wnd--2020-01-08--The new racism: Hatred of old white guys

A voter may dislike a black , homosexual or female candidate , but it 's not likely that he would openly admit it .
However , diversity-crazed leftist/progressive Democrats have openly condemned the physical characteristics of some of their 2020 presidential candidates .
Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are leading the polls despite the fact that they have been condemned as old white men .
While Pete Buttigieg is homosexual , something that pleases diversity crazies , he is also a white man , young and religious .
With Kamala Harris ' departure from the race , the Democratic field @ @ @ @ @ @ @ color .
Another , Sen. Cory Booker , stands at 2 % in the polls ; his days are numbered .
That means the only Democratic candidates polling high are those condemned as old white people – two men and one woman , Elizabeth Warren .
LaTosha Brown , the co-founder of Black Voters Matter , said she was initially eager for Joe Biden to enter the race but now has second thoughts .
Brown said : `` I 'm over white men running the country .
I do n't know if him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ field .
He has name recognition , but his strength is also his weakness . ''
Former presidential candidate Howard Dean lamented , `` If we have two old white guys at the top of this ticket , we will lose . ''
The newest entry into the presidential sweepstakes , Michael Bloomberg , had to apologize for what some see as his diversity insensitiveness , namely that of calling fellow presidential candidate Cory Booker `` well-spoken '' in a TV interview .
The New Jersey senator said he was `` taken aback @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's racist `` trope . ''
Michael Moore gave us his racist warning : `` Two-thirds of all white guys voted for Trump .
That means anytime you see three white guys walking at you , down the street toward you , two of them voted for Trump .
You need to move over to the other sidewalk because these are not good people that are walking toward you .
You should be afraid of them . ''
This is the new racism , much of it learned and taught at our nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them . ''
The stupid ideas about inclusion and diversity originate with academics on college campuses .
If their ideas did n't infect the rest of society , they might be a source of entertainment .
But these cancerous ideas have infected society .
Statements such as `` I 'm over white men running the country , '' or `` If we have two old white guys at the top of this ticket , we will lose '' are examples of that cancer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote `` The War Against White People '' in Minding the Campus .
He declared : `` Anti-white hate is now mainstream American culture .
Not just by racial extremists such as Black Lives Matter , for whom statements such as 'all lives matter ' or 'blue lives matter ' are racist .
Our highest leaders sing the same song . ''
When Barack Obama was campaigning for the presidency in 2008 , he said of working-class white voters , `` They get bitter , they cling to guns or religion or antipathy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations . ''
During the 2016 presidential campaign , candidate Hillary Clinton claimed that half of Donald Trump 's supporters were `` a basket of deplorables '' who were `` racist , sexist , homophobic , xenophobic , Islamophobic – you name it . ''
Do you think Clinton was talking about Trump 's black , Asian and Hispanic supporters ?
No , she was talking about millions of Trump 's white supporters .
Then there 's Sarah Jeong , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ board and graduate of the University of California , Berkeley , and Harvard Law School .
She expressed publicly many anti-white opinions .
Among them are : `` The world could get by just fine with zero white people . ''
`` Dumba -- f–-ing white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pi -- ing on fire hydrants . ''
It 's `` kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men . ''
I guarantee you that The New York Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statements about black , Hispanic or homosexual people .
The bottom line is that the new racism , born in academia , is just as ugly as the old racism .

A voter may dislike a black, homosexual or female candidate, but it's not likely that he would openly admit it. However, diversity-crazed leftist/progressive Democrats have openly condemned the physical characteristics of some of their 2020 presidential candidates. Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are leading the polls despite the fact that they have been condemned as old white men. While Pete Buttigieg is homosexual, something that pleases diversity crazies, he is also a white man, young and religious. With Kamala Harris' departure from the race, the Democratic field has lost one of its persons of color. Another, Sen. Cory Booker, stands at 2% in the polls; his days are numbered. That means the only Democratic candidates polling high are those condemned as old white people – two men and one woman, Elizabeth Warren.
LaTosha Brown, the co-founder of Black Voters Matter, said she was initially eager for Joe Biden to enter the race but now has second thoughts. Brown said: "I'm over white men running the country. I don't know if him (sic) getting in changes the field. He has name recognition, but his strength is also his weakness." Former presidential candidate Howard Dean lamented, "If we have two old white guys at the top of this ticket, we will lose." The newest entry into the presidential sweepstakes, Michael Bloomberg, had to apologize for what some see as his diversity insensitiveness, namely that of calling fellow presidential candidate Cory Booker "well-spoken" in a TV interview. The New Jersey senator said he was "taken aback" by what he saw as Bloomberg's racist "trope."
Michael Moore gave us his racist warning: "Two-thirds of all white guys voted for Trump. That means anytime you see three white guys walking at you, down the street toward you, two of them voted for Trump. You need to move over to the other sidewalk because these are not good people that are walking toward you. You should be afraid of them."
This is the new racism, much of it learned and taught at our nation's colleges. George Orwell said, "Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them." The stupid ideas about inclusion and diversity originate with academics on college campuses. If their ideas didn't infect the rest of society, they might be a source of entertainment. But these cancerous ideas have infected society. Statements such as "I'm over white men running the country," or "If we have two old white guys at the top of this ticket, we will lose" are examples of that cancer.
Last year, Philip Carl Salzman wrote "The War Against White People" in Minding the Campus. He declared: "Anti-white hate is now mainstream American culture. Not just by racial extremists such as Black Lives Matter, for whom statements such as 'all lives matter' or 'blue lives matter' are racist. Our highest leaders sing the same song."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
When Barack Obama was campaigning for the presidency in 2008, he said of working-class white voters, "They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." During the 2016 presidential campaign, candidate Hillary Clinton claimed that half of Donald Trump's supporters were "a basket of deplorables" who were "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic – you name it." Do you think Clinton was talking about Trump's black, Asian and Hispanic supporters? No, she was talking about millions of Trump's white supporters.
Then there's Sarah Jeong, a member of The New York Times editorial board and graduate of the University of California, Berkeley, and Harvard Law School. She expressed publicly many anti-white opinions. Among them are: "The world could get by just fine with zero white people." "Dumba-- f–-ing white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pi--ing on fire hydrants." It's "kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men." I guarantee you that The New York Times would have fired any employee making similar statements about black, Hispanic or homosexual people.
The bottom line is that the new racism, born in academia, is just as ugly as the old racism.


wnd--2020-01-08--Liberal takeover of Methodists despite losing LGBT vote

At their annual conference last February , conservative Methodists won the vote to keep the third-largest Christian denomination in America traditional on the subjects of marriage and the clergy .
They decided that , like the Catholic Church and many other denominations , the United Methodist Church would continue with a one-man , one-woman approach to matrimony and not have openly LGBTQ clergy .
As the largest Christian denomination in the United States other than the Catholic Church and the Southern Baptists , both of which prohibit same-sex marriage , the United Methodist Church has roots going back to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American Revolution made it no longer practical for colonists to remain members of the Anglican Church run by the King of England .
Methodist presidents of the United States have included George W. Bush , William McKinley , Rutherford Hayes , Ulysses S. Grant , and James K. Polk .
Today there are nearly 7 million Americans who are members of the United Methodist Church , and more than 5 million mostly conservative foreign members , with an estimated 32,000 congregations worldwide .
A marriage by a Catholic in a Methodist Church is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approval is sought beforehand .
About a hundred American colleges and a small number of secondary schools have Methodist roots .
The university elites demanded that doctrine be changed to authorize same-sex marriage ceremonies in Methodist churches .
But after a full debate of the issue , Methodists rejected changing their doctrine by a healthy 53-47 % margin at their conference held in St. Louis last February .
The conservative voters even prevailed in strengthening the traditional doctrine on marriage .
So why are they losing anyway , despite winning the vote ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a group of Methodists announced a brokered settlement by which the United Methodist Church would adopt same-sex marriage and ordain openly LGBTQ clergy .
If approved at its upcoming international conference in May , conservatives would have to accept this doctrinal change or get out .
A supermajority vote would be required before a conservative congregation could split off and continue with the traditional doctrine .
The settlement offers them $ 25 million in church funds to leave , which is a clever way for the liberal side to try to buy off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the entire church for themselves .
But why are n't the liberals who lost the election by 6 percentage points the ones who are leaving instead ?
Rather , in a deceptive takeover strategy , they are using church funds to buy themselves a majority .
History buffs might notice that in the Russian Revolution of 1917 the victorious minority called themselves Bolsheviks ( which means majority ) and unfairly labeled their opponents as Mensheviks ( which means minority ) .
When leftists are in a minority , then they look for other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a $ 39 million payment ( from church funds ) on the issue of race , which is irrelevant to the marriage dispute .
Perhaps it is an attempt to win over African congregations which oppose same-sex marriage .
Another portion of the settlement allows the clergy of conservative congregations to hold onto their pensions which they have earned .
But they have a legal right to their pensions without the settlement .
Christianity Today , the same liberal newspaper that called for President Trump to be removed from office , quickly blessed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deal to allow the liberal faction to take over the United Methodist Church is somehow `` an answer to prayer , '' even for conservatives .
The leadership of the single largest Methodist congregation , the United Methodist Church of the Resurrection in the Kansas City area , immediately announced its support for the settlement .
But it had already been pushing to change the Methodist doctrine about marriage .
It is ironic that a similar approach by Democrats is taken about President Trump .
They lost the 2016 election , but instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to try to nullify it .
As with the impeachment of Trump , the relentless attempt to take control of the Methodist church is coming from university elites .
They are akin to the wealthy financial and media supporters who have made Pete Buttigieg a contender in the Democratic presidential race for its nomination , despite being merely a former mayor who lost in a landslide in his attempt to be elected to statewide office .
A total of 93 college and university presidents demanded that the Methodist Church change its centuries-old doctrine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent defeat of the British Labour Party , working-class Americans reject the ivory tower agenda .
The proposed settlement is not really a `` split '' or a `` schism '' as it is being promoted .
Rather , it is an attempt to pay conservatives to abandon and leave their own church in which they have a majority , in order to allow the liberal minority to take it over .

At their annual conference last February, conservative Methodists won the vote to keep the third-largest Christian denomination in America traditional on the subjects of marriage and the clergy. They decided that, like the Catholic Church and many other denominations, the United Methodist Church would continue with a one-man, one-woman approach to matrimony and not have openly LGBTQ clergy.
As the largest Christian denomination in the United States other than the Catholic Church and the Southern Baptists, both of which prohibit same-sex marriage, the United Methodist Church has roots going back to the fiery Anglican preacher John Wesley. The American Revolution made it no longer practical for colonists to remain members of the Anglican Church run by the King of England.
Methodist presidents of the United States have included George W. Bush, William McKinley, Rutherford Hayes, Ulysses S. Grant, and James K. Polk. Today there are nearly 7 million Americans who are members of the United Methodist Church, and more than 5 million mostly conservative foreign members, with an estimated 32,000 congregations worldwide.
A marriage by a Catholic in a Methodist Church is typically recognized by the Catholic Church if approval is sought beforehand. About a hundred American colleges and a small number of secondary schools have Methodist roots.
The university elites demanded that doctrine be changed to authorize same-sex marriage ceremonies in Methodist churches. But after a full debate of the issue, Methodists rejected changing their doctrine by a healthy 53-47% margin at their conference held in St. Louis last February.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The conservative voters even prevailed in strengthening the traditional doctrine on marriage. So why are they losing anyway, despite winning the vote?
Two days after New Year's, a group of Methodists announced a brokered settlement by which the United Methodist Church would adopt same-sex marriage and ordain openly LGBTQ clergy. If approved at its upcoming international conference in May, conservatives would have to accept this doctrinal change or get out.
A supermajority vote would be required before a conservative congregation could split off and continue with the traditional doctrine. The settlement offers them $25 million in church funds to leave, which is a clever way for the liberal side to try to buy off just enough opponents to take control of the entire church for themselves.
But why aren't the liberals who lost the election by 6 percentage points the ones who are leaving instead? Rather, in a deceptive takeover strategy, they are using church funds to buy themselves a majority.
History buffs might notice that in the Russian Revolution of 1917 the victorious minority called themselves Bolsheviks (which means majority) and unfairly labeled their opponents as Mensheviks (which means minority). When leftists are in a minority, then they look for other ways to win.
The settlement includes a $39 million payment (from church funds) on the issue of race, which is irrelevant to the marriage dispute. Perhaps it is an attempt to win over African congregations which oppose same-sex marriage.
Another portion of the settlement allows the clergy of conservative congregations to hold onto their pensions which they have earned. But they have a legal right to their pensions without the settlement.
Christianity Today, the same liberal newspaper that called for President Trump to be removed from office, quickly blessed the settlement. It declares that the deal to allow the liberal faction to take over the United Methodist Church is somehow "an answer to prayer," even for conservatives.
The leadership of the single largest Methodist congregation, the United Methodist Church of the Resurrection in the Kansas City area, immediately announced its support for the settlement. But it had already been pushing to change the Methodist doctrine about marriage.
It is ironic that a similar approach by Democrats is taken about President Trump. They lost the 2016 election, but instead of accepting the election outcome they maneuver to try to nullify it.
As with the impeachment of Trump, the relentless attempt to take control of the Methodist church is coming from university elites. They are akin to the wealthy financial and media supporters who have made Pete Buttigieg a contender in the Democratic presidential race for its nomination, despite being merely a former mayor who lost in a landslide in his attempt to be elected to statewide office.
A total of 93 college and university presidents demanded that the Methodist Church change its centuries-old doctrine about marriage. But as in the recent defeat of the British Labour Party, working-class Americans reject the ivory tower agenda.
The proposed settlement is not really a "split" or a "schism" as it is being promoted. Rather, it is an attempt to pay conservatives to abandon and leave their own church in which they have a majority, in order to allow the liberal minority to take it over.


wnd--2020-01-08--The absurd ignorance of members of Congress

Congressional hearings were created to educate lawmakers so they have knowledge before they pass bills or impeach a president .
Not today .
Today , hardly any education happens .
During the President Trump impeachment `` testimony , '' legislators tried to score points .
At least five times , Rep. Adam Schiff , D-Calif. , shut down criticism by shouting , `` Gentleman is not recognized ! ''
I get that politicians are eager for `` face time '' in front of a larger audience , but I assumed they would at least try to learn things .
Nope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ask real questions because they fear looking as dumb as then-Sen. Orrin Hatch , R-Utah , did at a hearing on Facebook .
He asked Mark Zuckerberg , `` How do you sustain a business model in which users do n't pay for your service ? ''
`` We run ads , '' smirked Zuckerberg .
`` I see , '' said Hatch .
What 's obvious to most people somehow eludes the oblivious `` experts '' in Congress .
At another Facebook hearing , Congress grilled Zuckerberg about his plan to launch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , `` I actually do n't know if Libra is going to work , but I believe it 's important to try new things . ''
He was right .
But instead of asking about technological or economic implications of the idea , Rep. Al Green , D-Texas , asked Zuckerberg , of the companies partnering with him , `` How many are headed by women ? ''
`` Congressman , I do not know the answer , '' replied Zuckerberg .
`` How many of them are minorities ? ''
asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the LGBTQ+ community ? ''
Green does n't want to learn anything .
He wants to sneer and score points .
Politicians ' sloppy ignorance is extraordinary .
Rep. Steve King , R-Iowa , grilled Google CEO Sundar Pichai about iPhones , citing a story about his granddaughter using one , leading Pichai to explain , `` Congressman , iPhone is made by a different company . ''
Today 's posturing is not what the founders had in mind when they invented hearings in 1789 .
George Mason said members of Congress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inspect the Conduct of public offices . ''
But today , they are more likely to threaten CEOs and bully opponents .
`` Are you stupid ? ''
then-Rep. Darrell Issa , R-Calif. , said to one witness .
They want to showboat , not learn .
Often , they ask questions even when they know the answers .
`` Ms. DeVos , have you ever taken out a student loan ? ''
asked Sen. Elizabeth Warren , D-Mass.
, of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos .
`` Have any of your children had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that DeVos is a billionaire , but she wanted to score points with her fans .
One of the louder showboaters today is self-proclaimed socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , D-N.Y. She asked Wells Fargo boss Tim Sloan , `` Why was the bank involved in the caging of children ? ''
Some of today 's hearings are useful in that we get to see how absurd and ignorant our representatives can be .
During a hearing on military personnel being stationed on the island of Guam , Rep. Hank Johnson , D-Ga. , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the whole island will become so overly populated that it would tip over and capsize . ''
Really .
He said that .
Then there was the time Rep. Maxine Waters , D-Calif. , chair of the House Financial Services Committee , summoned bank CEOs to Washington and demanded , `` What are you guys doing to help us with this student loan debt ?
! ''
`` We stopped making student loans in 2007 , '' Bank of America 's Brian Moynihan told her .
`` We actually ended student lending in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Corbat .
`` When the government took over student lending in 2010 ... we stopped doing all student lending , '' explained Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase .
The chair of the Financial Services Committee did n't even know that her own party kicked bankers out of the student loan business , insisting that government take over ?
!
Apparently not .
She is so eager to blame business for government 's mistakes that she did n't research her own topic .
The more I watch politicians , the more I hate them @

Congressional hearings were created to educate lawmakers so they have knowledge before they pass bills or impeach a president.
Not today. Today, hardly any education happens.
During the President Trump impeachment "testimony," legislators tried to score points. At least five times, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., shut down criticism by shouting, "Gentleman is not recognized!"
I get that politicians are eager for "face time" in front of a larger audience, but I assumed they would at least try to learn things. Nope.
Maybe they don't want to ask real questions because they fear looking as dumb as then-Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, did at a hearing on Facebook. He asked Mark Zuckerberg, "How do you sustain a business model in which users don't pay for your service?"
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
"We run ads," smirked Zuckerberg. "I see," said Hatch.
What's obvious to most people somehow eludes the oblivious "experts" in Congress.
At another Facebook hearing, Congress grilled Zuckerberg about his plan to launch an electronic currency called Libra. Zuckerberg said, "I actually don't know if Libra is going to work, but I believe it's important to try new things."
He was right. But instead of asking about technological or economic implications of the idea, Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, asked Zuckerberg, of the companies partnering with him, "How many are headed by women?"
"Congressman, I do not know the answer," replied Zuckerberg.
"How many of them are minorities?" asked Green. "Are there any members of the LGBTQ+ community?"
Green doesn't want to learn anything. He wants to sneer and score points.
Politicians' sloppy ignorance is extraordinary. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, grilled Google CEO Sundar Pichai about iPhones, citing a story about his granddaughter using one, leading Pichai to explain, "Congressman, iPhone is made by a different company."
Today's posturing is not what the founders had in mind when they invented hearings in 1789.
George Mason said members of Congress "possess inquisitorial powers" to "inspect the Conduct of public offices."
Yes! Investigate government.
But today, they are more likely to threaten CEOs and bully opponents.
"Are you stupid?" then-Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said to one witness. They want to showboat, not learn. Often, they ask questions even when they know the answers.
"Ms. DeVos, have you ever taken out a student loan?" asked Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos. "Have any of your children had to borrow money?"
Warren knows that DeVos is a billionaire, but she wanted to score points with her fans.
One of the louder showboaters today is self-proclaimed socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. She asked Wells Fargo boss Tim Sloan, "Why was the bank involved in the caging of children?"
"We weren't," replied Sloan.
Some of today's hearings are useful in that we get to see how absurd and ignorant our representatives can be.
During a hearing on military personnel being stationed on the island of Guam, Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., said, "My fear is that the whole island will become so overly populated that it would tip over and capsize." Really. He said that.
Then there was the time Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., chair of the House Financial Services Committee, summoned bank CEOs to Washington and demanded, "What are you guys doing to help us with this student loan debt?!"
"We stopped making student loans in 2007," Bank of America's Brian Moynihan told her.
"We actually ended student lending in 2009," added Citigroup's Michael Corbat.
"When the government took over student lending in 2010 ... we stopped doing all student lending," explained Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase.
The chair of the Financial Services Committee didn't even know that her own party kicked bankers out of the student loan business, insisting that government take over?! Apparently not. She is so eager to blame business for government's mistakes that she didn't research her own topic.
The more I watch politicians, the more I hate them.
Let's give them less power.


Presidential red lines

Ilhan Omar 's response to Soleimani strike shows why she was n't told in the first place

* Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required.
Thank you for contacting us. Please check your email inbox to confirm your message and send it to our editorial team.


wnd--2020-01-08--Ricky Gervais' mind-blowing monologue

Ricky Gervais' mind-blowing monologue

( AMERICAN SPECTATOR ) -- If you missed Ricky Gervais ’ mind-blowing opening monologue at the Golden Globe Awards , then now might be a good time to fix that .
If you ’ re conservative , or even if you ’ re just not a social justice warrior , chances are you ’ ll agree that it was the freshest breath of air that town has felt in decades .
Gervais , who was in his fifth , and allegedly final , year hosting the event , came to the point where he simply didn ’ t care about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crowd .
The funny thing is , Gervais is anything but a man of the right .
He ’ s a liberal , but he ’ s also a defender of free speech and an equal-opportunity poker of fun .
Gervais is also a sworn enemy of the SJW cancel-culture crowd so many Hollywood swells have put themselves out as part of .
So his opening monologue was delivered in an “ I don ’ t care anymore ” spirit , and within that spirit he ignited some military-grade truth bombs and threw @ @ @ @ @

(AMERICAN SPECTATOR) -- If you missed Ricky Gervais’ mind-blowing opening monologue at the Golden Globe Awards, then now might be a good time to fix that. If you’re conservative, or even if you’re just not a social justice warrior, chances are you’ll agree that it was the freshest breath of air that town has felt in decades.
Gervais, who was in his fifth, and allegedly final, year hosting the event, came to the point where he simply didn’t care about being nice to the hypocritical Hollywood Left crowd. The funny thing is, Gervais is anything but a man of the right. He’s a liberal, but he’s also a defender of free speech and an equal-opportunity poker of fun. Gervais is also a sworn enemy of the SJW cancel-culture crowd so many Hollywood swells have put themselves out as part of.
So his opening monologue was delivered in an “I don’t care anymore” spirit, and within that spirit he ignited some military-grade truth bombs and threw them into the crowd.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-01-08--My 2-point plan to Keep America Great

My 2-point plan to Keep America Great

My plan to `` Keep America Great '' is very simple : 1 ) Stop exporting American soldiers to countries that hate our guts .
2 ) Stop importing people from countries that hate our guts .
When I voted for Donald Trump in 2016 , I thought this was the plan .
The `` America First '' champion rightly assailed Barack Obama for recklessly endangering the lives of our soldiers to pursue politically driven endless wars .
President Trump promised to build an effective wall on the southern border .
He enacted tough travel restrictions , upheld by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ countries whose terror-coddling governments pose national security threats .
Yet , here we are at the dawn of 2020 with thousands of U.S. troops headed back to the Stone Age Middle East maw , Mexican drug cartels on the loose while our Border Patrol hands out diapers to illegal immigrants and refugees from around the world – including nearly 1,400 welcomed just last year from the very high-risk countries the Trump travel ban was supposed to block – transforming the nation without the consent of the governed .
The leaky block list includes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ launched multiple missiles at U.S. airbases late Tuesday in retaliation for our deadly airstrike last week that killed Quds Gen. Qassem Soleimani .
TRENDING : Nunes : Inspector general who started impeachment now under investigation Now , we are on heightened alert here in our homeland with authorities nervous that Hezbollah sleeper cells ( which I 've documented since writing `` Invasion '' in 2002 ) might strike from within .
Some of you still wonder why I write so frequently and vehemently about our failed immigration and entrance policies .
It 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the survival of our country than the right to determine who gets in and the ability to enforce it .
As I reported last year , thanks to an executive order signed by Trump in September , local communities were given the explicit opt-in rights to stem the lucrative tide of refugees coming largely from Third World countries and jihadist breeding grounds .
This Wednesday , religious `` charities '' that profit the most from this multi-billion-dollar racket will be in court to assert blanket , open-borders veto power over the people .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Maryland will hear arguments from vested refugee resettlement interests who oppose Trump 's order requiring government contractors to obtain written consent from all localities and states in which they plan to resettle refugees .
The Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society , Church World Service and Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service – three of the nine State Department partners who resettle all refugees – argue that the federal government should prioritize family reunification of foreign refugees over local control .
Translation : Americans come last .
The lawsuit assails the White House executive order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organizations – including Plaintiffs – that have spent decades developing networks , expertise , and resources to carry out the American ideal of welcoming refugees . ''
Those `` resources '' come from you and me : Tax subsidies that constitute the vast majority of these nonprofit activists ' budgets .
Over the past decade , according to an analysis by immigration researcher James Simpson , the three plaintiff groups have raked in the following amounts from the federal refugee resettlement program : – Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services : $ 471.6 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
The refugee resettlement contractors , in turn , spread their massive wealth – from both public and private sources – to a galaxy of subcontractors looking to register Democratic voters , fill their pews and recruit new clients and constituents .
The `` Interfaith Immigration Coalition '' holding a protest event after the hearing on Wednesday to support the refugee pipeline includes : Columban Center for Advocacy and Outreach ; Congregation of Our Lady of Charity of the Good Shepherd ; U.S .
Provinces ; Daughters of Charity ; Disciples Refugee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; Interfaith Immigration Coalition ; Jewish Council for Public Affairs ; Leadership Conference of Women Religious ; National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd ; National Council of Jewish Women ; Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism ; Rise for Refuge ; Sisters of Mercy of the Americas - Institute Leadership Team ; T'ruah ; The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights ; The United Church of Christ ; and We Are All America .
Thanks to pressure from these groups with bottomless budgets and clout , 18 Republican – yes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against Trump and self-determination in favor of increased refugee settlement , including : Doug Ducey of Arizona , Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas , Eric Holcomb of Indiana , Kim Reynolds of Iowa , Brad Little of Idaho , Mike Parsons of Missouri , Larry Hogan of Maryland , Charlie Baker of Massachusetts , Mike DeWine of Ohio , Kevin Stitt of Oklahoma , Pete Ricketts of Nebraska , Chris Sununu of New Hampshire , Doug Burgum of North Dakota , Kristi Noem of South Dakota , Bill Lee of Tennessee , Gary Herbert @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Virginia and Phil Scott of Vermont .
The names must be named and the sellouts must be shamed , especially as war breaks out on all fronts .
What 's the point of sending young American troops to fight enemies `` over there '' if we are welcoming them by the tens and hundreds of thousands over here ?

My plan to "Keep America Great" is very simple:
1) Stop exporting American soldiers to countries that hate our guts.
2) Stop importing people from countries that hate our guts.
When I voted for Donald Trump in 2016, I thought this was the plan. The "America First" champion rightly assailed Barack Obama for recklessly endangering the lives of our soldiers to pursue politically driven endless wars. President Trump promised to build an effective wall on the southern border. He enacted tough travel restrictions, upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, on visitors from countries whose terror-coddling governments pose national security threats.
Yet, here we are at the dawn of 2020 with thousands of U.S. troops headed back to the Stone Age Middle East maw, Mexican drug cartels on the loose while our Border Patrol hands out diapers to illegal immigrants and refugees from around the world – including nearly 1,400 welcomed just last year from the very high-risk countries the Trump travel ban was supposed to block – transforming the nation without the consent of the governed. The leaky block list includes Syria, Iraq and Iran, which launched multiple missiles at U.S. airbases late Tuesday in retaliation for our deadly airstrike last week that killed Quds Gen. Qassem Soleimani.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Now, we are on heightened alert here in our homeland with authorities nervous that Hezbollah sleeper cells (which I've documented since writing "Invasion" in 2002) might strike from within.
Some of you still wonder why I write so frequently and vehemently about our failed immigration and entrance policies. It's because nothing matters more right now to the survival of our country than the right to determine who gets in and the ability to enforce it.
As I reported last year, thanks to an executive order signed by Trump in September, local communities were given the explicit opt-in rights to stem the lucrative tide of refugees coming largely from Third World countries and jihadist breeding grounds. This Wednesday, religious "charities" that profit the most from this multi-billion-dollar racket will be in court to assert blanket, open-borders veto power over the people.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland will hear arguments from vested refugee resettlement interests who oppose Trump's order requiring government contractors to obtain written consent from all localities and states in which they plan to resettle refugees. The Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, Church World Service and Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service – three of the nine State Department partners who resettle all refugees – argue that the federal government should prioritize family reunification of foreign refugees over local control. Translation: Americans come last.
The lawsuit assails the White House executive order for threatening "to systematically dismantle the organizations – including Plaintiffs – that have spent decades developing networks, expertise, and resources to carry out the American ideal of welcoming refugees." Those "resources" come from you and me: Tax subsidies that constitute the vast majority of these nonprofit activists' budgets. Over the past decade, according to an analysis by immigration researcher James Simpson, the three plaintiff groups have raked in the following amounts from the federal refugee resettlement program:
– Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services: $471.6 million (94% from of its budget).
– Church World Service: $433.3 million (72% of its budget).
– Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society: $186.1 million (54% of its budget).
The refugee resettlement contractors, in turn, spread their massive wealth – from both public and private sources – to a galaxy of subcontractors looking to register Democratic voters, fill their pews and recruit new clients and constituents. The "Interfaith Immigration Coalition" holding a protest event after the hearing on Wednesday to support the refugee pipeline includes: Columban Center for Advocacy and Outreach; Congregation of Our Lady of Charity of the Good Shepherd; U.S. Provinces; Daughters of Charity; Disciples Refugee & Immigration Ministries; Franciscan Action Network; Interfaith Immigration Coalition; Jewish Council for Public Affairs; Leadership Conference of Women Religious; National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd; National Council of Jewish Women; Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism; Rise for Refuge; Sisters of Mercy of the Americas - Institute Leadership Team; T'ruah; The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights; The United Church of Christ; and We Are All America.
Thanks to pressure from these groups with bottomless budgets and clout, 18 Republican – yes, Republican – governors are also standing against Trump and self-determination in favor of increased refugee settlement, including: Doug Ducey of Arizona, Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, Eric Holcomb of Indiana, Kim Reynolds of Iowa, Brad Little of Idaho, Mike Parsons of Missouri, Larry Hogan of Maryland, Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Kevin Stitt of Oklahoma, Pete Ricketts of Nebraska, Chris Sununu of New Hampshire, Doug Burgum of North Dakota, Kristi Noem of South Dakota, Bill Lee of Tennessee, Gary Herbert of Utah, Jim Justice of West Virginia and Phil Scott of Vermont.
The names must be named and the sellouts must be shamed, especially as war breaks out on all fronts. What's the point of sending young American troops to fight enemies "over there" if we are welcoming them by the tens and hundreds of thousands over here?


wnd--2020-01-08--Trump responds to Iran attack on U.S. base in Iraq

( NEWS.COM.AU ) -- Donald Trump has responded to Iran ’ s missile attack and subsequent series of threats by @ @ @ @ @ ” .
Taking to Twitter , the President praised the US military and announced that @ @ @ @ @ statement tomorrow morning .
There were initial reports Mr Trump would give a televised address @ @ @ @ @ House has since confirmed this will not be occurring .

(NEWS.COM.AU) -- Donald Trump has responded to Iran’s missile attack and subsequent series of threats by declaring “all is well”.
Taking to Twitter, the President praised the US military and announced that he would be issuing a statement tomorrow morning.
There were initial reports Mr Trump would give a televised address tonight, but the White House has since confirmed this will not be occurring.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-01-08--Atheists demand U.S. town remove cross from mural

An organization of atheists and others who oppose religion in public life is demanding that an Illinois town remove a cross from a mural memorializing a famous white 9/11 cross .
But the non-profit First Liberty Institute is advising officials in Effingham , Illinois , to ignore the complaint by the Freedom from Religion Foundation , because the image is protected by U.S. Supreme Court precedent .
The Washington Examiner reported the Wisconsin-based FFRF urged Effingham officials to erase a cross depicted in a mural on an overpass near the town 's high school .
The image also includes an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a mural `` that depicts nothing except a Latin cross alongside the American flag sends a clear message : that patriotism and religiosity are interrelated . ''
TRENDING : Nunes : Inspector general who started impeachment now under investigation First Liberty responded with a letter to Effingham Mayor Mike Schutzbach arguing the mural is legal and protected by the Supreme Court 's decision on the American Legion cross in Bladensburg , Maryland .
`` The Cross at the Crossroads ' two decades of prominence as part of Effingham surely has established it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the community , ' '' said First Liberty .
First Liberty successfully defended the Bladensburg cross at the U.S. Supreme Court .
The cross in Effingham is a `` recognized symbol in and of the city and an unmistakable community hallmark , '' said Roger Byron , senior counsel to First Liberty .
`` Formally dedicated days after the attacks of September 11 , the Cross depicts Effingham 's tradition of patriotism and unity , '' he said .
`` There is little wonder it was included in a mural on city @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an established land mark should carry that same 'special significance . '
'' Byron said the argument to remove the cross was `` markedly light on law . ''
The city , he advised , should disregard the complaint .
Otherwise , Effingham could be perceived as being `` hostile '' to such symbols , he noted .

An organization of atheists and others who oppose religion in public life is demanding that an Illinois town remove a cross from a mural memorializing a famous white 9/11 cross.
But the non-profit First Liberty Institute is advising officials in Effingham, Illinois, to ignore the complaint by the Freedom from Religion Foundation, because the image is protected by U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
The Washington Examiner reported the Wisconsin-based FFRF urged Effingham officials to erase a cross depicted in a mural on an overpass near the town's high school. The image also includes an American flag.
The atheist group complained that a mural "that depicts nothing except a Latin cross alongside the American flag sends a clear message: that patriotism and religiosity are interrelated."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
First Liberty responded with a letter to Effingham Mayor Mike Schutzbach arguing the mural is legal and protected by the Supreme Court's decision on the American Legion cross in Bladensburg, Maryland.
"The Cross at the Crossroads' two decades of prominence as part of Effingham surely has established it as just such a symbol and 'part of the community,'" said First Liberty.
First Liberty successfully defended the Bladensburg cross at the U.S. Supreme Court.
The cross in Effingham is a "recognized symbol in and of the city and an unmistakable community hallmark," said Roger Byron, senior counsel to First Liberty.
"Formally dedicated days after the attacks of September 11, the Cross depicts Effingham's tradition of patriotism and unity," he said. "There is little wonder it was included in a mural on city property. A community mural commemorating such an established land mark should carry that same 'special significance.'"
Byron said the argument to remove the cross was "markedly light on law."
The city, he advised, should disregard the complaint.
Otherwise, Effingham could be perceived as being "hostile" to such symbols, he noted.


wnd--2020-01-08--Muslim charged for starting Australian wildfire laughs after court hearing

A Muslim teen who was accused along with his brother of starting a fire in Australia was seen laughing as he left court in Sydney on Tuesday .
Fadi Zraika and his brother Abraham , both 18 , allegedly set off fireworks that started a grass fire at a park in Guildford , near Sydney , on Dec. 22 , the Daily Telegraph reported .
On Monday , the New South Wales police force announced it had charged 24 people with deliberately starting catastrophic fires that have ravaged many parts of the country .
The blazes are so widespread they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Daily Telegraph said police were called to the park about 2:40 p.m. after reports of several loud explosions were followed by small grass fires that spread rapidly in sudden winds .
TRENDING : Nunes : Inspector general who started impeachment now under investigation The fires were put out by the Rural Fire Service .
Jihad Watch Director Robert Spencer noted Islamic jihadis have identified setting fires as a tool of jihad .
In 2018 , the ISIS-linked Al-Ansar Media claimed wildfires in California were retribution for America 's participation in the civil war @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that William Scott , a former National Security Agency official , said terrorists had been using fire as a tactical weapon .
Scott said at the time that after U.S. Navy SEALs killed al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden , they `` captured a treasure trove of material that provided some unprecedented insight into the al-Qaida plans .
And one of those was a detailed campaign for starting fires throughout the [ American ] West . ''
In 2012 , al-Qaida called on its followers to set forest fires in the United States .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ organization presented instructions for the creation and ignition of `` ember bombs . ''
In 2003 , an FBI memo warned that a senior al-Qaida detainee told interrogators he planned to spark multiple , catastrophic wildfires simultaneously in Colorado , Montana , Utah and Wyoming to strike a blow to the U.S. economy .

A Muslim teen who was accused along with his brother of starting a fire in Australia was seen laughing as he left court in Sydney on Tuesday.
Fadi Zraika and his brother Abraham, both 18, allegedly set off fireworks that started a grass fire at a park in Guildford, near Sydney, on Dec. 22, the Daily Telegraph reported.
On Monday, the New South Wales police force announced it had charged 24 people with deliberately starting catastrophic fires that have ravaged many parts of the country. The blazes are so widespread they can be seen from space.
The Daily Telegraph said police were called to the park about 2:40 p.m. after reports of several loud explosions were followed by small grass fires that spread rapidly in sudden winds.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The fires were put out by the Rural Fire Service.
Jihad Watch Director Robert Spencer noted Islamic jihadis have identified setting fires as a tool of jihad.
In 2018, the ISIS-linked Al-Ansar Media claimed wildfires in California were retribution for America's participation in the civil war in Syria.
WND reported in 2013 that William Scott, a former National Security Agency official, said terrorists had been using fire as a tactical weapon.
Scott said at the time that after U.S. Navy SEALs killed al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden, they "captured a treasure trove of material that provided some unprecedented insight into the al-Qaida plans. And one of those was a detailed campaign for starting fires throughout the [American] West."
In 2012, al-Qaida called on its followers to set forest fires in the United States. In its magazine Inspire, the terrorist organization presented instructions for the creation and ignition of "ember bombs."
In 2003, an FBI memo warned that a senior al-Qaida detainee told interrogators he planned to spark multiple, catastrophic wildfires simultaneously in Colorado, Montana, Utah and Wyoming to strike a blow to the U.S. economy.


wnd--2020-01-08--Nunes: Inspector general who started impeachment now under investigation

The intelligence community inspector general who already had been rebuked for his handling of the whistleblower complaint that triggered the Democrats ' impeachment of President Trump is under investigation , according to Rep. Devin Nunes , R-Calif .
The House Intelligence Committee 's ranking member noted in an interview with investigative reporter Sara Carter that the transcript of Michael Atkinson 's testimony has never been released by the majority Democrats under the panel 's chairman , Adam Schiff .
Nunes said Atkinson is `` under active investigation . ''
`` I 'm not gon na go any farther than that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance to come in and prove his innocence , but my guess is Schiff , Atkinson , they do n't want that transcript out because it ’ s very damaging , '' Nunes said .
TRENDING : Nunes : Inspector general who started impeachment now under investigation The Conservative Tree House blog recalled an Oct. 6 radio interview with Nunes by `` Breitbart News Sunday '' host Matt Boyle in which the congressman called Atkinson 's testimony `` a joke . ''
The interview took place before it was revealed that Schiff 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the complaint was filed .
Nunes said in the October interview that Atkinson is `` either totally incompetent or part of the deep state , and he 's got a lot of questions he needs to answer because he knowingly changed the form and the requirements in order to make sure that this whistleblower complaint got out publicly . ''
The reference was to altering the requirement that a whistleblower have first-hand knowledge regarding the complaint .
The whistleblower , reported to be CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella , did not hear the phone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Volodymyr Zelensky that is at the center of the complaint .
`` So he 's either incompetent or in on it , '' Nunes said of the IG .
`` And he 's going to have more to answer for , I can promise you , because we are not going to let him go .
He is going to tell he truth about what happened . ''
The Conservative Tree House also noted that the Justice Department 's Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion that Atkinson 's internal justification for accepting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

The intelligence community inspector general who already had been rebuked for his handling of the whistleblower complaint that triggered the Democrats' impeachment of President Trump is under investigation, according to Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif.
The House Intelligence Committee's ranking member noted in an interview with investigative reporter Sara Carter that the transcript of Michael Atkinson's testimony has never been released by the majority Democrats under the panel's chairman, Adam Schiff.
Nunes said Atkinson is "under active investigation."
"I'm not gonna go any farther than that because you know obviously he has a chance to come in and prove his innocence, but my guess is Schiff, Atkinson, they don't want that transcript out because it’s very damaging," Nunes said.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The Conservative Tree House blog recalled an Oct. 6 radio interview with Nunes by "Breitbart News Sunday" host Matt Boyle in which the congressman called Atkinson's testimony "a joke."
The interview took place before it was revealed that Schiff's team had contact with the whistleblower before the complaint was filed.
Nunes said in the October interview that Atkinson is "either totally incompetent or part of the deep state, and he's got a lot of questions he needs to answer because he knowingly changed the form and the requirements in order to make sure that this whistleblower complaint got out publicly."
The reference was to altering the requirement that a whistleblower have first-hand knowledge regarding the complaint. The whistleblower, reported to be CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella, did not hear the phone call between President Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky that is at the center of the complaint.
"So he's either incompetent or in on it," Nunes said of the IG. "And he's going to have more to answer for, I can promise you, because we are not going to let him go. He is going to tell he truth about what happened."
The Conservative Tree House also noted that the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion that Atkinson's internal justification for accepting the whistleblower complaint was poor legal judgment.


wnd--2020-01-08--Iranian general: Objective still elimination of Israel, U.S. presence

A senior general in Iran 's Revolutionary Guard Corps says the killing of Qassem Soleimani will motivate Muslim youths around the world to pull Americans from embassies and military bases and hang them blindfolded from trees .
Gen. Mohammad Reza Naqdi , IRGC deputy commander for coordination , told the Iranian Ofogh TV on Jan. 3 that `` the Americans should sit down and watch what will happen in the region now . ''
Iran , he said , `` can do things to them in land and sea '' with missiles and drones , but he does not consider @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I do n't see these as real blows , '' he said , according to the Middle East Media Research Institute .
`` The blood of the martyrs is more powerful than our blows , more powerful than if we launch a few missiles or kill several of their senior officers and top agents .
The blood carries much more weight .
The blood does other things and that is what is important . ''
TRENDING : Nunes : Inspector general who started impeachment now under investigation Naqdi said Islamic youth are now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. presence in their countries , and America `` has no security anymore . ''
`` Many young people now have the motivation to attack it .
Until now , they would live their lives , and pass right next to America 's nest of spies [ embassy ] in their country , '' he said .
`` Starting tomorrow , or even today , they will view this nest of spies differently . ''
The general said the `` pressure America exerts on the Islamic nation will lead the peoples of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their nests of spies and their military bases ... and hang them blindfolded from the trees in their cities . ''
Naqdi said that motivation to attack the `` Zionist regime , '' Israel , has now quadrupled .
`` If , for example , two weeks ago , you wanted to recruit people to go and fight the Zionist regime , you could have recruited maybe 10 divisions , '' he said .
`` As of today – Friday , January 3 – you can recruit and mobilize 40 divisions of young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is what 's going on . ''
He said such a result is `` much more effective than landing a [ military ] blow of revenge . ''
`` This will lead to the evacuation and the isolation of all the U.S. military bases in the region .
It will lead to the elimination of the Zionist regime . ''

A senior general in Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps says the killing of Qassem Soleimani will motivate Muslim youths around the world to pull Americans from embassies and military bases and hang them blindfolded from trees.
Gen. Mohammad Reza Naqdi, IRGC deputy commander for coordination, told the Iranian Ofogh TV on Jan. 3 that "the Americans should sit down and watch what will happen in the region now."
Iran, he said, "can do things to them in land and sea" with missiles and drones, but he does not consider this to be real revenge.
"I don't see these as real blows," he said, according to the Middle East Media Research Institute. "The blood of the martyrs is more powerful than our blows, more powerful than if we launch a few missiles or kill several of their senior officers and top agents. The blood carries much more weight. The blood does other things and that is what is important."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Naqdi said Islamic youth are now motivated to carry out attacks against the U.S. presence in their countries, and America "has no security anymore."
"Many young people now have the motivation to attack it. Until now, they would live their lives, and pass right next to America's nest of spies [embassy] in their country," he said. "Starting tomorrow, or even today, they will view this nest of spies differently."
The general said the "pressure America exerts on the Islamic nation will lead the peoples of the Islamic countries to pull them out of their nests of spies and their military bases ... and hang them blindfolded from the trees in their cities."
Naqdi said that motivation to attack the "Zionist regime," Israel, has now quadrupled.
"If, for example, two weeks ago, you wanted to recruit people to go and fight the Zionist regime, you could have recruited maybe 10 divisions," he said. "As of today – Friday, January 3 – you can recruit and mobilize 40 divisions of young men to fight the Zionist regime. This is what's going on."
He said such a result is "much more effective than landing a [military] blow of revenge."
"This will lead to the evacuation and the isolation of all the U.S. military bases in the region. It will lead to the elimination of the Zionist regime."
See MEMRI's video:


wnd--2020-01-09--Remember Hillary's 'We came, we saw, he died'?

Only in the most Orwellian of worlds could the same people who boasted laughingly of killing Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi greet Trump 's take-out of Iranian terrorist Gen. Qassem Suleimani with pious outrage – but that , alas , is the world we inhabit .
In focusing on the obvious fiasco at Benghazi , we overlook the Obama administration 's larger assault on Libya .
Given the Democratic hysterics of the past week , the time seems right for a little reflection on this extraordinary misadventure .
In his March 2011 address to the nation , Barack Obama laid out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intervention in Libya .
`` We knew that if we … waited one more day , '' said Obama , `` Benghazi , a city nearly the size of Charlotte , could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world . ''
The last time Gadhafi had gotten much play in the America media was 2003 when he was persuaded to abandon his WMD program .
As recently as April 2009 , Gadhafi 's son had a friendly meeting with Hillary Clinton in Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delegation led by John McCain met with Gadhafi in Tripoli and described his regime as `` an important ally in the war on terrorism . ''
TRENDING : Nunes : Inspector general who started impeachment now under investigation In early 2011 , the goodwill Gadhafi had mustered suddenly lost all value .
Obama asked America to believe he was committing the United States to war to prevent a Rwanda-sized stain on `` the conscience of the world . ''
Instead of directing the attack against Gadhafi , an old-school Arab tyrant , Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's ample air power to aid the Libyan insurgency .
As happened in Kosovo in 1999 , the major media refused to challenge a Democratic president 's account of impending genocide .
Obama inflated the horror and assigned blame to just one of the two culpable parties , much as Clinton did in Kosovo .
For the Libyan conflict , Alan Kuperman , a professor of public affairs at the University of Texas and author of `` The Limits of Humanitarian Intervention , '' did the calculations the media refused to do .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks after the president 's address on Libya , Kuperman made the simple point , `` The best evidence that Gadhafi did not plan genocide in Benghazi is that he did not perpetrate it in the other cities he had recaptured . ''
No political partisan , Kuperman previously served as a legislative assistant to Democrat House Speaker Tom Foley and legislative director for then-Rep. Chuck Schumer .
What did happen in Libya , Kuperman explained , is that rebel forces , fearing imminent defeat , followed the Kosovo playbook and faked a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Soliman Bouchuiguir , president of the Libyan League for Human Rights in Geneva , told Reuters that if Gadhafi attacked Benghazi , there would be `` a real bloodbath , a massacre like we saw in Rwanda . ''
Four days later , the U.S. military started bombing .
On March 21 , the New York Times reported , `` The rebels feel no loyalty to the truth in shaping their propaganda , claiming nonexistent battlefield victories , asserting they were still fighting in a key city days after it fell to Gadhafi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his barbaric behavior . ''
That said , the Times and the other mainstream media largely kept their doubts on the back pages .
Democrats in Congress kept quiet as well .
A month after the bombing started , Obama and his allies sent a letter to the international press , claiming , `` The bloodbath that [ Gadhafi ] had promised to inflict on the citizens of the besieged city of Benghazi has been prevented . ''
In reality , the only people who promised bloodbaths were the rebel spokesmen and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fabrication would have been amusing were it not so lethal .
By this time , Obama had to know the pretext for war was false , but he would continue to pursue it for another six deadly months .
`` The biggest misconception about NATO 's intervention , '' wrote Kuperman after the fact , `` is that it saved lives and benefited Libya and its neighbors . ''
In fact , Gadhafi did not attack peaceful protesters .
The rebels started the violence , and Gadhafi responded .
Barely six weeks after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but suppressed it at the cost of about 1,000 lives .
Then NATO intervened .
On Oct. 20 , 2011 , NATO planes attacked a convoy among whose passengers was a desperate Gadhafi .
He was hoping to find refuge in his birthplace , the Jarref Valley .
That was not to be .
Gadhafi fled the shattered convoy on foot and hid in a drainpipe while his bodyguards tried and failed to hold off a local militia .
The militia members took Gadhafi prisoner , indelicately sodomized him with a knife , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They then threw Gadhafi , still breathing , onto a pickup truck .
When the truck pulled away , he promptly fell off .
This Keystone Cops-meets-Mad Max muddle was not quite the image of a new Libya the new Libya was hoping to project , so the prime minister claimed his troops killed Gadhafi in a crossfire .
Lying had worked well in the past .
Why stop now ?
The Guardian headline captured the giddy mood in Washington : `` Obama hails death of Moammar Gadhafi as foreign policy success : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ particularly Syrian president Bashar al-Assad , that they could be next . ''
Ever the comedienne , Secretary of State Hillary Clinton summed up the administration 's attitude best .
Upon hearing of Gadhafi 's death , she boasted laughingly on camera , `` We came .
We saw .
He died . ''
My guess is that the families of Chris Stevens , Glen Doherty , Tyrone Woods and Sean Smith do not share Hillary 's sense of humor .

Only in the most Orwellian of worlds could the same people who boasted laughingly of killing Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi greet Trump's take-out of Iranian terrorist Gen. Qassem Suleimani with pious outrage – but that, alas, is the world we inhabit.
In focusing on the obvious fiasco at Benghazi, we overlook the Obama administration's larger assault on Libya. Given the Democratic hysterics of the past week, the time seems right for a little reflection on this extraordinary misadventure.
In his March 2011 address to the nation, Barack Obama laid out the case for America's surprise military intervention in Libya. "We knew that if we … waited one more day," said Obama, "Benghazi, a city nearly the size of Charlotte, could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world."
The last time Gadhafi had gotten much play in the America media was 2003 when he was persuaded to abandon his WMD program. As recently as April 2009, Gadhafi's son had a friendly meeting with Hillary Clinton in Washington.
In September 2009, a Senate delegation led by John McCain met with Gadhafi in Tripoli and described his regime as "an important ally in the war on terrorism."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
In early 2011, the goodwill Gadhafi had mustered suddenly lost all value. Obama asked America to believe he was committing the United States to war to prevent a Rwanda-sized stain on "the conscience of the world."
Instead of directing the attack against Gadhafi, an old-school Arab tyrant, Obama deferred to NATO and then lent America's ample air power to aid the Libyan insurgency.
As happened in Kosovo in 1999, the major media refused to challenge a Democratic president's account of impending genocide. Obama inflated the horror and assigned blame to just one of the two culpable parties, much as Clinton did in Kosovo.
For the Libyan conflict, Alan Kuperman, a professor of public affairs at the University of Texas and author of "The Limits of Humanitarian Intervention," did the calculations the media refused to do.
Writing in the Boston Globe just two weeks after the president's address on Libya, Kuperman made the simple point, "The best evidence that Gadhafi did not plan genocide in Benghazi is that he did not perpetrate it in the other cities he had recaptured."
No political partisan, Kuperman previously served as a legislative assistant to Democrat House Speaker Tom Foley and legislative director for then-Rep. Chuck Schumer.
What did happen in Libya, Kuperman explained, is that rebel forces, fearing imminent defeat, followed the Kosovo playbook and faked a humanitarian crisis.
On March 14, Soliman Bouchuiguir, president of the Libyan League for Human Rights in Geneva, told Reuters that if Gadhafi attacked Benghazi, there would be "a real bloodbath, a massacre like we saw in Rwanda.'' Four days later, the U.S. military started bombing.
On March 21, the New York Times reported, "The rebels feel no loyalty to the truth in shaping their propaganda, claiming nonexistent battlefield victories, asserting they were still fighting in a key city days after it fell to Gadhafi forces, and making vastly inflated claims of his barbaric behavior."
That said, the Times and the other mainstream media largely kept their doubts on the back pages. Democrats in Congress kept quiet as well.
A month after the bombing started, Obama and his allies sent a letter to the international press, claiming, "The bloodbath that [Gadhafi] had promised to inflict on the citizens of the besieged city of Benghazi has been prevented." In reality, the only people who promised bloodbaths were the rebel spokesmen and the Western leaders.
This absurd self-fulfilling fabrication would have been amusing were it not so lethal. By this time, Obama had to know the pretext for war was false, but he would continue to pursue it for another six deadly months.
"The biggest misconception about NATO's intervention," wrote Kuperman after the fact, "is that it saved lives and benefited Libya and its neighbors."
In fact, Gadhafi did not attack peaceful protesters. The rebels started the violence, and Gadhafi responded. Barely six weeks after the rebellion started, Gadhafi had all but suppressed it at the cost of about 1,000 lives. Then NATO intervened.
On Oct. 20, 2011, NATO planes attacked a convoy among whose passengers was a desperate Gadhafi. He was hoping to find refuge in his birthplace, the Jarref Valley. That was not to be.
Gadhafi fled the shattered convoy on foot and hid in a drainpipe while his bodyguards tried and failed to hold off a local militia.
The militia members took Gadhafi prisoner, indelicately sodomized him with a knife, and captured it all on video. They then threw Gadhafi, still breathing, onto a pickup truck. When the truck pulled away, he promptly fell off.
This Keystone Cops-meets-Mad Max muddle was not quite the image of a new Libya the new Libya was hoping to project, so the prime minister claimed his troops killed Gadhafi in a crossfire. Lying had worked well in the past. Why stop now?
The Guardian headline captured the giddy mood in Washington: "Obama hails death of Moammar Gadhafi as foreign policy success: President warns other Middle Eastern dictators, particularly Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, that they could be next."
Ever the comedienne, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton summed up the administration's attitude best. Upon hearing of Gadhafi's death, she boasted laughingly on camera, "We came. We saw. He died."
My guess is that the families of Chris Stevens, Glen Doherty, Tyrone Woods and Sean Smith do not share Hillary's sense of humor.


wnd--2020-01-09--Did Trump just assassinate Gandhi?

Did Trump just assassinate Gandhi?

It started during the Vietnam War , of course ; popular support for the Democrat-escalated campaign was waning dramatically as the 1960s came to a close .
There had been no real progress on the battlefield in half a decade , nor through the doomed Paris Peace Talks , the on-again , off-again negotiations that many hoped would end the conflict .
As the body count continued to escalate , many Americans were beginning to see Vietnam as little more than an R & D department for weapons manufacturers , and the term `` military-industrial complex '' became a household @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` military action '' became a quagmire , a word political operatives would seize upon for decades afterward to denote any unpopular conflict or potential conflict – or more accurately , any conflict or potential conflict such operatives wished to be perceived as unpopular .
Like a number of social initiatives co-opted by leftists during that period ( including the Civil Rights Movement ) , far-left operatives insinuated themselves onto college campuses and used students to drive the antiwar sentiment .
As is occurring today , many young people also came to romanticize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ systems than the one we had going , despite the very evident tyranny and squalor that existed in socialist and communist regimes .
While there were definitely elements of immorality attendant to how the Vietnam War was conducted , thanks to the ascendency of leftists in the public square , it became almost fashionable in the ensuing years to characterize the United States as an immoral , overbearing international police state that regularly engaged in all manner of criminality in order to obtain its objectives .
Leftists routinely labeled America as `` imperialist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ considering the fact that we never actually established an empire , as had Britain .
Hollywood was instrumental in advancing and mainstreaming anti-American sentiment .
One of the most popular television programs ever to hit the small screen was `` M*A*S*H , '' a comedy-drama series that covered the exploits of surgeons serving in a Mobile Army Surgical Hospital during the Korean War .
`` M*A*S*H '' aired on CBS from 1972 to 1983 , a span over three times as long as the war itself .
TRENDING : Nunes : Inspector general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and anti-military messages were expertly refined during the course of `` M*A*S*H 's '' run and disseminated on a weekly basis .
Many of these were delivered by the show 's star , the marginally coherent , uber-liberal blabbermouth and Hollywood brat Alan Alda .
In the `` M*A*S*H '' universe , America was pretty much an immoral , overbearing international police state , rife with racism , sexism , homophobia and the like .
Communists were just like us – maybe even nicer – and anyone dedicated to the military or of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knuckle-dragging buffoon .
Thus , it should surprise us little that after nearly 40 years of exposure to such messages , America is replete with ignoramuses , subversives and true-believing socialists who think that an American president taking out a notorious high-level military operative from a nation that has been sponsoring terrorism for four decades was completely unacceptable .
Now , in these days of press venues that have completely given themselves over to propaganda and presidents being impeached without any actual charges ever being leveled , it should n't be surprising that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats are characterizing President Donald Trump 's termination of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani as `` murder '' and a `` war crime . ''
Indeed , given the major television network news reports covering Soleimani 's funeral , one would think President Trump had just assassinated Gandhi .
For the last 40 years , the mullahs in Iran and military leaders like Soleimani have been promising that America will `` drown in rivers of blood '' and other tinhorn hyperbole .
Terrorism is evil , and terrorists are cowards who should perish in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terror , and , as the president articulated , he should have been taken out years ago .
Sadly , by 1979 , thanks to over a decade of anti-American propaganda and the milksop governance of Jimmy Carter as our president , many Americans were already well on their way to believing that grabbing our ankles was a better response than ever firing a shot against our enemies in any situation .
By the time Barack Obama came on the scene , we were ready to sit silently as his treasonous administration acted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , despite the subversive swine currently lionizing Soleimani and demonizing Trump for murdering `` Gandhi , '' rest assured that there 's far more celebration than grieving going on over Soleimani 's death .
Even the left-leaning Washington Post ran a commentary this week by an Iranian journalist , admonishing observers not to believe Iranian propaganda about widespread mourning for the terror kingpin .
In 1979 , any American standing up publicly for the regime in Iran would have resulted in a such a person receiving swift beating at the very least .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ it to say that the cringing , craven whining of leftists , apologies for our `` criminal '' president and entreaties for Iran to please not kill us all in retaliation for Soleimani 's death make me want to vomit .
For my part , I hope and pray that our president continues to put the screws to Iran .
Perhaps he 'll find a way to put an end to the mullahs once and for all .
In any case , we can pretty much count on Trump exercising more flexibility after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But be warned : Between the ideologues , the young propagandized and the human refuse that 's been aggressively imported in order to tip the electoral scales , given another decade or two , we just might have an electorate comprised of so many subversives and fools that we wo n't be able to out-vote them .
Then , America will be done .

It started during the Vietnam War, of course; popular support for the Democrat-escalated campaign was waning dramatically as the 1960s came to a close. There had been no real progress on the battlefield in half a decade, nor through the doomed Paris Peace Talks, the on-again, off-again negotiations that many hoped would end the conflict. As the body count continued to escalate, many Americans were beginning to see Vietnam as little more than an R&D department for weapons manufacturers, and the term "military-industrial complex" became a household word.
Ultimately, the ostensibly anti-communist "military action" became a quagmire, a word political operatives would seize upon for decades afterward to denote any unpopular conflict or potential conflict – or more accurately, any conflict or potential conflict such operatives wished to be perceived as unpopular.
Like a number of social initiatives co-opted by leftists during that period (including the Civil Rights Movement), far-left operatives insinuated themselves onto college campuses and used students to drive the antiwar sentiment. As is occurring today, many young people also came to romanticize socialism and even communism as possibly better systems than the one we had going, despite the very evident tyranny and squalor that existed in socialist and communist regimes.
While there were definitely elements of immorality attendant to how the Vietnam War was conducted, thanks to the ascendency of leftists in the public square, it became almost fashionable in the ensuing years to characterize the United States as an immoral, overbearing international police state that regularly engaged in all manner of criminality in order to obtain its objectives. Leftists routinely labeled America as "imperialist," which is somewhat amusing, considering the fact that we never actually established an empire, as had Britain.
Hollywood was instrumental in advancing and mainstreaming anti-American sentiment. One of the most popular television programs ever to hit the small screen was "M*A*S*H," a comedy-drama series that covered the exploits of surgeons serving in a Mobile Army Surgical Hospital during the Korean War. "M*A*S*H" aired on CBS from 1972 to 1983, a span over three times as long as the war itself.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Anti-American and anti-military messages were expertly refined during the course of "M*A*S*H's" run and disseminated on a weekly basis. Many of these were delivered by the show's star, the marginally coherent, uber-liberal blabbermouth and Hollywood brat Alan Alda. In the "M*A*S*H" universe, America was pretty much an immoral, overbearing international police state, rife with racism, sexism, homophobia and the like. Communists were just like us – maybe even nicer – and anyone dedicated to the military or of patriotic temperament was depicted as an utter knuckle-dragging buffoon.
Thus, it should surprise us little that after nearly 40 years of exposure to such messages, America is replete with ignoramuses, subversives and true-believing socialists who think that an American president taking out a notorious high-level military operative from a nation that has been sponsoring terrorism for four decades was completely unacceptable.
Now, in these days of press venues that have completely given themselves over to propaganda and presidents being impeached without any actual charges ever being leveled, it shouldn't be surprising that Hollywood, the establishment press and Beltway Democrats are characterizing President Donald Trump's termination of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani as "murder" and a "war crime." Indeed, given the major television network news reports covering Soleimani's funeral, one would think President Trump had just assassinated Gandhi.
For the last 40 years, the mullahs in Iran and military leaders like Soleimani have been promising that America will "drown in rivers of blood" and other tinhorn hyperbole. Terrorism is evil, and terrorists are cowards who should perish in ignominy. Soleimani was a prince of terror, and, as the president articulated, he should have been taken out years ago.
Sadly, by 1979, thanks to over a decade of anti-American propaganda and the milksop governance of Jimmy Carter as our president, many Americans were already well on their way to believing that grabbing our ankles was a better response than ever firing a shot against our enemies in any situation. By the time Barack Obama came on the scene, we were ready to sit silently as his treasonous administration acted in outright collusion with Iran.
So, despite the subversive swine currently lionizing Soleimani and demonizing Trump for murdering "Gandhi," rest assured that there's far more celebration than grieving going on over Soleimani's death. Even the left-leaning Washington Post ran a commentary this week by an Iranian journalist, admonishing observers not to believe Iranian propaganda about widespread mourning for the terror kingpin.
In 1979, any American standing up publicly for the regime in Iran would have resulted in a such a person receiving swift beating at the very least. Having lived in that America, suffice it to say that the cringing, craven whining of leftists, apologies for our "criminal" president and entreaties for Iran to please not kill us all in retaliation for Soleimani's death make me want to vomit.
For my part, I hope and pray that our president continues to put the screws to Iran. Perhaps he'll find a way to put an end to the mullahs once and for all. In any case, we can pretty much count on Trump exercising more flexibility after he is reelected later this year.
But be warned: Between the ideologues, the young propagandized and the human refuse that's been aggressively imported in order to tip the electoral scales, given another decade or two, we just might have an electorate comprised of so many subversives and fools that we won't be able to out-vote them.
Then, America will be done.


wnd--2020-01-09--How churches' support for war created social-justice rage

`` 'Saul , why do you persecute me ? '
( Acts 22:7 ) .
This is the fundamental question .
Christian conversion is our discovery that we are persecutors without knowing it .
All participation in the scapegoat phenomenon is the same sin of the persecution of Christ .
And all human beings commit this sin . ''
– Rene Girard , `` Evolution and Conversion '' ( 142 ) We discovered the scientific method because we stopped burning witches .
We stopped burning witches because , despite the slowness in understanding and stubborn choice to disregard the question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the story of Jesus saving people through his refusal to return violence against his persecutors slowly undermined the millenia-old groupthink that witches , or other misfits , are the primary cause of plagues , droughts and infant deaths .
The question `` Why do you persecute me ? ''
inspired the West to create hospitals with universal admittance , give the handicap our best seats in theaters , and wrestle with notions of restitution for past persecutions like slavery and land confiscation .
It allowed us to consider treating the last as if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increasing awareness for the plight of those we sacrifice for the greater good can get warped and redirected into new , clever ways of sacrifice .
Humanity is like a recovering heroin addict .
In ancient times , ritual sacrifice and violence against misfits was our false transcendence .
It felt good , and it helped us function and avoid worse demons .
We slowly realized how ugly and oppressive the drug is to those around us and are now in the process of weaning off the substance .
However , along the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relapses , where we do not realize we are still sneaking in a quick fix of sacrificial violence .
Any time we consent to using violence against nonviolent people to preemptively protect `` the greater good '' we are falling back into this fix .
So how do we educate ourselves in the way of becoming aware of our complicity in persecution ?
How do we train ourselves to see with new eyes that those who seem to deserve to be blamed the most for our problems are , in fact , hidden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ general who started impeachment now under investigation If you want to study how to found a remarkable company , you read Steve Jobs biographies and discuss it with fellow entrepreneurs .
If you want to exercise , you go to the gym or hike with friends .
If you want to learn the story of Jesus and how to imitate him , you go to church .
These gyms for Jesus imitation should unlock the meaning of `` Saul , why do you persecute me ? ''
and apply it to society .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ God `` desiring mercy , not sacrifice , '' how he was `` the stone the builders rejected , '' and how we should not resist evil with violence .
With almost 400,000 churches in America and 70 % of Americans claiming to be Christian , which means `` Jesus imitator , '' we should be able to spot the hidden scapegoats found in the specks of our eyes .
But what does one get when you visit a local congregation ?
By omission or commission , we get leaders using their role-model @ @ @ @ @ @ @ side with persecution .
We are getting gyms with pools made of ice cream and barbells racked with donuts .
For decades , church leaders have remained silent in the face of elective wars .
Rather than warning their flocks to discourage their children from participating in elective wars in Iraq , Afghanistan and Syria or aiding chaos in Yemen , Libya or Pakistan , they have stayed silent , neutral or even celebratory of such endeavors .
War , if it is to be done , should only be in self-defense from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rebels and terrorists to benefit financial interests is no place for any person representing a nation of Jesus imitators .
Church leaders should denounce elective wars .
They should know that a state commission , a helmet and a uniform does not act as an exemption from the question , `` Why do you persecute me ? ''
To betray young men and women 's valor to placate the state-serving status quo is a betrayal of Jesus himself .
It is a slander of the Gospel .
Unjust sacrifice of soldiers ' lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of persecution church leaders have aided .
If a person goes into a house of Jesus , they should be equipped with the ethical model of Jesus in their personal and civic life .
That message would challenge Christians to consider their obligation to imitate Jesus in participating in jury duty .
If a nonviolent person who is not a danger to society is being put on trial , a Jesus imitator should know that they have the power to throw away the stone in their hand and render a `` Not guilty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law .
The founders created jury nullification as a tool that allows people who feel powerless to affect elections to make a difference , one persecuted neighbor at a time .
If church leaders explained how laws against nonviolent , victimless behaviors actually create fatherlessness , separated families , prison assault , PTSD , generational violence , poverty and empower gangs , society would not flock to other church-like communities based around race , gender , sexuality , or political ideology .
Such `` social justice '' movements are motivated by anger , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of despair that victims are being oppressed .
Because they create groups based on external identity conformity , they are necessarily antagonistic to outside scapegoats that are the opposite of their shared identity .
Churches can heal the cultural sickness of which identity politics is a symptom .
If church leaders start speaking out with grace against elective wars here and abroad , they can heal the national body .
When church leaders enter the public square to defend the individual person against collective violence and face the question , `` Why do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put aside identity politics and unite the culture in imitation of Jesus .

"'Saul, why do you persecute me?' (Acts 22:7). This is the fundamental question. Christian conversion is our discovery that we are persecutors without knowing it. All participation in the scapegoat phenomenon is the same sin of the persecution of Christ. And all human beings commit this sin." – Rene Girard, "Evolution and Conversion" (142)
We discovered the scientific method because we stopped burning witches. We stopped burning witches because, despite the slowness in understanding and stubborn choice to disregard the question at the heart of Christian conversion, the story of Jesus saving people through his refusal to return violence against his persecutors slowly undermined the millenia-old groupthink that witches, or other misfits, are the primary cause of plagues, droughts and infant deaths.
The question "Why do you persecute me?" inspired the West to create hospitals with universal admittance, give the handicap our best seats in theaters, and wrestle with notions of restitution for past persecutions like slavery and land confiscation. It allowed us to consider treating the last as if they were first. However, our increasing awareness for the plight of those we sacrifice for the greater good can get warped and redirected into new, clever ways of sacrifice.
Humanity is like a recovering heroin addict. In ancient times, ritual sacrifice and violence against misfits was our false transcendence. It felt good, and it helped us function and avoid worse demons. We slowly realized how ugly and oppressive the drug is to those around us and are now in the process of weaning off the substance. However, along the way, there are pitfalls, momentary relapses, where we do not realize we are still sneaking in a quick fix of sacrificial violence.
Any time we consent to using violence against nonviolent people to preemptively protect "the greater good" we are falling back into this fix. So how do we educate ourselves in the way of becoming aware of our complicity in persecution? How do we train ourselves to see with new eyes that those who seem to deserve to be blamed the most for our problems are, in fact, hidden scapegoats?
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
If you want to study how to found a remarkable company, you read Steve Jobs biographies and discuss it with fellow entrepreneurs. If you want to exercise, you go to the gym or hike with friends.
If you want to learn the story of Jesus and how to imitate him, you go to church. These gyms for Jesus imitation should unlock the meaning of "Saul, why do you persecute me?" and apply it to society. They should unpack what Jesus meant by God "desiring mercy, not sacrifice," how he was "the stone the builders rejected," and how we should not resist evil with violence.
With almost 400,000 churches in America and 70% of Americans claiming to be Christian, which means "Jesus imitator," we should be able to spot the hidden scapegoats found in the specks of our eyes. But what does one get when you visit a local congregation?
By omission or commission, we get leaders using their role-model platform in the name of Jesus to side with persecution. We are getting gyms with pools made of ice cream and barbells racked with donuts. For decades, church leaders have remained silent in the face of elective wars. Rather than warning their flocks to discourage their children from participating in elective wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria or aiding chaos in Yemen, Libya or Pakistan, they have stayed silent, neutral or even celebratory of such endeavors.
War, if it is to be done, should only be in self-defense from actual, initiated violence. Working alongside rebels and terrorists to benefit financial interests is no place for any person representing a nation of Jesus imitators.
Church leaders should denounce elective wars. They should know that a state commission, a helmet and a uniform does not act as an exemption from the question, "Why do you persecute me?" To betray young men and women's valor to placate the state-serving status quo is a betrayal of Jesus himself. It is a slander of the Gospel.
Unjust sacrifice of soldiers' lives and limbs is not the only form of persecution church leaders have aided. If a person goes into a house of Jesus, they should be equipped with the ethical model of Jesus in their personal and civic life. That message would challenge Christians to consider their obligation to imitate Jesus in participating in jury duty. If a nonviolent person who is not a danger to society is being put on trial, a Jesus imitator should know that they have the power to throw away the stone in their hand and render a "Not guilty" verdict as a judgment against bad law.
The founders created jury nullification as a tool that allows people who feel powerless to affect elections to make a difference, one persecuted neighbor at a time.
If church leaders explained how laws against nonviolent, victimless behaviors actually create fatherlessness, separated families, prison assault, PTSD, generational violence, poverty and empower gangs, society would not flock to other church-like communities based around race, gender, sexuality, or political ideology. Such "social justice" movements are motivated by anger, fear, hate and an overriding sense of despair that victims are being oppressed. Because they create groups based on external identity conformity, they are necessarily antagonistic to outside scapegoats that are the opposite of their shared identity.
Churches can heal the cultural sickness of which identity politics is a symptom. If church leaders start speaking out with grace against elective wars here and abroad, they can heal the national body. When church leaders enter the public square to defend the individual person against collective violence and face the question, "Why do you persecute me?" we can put aside identity politics and unite the culture in imitation of Jesus.