U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs’ Shakeba Morrad Mocks Families of Hostages

How is this America? How is this person in the U.S Department of Veteran Affairs?

Shakeba Morrad of the U.S Department of Veteran Affairs shockingly mocks the pleas of Jews and Israelis for the release of hostages by Hamas.

About Shekeba Morrad

Overview

Shekeba Morrad is an attorney with the United States federal government who mocked people pleading for Israeli civilians kidnapped by Hamas terrorists to be returned. She posted an Instagram video in November 2023 where she put on an accent and mocked calls for the return of hundreds of hostages, but she deleted the video that same month.

The federal government subsequently opened an investigation into the incident amidst calls from several U.S. senators for Morrad’s immediate removal from her job in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). At the time of her video, she was an appellate attorney in VA at the Office of General Counsel.

Hamas kidnapped the civilians, including women and children, during a series of terror attacks and war crimes that left over 1,200 Israelis dead, hundreds kidnapped and thousands wounded. Hamas executed the terror attacks on October 7, 2023.

The other Hamas war crimes included mass murder, torture, rape and beheadings. Israel retaliated with a war called “Swords of Iron.”

Hamas has been designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S., Canada, European Union, Israel and other countries. Founded in 1987, it has killed thousands of Israeli civilians through mass shootings and suicide bombings. Hamas has also kidnapped children, families and the elderly and held them hostage in Gaza. It has desecrated [slide 2] dead bodies and launched numerous rocket attacks against Israeli civilians.

Mocking People Pleading for the Return of Kidnapped Israelis

On November 12, 2023, Morrad appeared in a video of herself from Instagram mocking calls for the return of Israeli citizens who were kidnapped by Hamas and being held hostage in Gaza.

Morrad put on an accent and said [00:00:01]: “We just want our hostages back! Give us our 200 hostages!”

Morrad later deleted the video and privated her Instagram account.

On November 28, 2023, VA reportedly opened an investigation into the incident.

On the same day, VA released a statement that said: “We are aware of this incident, are investigating the matter, and will take any appropriate action.” The statement also said: “There is no place at VA for anti-Semitism or any expression of bigotry or hatred.”

Biographical Information

As of November 2023, Morrad was listed on the website RocketReach as having received a JD from Syracuse University (SU) College of Law in 2013. The website also said that she graduated from the University of Virginia (UVA) with a bachelor’s degree in foreign affairs. Her location was listed as Washington, D.C.

Arizona Supreme Court Revives Law Protecting the Unborn

On Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court put back in place a 160-year-old ban on abortion, The Wall Street Journal reported. “Abortion in the state has been allowed through 15 weeks of pregnancy under a law that the GOP-controlled Arizona Legislature passed in 2022, shortly before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Abortion opponents and some Republican lawmakers argued that the recent law didn’t override one dating back to 1864 — before Arizona was a state — that banned abortion throughout pregnancy except in lifesaving situations.”

The ruling “agreed that the 19th century law still takes precedence,” WSJ added, but the “court delayed implementation of the ban for at least two weeks to allow for additional legal arguments.” In comments to The Washington Stand, Cathi Herrod, president of the Center for Arizona Policy, clarified, “The focus for [this decision] is that the Arizona Supreme Court did what justices are supposed to do: they upheld the rule of law. They did not make policy.”

She continued, “Arizona law clearly stated that if Roe v. Wade was overturned, our pre-Roe law would go back into effect. So, today’s decision was a statutory construction. It was not a constitutional one, and it was not a policy decision. There’s a lot of misinformation out there, so it’s very important to emphasize that this … is how we want judges to rule.”

Herrod went on to share how a proposed amendment called the Arizona Right to Abortion Initiative could nullify the court decision. “That amendment does not reflect Arizona values or where Arizonans are on the issue of abortion,” she contended. The amendment would “bring in unrestricted and unregulated abortion,” she emphasized. “It would overturn most — if not all — of Arizona’s pro-life laws. It would not require doctors to be part of the woman’s decision, examination, or the procedure itself. Moms and dads would have no role in the abortion of their minor daughters deciding whether or not to have an abortion. It would usher in taxpayer funding of abortion.”

But given the dramatic effects of such a potential amendment, Herrod predicted, “When Arizonans read and see what the proposed abortion access amendment really is about, I’m confident Arizona voters will turn it down.”

In light of the decision by the Arizona Supreme Court, Mary Szoch, director of the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council, shared with TWS, “In a huge win for women and their unborn children, the Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that the law on the books protecting unborn babies from the moment of conception will go into effect. Praise God!”

She added, “Acknowledging what an abortion is, the Arizona law states that an abortionist who kills an unborn child can be punished with two to five years in prison. In recognition of the fact that the intent of an abortion is to kill the child, not to save the mother, actions taken to save a mother’s life that sadly result in the death of the unborn child will not be punishable.”

Szoch concluded, “This ruling is on hold for 14 days, but we should all pray it goes into effect. With this decision, the importance of the upcoming election cannot be overstated. Unborn babies lives will be on the ballot. Pro-lifers must turn out to vote.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

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


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

Experts: Biden Administration’s Foreign Policy Is Naïve

President Joe Biden’s rapidly shifting Israel policy is taking criticism from foreign policy experts who believe the administration is fundamentally or deliberately misunderstanding the true nature of the situation. “The Biden administration either is not connecting the dots or frankly, they don’t care, which is actually more troubling,” suggested Family Research Council President Tony Perkins.

“The Biden administration fundamentally doesn’t understand the Israeli people,” Center for Security Policy senior fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs Caroline Glick lamented on “Washington Watch” Monday. “They think they can snap their fingers, and Israel will just salute them and do whatever they tell us. But the Israeli people — particularly since October 7th — understand the implications of the enemy’s calls to annihilate the Jewish people.”

“The Biden administration doesn’t understand the seriousness of purpose, not only of Israel, but of our enemies — of Iran, of Hezbollah, of Hamas, etc.,” Glick continued. “They think that they can just again snap their fingers and say, ‘It’s over,’ and we’re going to get it to a ceasefire. And it never happens that way.”

If Jews aren’t safe in Israel, “Where do they go from here?” Perkins asked. He related an anecdote to demonstrate that “people go to Israel as kind of the last place of protection and safety for the Jewish people.” During a recent trip to Israel, he visited “one of the kibbutz that had been attacked just north of the Gaza border,” where residents told him they had emigrated from Europe “because of the rising anti-Semitism.” The perception that Israel is a safe place for Jews “was shattered on October 7th,” he explained, and “that’s the realization that really encompasses Israelis in Israel right now, that the rest of the world — at least here in America — doesn’t fully understand.”

Glick agreed that even “the Jews in the diaspora in the United States and Europe and in other countries are beginning to realize that” same fact. “The scale of the massacre and the savagery of what was done to Israel by Hamas … on October 7th has empowered and inspired anti-Semites of all kinds in the United States to openly attack Jews on the streets … in a way that nobody had experienced until now,” she said. “The idea that Jews can be safe anywhere if they’re not secure in Israel has just been shattered. It’s very clear that the security of all Jews everywhere is contingent on Israel defeating our enemies in Israel.”

Yet the Biden administration seems slow to recognize this, she complained. “There is a lot of ideological rigidity in the administration that’s very hostile to Israel and willing to accommodate Hamas,” said Glick. Based on their actions, “it’s almost impossible to not reach that conclusion.”

“The Biden administration is falling into the U.N. rhetoric right now of ‘Israel is always the problem,’” Senator James Lankford (R-Okla.) pointed out during Monday’s “Washington Watch.” “If you go to the U.N., Israel is always the problem.”

But Lankford disagreed with that assumption. “The problem is Iran in the Middle East. They are the destabilizing force,” he said. “They’re funding the Houthis, Hamas, and Hezbollah. It’s amazing to me,” he added, “that President Biden is chastising Israel right now for trying to defend themselves from the attacks that come from Gaza, but I hear absolute crickets about Hezbollah and their march to the south right now, and their militarization of that zone that’s supposed to be demilitarized.”

“The problem [is] the Qataris right now, that they’re not using the leverage that they really have” as one of Hamas’s chief financial backers, Lankford continued. “The pressure really needs to be placed on the people that could actually end this war. Rather than demanding Israel has a ceasefire, let’s demand [that] Hamas has a ceasefire, the Houthis [have] a ceasefire, Hezbollah has a ceasefire, [and that] Qatar uses its real leverage that it has to be able to get those hostages out.”

Glick criticized the Biden administration for believing that, “if they can just blame Israel for everything, then Iran will be happy and appeased and they’ll stop bothering America, at least until after the elections in November.” She skewered them for thinking that, “if they just say that there’s going to be a ceasefire, humiliate the government of Israel, [and] try to overthrow the government of Israel by sowing domestic subversion … that all the problem is going to go away.”

“That, of course, is not how things work,” Glick declared. “Nothing happens that way. Nothing.”

“There are people in that region that intensely hate our freedom, that intensely hate us as Americans,” Lankford noted. Radical Islamist extremists often repeat that “America is the Great Satan, and Israel is the Little Satan,” he said. “They’re really trying to be able to come after us and will do that [with] every opportunity.”

“Jews aren’t responsible for what happened,” protested Glick. “We’re not responsible for the hatred of others. We can only do our best to defend ourselves from that hatred. And that’s what we’re doing in this war.”

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Israel Withdraws Forces to Prepare Rafah Offensive

Several Michigan Democrats Fail To Condemn ‘Death To America’ Chants

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


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

America’s ship of state is underwater and sinking faster each and every day!

The RMS Titanic was a British passenger and mail carrying ocean liner, operated by the White Star Line, that sank in the North Atlantic Ocean on 15 April 1912 as a result of striking an iceberg during her maiden voyage from Southampton, England, to New York City, United States. The captain of the RMS Titanic was Edward J. Smith a man with 32-years of experience.

Fast forward 109 years later to January 20th, 2021 and the inauguration of Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. who was put in charge, some say illegally, of our ship of state. Biden has put together a crew with the sole purpose to sink the USS America, as did the RMS Titanic.

The Titanic’s demise was due to a collision with an iceberg that caused the ocean liner to sink on April 14–15, 1912. The cause of the sinking of the USS America is a collision with the U.S. Constition with Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. at the helm, and his crew, who are determined to destroy our Constutional Republic beginning on January 20, 2021 till November 5th, 2024.

America’s Ship of State is Sinking Fast

It took the RMS Titanic two days to sink and because of the ship’s faulty design 1,496 passengers died.

Today, the USS America under the Biden Regime’s faulty designs are bent on killing that many each and every month, be it via chemical or actual abortions, murders in our streets and the mayhem on our borders by criminal illegal aliens.

But it gets much much worse.

Our economy is in the tank. Our national debt is the highest in history, our culture and society are under constant attack by the Red/Green/Rainbow Alliance. BTW, there are two shades of Green in the Alliance, the green of the radical Islamists like Hamas, Hezb’allah, the Houthis, Iran et. al. and those Climate Nazis bent on the total control of our oil and CO2.

The great ship of state is using up its oil reserves at a rapid pace as the Climate Nazis demand we close down all coal, oil and natural gas use. The ship of state can’t run on electricity produced by solar panels. The ship of state will soon be crashing into offshore windmills.

The government of we the people, by the people and for the people is rapidly being replaced.

It is being replace by the USS Big Government. Today big government is the opiate of Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., and his crew.

Today there are chants in places like Dearborn, Michigan of “death to America.” while Governor Whitman and Rep. Ilan Omar yawn.

But what about the Republicans in the U.S. Congress? Won’t they save us under Speaker Mike Johnson?

Apparently not.

Watch this video that explains what has radically changed Mike Johnson to understand.

In a letter to his father during the great Civil War, Ulysses S. Grant wrote, “Whatever may have been my political opinions before, I have but one sentiment now: that is, we have a government, and laws, and a flag, and they must all be sustained. There are but two parties now: traitors and patriots. And I want hereafter to be ranked with the latter.”

History is repeating itself.

The USS America today is being piloted by traitors bent on sinking it.

The Bottom Line

We must go back to save our future.

We are in a civil war. The traitors started it. We the people must finish it.

We the people need a wartime President and his name is Trump.

©2024. . All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden Reportedly Poised To Finalize Another Major Crackdown On Alaskan Oil

Biden Reportedly Has No Plans To Address Inflation With Policy Changes Before Election

ROOKE: Secret Tapes Reveal The Fed Throws Americans Under The Bus To Serve Biden

‘That’s Not True’: Former Obama Official’s Attempt To Blame Businesses For Inflation Swatted Down

LONDOÑO: Biden’s Student Loan Cancellation Policies Are More Likely To Harm Than Help

Israel Remains Steadfast in Goal of Defeating Hamas despite Pushback, Say Experts

After six months of near-continuous battle in the Gaza Strip, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) announced on Sunday that they were withdrawing the 98th Division of troops from the Khan Younis area, with an IDF spokesperson saying that the move signals “another stage in the war effort.” As the Biden administration continues to call for an “immediate ceasefire” with 129 hostages still believed to be held by the Hamas terrorist group, experts and lawmakers say that Israel must be allowed to continue the fight in order to ensure the nation’s security.

“The war is not over,” said Lt. Col. Peter Lerner, an IDF spokesperson. “War can only be over when [the hostages] come home and when Hamas is gone.” The IDF went on to tell NBC News that the 98th Division had withdrawn in order to “recuperate and prepare for future operations.” The IDF’s Nahal Brigade still remains in central Gaza in order to “preserve the IDF’s freedom of action and its ability to conduct precise intelligence based operations.”

On Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that “he has decided on a date for Israel to enter Rafah” in southern Gaza, which is considered the last major stronghold of Hamas. In response, U.S. State Department spokesman Matthew Miller reiterated the Biden administration’s opposition to an invasion of Rafah, stating that Israel should use alternative methods of achieving its wartime goals.

Israel’s war against Hamas began last October 7, when Hamas terrorists massacred over 1,200 Israelis, mostly civilian men, women, and children. They also kidnapped 253 people, of which 105 have since been released. Israel has officially said that of the 129 hostages that remain in captivity by Hamas (including eight Americans), 34 are likely dead, with as many as 50 possibly deceased.

Disapproval of Israel’s war effort by the Biden administration has increased in recent days, with Secretary of State Antony Blinken appearing to compare Israel’s war effort with the terrorist tactics of Hamas during a press conference when he said, “If we lose that reverence for human life, we risk becoming indistinguishable from those we confront.” In addition, congressional Democrats have called for U.S. weapons aid for Israel to cease.

In response to the mounting criticism, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) declared on Sunday that “Washington must be united in our support for our great ally, Israel, as they fight for their sovereignty and right to exist.” He went on to emphasize that “it’s time to stop lecturing Israel on how it should best defend itself and begin equipping our friend with the resources necessary to eliminate the threat of Hamas, once and for all.”

Experts on the ground in Israel say much of the criticism is grounded in falsehoods. On Friday, Chris Mitchell, Middle East bureau chief for CBN News, joined “Washington Watch” from Jerusalem to give on how Israel is conducting the war effort.

“[A] lot of [Israelis] feel … there’s no comparison between them and the way Hamas has conducted this war,” he noted. “Israel has been doing … what they can to protect civilian lives, even though there tragically have been Palestinians killed in this war. And I would add that the inflated figure of 33,000 Palestinian [deaths] is inflated by Hamas for propaganda purposes. But to compare the way that Israel has conducted this war by trying to alert civilians to get out of harm’s way, by using leaflets, by sending text messages, by making phone calls to get out of a war zone … many military historians say [it is] unprecedented that the IDF actually telegraphs exactly what they’re going to do and actually puts IDF soldiers at risk. And I know I’ve talked to some Israelis here, and they know that their sons or daughters could be in harm’s way because of the way the IDF conducts its mission.”

Mitchell went on to describe how despite media reports of increased divisions within Israel, the nation remains largely united around the goal of defeating Hamas.

“The political climate here, I would say, is pretty steadfast in … rally[ing] around Prime Minister Netanyahu,” he observed. “[A] number of Israelis on the left side of the ledger may not agree with Prime Minister Netanyahu, but they certainly agree with the war goals that the War Cabinet has. … Benny Gantz, who’s one of the political opposition leaders, he called for a new elections just a couple of days ago. … I would say in the last few days that some of the divisiveness that was before October 7th has emerged a little bit, but I think there are other Israelis that are saying, ‘Listen, we’re in the middle of a war. We can’t afford elections, and we certainly don’t want to be undermined by other countries that want to come in and dictate what happens politically here.’”

Mitchell further underscored how determined the Jewish people are in defeating Hamas.

“I think a lot of Israelis and many Jews around the world think this is a time when Benjamin Netanyahu really has to make a decision for the state of Israel, for the Jewish people, whether or not they’re going to submit to sort of the dictates of the United States or actually have to go it alone. They do feel isolated right now and alone, but I think they also feel resolute in the sense that they believe that there’s no way that they can lose this war. There’s no way they can allow Hamas to remain a viable entity in the Gaza Strip.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: America, Support Israel and Choose Victory

POST ON X:

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


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

Pro-Life Leaders React to Trump’s Abortion Statement: ‘Rebuild America’s Spiritual Walls’

Pro-family leaders reacted to President Donald Trump’s announcement that abortion policy should be handled exclusively by the states by saying that “pro-life policies should be pursued at every level of government” to rebuild “the spiritual walls of our nation.” Although pro-life advocates expressed gratitude for the president’s role in overturning Roe v. Wade and restoring voters’ democratic control over the issue of abortion, they say his “work is not over” when it comes to protecting innocent life.

The 45th president delivered on a promise he made last week to present his position on abortion in a four-minute-long video posted on social media Monday morning. The president said abortion should be handled at the state level, endorsed exceptions for abortion in the cases of rape and incest, and strongly supported in vitro fertilization (IVF). “Democrats are the radical ones” on abortion, by endorsing abortion, for any reason, until the moment of birth, he said.

“The states will determine by vote or legislation — or perhaps both — and whatever they decide must be the law of the land,” said Trump. “Many states will be different, many will have a different number of weeks, or some will have more conservative [respect for life] than others.”

“I was proudly the person responsible for the ending” of Roe, he said. But the Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs decision “took [the issue of abortion] out of the federal hands and brought it into the hearts, minds, and vote of the people in each state,” he stated. “Now it’s up to the states to do the right thing.”

Trump thanked the six justices who voted for the Dobbs decision by name — Chief Justice John Roberts, as well as Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett — for allowing “this long-term, hard-fought battle to finally end.” Trump nominated three of those jurists to the nation’s highest court, including Justice Barrett, whom the Senate confirmed just seven days before the 2020 election.

But justices on both sides of the 2022 Dobbs ruling agreed the federal government can play a role in setting abortion policy. “On the question of abortion, the Constitution … leaves the issue for the people and their elected representatives to resolve through the democratic process in the [s]tates or Congress — like the numerous other difficult questions of American social and economic policy that the Constitution does not address,” wrote Justice Brett Kavanaugh in his concurrence to Dobbs.

In their dissent, liberal justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan agreed Dobbs gives voters absolute freedom of choice to set abortion policy nationwide. “Most threatening of all,” they wrote, “no language in today’s decision stops the [f]ederal [g]overnment from prohibiting abortions nationwide, once again from the moment of conception and without exceptions for rape or incest.”

After Trump’s statement, pro-life leaders urged the presumptive 2024 Republican presidential candidate to use the full authority his judicial policy successes had won to pass pro-life protections in his second term. “Former President Trump has played a vital role in bringing our nation to this pivotal point of being able to restore the fundamental right to life in America,” said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, in a statement released first to The Washington Stand. “I applaud President Trump for the work he has done, but that work is not over.”

“As voters continue to elect pro-life legislators at both the state and federal levels, pro-life policies should be pursued at every level of government until every child, born and unborn, is welcomed into this nation and protected under our laws, federal and state,” Perkins continued. “The effort to protect innocent life is crucial as we work toward a day when we will once again see the spiritual walls of our nation stand high and secure.”

President Trump on Monday continued to highlight that “Democrats are the radical ones on this [abortion] position, because they support abortion up to and even beyond the ninth month,” and “even execution after birth.” Trump likely referred to former Virginia Governor Ralph Northam (D), who declared in 2019, “I can tell you exactly what would happen” if a child is born alive during a botched abortion: “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.” Similarly, in 2013, Alisa LaPolt Snow, a lobbyist for the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, told the Florida legislature the decision about whether to save a baby born alive during a botched abortion “should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.” Philadelphia abortionist and mass murderer Kermit Gosnell made the infanticide of newborn premature babies his regular “abortion” procedure.

Perkins said defunding abortion and ending the federal government’s role in facilitating abortion would win Trump voters, as it already enjoys broad support. “The legal authority to protect this fundamental right to life has not only been restored to the states but also to policymakers at the federal level, where broad support exists to not force taxpayers to pay for abortion. The federal government should not be funding the facilitation of abortion in any form or fashion — at home or abroad,” said Perkins.

The Democratic Party platform calls for taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand for any reason a matter of “health, rights, and justice.” But polling data show the national consensus diverges sharply from prevailing liberal orthodoxy. As this author has noted:

  • 67% of Americans oppose funding abortion overseas, according to a 2024 KofC/Marist poll;
  • 66% say people with religious objections should not be legally required to carry out abortions;
  • 58% of the American people believe abortion should not be legal past the first trimester, except for rape or incest;
  • 61% of Americans oppose sending abortion-inducing pills through the mail;
  • 53% of Americans oppose funding abortion in the United States;
  • 55% said employers with religious objections should not be forced to pay for abortion coverage in their employees’ insurance in a 2023 Marist poll; and
  • 55% of all Americans support laws protecting a child from his or her first fetal heartbeat in a 2019 Hill-HarrisX survey.

Additionally, “a clear majority (59%) of voters say they would support Congressional legislation that would prohibit abortions after a baby can feel pain at fifteen weeks of pregnancy,” with exceptions for rape and incest, a poll from last June found. That majority would allow states “to pass even more protective laws.”

On the other hand, polls consistently show a minority supports the right to an abortion for any reason, at any time: just over one in four Americans (29%) in the most recent Marist poll. Only 9% of young people belonging to the Millennials and Gen Z “supported the Democratic Party’s radical agenda of abortion through all 9 months without limits,” according to a poll conducted for Students for Life of America.

Nonetheless, Democrats plan to nationalize the issue of abortion, endorsing a national abortion approval bill and taxpayer subsidies for abortionists. Biden has centered his reelection campaign around a promise to strike down pro-life protections nationwide. The legislation he endorses, the Women’s Health Protection Act, goes much further than the abortion regime foisted on America by Roe, Doe v. Bolton (1973), and Casey v. Planned Parenthood (1992) — erasing more than 1,300 laws passed while Roe, Doe, and Casey remained binding legal precedent.

“Saying the issue is ‘back to the states’ cedes the national debate to the Democrats who are working relentlessly to enact legislation mandating abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy. If successful, they will wipe out states’ rights,” warned Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser in a statement emailed to The Washington Stand. “Unborn children and their mothers deserve national protections,” she added, saying she was “disappointed in President Trump’s position.”

Jeanne Mancini, president of the March for Life, agreed the next president must use the power available to advance the right to life. “There remains an urgent need to advocate for the unborn at the federal level, which is one of the reasons we continue to march annually in our nation’s capital even after the Dobbs decision. Pro-abortion politicians relentlessly work to enact federal legislation like the deceptively titled Women’s Health Protection Act, which would cancel every states’ ability to limit abortion through all nine months of pregnancy, and erases existing pro-life protections for vulnerable women and children nationwide,” said Mancini in a statement emailed to TWS.

After rejecting Roe’s sweeping, top-down abortion policy, voluntarily adopting an anything-goes abortion policy would make the United States a global outlier, pro-life leaders noted. “The overwhelming majority of European nations reject such barbaric policies with minimum protections for children after the first trimester. We as a nation need to work toward federal minimum protections for the unborn, and advocate for policies that support pregnant women and families in need,” Mancini told TWS.

Trump’s video statement also generated controversy for endorsing exceptions for the one percent of abortions due to rape and incest, respectively. “I am strongly in favor of exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother” — a position he has long held, and which he has consistently noted polls well. “We have an obligation to the salvation of our Nation, which is currently in serious decline, to win elections, without which we will have nothing other than failure, death, and destruction,” Trump posted on Truth Social Sunday evening. (Emphasis in original.)

“There’s no ‘salvation of our Nation’ while we are permitting killing children,” replied Lila Rose, founder of Live Action. “This includes helpless children conceived in rape.” Ryan Bomberger, the founder of the Radiance Foundation, who was conceived in rape, asked whether “lives with origin stories like mine should die to Make America Great Again.”

“Unborn children and their mothers deserve national protections,” said Dannenfelser, saying she was “disappointed in President Trump’s position.”

Seeming to anticipate their reactions, President Trump said Monday, “You must follow your heart on this issue — but remember, you must also win elections to restore our culture” and “save our country,” which three years of Democratic rule has placed “at the brink.”

Perkins agreed with the president’s diagnosis that America teeters on the knife’s edge of catastrophe, which requires America to be rooted on a solid rock of abiding values. “To restore our nation to a place of political greatness, we must first restore our moral goodness, and foundational to that is the respect for and protection of all human life. After 50 years of spiritual, cultural, and political engagement, we thankfully reached a point where Roe v. Wade was sent to the dustbin of history, but the effort to restore the inalienable right to life is far from over as we continue working to protect children from the moment of conception,” he said.

“Always follow your heart. But we must win,” Trump said. “We are a failing nation, but we can be a failing nation no longer. We will make our nation great. We will make our nation greater than ever before.”

Trump also voiced strong support for in vitro fertilization. “We want to make it easier for mothers and families to have babies, not harder. That includes supporting the availability of fertility treatments like IVF in every state in America,” the president said, stating his view is supported by “the vast majority of Republicans, conservatives, Christians, and pro-life Americans.”

Democrats injected IVF into the national discourse to attack the Dobbs decision. Despite President Joe Biden’s false assertion during the State of the Union address that “the Alabama Supreme Court shut down IVF treatments,” the ruling had nothing to do with IVF’s legal status. Yet IVF presents deep moral concerns for those who believe life begins at conception. Mary Szoch, director of the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council, has noted that “93% of the embryos created through IVF never result in a live birth.” Sometimes, the doctor implants multiple embryos and then selectively aborts less robust fetuses. Millions more remain frozen, often abandoned — or later destroyed — by their parents.

“We clearly have some work to do to educate the GOP on the lawlessness of a predatory IVF industry, whose own sloppiness has caused the painful headlines we all have seen,” said Kristen Hawkins of Students for Life of America in a statement emailed to TWS. “It’s an industry in need of regulation.” Others contrasted Trump’s states’ rights view of abortion with his commitment to “supporting the availability of fertility treatments like IVF in every state in America.” Fox News Digital Editor Ken Shepherd pointed out that former President Trump “seems to be saying abortion is a matter for the states, but his language on IVF regulation seems to suggest every state should protect IVF as a right. This seems a bit incongruent.” (Emphasis in original.)

Yet pro-life leaders took heart at the palpable difference in focus between the two parties’ presumptive presidential candidates. “Unlike President Biden, President Trump begins his remarks on abortion celebrating ‘the ultimate joy in life’ – children and family,” said Hawkins. While pro-life advocates “clearly have some work to do to educate the Trump administration” on federal pro-life protections, sharing “the mutual goals of supporting families and welcoming young children” proves that “we can work together to restore the culture of life stripped away by the national Democratic Party and their leadership.”

“Fighting against that kind of abortion extremism is a reason to vote for Donald Trump,” Hawkins told TWS. Dannensfelser also promised SBA Pro-Life America will “work tirelessly to defeat President Biden and extreme congressional Democrats” in November.

Talk show host Steve Deace questioned the political viability of Trump’s abortion stance. “Is there truly a constituency of people who vote on this issue who will find this reasonable?” he said. “[I]f you’re voting on abortion you feel strongly about it, one way or the other. And if you have anything close to the position Trump has, you’re not even voting on that issue, so it doesn’t matter.”

But Perkins believes President Trump “is going to continue to pursue a pro-life policy” once elected, based on the counsel of his advisors and the political calculus of the Republican Party.

“I saw today’s statement with a comma behind it, not a period,” Perkins told “Greg Kelly Reports” on Newsmax Monday evening. “I’ve had conversations leading up to this with the former president. If Congress were to reach a consensus on a piece of legislation and send it to his desk, I have no doubt he would sign it.”

“His record is very clear; he’s the most pro-life president that we’ve had,” Perkins concluded.

Pro-life leaders hope a second Trump presidency will live up to his words Monday morning: “The Republican Party should always be on the side of the miracle of life — on the side of mothers, fathers, and their beautiful babies.”

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

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

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


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

The Most Accurate Summary of Donald J. Trump and Why He Must Win

If I wanted to quibble, the only issue would be that the left does not actually want the things the speaker claims they want.

In fact these things like equity and so on are really weapons against the United States and the West in general. But in practice this is a distinction without a difference at this stage of the revolution which has taken place. Also, one may suspect that elections mean nothing. That even if Donald Trump is permitted to win, he will be so sequestered that he will only be a target for blame for what the COMINTERN continues to do, and not actually able to do much of anything. In other words, 100X worse than what we saw in his first term.

Still these videos and especially the top one, may be the last word in terms of showing people you know who don’t get it yet, why you are supporting Trump, and why they should unless they genuinely want what the communists are creating.

In the speech “The Hour is Getting Late” below, playwright, writer and speaker Tom Klingenstein explains the need for a wartime President in the upcoming 2024 election.

Tom believes that we are in a cold civil war. The enemy—what he calls the “Woke Comms”—are winning, in large measure because Republican leaders have yet to engage. His essays, speeches and plays all encourage Republicans to do just that— to think, talk, and act as if we are at war. Among his essays are “Preserving the American Way of Life”, “How the Administrative State Conquered America” and “A Primer On Wokeism.” His election speech, “A Man vs. A Movement” was viewed by millions of his fellow Americans.

Kingenstein states, “There is a Lincoln or Churchill among us, there always is. But he must stand up. This is not the time for polling or focus groups. It’s the time for someone to lead. Someone with the courage to stand alone, someone of honorable ambition who believes that America’s traditional culture is exceptional and is committed to keeping it that way. Someone who will recall the great successes of our past and renew our belief that we are capable of still more.”

WATCH: The Hour is Getting Late

WATCH: Trump’s Virtues Part II

RELATED ARTICLE: Time to Rethink Your Never Trumpism

RELATED VIDEOS:

We have to define what we stand for: Vivek Ramasamy

Only Trump! – A Man versus A Movement

POST ON X:

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

THEOLOGICAL BUTCHERS: Constantine, the Church and the Jews

“You can’t love God without loving the Jewish people.” —  Corrie Ten Boom

“For the Lord will not cast off his people, neither will He forsake his inheritance.” — Psalm 94:14

“Behold, I have engraven thee upon the palms of my hands; thy walls are continually before me.” —  Isaiah 49:16

“Wherever replacement theology has flourished, the Jews have had to run for cover.” —  Biblical scholar, Thomas Ice


The relationship between Gentiles and Jews thrived in the early Church and they viewed one another as brothers and sisters. Gentiles adopted Jewish traditions as Sabbath rest, Biblical feasts, Holy Days, et al.  As Christianity spread and more Gentiles were converted, the Church began to estrange itself from its Jewish Roots. Soon, the Church consisted more of Gentiles than Jews causing the church to deviate from its Biblical roots.

Since those early days, there has been a two-thousand-year Church battle against Judaism.  The dark history is the central tragedy of Western civilization with its fault lines reaching deep into our own culture. The ugly hostility and contempt of God’s people has slithered out from under rocks and is raising its poisonous fangs once again.

These imperial measures were the fruits of replacement theology from the early church fathers, and their allegorical translations of the Word.  As noted in this series, replacement theology increasingly became mainstream within the Roman Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant communions.  The germination of this repugnant and false doctrine commenced during the early second century, followed by budding during the third century and then coming to full bloom in the fourth century and onward.  It was Augustine who formally established the noxious strain that has become the accepted norm for eschatology within the Christian church in general.

None of this had to be, as there were men of God who loved the Word and knew that Jacob was destined for glory by the Lord Himself.  Heroes were forgotten, truth was buried, words were changed via a symbolic fictional narrative that conveys a meaning not explicitly set forth in the narrative, and the liars were promoted as church fathers.

Prior to Chrysostom and Jerome and Ambrose and Augustine, the cancer of anti-Judaism was already metastasizing.  Constantine and the leading theologians and scholars of the Nicaean Council, in their formulations on behalf of the state church, provided the impetus that gathered steam and rolled on through the centuries.

Augustine appears to ignore Paul when, in Romans 11:17-20, Paul explicitly admonishes the Gentile Christians to treat the Jews, both believing and unbelieving, with respect and fear.

Following the consolidation of vigorous supersessionism (the name used by the promoters) via Ambrose and Augustine during the close of the fourth century, the growing authority of the Roman Catholic church ensured that no other eschatology would be tolerated.  From then on, albeit there was some relief injected during the mid-seventeenth century in England, and even on to recent time, still, the global humiliation of the Jewish people was assured and perpetuated.  The Reformation also provided some relief, yet it continued to perpetuate the Augustinian eschatology that ultimately led to the horrific slaughter of the Jews during the twentieth century.

The Illegitimate Hybrid

As Leonard Verduin has put it, “In a word, the sons of God (the church) and the daughters of men (the state) had given birth to an illegitimate hybrid, an ungainly and ugly creature but, as is often the case with hybrids, a rugged one.  It promised to be on the scene for a long time to come.”

“The advance of the politicizing and secularizing of biblical Christianity, especially its manifestation during the Constantinian revolution, resulted in church and state being welded together with the church becoming dominant along with supporting military development and the employment of coercion.” (Leonard Verduin, The Anatomy of a Hybrid, 1976, 103-104, 107).

This evil hybrid is with us today with all its superficiality, carnality, tyranny, and perpetuated anti-Judaic heritage.  We need an eschatological revival beginning with heartfelt repentance concerning a shameful and evil anti-Judaic past.  Then we need the truth of the Lord’s Word spread throughout the nation and world and a kindly rapport with the Jewish people.  We need to plead for forgiveness from both the Lord and His people.  And we need to do what the Lord said, To the Jew First, and also to the Greek.

The transformation of Constantine’s cross into a sword, the rise of blood libels, scapegoating, and outright Jew hatred, has the church not only in conflict with the Jewish people, but also with itself.

Constantine

Constantine was born 272 AD and died 337 AD.  Christianity was illegal in the Roman Empire until the fourth century.  Replacement Theology had already overtaken the church and metastasized into Jewish hatred.  They had no authority to do anything other than speak against the Jewish people, but that changed in AD 313 with a ruler named Constantine.

As a member of Emperor Diocletian’s court, Constantine was preparing to lead his troops at the Battle of Milvian Bridge in AD 312 when he claimed to have a vision of a cross in the sun.  He prayed to the Christian God, put Christian symbols on his banners and then won a victory over an older and more experienced general.

In AD 313, Constantine became emperor of the Roman Empire and legalized Christianity and brought the church under the authority of Rome.  Clergy were on the empire’s payroll, and the church became part of the state.  Eight years later, Christianity became the official religion and 60 years later it was the exclusive religion of the Roman Empire.

Eusebius, who was an influential scholar and the bishop of Caesarea by the Sea, was born around 265 and died around 340.  He is widely known for his Ecclesiastical History, but penned a broad range of useful literature.  His theological proclivities fell on the side of amillennialism and the allegorical method, but he had a defense of the pretribulation rapture that was especially significant and was in several of his documents.  Eusebius had baptized Constantine, became his close advisor and wrote the biography of Constantine shortly after his death.

In the early church, premillennialism and the pretribulation rapture held out against the juggernaut of replacement theology for a couple more centuries after a Biblically prophesied literal millennium had been driven into oblivion.

Ephraim the Syrian also believed and wrote about the pretribulation catching away in ten of his documents.  The Eusebius passages do not stand alone; along with numerous citations from other early fathers that are long and well known.  The truth is the pretribulation rapture was taught by many in the early church.  The testimony endured until the late Koine era, when it was finally snuffed out after several centuries of concerted efforts by the juggernaut of replacement theology to crush all opposition.

Proponents of replacement theology will claim that the premillennial belief system did not appear on the scene of church history until J.N. Darby in the 1830s.  Their efforts to destroy the premillennial doctrine is evident in their diatribes against the Jewish people as well as those in the church who fully love and bless Israel.

Irenaeus of Lyon (120-202) was a pre-tribulationist. Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp (who was a disciple of the apostle John) and articulated his eschatological views in Against Heresies, Book 5, written to refute gnostic heresies. Link

Premillennial verses are not just in the New Testament.  Daniel 12:1-2, Isaiah 26:19-21, Isaiah 57:1, Zephaniah 2:3 and Micah 7:2a clearly indicate the premillennial view reiterated in the New Testament.  When any denomination of the church claims the Torah and the writings of the major and minor prophets of the Hebrew Bible are unimportant, they are purposely denying the truth of God’s Word as therein lies the core of faith, much of which is reiterated in the New Testament.

Now we take a look at the ecumenical councils.  This is a period in which “for the first time in history the Church’s theological understanding concerning Israel dictated official policy even though it was indirectly.”  (Diprose, Israel and the Church, 126.)

The establishment of an imperially governed church, into which traditional anti-Jewish teachings were incorporated, threatened the Jews far more seriously than the pen of Augustine and the orations of Chrysostom.

This is state legislated hatred of God’s people, Israel.

Constantine’s Nicaea Council

“Through the ecumenical councils, the church was in the position of adopting an officially sanctioned anti-Semitic program, imposing repressive social, religious and economic restrictions on the Jewish people.  The measures aren’t too different in principle from those being adopted by today’s church ‘councils’ with ‘Boycott Israel’ canon law.  Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) is a nonviolent Palestinian-led movement promoting boycotts, divestments, and economic sanctions against Israel.

“The early church believed the stateless Jews had been lawfully dispossessed and the church, under Constantine’s protection, was at liberty to plunder Jewish interests with impunity ‘believing,’ albeit falsely, it was serving God’s best interests.  The Nicaea Council in AD 325 marked the point at which the scales of justice would forever weigh in the favor of the church.” (Israel Betrayed, Volume 1, Andrew D. Robinson.)

The leading theologians and scholars subsequently agreed with the proclamation of the First Council of Nicaea and Constantine.  Anti-Jewish measures had previously been taken as early as AD 306 at the Spanish Council of Elvira.  They had passed 81 canons then and several concerned the separation of Jewish and Christian interests.  Legislation arose outlawing synagogues and giving permission to burn Jews who broke the law. Jewish people were excluded from high office, restricted in other positions, and forced to shut their businesses on Sunday. Since religious Jews also closed on Saturday, the law helped Gentile merchants.

Christians could not share a meal with a Jew, marry a Jew, or observe the Jewish sabbath and this Jew hatred even went so far as defining what blessings could be given, even over agriculture.

Sounds much like Nazi Germany!

The entire Council was anathema to the Old and New Testaments by passing resolutions which were completely incompatible with the Lord’s teachings.  Known as “the synod of the 318 fathers,” although the actual attendance is uncertain, Nicaea was convened at Constantine’s behest.  The last was held at Nicaea in AD 787.

The most significant ruling to change Jewish-Christian relations was Constantine’s desire to separate “Easter” from Passover on the fourteenth of Nissan, which never should have been done.  He wrote a vile letter to the council defaming the Jewish people and their practice of Passover.  His tone was shamefully anti-Judaic, and I include only a small portion:

“We ought not, therefore, to have anything in common with the Jews.  We desire, dearest brethren, to separate ourselves from the detestable company of the Jews.  It is your duty not to tarnish you soul by communications with such wicked people [the Jews]. (Constantine I: “On the Keeping of Easter,” Fordham University Internet Medieval Sourcebook, ed. Paul Halsall, http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/const1-easter.html)

Nicaea set the spiritual tone for future discrimination by kindling the fires of church-and state-sanctioned anti-Semitic dogma and activism.

Successive councils fanned this hatred into flames and Constantine ensured the fires were kept fueled.  He decreed that no one should remain in servitude to a Jewish master, which purposely undermined the economic structure of Jewish agricultural society.  They found it impossible to maintain any fair-sized agriculture unit with employing “slaves” who were rapidly becoming Christianized.  Poverty overtook them and dark days in the history of Christian Jewish relations emanated from the horrible discrimination against the Jews.

In 415 another turning point came, and anti-Semitism went from being merely verbal to being physical when Cyril, head of the church in Alexandria, led a brutal anti-Jewish riot in the city’s Jewish quarter. Christians beat Jews, raped women, murdered men, stole Jewish property, and drove the Jewish people from the city. From that point on, anti-Semitism mushroomed. It is literally impossible to count the number of cruel, violent, and merciless things done to God’s Chosen People.

The First Crusade

The following three paragraphs come in part from Constantine’s Sword, The Church and The Jews, by James Carroll.

The first crusade was a military expedition that set out from northwestern Europe in the spring of 1096, bound for the Holy Land.  But the cross-marked army’s first act of belligerence took place in the Rhineland, not Jerusalem, and its target was not the Muslim infidel, but the Jewish one.  The story of the crusades used to be familiar to all school children, but like so many other historic events, it has been eliminated.  It was rarely told from the view of the first victims and what they saw when the horde came.

“Mainz Anonymous,” wrote one of the surviving Hebrew chronicles recounting the events of 1096 as they were experienced by the Jews:

There first arose the princes and nobles and common folk in France, who took counsel and set plans to ascend, and “to rise up like eagles” and to do battle and “to clear a way” for journeying to Jerusalem, the Holy City, and for reaching the sepulcher of the Crucified, “a trampled corpse” “who cannot profit and cannot save, for he is worthless.”  They said to one another: “Behold we travel to a distant land to do battle with the kings of that land. “We take our souls in our hands’ in order to kill and subjugate all those kingdoms that do not believe in the Crucified.  How much more so (should we kill and subjugate) the Jews, who killed and crucified him.”  They taunted us from every direction.  They took counsel, ordering that either we turn to their abominable faith or they would destroy us “from infant to suckling.”  They, both princes and common folk, placed an evil sign upon their garments, a cross.  (The Hebrew First-Crusade Chronicles: S, cited by Chazan, European Jewry, 225.)

Another Jewish chronicler of the crusaders’ rampage through the Rhineland, Solomon bar Simson, also fixed on the symbol of the cross: “They decorated themselves prominently with their signs, placing a profane symbol, a horizontal line over a vertical one, on the vestments of every man and woman whose heart yearned to go on the stray path to the grave of their Messiah.  Their paths swelled until the number of men, women and children exceeded a locust horde covering the earth.”  (“The Chronicle of Solomon bar Simson,” in Eidelberg, The Jews and the Crusaders, 21.)

These memories were only partly overshadowed by the Holocaust of the twentieth century, the systematic extermination of Jews by the Nazi regime in Germany before and during World War II (1939–45). Referring to this later period of violence, the historian Malcolm Billings noted in his book The Crusades: Five Centuries of Holy Wars, “The road to the Holy Land ran through what Jews later came to describe as the first Holocaust.”  The goal was to rid the Holy Land of Muslims, but their path was littered with the bodies of God’s chosen, men, women and children.

Not all European Christians shared in this blood lust against the Jews. Many members of the Christian clergy tried to excommunicate, or expel from the church, those who were persecuting the Jews.  Some went much further.  Like Yad Vashem, which honors non-Jews who took great risks to save Jews during the Holocaust, a small percentage of the church did the same thing in the Crusades.

Conclusion

I have but skimmed the surface of the Amillennial replacement theologists’ devotion in allegorizing the Word of God to fit their determined desire of replacing the Jews in the Christian Bible.  My heart breaks that so many have been led astray in our churches thinking that our Creator was done with “the apple of His eye.”

What moral turpitude are the words, writings and actions of these men who literally endorsed the hatred and murder of those beloved by God.

James Parkes explains the significance of these developments, “There is no other adequate foundation (for modern anti-Semitism) than the theological conceptions built up in the first three centuries.  But upon these foundations an awful superstructure has been reared, and the first stones of that superstructure were laid, the very moment the church had power to do so, in the legislation of Constantine and his successors.” (Quoted in Diprose, Israel and the Church, 127.)

In R. Kendall Soulen’s, God of Israel, he writes, “Apart from a relationship to the people Israel, no relationship to the God of Israel is possible.  God is the Creator and Ruler of the universe, but God does not draw near as the conclusion of cosmological or ontological proofs for the existence of God.  God draws near as the God of Abraham who took the people Israel out of the land of Egypt and who remains this nation’s God to the end of time.”

As Paul declares, “It is not as though the Word of God has failed” (Romans 9:6).  For this reason, it remains true that the Jewish people “are (and will continue to be) beloved (by God) for the sake of their forefathers” (Romans 11:28).

Hatred of the Jewish people, fomented by the Church, is a demonic apostasy of truth loaded with deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons.  Without the Jewish people, there would be no Christian Bible, there would be no Christian Messiah, the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, the Root of King David, would not exist without God’s Chosen People.

As Corrie Ten Boom said time and again, “You can’t love God without loving the Jewish people.”  And to that I say a Big AMEN!

©2024. Kelleigh Nelson. All rights reserved.


Bibliography

Ariel Magazine, Fall 2023, Volume I / #48, The Eternal Order, Brainard, Lee W., Rapture Discoveries in Eusebius.

Brown, Michael L., 1992, Destiny Image Publishers, Our Hands are Stained with Blood.

Carroll, James, 2001, Houghton Mifflin company, Constantine’s Sword, The Church and the Jews.  My daughter gave me this book over 20 years ago.  Author James Carrol is a former Catholic priest who left the priesthood to write.

Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G., 2003, Ariel Ministries, The Footsteps of the Messiah.

Horner, Barry E., 2007, Broadman and Holman Academic., now Barry E. Horner update of the first edition, Volume I of a Trilogy, Future Israel, Why Christian Anti-Judaism Must Be Challenged. (Horner’s book were suggested by my friend, Sarah.)

Horner, Barry E., 2018, Barry E. Horner, Eternal Israel Biblical, Theological, and Historical Studies That Uphold the Eternal, Distinctive Destiny of Israel.

House, H. Wayne and Ice, Thomas, 1988, Multnomah Press, Dominion Theology: Blessing or Curse? An Analysis of Christian Reconstructionism.

Leventhal, Barry R. 2023, Ariel Ministries, Where Was God?  Theological Perspectives on the Holocaust.

Melnick, Oliver J., 2007, Purple Raiment, an imprint of Joan Prinjinski, They Have Conspired Against You, Responding to the New Anti-Semitism.

Robinson, Andrew D., 2018, Ariel Ministries, Israel Betrayed, Volume I: The History of Replacement Theology.

Robinson, Andrew D., 2020, Ariel Ministries, Israel, The Inheritance of God

Saving American Children a.k.a. Saving America — Part 2

Please read Saving American Children – Part 1.

What should be the primary objectives of competent U.S. public K-12 schools?

Good question, as this is a highly debated topic. Many hundreds of articles, reports, and books have been written on this matter.

IMO one of the main reasons that the US education system is in a quagmire, is that we have not fully and properly addressed this fundamental question. As a result, the States end up being pushed Left — as the Left has a very aggressive, well-coordinated K-12 education strategy (e.g., Next Generation Science Standards).

One good answer to this question is that schools should teach their students to be productive, healthy, happy citizens. Sounds good, but what does that translate to?

Let me suggest some major objectives in their approximate order of priority:

  1. How to Think (being a Critical Thinker),
  2. Functional Basics (the 3 R’s),
  3. Knowledge (covering a wide range of topics),
  4. Curiosity (a desire to learn more),
  5. Communication Skills (to better convey ideas, etc.),
  6. Empathy (sensitivity to others),
  7. Teamwork (cooperatively working together),
  8. Flexibility (to adapt to changing situations),
  9. Patriotism (appreciate the sacrifices of our forefathers),
  10. Foster Interests (for each child).

Again, the most important one is the first! In fact, if you consider things carefully, almost all of the others depend on the ability to do Critical Thinking!

An interesting survey (February 2024) of States that have published their K-12 education priorities, concluded that the top one is Critical Thinking! (See Figure 1. Most Commonly Cited Skills & Competencies.)

Note 1: Be forewarned that just because a State says that Critical Thinking is prioritized, it doesn’t mean they are actually doing it! For example, my home state of NC officially declares that Critical Thinking is a top priority — but I could find no evidence that Critical Thinking was being prioritized (properly taught and utilized). On the other hand, I found considerable evidence that the opposite is being taught.

The opposite of Critical Thinking is to teach children to conform: defer to experts, be politically correct, adhere to consensus opinions, accept without question what computer programs say, ignore inconvenient facts, etc., etc.

Note 2: I am specifically de-emphasizing “readiness for college,” as readiness for life should be a much more important priority. Further, college has gone downhill over the last few decades (while becoming much more expensive), so it makes more sense than ever before for many high school graduates to forego college.

Note 3: My list purposefully minimizes teaching values (e.g., responsibility), as the primary sources for such education should be parents. A supplement to that is to send children to private schools. [A major distinction between public and private schools is that values (e.g., Judeo-Christian standards) are taught in the latter.]

Why not teach values in public schools? Because they are petrified of having any traditional religion (e.g., Judeo-Christian) connections (separation of church and state). The main way public schools fill this value void, is by teaching atheism — even though technically that is a religion. The other primary result is that relativism is endorsed, which is actually the opposite of teaching values, as it effectively says that there are no value standards, as everything is relative.

In other words, when public schools attempt to teach values (think SEL), they not only contradict the Judeo-Christian standards that were the basis of our country, but the children are worse off than if the schools had stayed out of the value arena.

I think that there is merit to this assessment:

Many American schools follow a strictly economics-based model. This kind of economic-driven model emphasizes certification, centralization, and standardization. In this system, students are subject to a rigorous and often inflexible curriculum to advance numeracy, literacy, and science skills. The ultimate purpose of an economics-driven education system is to form productive workers. While success in the job market should be one of the top priorities of any school, a truly high-skilled workforce can only be generated if schools address all facets of student development.

To sum up: We need to discuss and agree on the primary objectives of competent US public K-12 schools, or else it will continue to be dictated by Left-leaning activists. (Critical Thinking MUST be a primary objective.) The most practical way to initiate this is to have one State set a good example for other States to emulate. (I’m working on North Carolina to be such a state.)

Some Resources:

What Is Education For?

The Purpose of K-12 Education

Should US Public Schools be Teaching SEL?

Principles Of Child Centered Education

The purpose of a K-12 education: Who decides and how do we get there?

What is the Goal of the American Education System?

The Purpose of K-12 Public Education Today: Readiness for College, Career & Life

Report: Education, K-12

©2024.  All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Tulsi Gabbard explains how the Biden administration is sneaking the Woke ideology into schools


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

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

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

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

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

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

Robinette Hood: Here’s How Biden’s EV Agenda Will Take From The Poor And Give To The Rich

President Joe Biden’s massive electric vehicle (EV) agenda will subsidize the lifestyles of America’s well-to-do while hitting average people the hardest, economists and auto market analysts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The Biden administration is aggressively regulating the U.S. auto market to drastically increase the proportion of EVs sold over the coming decade, but consumer demand has not taken off as quickly as proponents had projected despite the subsidies made available by Biden’s flagship climate bill, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Manufacturers are slashing prices of their EVs to make the vehicles more appealing to consumers, which will increase prices for internal combustion engine (ICE) cars to compensate; this dynamic will only pick up speed and infect the used-car market favored by lower-income consumers as the administration’s stringent regulations kick in over time, economists and auto market analysts told the DCNF.

EVs benefit from direct subsidies, such as the IRA’s $7,500 consumer tax credit, but they also will increasingly benefit from a hidden cross-subsidy whereby manufacturers drop their prices and offset those losses by boosting prices of ICE vehicles, experts explained to the DCNF.

“As the mandated market share of EVs grows, the number of ICE vehicle sales must shrink. A decreasing number of ICE vehicle sales would have to prop up an increasing number of EV sales. The price hike per ICE vehicle would have to increase to offset losses on the ever-larger volume EVs sold,” Marlo Lewis, a senior fellow for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told the DCNF. “Used cars compete with new cars for customers. If new car prices rise, so will used car prices. Even with generous federal, state, and manufacturer incentives, EVs cost thousands of dollars more than comparable ICE vehicles, and millions of middle-income households are already priced out of the market for new vehicles.”

The Biden administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have each promulgated major emissions or fuel economy regulations designed to effectively require massive increases in the number of EVs sold in the 2030s. Despite these regulations and massive federal spending intended to help advance EV production and demand, American manufacturers are losing billions of dollars on their EV product lines.

These losses are poised to kick off a chain of second-order consequences on the auto market that will disadvantage lower-income consumers whose needs are especially not well-suited by EVs, O.H. Skinner, the executive director of the Alliance for Consumers, told the DCNF. Democrats set aside billions of dollars to help build out a national EV charging network in the bipartisan infrastructure package of 2021, but those funds have so far only led to a handful of charging stations coming online across the country while “range anxiety” remains a very real concern for consumers.

One of the most pernicious effects of the EV agenda is the skyrocketing cost of many traditional models. When D.C. and California elites fixate on wiping away the majority of the cars on the market, it distorts the market — the cars that people want are in shorter and shorter supply, leading to higher prices and requiring consumers to pay over list price to snag what is available, while the market is flooded with EVs that consumers aren’t interested in, even at steep discounts,” Skinner told the DCNF.  “And this will roll forward into the used market as well, as the same shortages flow through for years, hurting those who most need affordable cars that meet their family needs.”

The general effect that Skinner describes projects that increased costs of new gas-powered cars — driven by manufacturers’ desire to offset losses on EVs and increase demand for a decreased number of available new gas-powered models — will boost demand for used cars as consumers turn to that market for better deals. In turn, that increase in demand will put upward price pressure on the used car market, making cheaper options less affordable to the detriment of demographics that do not have the means to splurge on pricier automobiles.

The used vehicle market is significantly larger than the market for new cars.

In 2022, approximately 38.6 million used vehicles were sold, compared to 13.6 million brand new vehicles, according to data aggregated by Statista. The regressive impacts of the administration’s EV agenda stand at odds with much of its rhetoric on its broader environmental agenda, which broadly seeks to promote climate policy and social justice at the same time.

“Even if it’s not explicitly stated, the only way that automakers can survive billions in losses from one division (EVs) is because of profits from the other division (conventional car),” Mark Mills, the director of the National Center for Energy Analytics, told the DCNF. The long-term and downstream impacts of this cross-subsidization are “profoundly regressive,” he added, alluding to the fact that the government and manufacturers are taking actions in ways that make luxury EVs less expensive while driving up the costs of models favored by the everyman.

EV adoption is lagging in the American heartland relative to coastal and more densely-populated states like California, which had more than four times as many EV registrations as of 2022 than the next state on the list, according to Department of Energy data.

The White House did not respond immediately to requests for comment.

AUTHOR

NICK POPE

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden Admin Classifies Martha’s Vineyard, Elite Locales As ‘Low-Income’ To Push EV Charger Subsidies

Biden To Visit NYC For Record-Shattering Celeb Fundraiser Same Day Trump Honors Fallen Cop

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


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

Speaking of eclipses … My poem on the Great American Eclipse of 2017

This morning, April 8th, I got to view a partial eclipse of the sun here in Northern California. It’s a fascinating phenomenon that provides a brief but welcome respite from divisive political sparring and other controversial topics, like football.

The last solar eclipse I watched was in August of 2017, aka the Great American Eclipse, since, unlike today’s, that total eclipse was visible across our country, from sea to shining sea.

I wrote a poem on that occasion that I’ll share with you now.

Solar Eclipse August 21, 2017

Do not convict the moon,
that every hundred years
forgets itself,
blunders into the spotlight,
plunging us in darkness.
The moon, I say, is innocent—
guileless, clumsy perhaps,
but not a villain here.

No, the villains are elsewhere,
though in our midst, plotting
their own eclipse, hatched
in the stygian reaches
of malignant minds,
seeking to come between you
and yourself.

This is the plague
of darkness.

Already you have lost
your children, guarding them
in the wrong places, ignoring
the danger in their safest spaces.

If once, just once, you
dropped all pretense and shed
your certainties, the truth
would embrace you
like a father welcoming home
his late-returning prodigal son.

You can no longer afford
your ignorance.
And what you see not,
you must infer, as astronomers,
through tracing bending orbits,
infer the presence of unseen planets.

What part of history
is dispensable? What
would you erase?
The hard-won knowledge
of good and evil—
our lodestar
since the fatal bite of Eden?

Listen:
the sun of truth gives the only light
that will never blind you.
Stare into it.

©2024. Cherie Zaslawsky. All rights reserved.


Cherie Z’s Truth Be Told is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

States are Sovereign: Our Forefathers gave an incredible gift to We the People!

Ever so slowly, almost invisibly, the gifts our founders fought and died for have been removed or relegated as out-of-date, not pertinent to a thriving, modern and powerful nation such as we have known. Add to this a deliberate removal from teaching the history, framework, foundational principles and unique characteristics of our founding as a nation in schools. These facts are evident as the State of Texas has taken on the role of defending itself (and America as a whole) from the diabolical invasion flowing across our former southern Border. The federal government deliberately has come against Texas to put them in their place – subservient to federal power. Our Forefathers would be aghast, and not the least bit hesitant to speak out boldly against such impunity. Allow me a few points I have no hesitation to believe our founders sitting in Philadelphia writing our unique constitution and laying out the foundation for a new government would rise and speak forcefully against such federal acts.

The central government is a creation of the States, and intended to be an agent FOR the States, not a ruler OVER the states. The federal government has no sovereignty of its own outside the powers delegated to it by the States, and the States were never intended to be slaves to their own creation of the federal government. Essential to the preservation of Liberty and our newly formed principles was the creation of a confederation and central government that would work on behalf of the States in foreign affairs and matters of over-all national security and preservation.

The Contract (The Constitution) is between the sovereign parties (the States), and the federal government is a creation of the contract and not a party. What do the states do when their creation acts outside the parameters of the contract by engaging in actions not authorized, such as passing unconstitutional laws and regulations? The framers considered it an absolute absurdity to think the federal government acting outside of the constitutional charter for even a moment could be considered legitimate and binding upon the sovereign States.

When the federal government steps outside its boundaries, since legally speaking we are a Constitutional Republic and not a kingdom or a democracy, our remedy lies with the States reasserting their sovereignty and taking responsibility for the power originally delegated to them by We the People. The States have an obligation to protect the People from an abuse of power by the central government. This is accomplished when the States step in-between the central government and the People to maintain the limited power of the central government.

This is exactly what the Great State and Republic of Texas did to preserve and protect their sovereignty and their people. This is exactly why the Elites hated what Texas did, because, in part, the Elites hate the Constitution and the privileges therein.

We need people to stand for truth as servant leaders with great humility and grace and with great courage and conviction to defend the documents and ideals that made our nation exceptional. We need ordinary heroes who are willing to pay the price, demonstrating obedience to the Lord’s ways, not man’s, and to serve with sincere joy and thanksgiving for what He has done creating our country.

©2024. Lyle J. Rapacki, Ph.D. All rights reserved.


Arizona Today is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.


RELATED VIDEOS:

Trump’s Abortion Stance: Why It’s the Best Pro-Life Position For the Current Moment

Kristan Hawkins: Why Trump’s 2024 Abortion Stance is the Smartest Move He Could Make

Venezuela: Amid socialist humanitarian crisis, no improvement in human rights

The human rights situation in Venezuela has been dire for many years, with little indication of improvement. Since 2014, there have been 15,800 politically motivated arrests, and over 270 political prisoners continue to languish in Venezuelan jails.

The misguided economic policies implemented by successive socialist governments have led to 19 million people facing malnutrition and a severe lack of healthcare. Consequently, a staggering 7.7 million individuals, out of a population of just over 29 million, have fled the country since 2014.

The government has even taken the drastic step of closing the UN Human Rights Office, purportedly due to its alleged involvement in anti-government activities. Furthermore, new legislation threatens to criminalise and impede the work of civil society within the country.

Once considered one of the wealthiest nations in Latin America, Venezuela has descended into a socialist dystopia marred by authoritarianism, a dearth of human rights, insufficient government investment, hyperinflation, rampant corruption, economic mismanagement, the collapse of public services, economic hardship, shortages, and widespread hunger. Currently, fifty percent of the population lives in poverty.

Popular tyrant

Socialism was introduced in Venezuela by Hugo Chávez, a populist who held the presidency from 1999 until his death in 2013. Chávez implemented the nationalisation of industries and directed public funds towards social programs. As a result, schools saw improvement, the unemployment rate halved, and per capita incomes more than doubled. Moreover, both the poverty rate and infant mortality rates decreased by 50 percent.

Chávez was widely praised domestically for his stance against the United States, famously referring to President George W. Bush as “the devil”. Following Chávez’s death from cancer, Nicolás Maduro succeeded him as president.

While Chavez was a charismatic populist, one of the most notable distinctions lies in his ability to forge a coalition comprising leftists, military personnel, and the poor. Furthermore, Chavez was lucky. He capitalised on a surge in oil prices during his presidency. As a prime example of a petrostate, Venezuela’s fortunes are directly tied to the rise and fall of global oil prices. Chavez successfully directed a portion of the $1 trillion windfall in oil revenue towards appeasing the public and solidifying his grip on power.

Despite his widespread popularity, Chavez operated as a dictator and tyrant. He expanded state control over oil companies and suppressed journalists and critics, essentially outlawing government criticism. Consolidating nearly all power into his own hands, he eradicated checks and balances.

Nonetheless, he maintained the façade of democracy by holding elections. Winning 13 out of 14 elections lent an aura of legitimacy to his regime. He utilised state funds for his campaigns and exerted influence over journalists to portray him favourably, although he refrained from outright election fraud. Moreover, he survived a coup attempt, bolstering his image and authority.

Economic woes

Maduro lacks the charisma of Chavez. While Chavez had a military background, Maduro’s career path was rooted in communism. He pursued studies in Cuba, was affiliated with the Socialist League — an extreme left-wing organisation — and prior to entering government, he worked as a union negotiator.

He lost much of Chavez’s support base, securing election with a mere 50.6 percent of the vote. Consequently, he has governed the country as an autocrat. Besides lacking Chavez’s charisma and broad consensus, Maduro hasn’t enjoyed his predecessor’s luck: oil prices plummeted in 2014, leading to the complete collapse of the Venezuelan economy.

At times, annual inflation has soared to as high as 700 percent, reaching about 300 percent in 2022. Between 2015 and 2016, an estimated seventy-five percent of the country’s population experienced an average weight loss of 19 pounds. Diseases such as malaria have ravaged the nation due to the inability of people to afford imported medicines.

While Chavez allocated funds to improve citizens’ lives, he failed to diversify the economy away from oil dependency. Maduro has perpetuated this legacy by neglecting structural economic reforms and instead imposing stricter government controls. He restricted currency exchange systems, leaving ordinary citizens unable to afford medicine, basic household goods, and imported foods that must be purchased with dollars.

In the socialist utopia of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, everyone is purportedly equal, except for those with connections to the Maduro government. They have access to discounted dollars and can afford imported goods, which now encompass almost all but the most essential food items for survival. Necessities like toilet paper must be imported and purchased with dollars. Despite being a major oil producer, the country even grapples with fuel shortages.

Even individuals fortunate enough to possess dollars or receive remittances from friends and family abroad are not immune to the effects of inflation.

For instance, a woman who sells cigarettes and small items on the street disclosed that she earns approximately $20 a week. However, due to the relentless surge in prices, this income barely covers 15 eggs, 3 kilograms (6.6 lb) of corn flour, and a small portion of grain and cheese.

In Venezuela, the average monthly salary in the private sector stands at $139, while it’s a mere $14 in the public sector. Nevertheless, the grocery expenses for an average family amount to about $370 per month.

Deteriorating

Maduro has faced widespread protests and blocked a referendum because he understood that he wouldn’t secure victory, given his approval rating, which frequently dips to as low as 20 percent. Subsequently, he directed the Supreme Court to dissolve a portion of the legislature that opposed him. The state of democracy in Venezuela is deteriorating rapidly.

Recently, a new National Electoral Council (CNE) was formed, and several presidential candidates were disqualified. Additionally, opposition party members were detained prior to elections, indicating that the electoral process is likely to be more of a spectacle than a meaningful exercise in democracy.

Last year, a new National Electoral Council (CNE) was formed, and several presidential candidates were disqualified. Moreover, opposition party members were detained prior to elections, indicating that the electoral process is likely to be more of a spectacle than a substantive exercise in democracy.

Union workers, journalists, and human rights defenders have faced increasing restrictions on their access to civic spaces. Additionally, they’ve endured harassment and persecution orchestrated by the authorities. The rights of indigenous people, as well as those of LGBT individuals and women, have been egregiously disregarded. Notably, a YouTuber was recently charged with terrorism merely for challenging government policies.

The crackdown on dissenters has escalated, with critics subjected to surveillance, harassment, and criminalisation. In the most severe instances, they’ve become victims of torture and murder. In 2017, he secured victory in a rigged election. During this election cycle, he successfully postponed elections for an entire year, but they are anticipated to resume in October 2024. If these elections were fair and transparent, his defeat would be inevitable.

In what appears to be an effort to bolster the country’s revenues and alleviate the people’s suffering ahead of the next election, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro enacted a law annexing the oil-rich region of Essequibo in neighbouring Guyana. A consultative referendum was conducted on this decision last December, garnering a staggering 96 percent approval from the populace.

As per a statement from the presidential palace, Guayana Esequiba will now be recognised as the 24th federal state of Venezuela. Moreover, the inhabitants of the newly annexed territory will be represented in the upcoming parliamentary session in 2025. However, Guyana has sought a ruling from the International Court of Justice (ICJ), although Venezuelan law asserts that the ICJ holds no jurisdiction within the country.

Change in Venezuela appears elusive until Maduro is ousted from power. However, considering his influence over the upcoming elections, it seems unlikely that he will relinquish control voluntarily. The prospect of international military intervention in Venezuela is highly improbable, given the likelihood of opposition from Security Council members China and Russia. As for the alternatives of assassination or coup, history has demonstrated that such actions typically do not lead to positive outcomes, often resulting in the replacement of one authoritarian leader with another.


Can Venezuela’s parlous condition be reversed? Sound off in the comments section below.


AUTHOR

Antonio Graceffo, PhD, China-MBA MBA, is a China economic analyst teaching economics at the American University in Mongolia. He has spent 20 years in Asia and is the author of six books about China. His writing has appeared in The Diplomat, South China Morning Post, Jamestown Foundation China Brief, Penthouse, Shanghai Institute of American Studies, Epoch Times, War on the Rocks, Just the News, and Black Belt Magazine.

RELATED VIDEO: IN FOCUS: Elon Musk Brazil Conflict and the Brink of Dictatorship with Frankie Stockes – OAN

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

The Uni-Party Socialist Congress returns to work April 9th 2024. Conservatives must fire House Speaker Mike Johnson!

The do nothing socialist Republican Party return to the Washington swamp on Tuesday April 9th, 2024 to continue their symbiotic traitorous relationship with their Communist Democrat pals.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) the poster child for the Democrat Communist Party will once again prepare legislation to print more money and or borrow money from Communist China to fund the corrupt government of Ukraine.

The majority of the House of Representatives ran by fraud republicans will continue to protect the borders of Ukraine while totally ignoring the borders of our constitutional republic allowing Biden to continue his invasion foreign nationals into the United States.

On Friday April 12th, 2024 the fraud republicans will also no doubt reauthorize the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) before its April 19th 2024 deadline.

This will allow the U.S. government to continue spying on American citizens in gross violation of our 4th Amendment rights using AT&T equipment and assistance in secret data collection buildings all over the USA.

A skyscraper in New York City 500 feet tall, with 29 stories and no windows and no lights located at 33 Thomas Street is one of many NSA listening posts funded by the Republican controlled congress used to spy on Americans.

Thanks to great American patriot Edward Snowden we would never have learned about this. The entry to this building is identified as an AT&T telecommunications building but what it really is an NSA mass surveillance spy hub. It’s code name is Titanpointe.

This unconstitutional spy hub is funded by the uni party communist/socialist congress so they can read your Emails, listen to your phone calls and collect data on Americans internet web surfing without any oversite. At night you can’t even see the building it disappears onto the darkness.

If you have an AT&T cell phone provider don’t bank on any privacy. General Clapper the former director of the NSA lied to congress repeatedly about his surveillance of Americans. Why is he not in jail?

AT&T was given the code name Luthium in all its contact with the National Security Agency. This building is also just a short walk away from the FBI field office in New York City.

If you are a fan of the US constitution and privacy under the 4th amendment you won’t like what goes on inside this building. The NSA has collected over 150 million phone records in the past on American citizens. There are over 59 NSA spy hubs all over our republic all funded by the Republican led Congress.

This illegal and unconstitutional FISA Act will no doubt be reauthorized by the uniparty socialist / communist congress and Americans will continue to be spied on at the building located at 33 Thomas Street in New York City and at 58 other buildings all over the republic.

Facebook, Google, AT&T all work closely with the NSA and if you still have AT&T and Facebook accounts you have surrendered your freedom as you freely give the US government access to your privacy.

The conservative members of congress in the Republican Party who must suffer the indignity of having an “R” after their name must take action to remove House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) from his leadership position when they return to their 4 hour tax payer funded work weeks and replace him with a real leader and conservative constitutionalist.

Then in November we must return president Trump back to the White House so he can get to work restoring constitutional law. Trump must also grant a full pardon to Mr. Edward Snowden on day one as our president in January 2025.

©2024. Geoff Ross. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Chuck Schumer Reportedly Bragged To Colleagues That Speaker Johnson Gave Democrats Everything They Wanted With $95 Billion Foreign Aid Bill | DC Enquirer

‘A Massive Betrayal’: JD Vance Pushes Speaker Johnson To Use His Leverage On Border

Biden Admin. Shields Federal Employees from Possible Trump Presidency

MARK MECKLER: No Jobs For Illegal Aliens, Period

Gov. Greg Abbott Slams NYC Mayor Eric Adams For ‘Aiding And Abetting’ Biden’s Border Policies

Russian Military Magazine: Moscow Attack Resulted From Migration Policy

Russia | Special Dispatch No. 11257

In the Russian magazine “Military Review,” columnist Victor Biryukov recently discussed the main preconditions that made possible the March 22, 2024 attack on the Crocus City Hall music venue in Moscow, in which approximately 144 people were killed. The author argues against the migration policies of the Russian government and highlights radicalism among migrants. Citing several experts’ opinions, the article calls for radical changes of migration legislation, the introduction of visa controls, and a tougher migrant policy.[1]

The March 22 attack on the Crocus City Hall venue in Moscow.

Following is a translation of the article:

“Islamic radicalism, in a broad sense, can be perceived as an ideological doctrine and political practice based on it, that constitutes an ideological basis for the activities of radical Islamist organizations, the latter taken together form a radical Islamic movement. According to a number of researchers, only Islamist groups have fully developed political extremist ideology in modern Russia.

“In recent years, the propaganda of radical Islam has often been carried out rather freely on social networks, and there is virtually no fight against it since Moscow pursues a rather aggressive policy of ‘peoples’ friendship’ constantly emphasizing the country’s multinational character and cultural diversity. On the contrary, [Russian] officials and law enforcers simply turn a blind eye to many things [violations]. This is ascribed to, among other things, the fact that there is a powerful [pro-]migrant lobby in the government, which supports the mass influx of migrants from Central Asia to Russia.

“In the article ‘World Jihad – A Threat Not Only To Israel And Europe, But Also To Russia,’[2] the author of this text wrote the following, ‘if tomorrow the radical Islamists will target Russia, and not Israel, then Muslims who have acquired Russian citizenship, but treat our culture with contempt and arrogance, may follow the path of terror. This prediction, unfortunately, came true in the end [the ‘Crocus City Hall’ attack].

“The terrorist attack in the Moscow Oblast’s ‘Crocus City Hall’ became possible, apparently, for two reasons:

“First, it is the aforementioned free propaganda of radical Islam, against which, as mentioned above, almost no one is fighting. The [detained] Tajiks were persuaded to conduct a terrorist attack by a some ‘preacher,’ who was an authority figure for them. We are talking about religious lessons provided by the Islamic State – Walayat Khorosan (ISIS–K), an organization banned in Russia, as at least one of the terrorists was member of a chat room called ‘Rahnamo ba Khuroson,’ which is directly associated with the organization.

“Second, it is the migration policy, thanks to which hundreds of thousands of ‘Guest workers’ from Central Asia enter Russia (and many subsequently obtain citizenship under a simplified procedure); they, practically, do not know the Russian language, are completely alien to Russian culture, and are often adherents of radical Islam. The Tajiks who committed the terrorist attack had virtually no command of Russian, were religious fanatics, and had no problem agreeing to shoot people in Russia for money.

“I Learn Lesson – I Listened To Sermons[3]

“The debates about who is the true mastermind behind the terrorist attack in ‘Crocus City Hall,’ which took the lives of 137 people, according to official data, as of the evening of March 24 (however, according to unofficial data there are 150 victims), are in fact, in the author’s opinion, of secondary importance, because the key role, as has already been said, was played by two factors: radical Islam and uncontrolled migration policy.

“At the moment, there are several versions regarding the mastermind of the attack.

“The Western press and the U.S. authorities name ISIS terrorists as the main culprit of what had happened. This version confirmed by the fact that the ‘Amaq’ news agency associated with ISIS published a video of shooting of people in ‘Crocus City Hall’ venue, filmed by Tajik-terrorists. The footage is frightening, among other [atrocities] it depicts as one of the wounded [attendees of the venue] has his throat cut with a knife.

“Some Russian media and the majority of bloggers and war correspondents claim that the real masterminds behind the terrorist attack are the Ukrainian political leadership, which was assisted by Western security services. The fact that the terrorists were fleeing towards the Ukrainian border, apparently expecting to hide there, and the fact that many Ukrainian officials openly gloated over the tragedy, indirectly point to Kyiv’s involvement.

“As of now, there is no direct evidence of this [version] (Belarusian ambassador Dmitry Krutoy stated that Belarusian security forces assisted in protecting the border to prevent the terrorists from fleeing, which indirectly evidences that the terrorists could have tried to hide in Belarus). Be that as it may, some domestic political analysts rushed to claim that somehow putting the blame on Ukraine is a political necessity, regardless of how events actually occurred.

“‘Russia’s task is to facilitate a political isolation of the Ukrainian terrorist regime by pointing out as much as possible to the connection of the terrorist attack with the Ukrainian authorities, and not with ISIS. To this end, it’s necessary not only to demonstrate the terrorists’ connection with Ukraine, but also to destroy the American version of the terrorist attack,’ writes, for example, political analyst Sergey Markov. He also urged ‘not to sow interethnic discord,’ assuring that ‘there will be no purge of migrants’ and the migration policy will remain intact.

“The author [of this article] will not contemplate the problem of the terrorist attack from a politicized point of view, will not search for some secret signs and make some conclusions about the mastermind behind the terrorist attack. However, the fact remains: the terrorist attack was committed by citizens of Tajikistan, who had no command of Russian, were adherents of radical Islam and listened to radical sermons (wherein, some public figures continue to assure that terrorism supposedly ‘has no nationality and religion’).

“‘I listened lessons there… on Telegram, learn lesson. Listened to sermons. The assistant to the preacher texted me,’ said Fariduni Shamsuddin (one of the terrorists) during an interrogation. He gladly accepted the offer to earn money from killing ‘infidels,’ because he ‘was high’ from killing people.

“The Tajiks who killed more than a hundred people were not professionals, judging by the published videos [of the attack], they do not handle arms well, do not control sectors [of the premises] and do not cover each other; they simply shoot left and right. True, they agreed to kill for money, but it is obvious that they enjoyed the ‘process’ per se. And there are several millions of such ‘foreign specialists’ in Russia.

“There are those who will argue, ‘But what point for Islamists to blow up something and kill someone [in Russia]? After all Moscow maintains good relations with the Islamic world: Iran, the UAE, and even with radical Islamist organizations: Hezbollah, Hamas, the Taliban, etc., and [the Kremlin] does not prevent encroaching Islamization [of Russia].’ Wherein, such people forget that the Islamic world is extremely diverse, and radical Islamists, supporters of armed jihad (and not of ‘peaceful Islamization’), have not gone anywhere.

“And ‘flirting’ with radical Islamists like the Taliban and Hamas is extremely dangerous, as today they might be smiling in your face, while grasping a dagger behind their backs, but tomorrow they may change their stance. The well-known Russian researcher of Islam, Igor Dobaev in his book ‘Islamic Radicalism: Genesis, Evolution, Practice’ rightly pointed out the following: ‘As a rule, stopping terrorist activities is a forced step dictated by the fear of repressions from the authorities. The Islamists’ compliance with generally accepted in modern conditions rules of the political game, is perceived by them only as a temporary truce with the ‘infidels’ represented by the official authorities. The prerequisite for such a truce, according to the traditional Islamic interpretation of law, is the temporary (military or political) weakness of ‘the faithful.’ Once strength is restored, the fight against the ‘infidels’ should be continued.’

“Uncontrolled Migration Facilitates An Ideal Recruiting Base For Terrorists

“Mass migration from Central Asian states, uncontrolled granting of [the Russian] citizenship, unregistered mosques, propaganda of radical Islam (which no one, actually, fights against) – this is the ‘soil,’ in which the ‘mushrooms’ of terrorism and Islamic extremism grow.

“An entire network of Islamist groups operates in Russia, wherein not only in [Russia’s] republics with predominantly Muslim population, but also in ‘Islamic enclaves’ of non-Muslim regions of the country, clustered around mosques (sometimes unregistered) which pop up in these territories. These Islamist network structures prepare the ground for devising more ambitious plans to reformat the country’s political field.

“Leaders of some Muslim organizations openly engage in heavy criticism of the activities of law enforcement agencies and publicly support the today’s migration policy, advocating the mass importation of their fellow believers from Central Asia. According to some experts, a sustainable and influential ‘Islamist lobby’ has developed in Russia. Taking advantage of this, the Salafist wing of Muslims has tried out in different regions a new format for them: authorized rallies, mobilizing their supporters there.

“Enjoying such network organizations, the terrorists face no problems in recruiting supporters. Public activist Roman Yuneman, rightly points out: ‘No matter who was behind the organization of the terrorist attack, whether it was HUR [Ukrainian intelligence][4] or not, it is important to remember: mass uncontrolled migration facilitates an ideal recruiting base for terrorists, criminals, or any intelligence services. Diasporas and illegal employment services, hostels and ‘rubber apartments,’[5] markets, ethnic MMA clubs and gyms, hidden prayer rooms and clandestine mosques – all this grey infrastructure with its closed economy and corrupt connections will endlessly generate recruits for organized crime and terrorist structures. And then such people can be recruited by HUR, banned ISIS, you name it… [It is necessary] to destroy the recruitment base via institutional measures: radical restriction of the inflow of migrants, visa regime for the rest [who wishes to enter the country], employer must be responsible [for his migrant employees], tougher penalties for fictitious residence permits and ‘rubber apartments,’ zero tolerance regime [toward migrants].’

“In turn, political analyst Nikolai Sevostyanov notes that there are hundreds of thousands of people who have obtained Russian citizenship circumventing the law by ‘negotiating [the price of such venture]’ at closed migrant chat rooms, where any issue can be dealt with. Migration, according to the analyst, ‘has turned into a pernicious mold eating away at the state.’

“‘Migration has become a threat to the state per se. There is a full-fledged army stationed in our cities, living by its own rules, in its own parallel world, beyond the reach of Russian laws, which is overflown with Wahhabi dogma and hatred of the indigenous population…

“The first thing to do: to conduct a comprehensive audit of passports issued over the recent years (at least over eight last years), and revoke citizenship from those who obtained it with violations. The second thing – is to declare a temporary moratorium on granting citizenship to those Central Asians, who do not belong to the indigenous peoples of Russia. The third – is to implement a ‘zero-tolerance’ regime in relation to any criminals among naturalized citizens. And the fourth thing to do is to eliminate organizing structures that contribute to the formation of judicial, security and economic mechanisms parallel to the state [ones],’ said Sevostyanov.

“As a matter of fact, labor migration to Russia is difficult to analyze logically, since, as political scientist Yuri Baranchik noted, it looks less like labor migration and more like barbarian invasions.[6]

“Wherein, it does not seem that officials are planning to change anything. Migration policy lobbyists, who immediately after the terrorist attack began propagated narratives via some media outlets (in particular, via ‘Kommersant’ newspaper) that the terrorists were not natives of Central Asia, but ‘Slavs with false beards,’ are now dispersing other narratives. [The latter claim] that those who advocate changes in migration policy are ‘agents of enemy intelligence services,’ ‘racists,’ ‘inciters of ethnic hatred,’ etc.

“Naturally, there are those who actively advocate for an immediate toughening of migration policy, for example, State Duma deputies Mikhail Matveev and Mikhail Sheremet. The latter proposed to limit the entry of migrants into Russia, at least for the duration of the special military operation [the war in Ukraine]. Alas, in essence, this is a lone voice in the wilderness.

“Be that as it may, without changes in migration policy, the threat of new terrorist attacks will continue to remain high, because Islamic radicalism in Russia enjoys ‘fertile soil.’

“If now the ‘preachers’ can easily find, among their supporters, those who are ready to kill people in the ‘Crocus City Hall’ venue in Krasnogorsk, then what will happen if they call for even more atrocious actions?”


[1] Topwar.ru/239011-propovednika-slushal-terakt-v-krokus-siti-holl-kak-rezultat-provalnoj-migracionnoj-politiki.html, March 27, 2024.

[2] Topwar.ru/index.php?do=go&url=aHR0cHM6Ly90b3B3YXIucnUvMjI4MjMxLXZzZW1pcm55ai1kemhpaGFkLXVncm96YS1uZS10b2xrby1ldnJvcGUtaS1penJhaWxqdS1uby1pLXJvc3NpaS5odG1s)

[3] The syntax of the sentences is broken due to the detainees’ poor knowledge of the Russian language.

[4] Main Directorate of Intelligence of the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine (HUR)

[5] “Rubber apartments” is a colloquial term for a residence used to register migrants en masse. A single such apartment building can “host” thousands of migrant workers.

[6] The author refers to the so-called migration period, or barbarian invasion of the Roman Empire 100-500 CE.

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