of Maryland, was born in the United Arab Emirates and lived in Pakistan before emigrating to the United States in 2010.
As a 14-year-old struggling to fit in at an American public high school, Khalid said he turned to the internet to make sense of what some saw as the negative connotation of his first name, “Mohammed.”
He said he quickly became enthralled with the answers online extremists offered.
He absorbed as much material as he could, Khalid said, watching propaganda videos that painted the West in a negative light. He said the ideology resonated with him because he remembered seeing the same clips on the news when he lived in Pakistan.
“One of the biggest things that I remember was that the Twin Towers, when they were falling down—I could not forget one of the comments,” Khalid said. “One of the commentators was like, ‘Well, maybe they had it coming.’ This was when it began to kind of make sense to me, that well, maybe what’s happening to me is reflective of a wider ideology that I’m not aware of.”
At 16, Khalid said he was spending 40 hours a week communicating with Islamists through password-protected online forums, translating Islamist propaganda videos into English to radicalize American Muslims. He confided in these Islamists, whom he considered closer than family.
“The more I confided in them, the more separated and secluded I became from my own family,” Khalid said. “My family could not figure out what was wrong with me; they did not know what was happening because I kept it very well hidden from them.”
Khalid was arrested in April 2014, charged with conspiracy to provide material to terrorists, and convicted. He says he spent five years in federal prison.
At 17, he was the youngest person to be convicted of terrorism-related charges in the U.S.
Slowly, with the help of officers at the juvenile detention center, he said, he began to emerge from the extremist mindset.
The officers “explained about their struggles, they explained about their dreams, about their journeys,” Khalid said.
“And so began a process of humanization, a process in which I was able to finally relate to these people whom I’d other-ized under the umbrella of Islamist ideology, and whom I finally, when I reached that beginning step, began to see as human beings,” he said.
When an audience member asked whether it is possible for Muslims to reject extremism without leaving their faith, Khalid, who remains a Muslim, answered yes:
I see … a lot of my friends actually struggling to reconcile [Islam] with the society they find themselves in. They want to be partakers of this American culture. At the same time, they want to hold on to a Muslim identity that unfortunately, you know, sometimes is collapsed together with a whole bunch of outdated traditions. … I think moving forward, a lot of people individually have to decide how they want to interpret the religion, instead of letting religion be this one-size-fits-all approach.
Maajid Nawaz, founder and chairman of the London-based counterextremism think tank Quilliam, also spoke at the event.
Nawaz said the most vulnerable groups in society are former Muslims. He suggested that Islamic theology should be updated to develop a “Western Muslim identity.”
Muslims have a responsibility to respect those who leave the religion, he added, rather than isolating or targeting them.
“If Muslims … want to explore other faith traditions, or none, we have to protect them and their right to do so,” Nawaz said. “Because in our communities still, that is a big to-do, and they are discriminated against.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2019-08-12 05:29:182019-08-12 05:32:11VIDEO: Former Islamist Extremist Describes His Escape From the Ideology
Europe has gone down this road before. It didn’t end well. This time, its principal motivator is the continent’s rapidly growing Muslim population, as well as its endless infatuation with an increasingly anti-Semitic Left.
“Europe Poised to Put Warning Labels on Jewish-Made Products,” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, August 9, 2019:
The European Union is poised to mandate that Israeli products made in contested territories carry consumer warning labels, a decision that could trigger American anti-boycott laws and open up what legal experts describe as a “Pandora’s box” of litigation, according to multiple sources involved in the legal dispute who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon.
The Advocate General of the European Court of Justice recently issued non-binding opinion arguing that EU law requires Israeli-made products to be labeled as coming from “settlements” and “Israeli colonies.”
The decision was seen as a major win for supporters of the anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement, or BDS, which seeks to wage economic warfare on Israel and its citizens. Pro-Israel activists, as well as the Jewish businesses involved in the legal dispute, see the decision as an ominous warning sign that they say is reminiscent of Holocaust-era boycotts of Jewish businesses.
With the EU court’s 15 judge panel now poised to issue its own binding judgment in the case, legal experts are warning that a potential decision mandating such labeling could pave the way for goods from any disputed territory to receive such treatment. The decision also could trigger U.S. anti-boycott laws meant to stop Israeli-made goods from being singled out for unfair treatment on the international market….
The legal dispute first began after France passed a law mandating that products made in the West Bank territory of Israel be labeled as coming from an “Israeli colony,” a label not applied to any other products across the globe.
The term “Israeli colony” is not legally required to be applied under EU law and was seen as overly burdensome by Israeli business leaders.
Following the French decision, the Israeli Psagot winery filed a lawsuit alleging unlawful discrimination against Jewish companies. That lawsuit eventually made its way to Europe’s highest court, the European Court of Justice.
That court now appears poised to affirm the advocate general’s opinion mandating that Israeli goods be labeled in a fashion that opponents say is unfair and anti-Semitic in nature….
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2019-08-12 04:13:182019-08-12 04:14:16Nazism returns: European Union to put warning labels on Jewish-made products
ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, yesterday afternoon, filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of former Marine, John Kevin Wood, and his wife, Melissa, who refuse to allow their teenage daughter to be subjected to Islamic indoctrination and propaganda in her high school World History class. The lawsuit was filed against the Charles County Public Schools, the Board of Education, and the Principal and Vice-Principal of La Plata High School located in La Plata, Maryland.
The Woods’ daughter was forced to profess and to write out the Shahada in worksheets and quizzes. The Shahada is the Islamic Creed, “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” For non-Muslims, reciting the statement is sufficient to convert one to Islam. Moreover, the second part of the statement, “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah,” signifies the person has accepted Muhammad as their spiritual leader. The teenager was also required to memorize and recite the Five Pillars of Islam.
Charles County Public Schools disparaged Christianity by teaching its 11th grade students, including the Woods’ daughter, that: “Most Muslims’ faith is stronger than the average Christian.”
The Charles County Public Schools also taught the following:
“Islam, at heart, is a peaceful”
“To Muslims, Allah is the same God that is worshiped in Christianity and Judaism.”
The Koran states, “Men are the managers of the affairs of women” and “Righteous women are thereforeobedient.”
Read the two exhibits containing Student worksheets here.
The sugarcoated version of Islam taught at La Plata High School did not mention that the Koran explicitly instructs Muslims “to kill the unbelievers wherever you find them.” (Sura 9-5)
When John Kevin Wood discovered the Islamic propaganda and indoctrination of his daughter, he was rightfully outraged. He immediately contacted the school to voice his objections and to obtain an alternative assignment for his daughter.
The Woods, as Christians, believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God and our Savior, that Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins, and that following the teachings of Jesus Christ is the only path to eternal salvation. The Woods believe that it is a sin to profess commitment in word or writing to any god other than the Christian God. Thus, they object to their daughter being forced to deny the Christian God and to her high school promoting Islam over other religions.
The school ultimately refused to allow the Woods’ daughter to opt-out of the assignments, forcing her to either violate her faith by pledging to Allah or receive zeros for the assignments. Together, John Kevin Wood, Melissa Wood, and their daughter chose to remain faithful to God and refused to complete the assignments, even though failing grades would harm her future admission to college and her opportunities to obtain college scholarships.
Adding insult to injury, in an effort to silence all pro-Christian speech in her school, La Plata’s principal, without a hearing or any opportunity to refute the false allegations against him, issued a “No Trespass” notice against John Kevin Wood denying him any access to school grounds.
Wood served 8 years in the Marine Corps. He was deployed in Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm and lost friends to Islamic extremists. A few years later, Wood responded as a firefighter to the 9-11 Islamic terrorist attack on the Pentagon. Wood witnessed firsthand the destruction created in the name of Allah and knows that Islam is not “a religion of peace.” The school prevented John Kevin Wood from defending his daughter’s Christian beliefs against Islamic indoctrination, even though as a Marine, he stood in harm’s way to defend our nation, and the Charles County Public Schools.
Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented: “Defendants forced Wood’s daughter to disparage her Christian faith by reciting the Shahada, and acknowledging Mohammed as her spiritual leader. Her World History class spent one day on Christianity and two weeks immersed in Islam. Such discriminatory treatment of Christianity is an unconstitutional promotion of one religion over another.”
Thompson added, “The course also taught false statements such as “Allah is the same God worshiped by Christians, and Islam as a “religion of peace. Parents must be ever vigilant to the Islamic indoctrination of their children under the guise of teaching history and multiculturalism. This is happening in public schools across the country. And they must take action to stop it.”
The Woods’ lawsuit seeks a court declaration that Defendants violated their constitutional and statutory rights, a temporary and permanent injunction barring Defendants from endorsing Islam or favoring Islam over Christianity and other religions, and from enforcing the no trespassing order issued against John Kevin Wood.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Thomas More Law Centerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThomas More Law Center2019-08-11 18:02:562019-08-11 18:02:56Federal Lawsuit Filed On Behalf of Marine Dad Banned from School Property After He Objected to Islamic Indoctrination of Daughter
Various academics say marriage is oppressive and unhealthy for women. Leftists foolishly deem themselves smarter than God. They always denounce and seek to undermine God’s plan in every area of life.
Speaking about marriage, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.” Genesis 2:24
God’s plan for marriage is one man and one woman.
The Bible says he who finds a wife finds a good thing. My beautiful wife Mary and I are celebrating 42 years of marriage. Interracial dating was taboo when we married. Early in our marriage, our car was chased by a carload of white racists. Strolling in Baltimore’s historic Fells Point, a bunch of angry white guys chased us into a bar. While eating in a family restaurant, a white guy approached our table, broke a beer bottle over my head and ran out of the restaurant. Still, Mary was willing to give up everything to be with me. She has been my lover, greatest advocate and friend; always encouraging me by saying, “I see greatness in you.” My wife Mary has been an amazing, “good thing”.
Leftist women will hate this. Mary brings me coffee in bed every morning. On our anniversary, while she was sleeping, I posted signs around the house which read, “Happy Anniversary! I love you!’ I know that sounds corny, but I knew she would like it.
Before Mary awoke, I drove to the mom and pop bakery for a pastry. I told Miss Lynn, the baker, my plan to surprise Mary with something sweet. She went in the back and reappeared with a tray of beautiful pastries. She said, “I just made these and your wife will love it.”
Miss Lynn said she and her husband have been married for 47 years. She said, “People don’t hang in there for the long haul anymore.” I jokingly replied, “You and your husband have never been angry or had a disagreement.” She chuckled and said, “No, never.” She said, “I’ve never considered divorce, but I have considered murder.” We both laughed. I thanked her and wished her a wonderful day.
The Bible says do not let the sun go down on your wrath. In my first marriage, anger between us would last several days; foolishly saying hurtful things to each other we could not take back. In 42 years, Mary and I have never ended a day angry at each other.
Rather than celebrating our anniversary with dinner at a fancy restaurant, we purchased a half bushel of Maryland steamed crabs to enjoy at home. As former Baltimorians, this is our version of heaven.
Over thirty years ago, I wrote a song honoring Mary. It is titled, “When I Look In Your Eyes.” Please enjoy our music video.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Lloyd Marcushttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngLloyd Marcus2019-08-09 19:03:292019-08-13 05:20:29Regarding Marriage: 42 Years and Counting
Last December when President Trump promised to pull all American Troops out of Syria and let the Turks keep the peace and take care of ISIS (a promise Trump made after a phone call with Erdogan), I said that this was Trump’s Neville Chamberlain moment.
Well now, the chickens have come home to roost.
Even though Trump back-peddled somewhat on his original promise by enacting only a partial pullout while leaving a small handful of advisers behind to continue helping the Kurds clean out ISIS holdouts, a token force will not be sufficient to stop a megalomaniac like Erdogan.
He has already annexed the N.W. Syria region of Afrin (which is part of the Aleppo province) and mostly ethnic-cleansed the place of all the Kurds, Christian, and Yazidis. And now he wants more. After assuming total control of Afrin he moved south into Idlib province where Turks are now being tested by the Assad regime and pressured by Russia to halt their advance.
Trump’s original withdrawal agreement with Erdogan was supposed to keep Erdogan from crossing the Euphrates into N.E. Syria, which is what he wants to do now. This is the territory of the YPG Kurds who formed the bulk of Syrian Democratic Forces we supported, along with some Christians and Yazidis.
Erdogan’s goal in Syria’s N.E. is the Hasaka province, where our YPG Kurds hold sway along with some Christians, and Yazidis. These people know what will happen to them when and if the Turks are allowed in.
In order for the Turks to reach the Hasaka province which lies east of the Euphrates is to pass through at least part of the Aleppo province that they haven’t conquered yet, and the Raqqa province.
Believe it or not, It sounds like someone in the administration has finally woken up to the fact that Turkey is a serious danger to regional security because:
News has recently broken that the U.S. has worked out a deal with the Turks for joint security patrols to ensure Turkey’s security. Yes, it is Turkish “security” that Erdogan has been using as his pretext for gobbling up Syrian territories for his imaginary neo-Ottoman Empire. This agreement is supposed to keep Erdogan on the west side of the Euphrates and out of the Kurd’s Hasaka province. Don’t hold your breath.
Here is why I don’t think that talks and “agreements” will keep the Turks out:
It is not just territory that Erdogan wants. Hasaka province boasts Syria’s richest agricultural region and most of its oil fields, not to mentioned more Kurds, Christians, and Yazidis to exterminate. But the real prize are the hundreds and probably thousands of ISIS fighters that the Kurds are holding prisoner (because their home countries don’t want them back). Erdogan wants to liberate these fighters so he can use them as spearheads for his additional conquest.
Why not? That is exactly what he did when he took the Afrin province. The so-called Syrian Free Army he used was composed of left-over ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Muslim Brotherhood fighters. They were his shock troops. He sent them into the Kurdish towns in Afrin region to exterminate the “undesirables” then had his regular Turkish forces enter later to “restore order” and convince the Americans that they are the “good guys.”
Getting their hands on a large, new, crop of jihadis would be a huge boon to Erdogan’s grandiose plans for conquest.
The only thing that can keep Turkey out of any more parts of Syria is a massive airlift of American forces into the region now. Talking and diplomacy will only be used by Erdogan to better position his forces for a blitzkrieg while we are asleep at the switch.
This situation is so like Hitler and Czechoslovakia.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Barry Webbhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngBarry Webb2019-08-09 18:41:562019-08-09 18:42:07The Turk Invasion: Only a Show of Force will stop Erdogan now
The Humanitarian Hoax is a deliberate and deceitful tactic of presenting a destructive policy as altruistic. The humanitarian huckster presents himself as a compassionate advocate when in fact he is the disguised enemy.
The 116th Congress 2019-2020 Equality Act is a Democrat bill prohibiting discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity in multiple areas including public accommodations and facilities, education, federal funding, employment, housing, credit, and the jury system. Sounds great – what’s the problem?
The Equality Act “updates” the definitions of three terms: sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity, and “expands” the categories of public accommodations. On May 17, 2019 H.R. 5: Equality Act passed the Democrat controlled House with unanimous support from Democrats plus eight Republican votes. Next, it goes to the Republican controlled Senate for consideration. Why the partisan split?
The Equality Act seeks to amend and expand the expressly recognized “non-discrimination” categories in the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The Civil Rights Act was designed to provide equal protection under the law to African Americans and to women in 20th century America making it illegal to discriminate against them based on race, ethnicity, or gender. In 1964 the word “gender” was specifically understood to mean male or female in the biological, chromosomal, colloquial sense of the word. In the 21st century the leftist Democrat party is selling sameness as equality and feelings as facts – they are not the same.
Even the name Equality Act is part of the deception. The name evokes compassion in the casual observer, but there is nothing equal about the Equality Act, it is a colossal humanitarian hoax that redefines maleness and femaleness with the words “gender identity.” This is how it works.
No longer satisfied with laws prohibiting discrimination based on gender, the radical left has taken aim at the biological definition of maleness and femaleness making it a subjective matter of opinion rather than an objective matter of chromosomes. Gender identity is not the same as gender. Why is this important?
Facts are not feelings. Facts support the objective reality that is the foundation of biological science, laws, and ordered liberty. Feelings support the subjective reality of political science, the arts, and psychology. We can have feelings about facts, but feelings cannot change facts in a society of ordered liberty. The danger of confusing objective and subjective reality is discussed at length in “The Humanitarian Hoax of Multiple Realities.”
In science, the sex of an individual is determined by a pair of sex chromosomes found in that individual’s DNA. Females have two of the same chromosomes XX, males are identified by having two different chromosomes XY.
Chromosomal sex determination in mammals is a natural function of human development with a primary and secondary component. Primary development is the determination of gonads internal sex glands that make sex hormones and reproductive cells – testes in the male and ovaries in the female. Secondary sex determination are the external expression of maleness and femaleness outside the gonads. This means a male has a penis, seminal vesicles, and prostate glands. The female has a vagina, cervix, uterus, oviducts, and mammary glands.
For the vast majority of the world’s population including, the United States, sexual development is an uncomplicated natural function of human reproduction. Leftist Democrats are exploiting the minuscule portion of the human population that has chromosomal abnormalities and/or ambiguous secondary sex characteristics for political gain.
The leftist Democrat party is attempting to alter the biological science of objective reality, facts, and chromosomes, and replace it with the subjective world of feelings, shattering the foundation of biological sciences and turning it into political science. This is the core of the humanitarian hoax of the Equality Act because it functionally obliterates the differences between maleness and femaleness making them the same rather than equal.
This is extremely important because sameness has serious consequence in society both legally and socially.
Let’s examine the consequences of the Democrat “update” including “gender identity” as it relates to the provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, particularly Title II, III, IV and V:
Title II – Public accommodations such as lodging, restaurants and theaters, may not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, and national origin.
Title III – Explicitly prohibits state and local governments from discrimination based on race, religion, color, or national origin in public facilities.
Title IV – Provides for the federal enforcement of desegregating public schools.
Title V – Empowers the Civil Rights Commission to further investigate and act on allegations of discrimination.
According to Wikipedia, “Gender identity is the personal sense of one’s own gender. Gender identity can correlate with assigned sex at birth or can differ from it. All societies have a set of gender categories that can serve as the basis of the formation of a person’s social identity in relation to other members of society. In most societies, there is a basic division between gender attributes assigned to males and females, a gender binary to which most people adhere and which includes expectations of masculinity and femininity in all aspects of sex and gender: biological sex, gender identity, and gender expression.”
The first and most basic human identity is universally announced around the world at the moment of birth. “It’s a boy!” “It’s a girl!” What this means is that in most societies around the world people accept the binary definitions of maleness and femaleness based on XX and XY chromosomes and their factual physical expression. The leftist Democrat attempt to redefine maleness and femaleness as non-binary and a matter of personal feelings, is a political power grab by the left selling sameness as equality. Why would they do that?
The leftist Democrat motivation is to collapse America from within and replace our democracy with socialism and our capitalism with communism. The left did not originate dirty political tricks, they have just honed them to an art form. Of the 45 Communist Goals read into the Congressional Record-Appendix, pp. A34-A35 on January 10, 1963 items 17 24, 25, 26, 39, 40, and 41 that seek to collapse accepted norms and the authority of the family are of special interest to this discussion.
If the Equality Act passes, schools will be teaching the leftist non-binary definition of maleness and femaleness to America’s children. The biological differences between boys and girls will be denied and the social norms of privacy obliterated. Titles II, III, IV, and V will force the implementation of joint bathrooms, joint locker rooms, joint showering facilities, joint sports teams, etc etc etc. The deceitful Equality Act targets America’s children with Lenin’s prescient warning, “Give me just one generation of youth, and I’ll transform the whole world.”
Six decades ago when W. Cleon Skousen published The Naked Communist and the Civil Rights Act was passed, it was unimaginable that leftist radicals would attempt to destabilize and transform society by redefining maleness and femaleness. Skousen, an anti-Communist and former FBI special agent and field director for the American Security Council, served President Ronald Reagan on the Council for National Policy. He maintained that Communism was waging a psychological war designed to soften America and change American thinking in preparation for the final Communist takeover.
1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture–education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“]united force[“] to solve economic, political or social problems.
43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.
44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.
45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court
It is chilling how much the 2020 Democrat party platform comports to the Communist goals listed in the 1963 Congressional Record-Appendix. The Democrat party has devolved from the America-first voice of JFK to the screeching sounds of leftist radicals who embrace Communism disguised as equality. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the new face of the New Democrat party, unapologetically seeks to make America Communist. She and her handlers have usurped the authority of former party leaders and are leading the insurrection against the old guard to establish the subversive new Democrat In Name Only (DINO) party.
Communism has always had world domination as its goal. Joseph Stalin explains how socialism is the stepping stone in his famous quote,
“World dictatorship can be established only when victory of socialism has been achieved in certain countries or groups of countries . . . and when these federation of republics have finally grown into a world union of Soviet Socialist Republics uniting the whole of mankind under the hegemony of the international proletariat organized as a state.” Stalin elaborates, “Divide the world into regional groups as a transitional stage to world government. Populations will more readily abandon their national loyalty to a vague regional loyalty than they will for a world authority. Later the regions can be brought together all the way into a single world dictatorship.”
Since its inception, Communism has been determined to eliminate all religions and their moral authority. Communism views religions as competing ideologies to the absolute authority of the state. Evangelical leader Franklin Graham reveals how the Equality Act legalizes reverse discrimination against the moral teachings and authority of our American Judeo-Christian tradition. Of special interest to his argument are items 27 and 28 that seek to discredit religion and its moral authority:
“Rather than offering meaningful protections for individuals, the Equality Act would impose sweeping new norms that negatively impact the unborn, health care, charitable services, schools, personal privacy, athletics, free speech, religious liberties, and parental rights,” five chairmen of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) declared in May.
“The Act’s unsound definitions of ‘sex’ and ’gender identity’ would erase women’s distinct, hard-won recognition in federal laws. Its sex-based nondiscrimination terms would end women’s shelters and many single-sex schools. It would close faith-based foster care and adoption agencies that honor children’s rights to a mother and father. The bill would even act as an abortion mandate, the bishops added.”
Beyond its confusing, destabilizing, psychological consequences to children in American schools K-12, the Equality Act would eliminate separate bathrooms, locker rooms, bathing facilities etc for adult men, and women in public spaces nationwide. Our cultural norms and ordered liberty in America have always recognized the biological differences between male and female. Men and women are NOT the same – equal yes, the same NO.
Horowitz explains how the Culture War against Christianity is a war against America and its founding principles rooted in Judeo-Christian norms and Western civilization. He reveals how after the communist empire fell, progressives did not abandon their fight, they simply re-branded communism as “social justice.”
A 6.10.19 article by Robert Curry titled, “Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, Western Civ Has Got to Go” recalls Jesse Jackson’s 1987 protest march at Stanford University. The protest was against Stanford’s required introductory humanities program “Western Culture” – not enough diversity for the protesters. The aftermath is clear. Radicalized professors abandoned teaching Western civilization in favor of teaching multiculturalism. Protesters led by politicians at Stanford thirty years ago successfully rid the university of a course in Western civilization.
Protesters led by politicians today are targeting Western civilization itself. Skousen’s 45 communist goals are the dark agenda of the current radical leftist Democrat party. If we allow leftist politicians to redefine maleness and femaleness, we will be facilitating their communist goals and promoting the social chaos that seismic social change requires.
The goal of subversion is to shatter the authority of the three pillars of American society – family, god, and government/patriotism – and substitute them with loyalty to the state. The collectivist infrastructure of socialism/communism requires complete centralization of authority so that the exclusive and singular authority is the state. The leftist Democrats imagine that if they succeed, they will be the final authority with complete power for the foreseeable future. Uh-oh!
In a stunning 1984 interview, former Soviet KGB informant and Soviet journalist defector Yuri Bezmenov discusses the Soviet subversion attempts in America after WWII.
Most Americans find it difficult to accept that Soviet attempts to infiltrate and collapse America are ongoing and have found a friend in leftist Democrats. Some of the Democrat collaborators are ideologues, others are corrupt politicians, but all are useful idiots working against the interests of the United States. Useful idiots?
Yes, Bezmenov makes it crystal clear that if the Soviets ever prevail, there will be no place in society for the collaborating leftist useful idiots. They will all be killed. Case closed.
The humanitarian hoax of the leftist Democrat Equality Act attempting to sell sameness as equality must be rejected entirely. If America allows the left to substitute subjective reality for objective reality we will find ourselves living in the communist nightmare that Yuri Bezmenov describes.
I am an American.
I am an American and I reject Russian communism.
I am an American and I reject Russian communism and Marxist socialism.
I am an American and I reject Russian communism, Marxist socialism, and leftist Democrats.
I am an American and I reject Russian communism, Marxist socialism, and leftist Democrats. I support the United States Constitution.
I am an American and I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.
I am an American and I entirely reject the humanitarian hoax of the very unequal leftist Equality Act.
Tell your Senators to vote NO on the deceitful H.R. 5: Equality Act while you still can.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Linda Goudsmithttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngLinda Goudsmit2019-08-09 17:39:572019-08-14 07:50:20The Humanitarian Hoax of the 2019-2020 Equality Act: Killing America With Kindness
Hereis one version of the news this week. Notice they work closely with Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service***which is almost completely federally funded.
It appears that these Lutherans have run out of poor and homeless AMERICANS in need of Christian charity.
Evangelical Lutheran Church Declares Itself a Sanctuary Denomination
MILWAUKEE, Aug. 8, 2019 /PRNewswire/ — The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), today at the 2019 ELCA Churchwide Assembly declared itself a Sanctuary Denomination, dedicated to serving and supporting the protection of migrants in communities nationwide. The ELCA is the first mainstream church body in America to declare itself a sanctuary denomination. The movement was spearheaded by the Metropolitan New York Synod (MNYS), one of the 65 synods of the ELCA.
“Christians have offered sanctuary for two thousand years, continuing an ancient biblical practice in which cities and houses of worship provided refuge and asylum for people fleeing injustice,” stated Christopher Vergara, who serves as chairperson of MNYS’s AMMPARO/Sanctuary Ministry. “Beginning in the 1980s, the Sanctuary Movement was a faith-based initiative to protect Central American refugees fleeing civil war and seeking safety in the United States. Today, the New Sanctuary Movement is a revived effort to protect undocumented migrants from needless jailing procedures and deportation, and to address the dire situation within the Department of Health and Human Services that has resulted in the stripping of services to refugees and unaccompanied children.”
By its vote, the ELCA Churchwide Assembly deemed that sanctuary means not only provision of shelter but also:
A response to raids, detentions, deportations, and the criminalization of immigrants and refugees;
A strategy to fight individual cases of deportation, to advocate for an end of mass detention, and to amplify immigrant voices;
A vision for what communities and the world can be; and
A moral imperative to take prophetic action of radical hospitality rooted in the ancient traditions of our faith communities.
[….]
Working locally with organizations like Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, Lutheran Social Services, The New Sanctuary Coalition, The New York Immigration Coalition, and the ELCA’s AMMPARO program, the MNYS has created a network of sanctuary congregations ready to help protect refugees and undocumented people from arrest and deportation.The pillars of the program lie in education, advocacy, and awareness.
*** You should be making it clear to elected officials that any ‘charity’ receiving federal funding should be disqualified from receiving federal grants and contracts if it participates in breaking federal law!
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2019-08-09 06:38:302019-08-09 06:42:04Evangelical Lutheran Church Declares Itself a Sanctuary Church, First in Nation
It has become commonplace among Leftists — not just Ilhan Omar — to claim that “white men” are a greater threat than jihad terrorists. (They say nothing about white jihad terrorists.) We have debunked this claim many times here at Jihad Watch, and here is another able takedown of this enduringly popular Big Lie.
“WALSH: Ilhan Omar Claims White Men ‘Cause Most Of The Deaths’ In America. She’s Wrong. Here Are The Facts.” By Matt Walsh, Daily Wire, July 25, 2019:
Imbecilic bigot Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) claimed in a recently resurfaced interview on Qatari propaganda network Al Jazeera that Americans should be “fearful” of white men who are “causing most of the deaths within this country.” These racist and blatantly false comments came in response to a question about Islamophobia. The interviewer asked if Islamophobia might be the result of a reasonable fear people have about Islamic terrorism. Omar could have responded that we shouldn’t fear anyone based on race, ethnicity, or religion, and that each person should be judged according to his or her own merits — but instead, she took the opportunity to fear monger about the dreaded white man.
“I would say our country should be more fearful of white men across our country because they are actually causing most of the deaths within this country,” Omar said. “And so if fear was the, the driving force of policies to keep America safe — Americans safe inside of this country — we should be profiling, monitoring, and creating policies to fight the radicalization of white men.”…
It is often claimed, and not just by Omar, that white people are responsible for most of the domestic terrorism in America. The most common source cited for this claim is a 2017 Government Accountability Office report that found that more people have been killed by right-wing terrorists than by Islamic terrorists. How did they arrive at that conclusion? Here’s a relevant passage from the report:
…of the 85 violent extremist incidents that resulted in death since September 12, 2001, far-right politics violent extremist groups were responsible for 62 (73%) while radical Islamist violent extremists were responsible for 23 (27%). The total number of fatalities is 106 for far right violent extremists and 119 for radical Islamist violent extremists over the approximately 15-year period. However, 52% of the deaths attributable to radical Islamist violent extremists occurred in a single event — an attack on the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida in 2016.
In order to make “far-right violent extremists” the deadliest, one has to compile his aggregate numbers beginning on September 12, 2001. That seems an oddly specific date. Why not start on January 1, 2001? How about January 1, 2000? Isn’t it easier and cleaner to look at the numbers over the past 20 years, since the beginning of the new century? Well, the reason for starting on September 12, 2001 is obvious — it excludes the deadliest terror attack in American history, which was carried out by Islamic extremists. In other words, if we arbitrarily ignore the 3,000 people radical Islamists killed in one day, then Muslim terrorists have recently killed fewer people than have right-wing extremists. This is a bit like tabulating the total number of people drowned in shipwrecks except for anyone who happened to drown on April 15, 1912.
If you want to know about shipwrecks, it seems the Titanic ought to be a prominent part of that analysis. Similarly, any analysis of terrorism in the United States must obviously include the most devastating terror attack this country has ever experienced. But here’s the kicker: Even if you did begin your tabulation on September 12, 2001, deaths by Islamic terrorism still dwarf all other categories because over 1,000 people have died from illnesses tied to 9/11 in the intervening years. Or do they also not count?
Of course, if we expand our view and look at the problem on a global scale, the threat of far-right terrorism begins to look like Pluto compared to Islamic terrorism’s Jupiter. The Global Terrorism Index found 66 deaths caused by far-right groups worldwide between 2013 and 2017. It also found that 18,000 total people were killed by terrorists in just the year 2017 alone. Who do we imagine is carrying the bulk of that load? We know it’s not the far-right white men….
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2019-08-07 06:33:382019-08-08 07:22:34Here’s why Ilhan Omar’s claim that ‘white men’ are greater threat than jihad terrorists is wrong
