Elementary Schools Teaching Taliban Curriculum

A leaked government report says Islamic elementary schools across the UK operated by the Darul Uloom movement are teaching children using the same curriculum as the TalibanThe Daily Mail reported.

The schools, which are under the auspices of the Darul Uloom (House of Knowledge) network, follow the philosophy of the extremist Deobandi movement. The curriculum, known as Dars-E-Nizami, is used to teach the boys to be imams.

It involves a literal interpretation of the Quran, an ideology espoused by some of the some of the most radical clerics that move to the UK from Afghanistan and Pakistan, among others.

The government report found the boys were being taught intolerant and misogynistic ideas.

Four of the schools had previously been criticized by Ofsted, the government regulatory agency for education in the county. Ofsted found students were taught music and dancing comes from the devil and women do not have the right to refuse sex with their husbands.

One particular Darul Uloom school in Birmingham was investigated in 2011 by UK’s Channel 4, which found students were taught to hate Christians, Hindus and Jews.

Ofsted also investigated a girl’s schools connected to the movement. In 2006, Aliyah Saleem spilled all about her Darul Uloom school in Nottingham after she was kicked out for possessing a disposable camera, among other “behavioral” offenses.

Saleem said attending school was like being in prison and the girls were taught their husbands were allowed to beat and rape because it made “Allah happy.”

Darul Uloom operates schools in a number of cities across Britain, including London, Manchester, Glasgow, Birmingham, Nottingham and Leicester. The Mail on Sunday identified a total of 48 Darul Uloom schools which teach the extremist curriculum.

Check out the trailer for our upcoming film “Kids: Chasing Paradise” about the radicalization of children by clicking here

Find out what you can do to Prevent Violent Extremism by clicking here

RELATED STORIES:

Court Kicks CAIR Out of San Diego School District

Pro-Islam Indoctrination in Public Schools?

Shocking Statistics on Teaching Islam in American Schools

Dearborn Islamic School Linked to Iran, Hezbollah Propagandists

PODCAST: Ex-Gay Pastor’s Counseling of Those Questioning Their Sexuality Could Be at Risk With Equality Act

Ken Williams represents what some activists say is impossible: Previously gay, he’s now married to a woman and has kids. He says God has helped him change. Williams now works at a church and counsels people who face their own unwanted sexual attractions—but some say his work should be illegal. Read our interview, posted below, or listen on the podcast:

We also cover these stories:

  • Democrats are beginning the process to hold Attorney General William Barr in contempt.
  • Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., is proposing a national gun licensing program.
  • Hillary Clinton is saying the 2016 election was “stolen” from her.

The Daily Signal podcast is available on Ricochet, iTunesSoundCloudGoogle Play, or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!

Katrina Trinko: Joining us is Ken Williams, a Christian pastor from California, and a man who once lived a gay lifestyle, but now councils those who want to leave it. Ken, thanks for joining us.

Ken Williams: Thank you for having me.

Trinko: You once lived as a gay man. Can you tell us a bit about that lifestyle?

Williams: Actually, I didn’t actually live as a gay man. I was not out and publicly living that lifestyle. I just was struggling every hour of every day with same-sex attraction, which for me was unwanted. And then I had several different experiences and a relationship for a period of time that was homosexual.

Daniel Davis: And at what stage of your life was that? Around college or after? In your 20s?

Williams: No, that was teens and into college. Yes.

Trinko: So why did you decide to abandon that way of life?

Williams: I never wanted that way of life. I never wanted to have sex with men. That’s just the only people I was sexually attracted to. That probably doesn’t seem like it makes any sense. But that’s pretty common actually.

We don’t really plan our sexual desires. We find ourselves with our sexual desires. And when I found myself with mine at, I don’t know, 13 or 14 years old, I realized to my shock one day, “Wow, I’m not like the other boys. I’m sexually attracted to the boys. I feel like I’m more like one of the girls.”

Eventually, over time, I succumbed to some of my temptations. But that wasn’t in alignment with what I personally wanted. It wasn’t in alignment with my faith or my understanding of what I felt like God was calling me to. It’s just where I found myself.

Trinko: And it’s striking that you’ve mentioned a few times now that wasn’t something you wanted. And why did you not want it? You mentioned your faith, but obviously, a lot of people have decided that they have an understanding of Christianity that does allow it. So why do you think that didn’t change your mind?

Williams: I just had conviction. Whenever I would move in a direction or if I would undress a man with my eyes, or if I looked at porn or something like that, I felt I was violating my conscience. And I wanted to have the family scenario. I loved my family and was really close to them and so I wanted to one day have my own wife, have my own children, all of that.

It was just for multiple reasons I didn’t want that. I had this gaping hole inside for masculinity and, at least in my case, it felt like I was trying to fill what was missing in me with someone else.

I had a lot of self-hatred going on, so I just really wanted it to delete me and replace me with the better looking, more impressive male guy that I looked up to. So it was very co-dependent and really unhealthy.

Trinko: Ken, you mentioned that you are married, which I think probably surprises a lot of people. Can you tell us about how you met your wife and how she came to peace with your past?

Williams: Yeah, sure. I met my wife at the church that we were both going to in a group of young people that got together periodically. What had happened to me there, that had never happened to me before, was … well, I had respected plenty of women before, but this time it turned into, “Wow, I really kind of keep looking at you.”

She was sitting across the way. She had long hair, she was playing with her hair, and she had this sparkly belt on, and I kept needing to look at her. I realized, “Wait a minute, I’ve never done this before. What’s going on?”

I realized I profoundly respected her because I had known her for a year, and I loved how I felt when I was around her. But this time, it crossed the threshold of actually becoming more intense than just a friendship.

I thought, “Wow, OK.” I just started spending more time with her, and eventually just wanted to ask her out. I got up the gumption to ask her out by text message, very courageous.

Trinko: Oh, come on.

Williams: Yes, not the proudest part of my story. But anyway, she gave the multiple choice answer back that I wanted, and I took her out on a date.

I take her to this nice restaurant. As I sit down, she’s about to sit down, she says, “You know, I’m going to run to the restroom.” She walks over, taps my shoulder to say, “Hey, I’m going to the restroom.” I know it sounds weird, but she touched my shoulder and electricity shot from my shoulder down to my toes, back and forth a few times, and I was like, “What is going on?”

Basically, I just fell in love with her. I fell in love with her. I developed sexual attraction for her. In the early days, I had some attraction to men still as well, but nobody was captivating my heart, or my attention, like she was.

We got married within a year of that. I’ve never once, I’m just being graphic, but it’s real, I’ve never once fantasized about another man in our entire marriage. We have a great sex life. We have four children, twins. We had four kids in less than four years, which to the listening audience, please spread your kids out more than that because you could lose your mind.

But I love being a family man. I love my wife and my kids. I’m living, really, somebody else’s life is what it feels like, and I’m loving it. I have quite a few friends that share my same story.

But if I can answer your secondary question, how was it for her? I tell people, too, it’s like, “Hey, people need to know in marriage what they’re buying.” Within a month of dating her, I felt like, “OK, we’ve been going out enough now that she needs to really know who I really am, and where I’ve been.”

We were spending a weekend together, Thanksgiving, at her parents’ house, but a few days prior to that we had taken a trip together. On the trip, I thought, “Oh, maybe this is the time.”

So I opened up to her and said, “Hey, FYI, I’ve dealt with this in my life, and here’s what it looked like.” And she said, “Oh, okay,” and she acted like it was no problem at all. She said, “Hey, can we pull over, I’m going to use the restroom.” Another restroom story.

She pops into the restroom, while I’m filling up with gas, and I didn’t know it, but she was having a full on panic attack in there. She was like, “Oh my gosh, God, what am I going to do?” She’s like, “God, help me, because I love this guy, but I don’t know what to do with this.”

She felt like, I don’t know what everybody’s faith journey is like here listening, but she felt like God very clearly just relayed to her, “Hey, don’t look at him that way, because I don’t.” Because I really wasn’t that person anymore. She thought, “Wow, OK.” So she endeavored to go that direction.

We had talks in the coming weeks about it, she needed to kind of process it. She’d say, “Well, what about this or what about that?” It kind of came down to, I said, “Hey listen, I’ve told you everything,” and I said, “Everything I just told you, there are five people in my life, close friends of mine, pastors of mine, they all know all of this story, and they all are present in my life.” So they’re aware of who I’m hanging out with, who I’m not.

I said, “You are welcome to talk to any of my friends,” that kind of thing. And I said, “You know, the reality is, any of us could fall to all kinds of temptations in life.”

And I said, “At the end of the day, you’re just taking a risk that I’m going to put God ahead of every other relationship, and I’m going to be true to my faith in God, which means that I would be faithful in marriage.” I said, “All I know to tell you is, I will endeavor to always put God first and you next, and at the end of day it’s a risk, but I hope you’ll choose me.”

She did, so that was 13 years ago in August.

Davis: Wow. … There’s so much hope there for people who might find themselves just trapped. There’s a category there that people today don’t seem to make room for, which is that you might develop a certain attraction. It seems like your attraction, maybe you can explain this—

Williams: Mmhmm.

Davis: … was for her specifically, not just for the female gender.

Williams: That’s true.

Davis: Is that the case?

Williams: It did start that way for sure, yeah.

As we’ve gone further through marriage, and I’ve continued to work on my own heart and being part of that men’s purity group, where I feel like I’m constantly getting better as a man and taking more responsibility for my life and just, I don’t know, continuing to grow.

Actually, my sexuality has as well, and I actually have some attraction now for other women as well, and it’s like I really am not trying to increase any, I don’t really need any, but that’s …

A lot of my friends that I know that share my similar experience, it becomes kind of fluid that way, as far as your understanding of yourself and of your sexual desires, they can shift. Even the APA will tell you that, that there can be a shift in sexual desires. So contrary to popular opinion, they can shift both ways.

Trinko: Actually, it’s funny you mention that because I was reading an advice column on Slate recently, where someone wrote in and said they had been a lesbian in their 20s and 30s, but now they were only attracted to men.

I don’t believe this person was religious, or they didn’t present themselves as religious, and they said, I feel really embarrassed to come out as straight. How do I do this?

Williams: Yes. My ministry partner, Elizabeth, at first was humiliated, she said, when she started having sexual desires for her husband because so much of her identity had been staked on being a lesbian feminist. She’s a brilliant lady, she had a master’s degree in theology and all this, and was an out and proud lesbian Christian. She was out in her seminary.

Her theology was such that she did not have any problem theologically, but she started having some experiences at church and with God that just led her away from that.

She was humiliated to one day discover, “I’m sexually attracted to this guy. What is going on here?” Because so much of her reputation was staked on her being a lesbian and a feminist. She had to figure out who she was all over again, and now she’s been married to that man for 14 years, and she’s no longer humiliated. She loves him.

Yeah, change is possible. If you’re a person of faith, it’s like all things are possible is in the Bible. I don’t know why we’ve removed this one area from being in reach of God.

Davis: You said you had a whole lack of sense of masculinity, or desire to be connected to other sorts of masculinity. Did you have that growing up? Were you close with your dad or another man who could kind of mentor you?

Williams: That was a challenge for me in my childhood. My dad loved me a time, but for whatever reason, we had trouble connecting deeply. He traveled quite a bit. My mom was more my same type of personality so she was easier to talk to.

I actually remember forming some judgments internally as a child, like, “Oh, women are better than men,” because when I would be at church, I would see the women stereotypically were standing around talking about God together, where the men were talking about football.

Not that there’s anything wrong with football and of course, that was a very short sighted, limited perspective as a child. I’m sure that the men had great faith as well, but I just drew some conclusions as a child that sent me in a way of saying, “I don’t really actually want men. I disapprove of masculinity.” But then I found myself, as I grew, craving masculinity because I had pushed it away.

Trinko: So you are now a pastor and you counsel, my understanding is, a lot of people in issues of sexuality. Can you tell us a little bit about how you approach that?

Williams: Yes. Really the only people that come to me for consulting are wanting to deal with same-sex attraction that’s unwanted or they are wanting to leave homosexuality behind. So I wouldn’t be qualified to help people that wanted to embrace it because I don’t have any experience with that.

But it’s interesting. There are all kinds of trigger points for people. I find that a very common characteristic is that there was some kind of a breakdown normally in childhood with their sense of intimacy, of love and belonging.

You heard some of that even in the story I told you about myself. I didn’t feel I was deeply valued or known really by anyone and certainly not by other males. So there can be all kinds of things. …

It’s not politically correct to say it, but it’s very common that sexual abuse is a part of the background of people who experience same-sex attraction. It’s definitely not 100% of the time, but it’s over 50% and that definitely bears out in the people that I minister to as well.

Davis: So if you have one individual who experiences these desires that they don’t want, how would you approach counseling them?

Williams: We try to ascertain, “OK, did something happen in your childhood? Let’s see if there was a moment. Do you remember when you first started experiencing these feelings?” Because that also happens for some adults as well, that’s a thing now.

I know a lady who didn’t deal with any same-sex attraction until she was in her 40s and then experienced it then.

So, “Did you have something traumatic happen? Did you form a judgment? Do you have any unforgiveness?” Can sometimes be a factor, which therefore kind of separated you from a person or people group. “Did you have a girlfriend or a boyfriend situation that went south on you and you were traumatized by that?”

There can be so many different different ways. We look for pain in there and we just try to connect them to a loving God that has grace for them exactly where they are. Loves them extravagantly right where they are, but also loves them enough to want to take them deeper into his presence and to an understanding of who they actually are.

Trinko: So would you consider what you do conversion therapy?

Williams: No. And I know over 100 people that have left homosexuality and I don’t know a single one of them that has ever experienced what people would say is conversion therapy, and they don’t know of anyone who has either.

It’s this term that gets used in culture that all of us with life experience, we don’t even know what you’re talking about. That didn’t happen to us. And in the movies that are out there, it’s very unfounded. So I have some things happen that were harmful to people. I’m sure that there are some cases out there, but I don’t personally know of any.

What’s so common though is people are confused about their identity or their sexuality. They go and they talk it out with a counselor, and the counselor helps them figure out what they want to go toward and leads them that direction … follows what they’re wanting to pursue and helps them go that direction.

So I know tons of people who have been so helped by things that could be labeled as conversion therapy that were merely a person talking with the counselor and figuring out, “Why do I feel the way that I do?”

Davis: There’s a bill in Congress here that you’ve been active in speaking on, the Equality Act, that would have a pretty sizable effect on the kinds of services that you offer, the counseling. Tell us about that.

Williams: If we’re going to call something the Equality Act, it sure would be great if it felt equal to all people. And so LGBTQ, the Q stands for queer or questioning. Well, questioning, OK, let’s take that. So if someone’s questioning their sexual identity, shouldn’t they be able to consider going down multiple paths if they’re questioning?

If we’re going to make it equal and fair, to remove from the table only the kind of therapy that would help a person walk away from homosexuality, how is that equal? How is that fair? How is that allowing someone to really question?

It’s basically elevating one viewpoint that says that all sexual fluidity must head in the direction of homosexuality. You’re not able to flow back another direction. And that’s just not fair. Any rational person can realize we must leave all of the options on the table if we’re going to be equal.

Trinko: Have you had any LGBT activists attack you for doing this kind of counseling? And if so, why do you think there’s such concern on the LGBT movement’s part that this counseling exists?

Williams: Yeah, great question. Yes, I’ve had death threats. I’ve had heinous things said. There’re a lot of really inappropriate things that definitely we’ve experienced, me and my ministry partner, Elizabeth Woning.

But I’ll tell you why I believe that exists out there. I think some of the responsibility does belong to culture and even to the church that for so long gay people were not loved well. I’m just being honest here.

For so long and in Christian circles it was this is the mandate, “Gay people are detestable. They’re going to hell. They’re terrible,” or whatever. And there wasn’t any offering for, “OK, wait a minute, God loves you and he wants to help you.”It was just, “You shouldn’t be who you are,” and that can’t be God first of all. And who wants to behave that way?

So I feel some of what we’re experiencing today is a reaction from a society that was holding expectations of people without helping loving them into what that expectation might be.

I so regret that that happened, but the way to fix it now is for all of us to be loving of people without necessarily agreeing. I mean, I don’t agree with my wife 100% but I love her.

We’ve got to now have a culture that allows people to make decisions for themselves. Still has standards for the truth, but we love people no matter where they are. And that’s got to work on both sides.

Davis: So there have been some notable ex-gays who have … done counseling and left the lifestyle but then returned to it. And sort of in the media that’s kind of looked at as, “Well, obviously, this counseling doesn’t work.” How would you respond to those claims?

Williams: I’m sure that with any area of counseling or people dealing with any life situation, there’s a desistance or however you would say it. There’re people that revert back to a previous way of living. There again that should be their right.

Of course, from my personal viewpoint, that’s sad for me because I feel they were probably on a direction, a pathway that was going to be very fulfilling for them. But something happened or it could be a lot of things happen in our lives. I don’t know what actually happened to cause them to go back in a previous direction, but we only tend to hear about the fantastic stories, don’t we?

What you don’t hear is all of the other stories of, “Well, I didn’t return back to that.” Those people just kind of go off into their lives and they maybe have a family and grow old together. Those aren’t as fantastic as the, “Oh, look, somebody that it didn’t work for them.” Like, “Yeah, OK. It didn’t for a percentage, but what about all the other people that it did?”

Trinko: You briefly mentioned pornography and I was wondering what do you think about the role of pornography in our current culture?

We know that there’re a lot of Americans who regularly view it, but we don’t really know that much about how it affects people. Do you see pornography playing a role in the kind of work that you do and affecting people?

Williams: Oh my goodness, absolutely. I know what it’s like to be addicted to pornography. I was addicted to gay porn for whole seasons of time and I have not dealt with porn at all in 15 years. So thank God that is no longer a part of my life.

It is very damaging. It’s damaging to culture in general, at a very basal level. Because what it does is it steals your voice. It steals your passion. It puts men in particular into passivity because you’re basically medicating … Very often people addicted to porn are medicating emotional wounds, disappointments. They’re not dealing with life head-on anymore.

Instead, they’re going to a quick hit of chemicals across their brain to make themselves feel better and they get very disempowered, very passive, not leading their families any longer. The fallout from porn we haven’t even been able to completely grapple with yet. But it’s immense.

I know this for one reason because I’ve been one of the leaders of a men’s purity group at my church for 10 years. We have 200 to 250 men every Monday night that gather and porn is just an issue for most of them. And if you can get them off of porn for three weeks, they come back, it’s like their present. They can think more clearly. They start leading their families again. They feel so good about themselves. I could talk about this for a long time. I feel very strongly.

Davis: Wow. We’re coming up on the month of June pretty soon, which the LGBT movement considers to be Pride Month. As we approach June, what would you say are the most helpful ways for us to engage those in that movement?

Williams: Yeah, thanks. We need to consider our relational capital that we have with another person before we speak. So if it’s somebody I don’t even know, I have no business going up and telling them how to raise their children or whether they should be smoking or not or what I think about their sexuality. That just doesn’t work well when you just do a drive-by comment.

So people that are in our lives though that we might actually have a conversation with I say, “Hey, in my experience of homosexuality, so often it’s a search for self, self-love,” and a search to just to be known and valued, like I shared earlier.

So I encourage people, “Hey, before you try to have any kind of conversation about whether they should quit alcohol addiction or anything else really, put more deposits into the person, then you’re taking withdrawals, a lot more. And really try to find common ground with them. Try to be the person in their life that they feel knows them more deeply than anybody else.” Strive for that.

Let them be heard, seen, valued, so that now you have relational capital and then maybe you will have an opportunity at some point to say, “Hey, tell me,”—questions, first of all, are great instead of commands. Who wants to be told what to do?

So questions about, “Hey, so let’s talk. We haven’t talked in a while. So you’re in a relationship with another woman. Tell me about that. How have you always felt that way?” … That’s just a good counselor.

Any counselor or even a consultant would come in with questions instead of their own expectations. So I think we really should do the same. Just be really loving and relational and then maybe you’d have an opportunity to share whatever’s on your heart for the person.

Trinko: OK. Well, Ken Williams, thanks so much for being on with us.

Williams: Thank you. It’s an honor. I appreciate it.

Trinko: And is there anywhere that people can find your work or reach out to you?

Williams: Yeah, absolutely. You can go to equippedtolove.com for our ministry. And then also if you just want to track along with all of the people who have left homosexuality and are having different testimonies there, you can follow us on Instagram at changedmvmt.

Trinko: OK. Thanks so much.

Williams: Thank you.

COMMENTARY BY

Katrina Trinko is editor-in-chief of The Daily Signal and co-host of The Daily Signal PodcastSend an email to Katrina. Twitter: .


Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY


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

Your Tax Dollars Flowing to Islamist Groups Like the Muslim American Society [Video]

If you missed the news about the Philadelphia controversy over the Muslim American Society program that featured young children reading aloud about killing Jews and Christians [below], here is one recent report about the on-going investigation.

In the wake of that shocking performance we learn, thanks to the Middle East Forum (via Creeping Sharia) hat tip: Michael, that the Muslim American Society is one of many Islamist-influenced organizations receiving government grants.

New Research Uncovers $41 Million of U.S.-Taxpayer-Subsidized Islamism

Research by the Middle East Forum has found that since 2007, federal government agencies have handed over $47 million to 61 Islamic institutions in the forms of 411 various grants and contracts.

On the face of it, this need not be of any particular concern. The government has long relied on contractors and charities from all faiths to implement its programs.

Alarmingly, however, radical Islamic movements completely control 36% of the Muslim institutions that received government monies, taking 42% of the total funding. A further 36% of the grantees, which received 44% of the funds, operate under varying degrees of radical influence. A mere 14% of identified government funds given to Muslim organizations were directed toward institutions free of Islamist influence.

In total, if the government’s own data is accurate, at least $41 million was given to institutions either controlled or under the partial influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, Jamaat-e-Islami (a violent South Asian Islamist movement), Salafis, Deobandis (a hardline South Asian Sunni sect from which the Taliban was created) and the Iranian regime, among others.

Some of the largest amounts involve grants to aid charities. Long favored by Islamist movements as a means to spread ideology through welfare, charities also provide extremists with plentiful funding and the occasional accompanying credibility of government partnership.

Continue reading here to see all of the groups getting gifts from you, via the US Treasury!

It is the same old maddening s***!  Just like all of the so-called religious charities busy changing America by changing the people and doing it with our money!

We have Donald Trump in the White House! Is this kind of funding ever going to end?

This post is filed in my ‘Charity fraud’ category.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

City of Minneapolis to Pay Family of Australian Woman Killed by Somali Cop $20 Million

Iowa: Somali Halal Store Owner Says Allegations of Food Stamp Fraud a “Misunderstanding”

Colorado: Building Owner Must Pay Muslim Father/Son $675,000 in Discrimination Case

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission.

VIDEO: The Vortex — Enemies of Truth

TRANSCRIPT

I’m Michael Voris coming to you from Jerusalem on our final day in the Holy Land as we wrap up production from here on our documentary on the Eucharist — and quickly, because so many have asked, you can preorder a copy of the final production by just clicking on the provided link.

It was here, in Jerusalem, about a 10-minute walk from where we are right now, that Roman Procurator Pontius Pilate asked his question of Our Lord: What is truth?

Enemies of Christ deny truth, they deny its existence as anything beyond whatever is expedient. Pilate denied it, even having truth Himself standing right in front of him.

Caiaphas denied it when he tore his robes in response to Our Lord’s truthful acclamation that He was, in fact, the Messiah and the Son of God.

And so it has gone down through the centuries even to our own day. And it doesn’t even matter what given waters the enemies of Christ may swim in — politics, media, religion — all His enemies are liars.

Which of course stands to reason because it was right over there, on the Temple Mount, where Islam’s Dome of the Rock now stands, that Our Lord brutalized the Jewish leaders for their rejection of truth in His own person.

He railed at them, naming them as offspring of the serpent and saying they were enemies of the truth because their father was the devil, who is the father of lies.

That is pretty severe language all by itself, but when coming as a judgment pronounced on you by the Son of God, it is a horrifying condemnation. Those who lie, who participate in lying to obscure or deny the truth, are the offspring of the devil.

And this isn’t just some historical or even biblical reality rooted in nostalgia or biblical scholarship. This is real today.

Consider CNN with its constant stream of fake news — meaning lies and distortions to get at Donald Trump. And that includes MSNBC, or The New York Times and so forth, the lot of them that want to get at it Him.

And why do they want to get at him? Because he represents to them — rightly or wrongly, a moral America — the head of a political grassroots movement that if successful would completely undo their liberal 1970s America which has ruled the country for nearly half a century. That vision of America was built on lies.

Roe v. Wade was built on the lie that Jane Roe, whose real name was Norma McCorvey, was gang raped by black men. Only decades later did it come out that that was a lie invented by Roe lawyer Sarah Weddington.

Weddington recently sat next to Andrew Cuomo as he signed the most wide-ranging abortion law in world history into effect earlier this year — more lies.

Joe Biden’s entire political career is built on lies — perhaps the biggest one coming to light is he is a creeper, not just friendly “Uncle Joe.”

He has manhandled so many women in public and done creepy things, like smelling their hair, that he has earned the nickname “The Handyman.”

Yet, the hypocrisy of the Left in giving him a pass because he supports child slaughter is revolting — revolting, but telling. They are willing to sacrifice some of their pretended sacred principles in order to keep abortion the sacrament they have raised it to.

So too the news media will do anything to avoid calling Islamic terrorists, Islamic terrorists — more lies.

The horror of what happened in Sri Lanka on Easter was dutifully reported by the fake news corrupt media as being the fault of “religious extremists” — oh yeah, which religion? To simply pin it on “religious” extremists, condemns all religions.

Why would the media not report the full truth of this, especially when they know it. Because it’s better for them to lie by omission if they want to keep up the pretense that Islam is the religion of peace.

They need to keep that narrative going so they can use it against Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular.

So too, those on the Left who keep yammering on and lying about man-made climate change. The climate changes. It has since creation. Man does not make the climate change.

The Left — the media, politicians, elitists and so forth — are all engaged heavily in lies because they want to bring about a new order for the world where Jesus Christ is excluded from it.

Islam is based on a lie, Freemasons lie, socialists and Marxists lie, the media lies, Democrats lie, Planned Parenthood lies, all of them enemies of Christ because He is the truth, and they reject truth and the world and civilization created in the West by His Catholic Church after the fall of the Roman Empire.

Pilate, a representative of that empire, you might say got this whole ball rolling, this denial and rejection of truth for the sake of political expediency. It happened right over there, on the Temple Mount the first time, and as we know, it wouldn’t be the last.

Those dedicated to Christ say the truth. You cannot love Christ and not also love the truth, for He is the truth. Truth is sometimes hard to hear. Dealing with its consequences is often hard to bear.

But if you want to spend eternity with truth, you better start living in correct association with Him here on earth. Call out lies. Call out falsehoods. Do it every time you encounter them.

Calling out the enemies of Christ is really, after all, only calling out their father, the devil. That’s what children of the light do. They attack the darkness.

Ending our time here in the land where Our Lord instituted the sacrament of His body and blood, for our whole crew, and Church Militant supporters who made this trip possible for the production of our documentary on the Eucharist, this is Michael Voris.

RELATED ARTICLES:

U.S. Report Blasts Vatican-China Deal

Georgia AG Opens Clerical Abuse Investigation

Nick Sandmann Sues NBC for $275 Million

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission.

Watch Shocking Video of Indoctrinated Muslim Kids in Philly

The following video, posted by the Investigative Project on Terrorism, shows a shocking display of indoctrinated Muslim kids in Philadelphia.

In the violent and anti-Semitic song, the children are hoping for the future “liberation” of the al-Aqsa mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

Contrary to the song, Muslims have full access to the mosque (save men under 40 in times of Islamist rioting). Since 1967, when Israel gained control of the Jordanian-occupied part of Jerusalem, Israel handed administration of the site back to Jordan. Israel maintains security control of the site.

RELATED ARTICLES:

ISIS Unveils New Indoctrination App For Kids

Pro-Islam Indoctrination in Public Schools?

Education or Indoctrination?

Enter Joe Biden, Stage Left

David Carlin: The former Veep is a liberal Catholic. It will be interesting to see how many bishops will offer corrections to his non-Catholic positions.


Joe Biden, a Democrat who happens to be a Catholic, is now officially running for President of the United States.  And he’s doing so in an effort to save what he calls the “soul” of America.

His assumption seems to be that there are two (more or less Platonic) Ideas of America currently struggling for dominance, the true Idea and the false Idea.  I suppose he sees himself and his views as symbolizing the true America, while he sees Donald Trump and his views as symbolizing the false America.

If Biden is to be the Democratic candidate, he will, of course, have to embrace and endorse the beliefs and values that currently prevail in the Democratic Party, and these beliefs and values include the following:

1. Abortion is a fundamental human right.

2. Homosexual behavior is a fine thing for people who are born that way; and anybody who disagrees is a homophobic bigot.

3. Same-sex marriage is a fundamental human right.

4. The U.S. Constitution, thanks to the theory of substantive due process, protects all human rights; and it’s up to any five members of the U.S. Supreme Court to decide what is, or what is not, a human right.

5. Non-liberal whites are almost always racists.

6. It is a great duty of the U.S. government to protect those among us who are most oppressed; namely, blacks, other persons of color, women, undocumented migrants, Muslims, homosexuals, transgender persons, and criminals (including drug dealers) who have committed no violent crimes.

7. When the rights of churches or religious individuals collide with the rights of the above-listed victim groups, the former must give way to the latter.

8. When the rights of parents collide with the rights of their transgender children, the former must give way to the latter.

9. Almost all our social ills can be cured, or at least significantly mitigated, by actions of the federal government.

Lest anybody think that the above is an invidious description of the Democratic belief system given by a person who is a lifelong Democrat-hater, let me assure the reader that I once possessed very strong Democratic credentials.  I think I first thought of myself as a Democrat on that day when I was about eight-years-old and my father explained to me, “The Republicans are the party of rich people.  The Democrats are the party of poor people, like us.”

Later in life I became a politician in my home state of Rhode Island.  I served twelve years (1981-93) as a Democrat in the R.I. Senate, two of those as majority leader.  In 1992, I was the (losing) Democratic candidate in my district for the U.S. House of Representatives.

By that date, it was clear that my party had become a pro-abortion party.  Yet I, a pro-life Democrat, still hoped that the party’s anti-Christian momentum could be reversed.  That, as it turned out, was quite foolish.

Increasingly, cultural enemies of Christianity have gained ideological dominance in the party.  From abortion they moved on to homosexuality and same-sex marriage; more recently they have advanced to transgenderism; and, in the future, they will almost certainly move on to assisted suicide: first to voluntary euthanasia, later to involuntary.It is with regret that I say it, but my old and dearly loved party has become a party of atheistic anti-Christianity.  This is Biden’s party, and if he doesn’t embrace its values he won’t get its nomination.

Some people may object to what I’ve said. They may point out that today’s Democratic Party still contains many Christians and is far from being a party made up solely of atheists.  True . . . and beside the point.

Many persons who identify as both Christians and Democrats are simple souls who imagine that their party, because it has the same name it had in the good old days of FDR and JFK, is the same party it has always been. They don’t understand, or they won’t allow themselves to understand, how radically their party has changed.

But those people are followers, not leaders. The ideological leadership of the party is in the hands of persons who may be called Secular Progressives.  These people are atheists and near-atheists. By “near-atheists” I mean agnostics, religiously indifferent people, and liberal Protestants (in contrast to Evangelical Protestants).

If liberal Protestants are Christians, it is in a Pickwickian sense of that word only.  For more than a century now, liberal Protestantism, in an attempt to “save” Christianity for persons with a modern mentality, has been shedding one element after another of Christian belief.

Having shed almost all Nicene doctrines, they have more recently, under the impact of the sexual revolution, dropped all traditional Christian sexual morality plus the ancient Christian taboo against abortion.  Nowadays liberal Protestantism, while not quite full-fledged atheism, is far closer to atheism than it is to traditional Christianity.

Liberal Catholicism, while drifting in the same direction, got its start later than liberal Protestantism, and so has not yet traveled quite so far down the road to atheism as has its elder brother.  Its main project at the moment is to persuade the Church to remove its age-old condemnation of homosexuality.  To all appearances, it has had considerable success with this project, not just among tolerant laypersons, but even among many priests and some bishops.

When Joe Biden tries to exploit the “fact” that he’s a Catholic, it will be interesting to see how many Catholic bishops will denounce his spurious appropriation of the faith.  If the denunciation is nearly universal, it will be a sign that the Church in America is recovering its health.  If not, it will be sign that we are still sliding downhill.

As for myself, I’m not optimistic.

COLUMN BY

David Carlin

David Carlin is a professor of sociology and philosophy at the Community College of Rhode Island, and the author of The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America.

RELATED ARTICLE: Obama-Era Spying Is Now a Political Risk for Biden

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.

VIDEO: Antisemitism and the Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) Event in Orlando, FL

On April 15th, the Heritage Florida Jewish News requested a ‘Press Pass’ by email, to attend the April 20th Emgage Action Gala at the Crowne Plaza Hotel where controversial Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib was the keynote speaker.  Our email request for the press pass went unanswered so a ticket was purchased and confirmed on April 17th.

At the check in table, my name and Heritage press credentials were presented and admittance to the event was denied, without cause or reason.   The only excuse given was, “No media allowed” rudely given by one of the organizers who refused to give her name.  However, nothing on the ticket receipt or advertising flyers said “No Media Allowed.”

My assignment was to report on Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s speech, but now we will explore possible reasons why Emgage Action would behave in such a antisemitic way towards the Heritage Florida Jewish News and its readership.

Front Page Magazine journalist Joe Kaufman reported in a March 19, 2019 article about Emgage founder Khurrum Wahid,

 Khurrum Basir Wahid is a Pakistani-born South Florida attorney, who has built his name on representing high profile terrorists.

His past clients include: Rafiq Sabir, who received a 25-year prison sentence for conspiring to provide material support to al-Qaeda; al-Qaeda operative Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, who received a life sentence for plotting to assassinate President George W. Bush; Sami al-Arian, who sought to create a Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) infrastructure within the Tampa, Florida-area; and Miami imam Hafiz Khan, who was convicted of sending $50,000 to the Pakistani Taliban with the intent to murder American troops overseas.”

“The Miami New Times reports, Wahid himself was placed on a federal terrorist watch list in 2011. The publication states, “[S]ometimes, a clash between his work and personal life is inescapable. Last year, he landed on a federal ‘selectee’ list – a terrorist watch list. Now he gets a pat down at the airport before flying and can’t print boarding passes at home.”                                  

Besides his controversial law practice, Wahid is the Co-Chairman of Emgage Action (formerly Emerge USA), an Islamist group he founded, in 2006, that attempts to pass its extremist agenda off as political advocacy. The group is part of the South Florida Muslim Federation, a consortium of South Florida’s radical Islamic organizations and terror-related mosques. Ammar Ahmed, the South Florida Director of Emgage, in February 2010, following a debate he participated in at a school, wrote on Facebook, “I hate white people” and joked that he “should have threatened to blow up the school.

The mosque Wahid attends is the Islamic Foundation of South Florida (IFSF). Wahid, as well, is the Registered Agent for IFSF’s corporation. On IFSF Youth Group leader Abdur Rahman al-Ghani’s Facebook pageal-Ghani labels Jews “demonic,” calls the US the “World’s Number One Terrorist Organization,” and says Muslims “will overtake the World.”

Perhaps the examples listed above provide a clue into the corporate culture of Emgage Action and their supporters.  Rep. Tlaib’s positions on BDS, Israel, and the Jewish people have made her a controversial figure among our freshman congressman and women and the nation.

An April 11,2019 Clarion Project article reports,

Tlaib is known for being a supporter of the Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) Movement against Israel, which according to the definition of anti-Semitism adopted by the State Department, is an anti-Semitic movement.”

The Times of Israel in a February 20, 2019 article reports, “

“In a video published on the Facebook page of the Israel Advocacy Movement, founder Joseph Cohen displayed a screen capture of the code used for Tlaib’s website which showed it was created using Wix.com.

“That’s right, the Palestinian queen of BDS has a website that was built and bought from Israel,” Cohen says.   Many of the haters of Israel have no idea that Israeli technology is present in just about every cell phone and computer on the market.

“Tlaib, whose parents are from the West Bank village of Beit Ur al-Fauqa, where much of her family lives, is one of the first-ever US lawmakers to support the anti-Israel boycott movement. She also says she supports a one-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and has called for cutting US aid to the country.”

“Tlaib has gained notoriety for putting a ‘post it’ note labeled “Palestine” over the State of Israel.  This political theater signals Rep. Tlaib likely believes Israel does not have the right to exist.  The policy making implications of such a radical view from a sitting United States Congresswoman is chilling.   In this picture, on the far left, is radical Palestinian activist Rasha Mubarak of Orlando, FL.  Keep your eye on Rasha Mubarak, it is rumored she has her sights on running for public office in Orlando.

Most disturbing is Rashida Tlaib’s social media posts where she says of her most radical supporters, “Every single one of you inspire me to stay true to my roots and who I am.” FB post March 31, 2018.

Two of Rep. Tlaib’s more radicalized supporters are Ahlam Jbara and  Mwafaq Jbara.

Ahlam Jbara is an avid supporter of Rasmeeh Odeh, who was arrested for orchestrating a bombing in an Israeli supermarket where two people were killed.  Another social media post show Ahlam Jbara baked Rasmeeh the murderer a birthday cake.  Ahlam also glorified  another Palestinian terrorist Muhammad Ali who stabbed three IDF soldiers in Jerusalem.

Mwafaq Jbara is a Palestinian terrorist who speaks fondly of meeting the co-founder of Hamas while being incarcerated at Megiddo prison in Israel.  Meggiddo prison is known for housing the most dangerous of Palestinian terrorists.  Jbara’s social media posts are a who’s who of high level terrorists.  Most disturbing is in one post he says, “If you see the roof of an Israeli bus flying in the air you will know it’s Yahya.”  Yahya is on of the chief bomb makers for Hamas.  Mwafaq Jbara is also seen posing with terrorist Rasmeeh Odeh.  Mwafaq Jbara and Rep. Tlaib are also Facebook friends.

We wanted to ask Rep. Tlaib about her friends support of terrorists and the killing of Jews but never got the chance.

The Israel Advocacy Movement made an excellent video exposing Rashida Tlaib’s close associates troubling past.

These associations present a pattern of behavior that should concern all American’s concerned with the State of Israel and our countries Middle East foreign policy.

In law enforcement circles, all the facts and evidence uncovered by the Israel Advocacy Movement is an indicator that Rep. Tlaib has troubling associations she should answer for.   Any individual with such connections would likely be denied even low level security clearances.

Conclusion

Once the the fiery rhetoric of antisemitism becomes accepted in the public square it only grows.  The facts and evidence presented in this article paint a disturbing picture of Rep. Rashida Tlaib,  her politics and nefarious associates.

The Zionist organization of America is calling on pro-Israel organizations and “decent Americans” to urge the removal of Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) from the Democratic party and Congressional committees.

In an insightful statement (this link is not working) ZOA National President Morton A. Klein and Chairman Mark Levenson declared,

Someone who knowingly and enthusiastically consorts with the most virulent anti-semites, blood-soaked terrorists and conspiracy theorists is clearly beyond the pale, or no one is beyond the pale.”

Pope Francis Accused of Heresy by Clergy and Theologians

VATICAN CITY (ChurchMilitant.com) – An international group of notable clergy and prominent academics is urging the world’s bishops to investigate Pope Francis for the canonical crime of heresy in an open letter released Monday.

The group, comprised of specialists in theology and philosophy, opens their letter — which was dated “Easter Week, 2019” but published on the feast of St. Catherine of Siena, a saint who influenced several popes with her counsels and admonitions — by stating their two-fold purpose to the bishops. First, they accuse Pope Francis of the canonical delict of heresy; second, they request that the bishops take the steps necessary to deal with the grave situation of a heretical pope.

In a summary of the letter, the clerics and scholars place this open letter to bishops within the context of two previous attempts to correct Pope Francis on matters of faith and morals.

The first attempt was a private letter to “the cardinals and Eastern Catholic patriarchs” in 2016 “pointing out heresies and other serious errors that appeared to be contained in or favored by Pope Francis’ Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia.”

The group notes the second attempt was the widely reported filial correction addressed directly to the Holy Father in 2017 because, as they say, “Pope Francis had continued by word, deed, and omission to propagate many of these same heresies.”

The authors of the filial correction stopped short of judging at that time “whether Pope Francis was aware that he was causing heresy to spread.”

In the present open letter, this group goes a step further by making the claim that the Pope “is guilty of the crime of heresy.” The academics and clerics clarify that such a crime is committed “when a Catholic knowingly and persistently denies something which he knows that the Church teaches to be revealed by God.”

One of the most prominent members of the clergy to sign the letter is English academic and Dominican priest Fr. Aidan Nichols. Nichols served as the first John Paul II memorial visiting lecturer at the University of Oxford from 2006 to 2008.

Nichols is a notable English-speaking theologian and well-published author of numerable books related to theology. Other well-known clerics signing the letter are Fr. John Hunwicke, former senior research fellow at Pusey House, Oxford, and Deacon Nick Donnelly, clerics who are popular on social media.

The group says it’s comprised of “not only specialists in theology and philosophy, but also academics and scholars from other fields.” The list of prominent lay scholars signing the letter includes Professor John Rist, a specialist in classical philosophy and the history of theology. Rist has held chairs and professorships at the University of Toronto, the Augustinianum in Rome, the Catholic University of America, the University of Aberdeen and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Other lay Catholic scholars signing the letter include Georges Buscemi, president of Campagne Québec-Vie and member of the John-Paul II Academy for Human Life and Family. Another signatory is Maria Guarini, S.T.B., from the Pontificia Università Seraphicum in Rome and editor of Chiesa e postconcilio.

Dr. Claudio Pierantoni was another cosigner. Pierantoni is a professor of medieval philosophy at the University of Chile and former professor of Church history and patrology at the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile.

Organizers of this open letter invite other clergy and academics to sign this open letter as well. They may request to do so by emailing their name and credentials to the following email address: openlettertobishops@gmail.com. Organizers note each request will be thoroughly vetted.

After taking all things into account, the group says the words, deeds, appointments and omissions of Pope Francis “amount to a comprehensive rejection of Catholic teaching on marriage and sexual activity, on the moral law, and on grace and the forgiveness of sins.”

In their 20-page open letter, they list seven heresies that Pope Francis has fostered but make it clear, however, that these heresies do not touch his teaching office as pope.

“It is agreed that no pope can uphold heresy when teaching in a way that satisfies the conditions for an infallible magisterial statement,” they affirmed.

They also are clear that no one has the authority to remove a sitting pope.

“It is agreed,” states the clerics and scholars, “that the Church does not have jurisdiction over the pope, and hence that the Church cannot remove a pope from office by an exercise of superior authority, even for the crime of heresy.” They go on to cite many other canonical opinions that include the opinion that a pope who commits heresy separates himself from the Catholic Church.

They are united in asking the bishops to look into the deliberate lack of clarity from the Pope on matters of faith and morals, statements which seem to contradict faith and morals by the Pope and the appointments of dubious men to key positions within the Church that propagate heretical views.

Despite the evidence that we have put forward in this letter, we recognize that it does not belong to us to declare the pope guilty of the delict of heresy in a way that would have canonical consequences for Catholics. We therefore appeal to you as our spiritual fathers, vicars of Christ within your own jurisdictions and not vicars of the Roman pontiff, publicly to admonish Pope Francis to abjure the heresies that he has professed.

They want the bishops to confront Pope Francis, and if he does not recant his errors, then they ask that he be charged by them with him the canonical crime of heresy.

Since Pope Francis has manifested heresy by his actions as well as by his words, any abjuration must involve repudiating and reversing these actions, including his nomination of bishops and cardinals who have supported these heresies by their words or actions. Such an admonition is a duty of fraternal charity to the Pope, as well as a duty to the Church. If — which God forbid! — Pope Francis does not bear the fruit of true repentance in response to these admonitions, we request that you carry out your duty of office to declare that he has committed the canonical delict of heresy and that he must suffer the canonical consequences of this crime.

COLUMN BY

BRADLEY ELI, M.DIV., MA.TH.

Raised in the great outdoors of Montana, Brad’s at home with horses, camping and farm life.

While putting a Petroleum Engineering degree to work in Alaska’s oil field, he studied Engineering Management and enjoyed Alaska’s rugged outdoors. Catholic from birth, Brad began devoting more time to reading the Bible, prayer and volunteering at Covenant House Alaska, an organization that cares for runaway kids.

At 26, Brad left his occupation to follow a religious vocation with a start-up Franciscan third order community in Connecticut. After completing his seminary studies, Brad taught high school math, science and religion in addition to helping run Catholic summer camps.

After 22 years the religious community ended, so Brad began working as a writer and associate producer for ChurchMilitant.com. Three years later he married a devout Catholic, and God has blessed the couple with a son.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant column is republished with permission.

VIDEO: Sri Lanka Bombings Revenge for ISIS Caliphate, Not New Zealand

After remaining quiet for five years, often reported dead, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of the Islamic State, appears on a 17 minute video, rallying what remains of his forces to launch further attacks on the “Christian Crusaders”, making excuses for their loses at Baghuz, listing a long list of dead amongst a long list of other subjects covered.

Special thanks to VladTepesBlog for the translation and subtitles.

Jihadists don’t need a reason to kill anyone. Their revenge and retaliation claims are a psychological game to make us feel as if we are responsible for their violence against us.

After a mass shooting at a mosque in New Zealand, some people worried that revenge attacks would follow. And indeed, the Sri Lanka bombings of churches seemed to follow that pattern. Soon the media was full of claims that ISIS had murdered hundreds of Christians as revenge for the New Zealand shootings.

COLOMBO, Sri Lanka — Sri Lanka’s defense minister said Tuesday that the coordinated Easter Sunday attacks that killed at least 321 people were in retaliation for the recent Christchurch mosque massacre in New Zealand.

“Extremist group named National Thowheed Jamaath carried out Sunday’s terror attacks in response to terror attacks in Christchurch,” Defense Minister Ruwan Wijewardene said.

Like everything coming out of the Sri Lankan government, this should have been taken with a grain of salt. It’s not just the Jihadists who want to shift responsibility for the violence on to us. The Sri Lankan government ignored warnings about the attack. It’s convenient for them to shift the blame. Reports from ISIS and the terrorists have been mixed. But now the Caliph of ISIS has released a video.

“And as for your brothers in Sri Lanka,” he is heard saying while footage of the attackers and attacks rolls, “they have put joy in the hearts of the monotheists with their immersing operations that struck the homes of the Crusaders on their Easter, in vengeance for their brothers in Baghuz.”

This appeal to Baghuz (also spelled Baghouz), the last vestige of ISIS’ caliphate in Syria, reclaimed by coalition and Syria Democratic Forces in late March, is the most critical element of Baghdadi’s statements. The loss was a major blow to the so-called caliphate and a staple of some leaders’ narratives of the group’s “defeat.”

Why would ISIS care, let alone launch a major operation in Sri Lanka over mass shootings in New Zealand?

That never made any sense.

Baghdadi plausibly positions the attacks in relation to the defeat of ISIS in Baghuz.

ISIS badly needs credibility after its losses and the Sri Lanka bombings provided them. The media however has less interest in reporting this statement by Baghdadi because it finds the New Zealand meme far more politically useful for its purposes.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column with video is republished with permission.

Yemeni Man gets Prison Time for Extortion Plot Involving a Child Bride

This story has been in my queue for a couple of weeks and am finally getting to it.

What is so galling about the news is that our law enforcement has spent time and (our) money to investigate a crime and now incarcerate a man for something that has nothing to do with us.

We apparently ‘welcomed’ a Yemeni family to live in the Buffalo, NY area who brought all of their cultural/religious baggage to America (and even went ‘home’ for awhile) and we get to straighten out the mess the ‘new Americans’ created.

By the way, Yemen is one of the countries now on Trump’s so-called Muslim ban list!

I first saw this short press announcement at the U.S. Justice Department website and then looked for more news.

BUFFALO, N.Y. – U.S. Attorney James P. Kennedy, Jr. announced today that Yousef Goba, 45, of Yemen, who was convicted of making extortionate threats to harm and kidnap a minor, was sentenced to serve 41 months in prison by U.S. District Judge Lawrence J. Vilardo.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy C. Lynch, who handled the case, stated that between February 2015 and April 2015, Goba contacted an individual who resided in Western New York (the victim) through both telephone and text messages. During those communications, Goba threatened to kidnap and injure the victim’s minor child. The minor child went to Yemen with her mother in September 2013. While in Yemen, the minor child, her mother, and siblings lived with Goba for a period of time. When the mother wanted to move from Goba’s residence, the defendant refused to let the minor child leave and threatened that he would have the minor child marry a Yemeni man, if money was not paid to him. On April 8, 2015, during a call recorded by the FBI, Goba demanded that the victim pay him $11,000 as well as money for other expenses for the release of the minor child.

I checked around and found this story from Buffalo News that includes additional information….

….including the fact that Goba is the brother of a Yemeni man convicted on terrorism charges right after 9/11.

Child extortion plot stretching from Lackawanna to Yemen sends man to prison

The girl’s mother, who has since divorced her husband and remarried, took the children to Yemen in September 2013 to live temporarily so the father could save money while working here. [And, we are expected to believe that?—ed]

The following summer, after spending time with the father’s family in Yemen, the mother and children moved in with Goba. When they tried to leave, the defendant allowed the mother and other children to depart, but not the girl, the prosecution maintains. [So this woman moves in with a man not her relative, but the brother of a convicted Islamic terrorist?—ed]

The government also claims Goba threatened to marry off the girl to a Yemeni national willing to pay for her, and that Goba sent the father a photo of the girl pointing to a wedding cake and a second picture of her with a ring on her finger.

In pleading to extortion, Goba said he was just trying to get the father to reimburse him for the money he spent providing for the family while they lived with him in Yemen. He was arrested in New York City in 2015 as he returned to the United States.

Goba is the brother of Lackawanna Six member Yahya Goba, but sources said there appears to be no connection between Goba’s case and his brother’s involvement with the Lackawanna Six.

More here.

Again, why not just leave Yemenis in Yemen?

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Massachusetts Doctor Charged with Paying Teen for Sex

ICE Cracking Down on “Fake Families”

Minnesota: Mohamed Noor Found Guilty in Death of Australian Woman

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission.

VIDEO: It All Depends on How You Interpret Islam – NOT!

Some people think that the answer to a reformed Islam is as simple as interpretation. Good luck

EDITORS NOTE: This Political Islam video is republished with permission.

Transgenderism as a Tool of Humiliation

Matthew Hanley: Transgender activists are unafraid to make menacing displays of power, to which appeals to basic reason count for nothing.


What if I were to tell you that defining gender by objective reference to genetics, anatomy, and genitalia “has no basis in science”? Would you consider that persuasive – or unhinged?

That, alas, is the viewpoint expressed in the journal Nature, long reputed to be an authoritative scientific publication. They now banish the classification of male and female as “a terrible idea that should be killed off” since it threatens to “undo decades of progress” in reclassifying sex and gender as a “social construct.” You might think Nature would be concerned about cultivating a credibility problem. But what do they have to worry about when colossal lies are the order of the day?

Regarding the “mismatch between gender and the sex on a person’s birth certificate,” Nature applauds the American Academy of Pediatrics for advising physicians to “treat people according to their preferred gender, regardless of appearance or genetics.” Pediatricians doubling as transgender apologists: this surely is the mark of a culture that has made peace with its disdain for children, science, and human nature.

Meanwhile, the American Psychological Association (APA) has issued guidelines warning about the dangers of espousing “traditional masculinity.” But if we are to take the APA at its word, why on earth should medical authorities encourage a female to become a male?  It seems the reigning approach is that troubled females should be entitled to undergo reassignment surgery – an act of mutilation – in order to acquire an unconvincing external appearance, but should also, thenceforth, be encouraged to disdain all the “harmful” traits associated with masculinity.

A related inconsistency is also routinely ignored: if transitioning from one sexual identity to another is so enthusiastically embraced as a good to be facilitated because of our enlightened appreciation of gender “fluidity,” why are there legal obstacles to legitimate approaches to help people transition away from homosexuality?

Though still quite rare, there has been a spike in the incidence of transgender identification in recent years – sometimes in bunches and rather out of the blue.  Going transgender does not necessarily invite derision but, believe it or not, is sometimes pursued as a way to boost popularity among one’s peers. To point that out is not to dismiss the genuine distress some adolescents acutely feel, but largely overcome with the passage of time.

Common sense suggests the transgender surge has been prompted by the Zeitgeist, against which the medical profession, in particular, should be on guard. Yet they have become complicit in its emergence.

We tell ourselves this is a free country.  No one is “forcing” them to peddle the falsehood that a man can become a woman, or vice versa. But just because this is not Mao’s China does not mean that a form of its Cultural Revolution has not made its way here.

So says Anastasia Lin, who left China at age 13 and now resides in Canada.  Writing recently in the Wall Street Journal, she pinpoints the ultimate objective of our politically correct mobs:

The goal is not to persuade or debate; it is to humiliate the target and intimidate everyone else. The ultimate objective is to destroy independent thought.

One can only hope that the extremism exploding all around us may help more people perceive that the target in this case, as with the sexual revolution more broadly, is Christianity itself, along with its social and moral order.  By definition, this means that man himself is in the crosshairs, a point to which many who have adopted the post-Christian quasi-religion of “humanitarianism” are apparently oblivious.

Lin describes how her parent’s generation in China “learned to keep their heads down and to watch what they said, even to their closest friends, for fear of being accused of thought crimes,” in order to lament what is taking hold here as well. Too many of us in any number of professions know how true those words ring.

Coercion in one form or another is mandatory anytime a lie is purveyed to the masses. Examples of this are multiplying before our eyes. A professor at Arizona State University contends, in the American Journal of Bioethics, that parents should not be permitted to prevent their children from acquiring puberty-blocking treatment.

In the inverted thinking so typical of our time, it is the withholding of this “treatment” that constitutes child abuse, rather than the abetting of delusions and the sanctioning of aggressive measures that are often harmful, and in a real sense experimental, since evidence justifying their use is utterly lacking.

For now, that remains a proposal in our country. But the Supreme Court of British Colombia decreed last month that the father of a fourteen-year-old girl may not thwart her quixotic attempt to transition into a boy. She is entitled to puberty blockers that are hers by unnatural right.  Furthermore, the father was put on notice that he also better watch his mouth: calling his own daughter a girl or using female pronouns when referring to her would be considered “family violence,” the truth now being a punishable offense.

And as the night follows the day, he has since been declared “guilty” of that “crime.”

In light of this menacing display of power, basic appeals to reason count for nothing. This is ultimately a matter of competing wills. But taking a strong stance against irrational gender tyrants can work, as Muslims in the UK proved by getting the LGBT-oriented curriculum pulled from their kids’ schools.

That the militant LGBT crowd, having pushed over everyone else, backed down in this context suggests that they are driven primarily by the desire to dismantle Christian sensibility rather than an unwavering belief in gender ideology. Note here the winner in this battle of wills.

If only faith and the art of persuasion were in vogue, more might see that abandoning Christianity and our inbuilt human nature does no favor to man; doing so tends toward ruin, as all too many discover after wading into the transgender abyss.

COLUMN BY

Matthew Hanley

Matthew Hanley is senior fellow with the National Catholic Bioethics Center. With Jokin de Irala, M.D., he is the author of Affirming Love, Avoiding AIDS: What Africa Can Teach the West, which recently won a best-book award from the Catholic Press Association. The opinions expressed here are Mr. Hanley’s and not those of the NCBC.

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.

Trump Set to Declare Muslim Brotherhood to be a Terror Organization

Al-Jazeera has reported that U.S. President Donald Trump has asked his agency heads to make preparations for declaring the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood to be a terrorist organization.  This news comes in the wake of Egyptian President al-Sisi’s recent visit to Washington.  Al-Jazeera is also reporting that this request by Trump has raised a firestorm within the Trump administration, with NSC head Bolton and Sec. State Pompeo supporting the move, but nearly everyone else–including the CIA against it.

While this move by Trump, in my view, is way too little, way too late, it is also disturbing for other reasons.  First off, is the probability that it will be limited to declaring only the Egyptian branch of the MB to be a terrorist organization, while giving the rest of this international organization a free pass–including its front entities here in the United States that are doing so much to curtail free speech while all the time imposing creeping shari’a.

I also find it most disturbing that anyone in the Trump administration, CIA, or Department of Defense would be opposed to the idea of declaring the entire Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, much less be opposed to restricting that designation to just the Egyptian branch (as some of them still are).  This illustrates the need for all of these people to be given some sort of briefing, seminar, or short course on the MB–including a required reading of their manifesto for North America.

Equally disturbing was that Trump did not seem to be able to come up with the idea of declaring even the Egyptian MB a terrorist organization until the Egyptian president briefed him on it.  That tells me that none of Trump’s advisors, including the head honchos at the CIA, thought it worth while to brief the president about the MB.  This reminds me of an incident early in the Trump presidency when he was on the verge of declaring the MB to be a terrorist organization, based on advice from Ted Cruz and other conservatives up on the hill.  But then the king of Jordan came to visit and told him not to do it, because Jordan has 15 MB members sitting in its parliament, and this would make things very difficult for the king.

Trump may well have been getting pressured from other sources as well as the king of Jordan, such as then head of the National Security Council H.R. McMasters, a suspected MB sympathizer and other elements of the administration.

The argument in favor of giving the MB a pass due to its membership in the Jordanian parliament, and that doing so would disrupt U.S. relations with Jordan, was incredibly flimsy and ill-informed.  Four other Arab countries (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE) have all declared the MB to be a terrorist organization, yet all four have continued to maintain solid relations with Jordan and king Abdalla.  Israel and Russia have also declared the MB to be a terrorist organization, and yet they too maintain relations with Jordan.

And now we see the same argument being presented here as Trump is once again considering the idea of declaring the MB to be a terrorist organization.  Only now, it is not only Jordan that has MB members in its parliament, but Tunisia also.  And, this, dear folks, is why Trump felt compelled to scale down his request to declaring only the Egyptian chapter of the MB to be a terrorist organization.  Far too many “experts” in the pentagon, and the intelligence apparatus, are ignorant of what the MB is and what its goals are.  They are also ignorant of the multiple tentacles that the Jihad utilizes.

Just because a MB chapter in say, Tunisia, has publicly eschewed the use of violence to achieve their aims does not mean that the MB international as a whole has eschewed the idea of replacing the U.S. Constitution with shari’a law–including that so-called peaceful MB franchise in Tunisia.

Case in point:  The Egyptian branch of the MB vowed to give up violence when most of them were in prison and incapable of doing anything violent.  This taqiyya innocence helped pave the way for Egyptian Anwar as-Sadat to let the MB out of prison.  They then repaid his act of kindness by spinning off a militant group to assassinate him.   The MB itself has continued to form its own “military wings” where youths are trained in hand-to-hand combat, and the use of other forms of violence.  These actions have taken place on the grounds of the supposedly moderate al-Azhar university (according to Egyptian sources).

This so very peaceful branch of the MB hasn’t hesitated to use violence when other means have failed to attain their goals and/or whenever it appears to them that the use of violence will succeed.

In the meantime, thousands of those “peace-loving” MB members had fled Nasser’s crack down, and ended up teaching in Saudi schools and colleges.  One of the products of this MB educational influence was one Usama bin Laden, a true lover of non-violence he.

All MB groups, and their affiliates and front entities across the globe ascribe to the same founding motto have the same goal in mind, and this is to replace existing non-Islamic governing systems with Shari’a law.  All methods to achieve that goal are on the table:  Violence, emigration, settlement, propaganda, infiltration of political, legal, military, and intelligence organs of the host nation, and up to and including violence whenever possible.  All of these techniques and methods are considered to be a part of the overall jihad, a part of “religious warfare.”

One only has to read their founding motto to understand how they feel about conducting violent jihad when they can get away with it:  “Jihad (religious warfare) is our way, and death on behalf of Allah is the loftiest of our wishes.”

If that is not enough, then these “experts” in our decision-making bodies should look at the Brotherhood’s emblem which features the word w-a’adou underneath two crossed swords.  The word w-a’adou means “and, prepare . . .” and it is the first word of verse 60 in the 8th sura (chapter) of the Qur’an, a verse that goes on to promote the idea of “preparing whatever weapons one can get a hold of so you can terrorize Allah’s enemies and your enemies, and others whom you do not know, but Allah knoweth them.”

What this means for America, is that the MB front entities like CAIR, ISNA, and MSA can continue to harass, demonize, and shut down truth tellers, so that their civilizational jihad may proceed a pace without any interruptions.

The only way to stop this creeping jihad in our own backyard (“aimed at eliminating and uprooting our civil society, civilization, and constitution, and replace it with shari’a”) is to declare the entire international MB to be a terrorist organization.  Then, and only then, can we roll up the MB’s front entities here in the U.S.  Anything less than that is criminal and tantamount to treason.  Because, unless we take this step, we are cooperating with and aiding and abetting a declared enemy who wants to destroy our way of life and replace it with sanctified Jew-hate, wife beating, FGM, child brides and the like.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Should the Muslim Brotherhood Be Labeled Terrorists?

Turkey’s Islamic Tyranny Warns Trump Not To Ban Muslim Brotherhood

Tunisia: “Islamic sharia law” invoked to shut down LGBTQ rights

CLICK HERE: To read other columns about the Muslim Brotherhood

PODCAST: Why Are Democrats Abandoning Religion?

Gallup recently released an interesting report discussing the erosion of attendance and membership in organized religion. They claim membership in churches, synagogues, and mosques has reached a new low, 50%. From 1938 to 1999, membership averaged 70%, but since then it has steadily declined to its current level. This helps explain why so many institutions are suffering financially and being forced to make dramatic changes, such as selling their building, terminating leaders and staff, mergers and consolidations, etc. Interestingly, the same can be said for other nonprofits, such as fraternal, civic, trade groups, and amateur sports institutions. Most, if not all, are experiencing a decline.

The downsizing of membership in organized religion is interesting as there are political ramifications in play. According to the Gallup report, Republicans show a modest decline in terms of membership, dropping from 77% to 69%. However, Democrats showed a more dramatic decline, going from 71% to 48%.

Why the significant drop in membership? Some people theorize religion has become synonymous with the Republican party and, as such, do not want to be associated with such values. I believe it goes well beyond this though. As the Democrats have become more radically liberal, thereby embracing Socialism, there is a natural inclination to avoid religion and abandon God. This explains why moderate Democrats are leaving the party and are either voting independently or switching over to the Republican party as they do not want to see their religion ridiculed by the far Left. Let us not forget, there have been efforts in the last few Democrat conventions to eliminate “God” from the wording of the party platform.

In particular, Christianity has been in the cross-hairs of radical Democrats for a long time, and still is to this day. To illustrate, the San Antonio City Council, controlled by Democrats, recently banned the popular Chick-fil-A restaurant from opening a new store in the city’s airport. Although the company was originally included in the plans, they were forced out apparently for their charitable donations to Christian groups who allegedly are anti-LGBTQ. According to a USA Today report, San Antonio Councilman Manny Pelaez (D) even went so far as to “lambaste, denigrate, and openly mock the otherwise upstanding corporate citizen of Chick-fil-A.” Further, “He described Chick-fil-A as a ‘symbol of hate’ because it has donated to religious charities that he considered to oppose LGBTQ rights.” All of this has resulted in a request for an investigation into the City Council’s decision based on religious discrimination.

As another instance, former President Barack Obama and Sec. Hillary Clinton, recently commented on the bomb attacks in Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday, by referring to the victims as “Easter worshippers” and not “Christians.” The snub was subtle, but significant in that it reflects the attitude by the Democrats to disrespect Christianity.

In a related story, it was recently announced the New York Yankees and Philadelphia Flyers will no longer play Kate Smith’s rendition of the Irving Berlin classic, “God Bless America,” a time-honored patriotic song, claiming Smith was a racist. Please remember Kate Smith was the woman President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (a Democrat) introduced to Winston Churchill years ago as “Mrs. America.” Smith was also the recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom for her singing during World War II. In other words, something smells fishy here; is it the singer or the song on trial here? I suspect the latter.

It is perfectly obvious the Democrats are rebelling against the 4-C’s of Republicanism:

  1. Christianity – Not only are they abandoning church, they are working to subvert it because of the moral values involved. The truth is, they are jealous of Christians in terms of what they have accomplished through their work ethic and benevolence.
  2. Capitalism – They are trying to replace it with Socialism in order to expand government control and create dependencies (aka, “Master/Slave” relationship). Democrats have abandoned the concept of “earning a living,” preferring entitlements instead.
  3. Constitution – They have made numerous attempts to undermine our governing document as it is perceived as an antiquated encumbrance against the Democrat agenda. This is why they wish to eliminate the Electoral College, change the makeup of the Supreme Court, implement gun control, and other changes to our Bill of Rights.
  4. Conservative values – These are values developed over the country’s history and includes such things as love of country (patriotism), citizenship, reverence for family, belief in deity, being a good neighbor, lending a helping hand, etc. Instead, the Democrats have developed a set of moral values diametrically opposed to conservatives in an attempt to redefine history, government, freedoms and rights. According to Gallop polls in 2017 and 2018, liberal positions have led to a sharp decline in morality in the country as we know it today. This is greatly assisted by the entertainment and news media who no longer feel restrained from promoting liberal values and demeaning those of conservatives.

So, in terms of organized religion, the Democrats are rapidly becoming the anti-God party as it doesn’t fit in with their political agenda. Whereas the United States used to be considered one of the most religious countries in the world, it’s ranking has slipped due to the departure of the Democrats. Again, this will likely cause our sense of morality to continue to stumble and fall.

The refutation of the 4-C’s represents a rejection of the traditional values of the country. It ultimately represents a radical re-definition and implementation of America, one where liberty is steadfastly controlled by government. Yes, it is all about “control.”

Keep the Faith!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Antisemites Target Jews Because They Hate Freedom

Lies Are Fueling the Rise of Anti-Semitism

EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce is Right podcast and column is republished with permission. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

Islamist Terrorism Remains the World’s Greatest Threat to Peace

After the horrific mass murder of 50 Muslim worshippers in Christchurch, New Zealand, there was widespread coverage and a torrent of mainstream news networks contemplating the threat of white supremacy.

These conversations, completely reasonable and necessary in the face of violent attacks from a racist gunman, soon began deteriorating into politically motivated and specious claims contending that “white supremacy” had become the predominate terror threat in the world.

Well, the coordinated bomb blasts aimed at Christian worshippers on Easter Sunday, which killed at least 290 people and injured hundreds more, demonstrates the kind of meticulous planning, funding, resources, and support that is still exclusively the domain of radical Islamic terrorism.

It’s not merely that the act was planned to maximize the death toll, but that it is a continuation of long-standing efforts by Islamists to destroy the Christian communities left in Asia.

Those who kill in the name of Islam are part of a worldwide, historic, ideological, and political movement that includes, to various degrees and various reasons, radicalized men and women from both great factions of the faith.

Then again, terrorist groups—as well as their recruitment and propaganda outfits—are often functioning in Islamic regimes, which either actively sustain terror, tolerate these groups, or pay them off to engage in terrorism elsewhere.

The Christians who remain in the Islamic world are often oppressed in other ways. In a number of these nations, publicly praying in any faith but Islam is forbidden and, in many, converting to Christianity is still punishable by death.

“Islamic extremism remains the global, dominant driver of persecution, responsible for initiating oppression and conflict in 35 of the 50 countries on the list,” according to Open Doors, a worldwide Christian group.

The idea that a similar threat exists in the West is risible. There’s not a single Western country that doesn’t afford Muslim citizens the same rights it does as all other citizens. No government on Earth supports white supremacy.

There is no funding infrastructure for those who support white power. There is no Christian or Jewish denomination, or any notable political factions, in those nations that imbue white supremacy with any theological or ideological legitimacy. There is no white supremacist government trying to obtain nuclear weapons, and none sending its terrorists to other countries. In the world’s free nations, where any political party can participate in the process, the power of racist groups is minimal.

Yet the American left continues to downplay the danger, first by arguing that Islam has nothing to do with Islamic terrorism, and then by lumping every white-skinned person who commits a terrorist act into one imaginary coherent political movement to contrast against it.

It’s true that Americans have been spared much Islamic terror since 2002—a year that, curiously, nearly every graph media uses to measure domestic terrorism starts—but only because we’ve spent billions of dollars each year and immense resources, both in lives and treasure, keeping it out of the country and fighting it abroad.

Another reason the majority of Americans might not comprehend Islamic radicalism’s reach is the skewed intensity of the media coverage. Political correctness and a chilling fear of being labeled “Islamophobic” makes it difficult to honestly report on terrorism around the world.

In addition to the massacre this Easter in Sri Lanka, at least 200 Christian civilians have been murdered in Africa by Islamic militants thus far in 2019—many of them killed by machete, some by bombings. Many more Christians have been murdered during the past calendar year.

In November 2018, for example, 42 people were slaughtered in an attack on a Catholic mission in the Central African Republic. In October, 55 Christians were murdered by a group of Islamists in Nigeria. Another 29 were killed when 10 churches were burned down in Ethiopia last summer. Another seven Coptic Christians were gunned down in Egypt—and others spared only because of the good work of police.

There are pockets of racists in the world, and individuals who engage in terrible acts of violence against innocent people. These are dangerous men, capable of doing tremendous damage. But no group threatens global peace the same way that political Islam does. None has its reach or material and theological support. None has created more mayhem and death in the world since the end of the Cold War. The Sri Lankan massacre is just another harrowing reminder.

COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM

COMMENTARY BY

David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist and the author of “First Freedom: A Ride through America’s Enduring History With the Gun, From the Revolution to Today.” Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLE: Should the Muslim Brotherhood Be Labeled Terrorists?


Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY


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