Biden Surrenders to Iran’s ‘Death to America’ Jihadis in Yemen Who Attacked USS Mason

Not exactly a surprise.

The Biden foreign policy team is crawling with Obama’s pro-Iranian echo chamber foreign policy trolls and the Iran Lobby was among his biggest bundlers.

Iran’s expansion into Yemen via the Houthis, a Jihadist group whose motto is “Death to America, Death to Israel,  A Curse the Jews, Victory to Islam”, has been backed by the media and the foreign policy establishment which falsely kept blaming the Saudi campaign against the Houthis for the famine when in fact it was the Houthis who had caused the famine by stealing humanitarian aid. This didn’t stop Islamists and the media from keeping the famine lie going anyway.

Or the Biden campaign from adopting it as a talking point.

The Houthis had meanwhile fired on the USS Mason (“Death to America” is right in their motto) and were ethnically cleansing Yemen’s Jewish population.

Despite all that, the Biden administration is now very predictably dropping support for the Saudi campaign against the Houthis, calling for a diplomatic solution, and dispatching a special emissary.

In other words, they’re surrendering to Iran and the Houthis.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, had pushed a terrorist designation for the Houthis on the way out the door, leading to outrage from the Democrats, their media, and even some Republicans. The Biden team is going the other way by rolling over for the, “Death to America” Jihadis leading to another of Obama’s “Victories for Islam”.

The Yemen mess spilled over due to Obama’s Arab Spring. Just wait for the Biden Islamist Winter.



Biden’s New Asst Sec of State Worked for Islamic Terror State That Funds Hamas

Nigeria: Sharia police arrested barber for giving haircuts that offend Islam

‘Don’t let her escape. Beat her. Why did you speak of our religion? Rub your nose on the ground. Repent from Allah.’

Former Iranian diplomat: ‘If Americans and Zionists act in a dangerous manner,’ anti-nuke fatwa ‘might be changed’

Spain: 23,000 migrants arrive in Canary Islands in a year, Morocco may be deliberately loosening migration controls

Pakistan: Supreme Court orders Muslim convicted of beheading Daniel Pearl to be moved to government ‘safe house’

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

Joe Biden’s Abortion Imperialism

“There can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children.”Nelson Mandela

Over 80 percent of Americans don’t believe that they should pay for abortions in developing countries.

During her first press conference, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki was asked about President Joe Biden’s stance on certain abortion policies.

“I will just take the opportunity to remind all of you that he is a devout Catholic and somebody who attends church regularly,” Psaki responded. “He started his day attending church with his family this morning but I don’t have anything more for you on that.”

Two days later, on the 48th anniversary of Roe v Wade, Joe Biden and his VP Kamala Harris released a statement affirming their unequivocal support of abortion, including their intention to have Roe v Wade codified in US law so that it cannot be overturned by a future Supreme Court ruling.

A week on, Biden signed an executive order rescinding the Mexico City Policy. Introduced by President Reagan in 1985, this policy prohibits NGOs from receiving US taxpayer funding if they promote or perform abortions overseas.

Some 83 percent of Americans have expressed support of the Mexico City Policy, believing that it isn’t the role of Americans to pay for abortions elsewhere. It is a law that has reliably flip-flopped with each incoming administration since then—favoured by Democrat lawmakers and rejected by Republicans. Trump even managed to expand the policy under his watch to cover government agencies engaged in healthcare abroad. Under Biden, it is no longer.

Two other changes on abortion are soon expected under the Biden administration. First, Biden has asked the Department of Health and Human Services to review a similar policy known as the Hyde Amendment, which prevents federal funds from being used to fund abortions for low-income Americans.

Second, the new president is expected to disavow the United States’ endorsement of the Geneva Consensus. This is a non-binding but landmark charter launched by Trump’s Secretary of State Mike Pompeo last year which was co-signed by over 30 nations. The charter’s aims include promoting better health for women, preserving human life, and strengthening the family as the foundational unit of society.

The response of many Catholics to these rapid developments under Biden has been strong, and understandably so.

“The fact that President Biden identifies himself as a devout Catholic, while working to preserve and expand legalised abortion, even using tax dollars to fund abortion, presents a unique challenge to the Bishops of the United States,” explained Kansas City Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann during an interview this week.

The Archbishop said that Biden’s actions are “confusing Catholics and non-Catholics regarding the Church’s teaching on the evil of abortion.”

The Archbishop of Los Angeles, José H. Gomez, is also the President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Aware of Biden’s stance ahead of time, Archbishop Gomez penned a public statement on the day of Biden’s inauguration calling on him to reconsider his pro-abortion views. The letter was signed by over a dozen US bishops.

“I am in full agreement with Archbishop Gomez,” Naumann said in his interview, referring to the letter. “We must continue to speak to President Biden, as well as all Catholics, and even all Americans, about the truth of what abortion is. Abortion is not something to be celebrated, and it is not healthcare. It is the intentional killing of a child. To participate in abortion or to promote abortion is a grave evil.”

If this was the response from within America, that from abroad was stronger still.

Culture of Life Africa, a Catholic agency defending the sanctity and dignity of life in Africa, released a video last week entitled A Message for President Biden: The Unified Voices of Africa. It was a direct response to Biden’s repeal of the Mexico City Policy, and its pleas were earnest.

“We appeal to Joe Biden, please do not sponsor abortion in Africa,” says Ujunwa, a university lecturer who appears in the video.

“I do not want the United States of America and this present government to fund abortions in Africa. We’ve never needed abortions and we do not want them,” adds a doctor named Ursula.

“In my culture, we support life from the beginning till the end,” says Ellen, a student. “I’m against abortion because abortion is about killing innocent babies in the womb of their mothers,” adding that she’s “against funding of abortion in Africa by any foreign country.”

Obianuju Ekeocha is the founder of Culture of Life Africa and a Nigerian-born human rights activist. Following the video’s release.

She is horrified by the desire of Western leaders to push abortion on the developing world. “I see this as a form of ideological supremacy whereby our pro-life, pro-family, and pro-faith cultures are considered inferior to the western ‘progressive’ ideologies especially on issues related to human sexuality and sexual morality,” Ekeocha explained in an interview.

Ekeocha is well aware of the consequences of Biden’s decision to repeal the Mexico City Policy: abortion providers active in Africa such as International Planned Parenthood Federation, Marie Stopes International, and DKT International will now receive funding to—in Ekeocha’s words—help “eliminate” Africans.

“Africa is the most vulnerable region where [there is] widespread poverty and the unfortunate reality of the African nations’ aid dependency,” Ekeocha added. “We are the lowest hanging fruit, the easy conquests for Western leaders like Biden to impose their world view and their ideology, even when they are very much opposed to our own way of life.”

“This means the elimination of my people,” said Ekeocha in the interview. “This means the death and killing of the most innocent of the African unborn babies.”

In the video, Ekeocha explained that, when it comes to foreign aid, the simple plea of African people to leaders like Joe Biden is, “help us, don’t kill us.”

The question that remains is, will Biden heed these appeals from Africa and the concerns of 83 percent of Americans—or will he continue his pursuit of abortion imperialism?


Kurt Mahlburg

Kurt Mahlburg is a writer and author, and an emerging Australian voice on culture and the Christian faith. He has a passion for both the philosophical and the personal, drawing on his background as a graduate… 



The dark side of sperm donation

The transhumanist quest for a godlike humanity threatens personal freedom

Young men today: social isolation, gaming, and porn

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

New York Times writer arrested as Iran agent, accused of writing ‘propaganda’ pieces

This is the “gold standard” of American journalism.

New York Times opinion writer arrested as alleged Iran agent, accused of writing ‘propaganda’ pieces

By: Annaliese Levy, Sara Carter, Jan 28, 2021

A New York Times opinion writer was arrested and charged with acting as an unregistered foreign agent of the Iranian government last week, The Algemeiner reported.

Kaveh Afrasiabi, a former political science professor and former adviser to Iran’s nuclear negotiation team, has been accused of violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

According to a press release from the Department of Justice, “Afrasiabi allegedly sought to influence the American public and American policymakers for the benefit of his employer, the Iranian government, by disguising propaganda as objective policy analysis and expertise,” Acting U.S. Attorney DuCharme said.

The press release states that Afrasiabi has a PhD and frequently publishes books and articles. He also appears on American television programs discussing foreign relations matters, particularly Iran’s relations with the United States.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office now accuses him of pushing propaganda.

Afrasiabi was allegedly paid, directed and controlled by the Government of Iran to lobby U.S. government officials and to create and disseminate information favorable to the Iranian government for over a decade.

“For over a decade, Kaveh Afrasiabi pitched himself to Congress, journalists, and the American public as a neutral and objective expert on Iran,” stated Assistant Attorney General Demers.

“However, all the while, Afrasiabi was actually a secret employee of the Government of Iran and the Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations (IMUN) who was being paid to spread their propaganda. In doing so, he intentionally avoided registering with Department of Justice as the Foreign Agents Registration Act required.”

The Times published an opinion article co-written by Afrasiabi in 2018 that called for a meeting between former President Trump and President Hassan Rouhani of Iran.

“Mr. Trump and Mr. Rouhani should listen to reason and take the opportunity this month to sit down for a face-to-face conversation. It would be the truly bold thing to do,” the article states.

In 2012, The Times published an article by Afrasiabi which claimed world leaders gathering in Tehran for a summit would “elevate Iran as the movement’s new president for three years and enhance Tehran’s regional and international clout” but “unfortunately, the United States … adopted a purely negative approach toward the Tehran summit.”

In a statement to The Algemeiner, Afrasiabi called the government’s claim that he was a secret Iranian agent “absurd” and “wild.”

“Whatever I did was perfectly legal and fully transparent,” Afrasiabi said.

“My conscience is clear, and if the U.S. government had an iota of sense of appreciation, they would thank me for all my tireless activities for the cause of detente, non-proliferation, human rights, inter-religious dialogue and understanding.”

Afrasiabi acknowledged that he was paid by the Iranian mission at the United Nations.

“I received checks from the Mission’s UN account and it never occurred to me that I was doing anything illegal,” he said.

Afrasiabi said that he was not lobbying America on behalf of Iran, but rather lobbying Iran on behalf of America.

Afrasiabi was ordered released Friday, on the condition that he have no contact with any known, current, or former members of the Iranian government unless in the presence of his lawyer. He was also required to post a $250,000 unsecured bond, and family members posted an additional $325,000 in unsecured bonds.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

Political “Unity” vs. Christian Unity

Rev. Jerry J. Pokorsky: We are not Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, even Americans first. We are Catholics, knowing the difference between good and evil.

Divisive politics seems to poison every aspect of contemporary life.  So there is an urgent need to reconsider what it would mean if what we were to seek is not an illusory political “unity,” but what true public harmony depends upon: Christian brotherhood.

When we say brother, the immediate, literal meaning usually comes to mind: He is my brother, by blood. If we are thinking about the brotherhood of mankind, our thoughts are typically more abstract, often sentimental aspirations. What do we mean when we, as Christians, refer to one another as brothers in Christ?

The sin of Adam and Eve mortally wounded human nature.  The world became subject to the divisive influence of the Devil, the “Prince of this world.” Unity gave way to disunity. Adam blamed Eve for his sin. Cain murdered his brother Abel. In His justice, God sent a flood to destroy the wicked, sparing the righteous Noah and his family.

Following the Great Flood, the divide separating God and man widened. Presuming they did not need God’s grace and could reach the heavens without God, the people constructed the infamous Tower of Babel. But God punished their arrogance, scattering the peoples and confounding their speech so that they could no longer understand each other.

In various ways, groupings of families and tribes have clustered around ethnic language groups. Their sinful pride institutionalized the social disunity that comes with differences in language. The tribes were necessary not only for survival and self-defense, but also for warfare and conquest.

Still, in the plan of God, tribes would play an essential part in the history of salvation. The twelve tribes that emerged in ancient Israel served the unity of the Israelites. Each tribe had its essential purpose. The tribe of Levi, for example, was a tribe dedicated to offering sacrificial worship. The priesthood was the destiny of men born into this tribe.

The tribalism of ancient Israel had many benefits, including the loyalty of family and extended family ties. Tribes had important military purposes, conquering Canaan and protecting their homeland. In battle, members of the tribes fought and died for their brothers. The bonds of blood unified them. The tribes of the Chosen People prepared an ethnic cradle for the coming of the Messiah.

But tribal differences also presented many difficulties in ancient Israel – as they do today. Tribal and family bonds often spark useless blood feuds and wars. We see the damage tribalism has inflicted, particularly in the Middle East and Africa. The Kingdom of Israel and Judah split into two kingdoms because of tribal quarrels. The mutual tribal hatreds of the Judeans and Samaritans remain evident in the Gospels. And even American folklore records family feuds, most famously the Hatfields and the McCoys.

But the Old Testament already points to ways of transcending and overcoming the evils of tribalism. God sends Jonah, the reluctant prophet, to the Ninevites, the archenemies of the Jews. He preaches repentance, and lo and behold, the enemies of the Jews repent! The message is loud and clear. Israel’s enemies are not necessarily members of a hostile tribe, only those unrepentant and in league with Satan.

The real enemy of the Jews is sin, evil, and the Devil himself. Beyond all previous expectation, after repenting of their sins, the Ninevites became their brothers – which forced the Jews to rethink what Jewish exceptionalism meant.

Jesus continues to teach repentance as the fundamental requirement of brotherhood. He begins His ministry in continuity with the teaching of John the Baptist: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel.” (Mark 1:15) Before we can be members of the tribe of Jesus – the kingdom of God – we must first renounce sin and reform our lives. He continues His saving ministry by enlisting the Twelve.

The number was significant to attentive Jews. They must have sensed the connection to the twelve tribes of Israel. Indeed, Jesus replaced the twelve tribes with a brotherhood that transcends all tribes in His new and everlasting Covenant.

The renunciation of sin followed by the obedience of faith forms the foundation of the tribe of Jesus. As Christians, when we call each other brother, we are not referring to the bonds of blood in a family or a tribe. We are brothers in the Lord, members of the Mystical Body of Christ. The blood that we share and have in common is the Precious Blood of Jesus. So the brotherhood of Jesus Christ extends beyond national boundaries. The brotherhood of Christ is properly called universal – i.e., Catholic.

So we must not first think of ourselves as Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, even Americans. We are Catholics. Our world view is Catholic, knowing the difference between good and evil.

We must struggle to see the world as Catholics with the unity that comes with repentance and faith.

The Blessed Eucharist, the source and summit of the Christian life, is the sign of our tribal unity in Jesus. But when clerics distribute Communion to those who publicly, manifestly, and obdurately oppose the Church’s faith and morals, they violate Church unity and introduce ideological tribalism.

We are no longer Catholics, brothers in Jesus. We find it necessary to self-identify as “conservative” or “liberal,” blurring the distinction between membership in the tribe of Jesus and membership in diabolical tribes of ideology. Indeed, the Devil prefers a politicized Catholic enemy to a far more formidable authentically Catholic enemy.

Traditional faith and morals form the cornerstone of our unity. But the restoration of Christian brotherhood is not painless. Breaking sinful patterns of ideological impositions on our religion requires the work of repentance. Jesus does not sugarcoat the difficulties: “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.” (Matthew 10:34)

Now is the time to transcend divisive politics with Christian brotherhood and Catholic unity, even if it first requires the sword of division.


Rev. Jerry J. Pokorsky

Father Jerry J. Pokorsky is a priest of the Diocese of Arlington. He is pastor of St. Catherine of Siena parish in Great Falls, Virginia.

EDITORS NOTE: This The Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2021 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

“Quo Vadis?” – Always a Good Question

Michael Pakaluk on a lesson from early Christians: If I am not putting away everything else to move quickly towards Christ, I am going away from him.

By chance, I picked up Henryk Sienkewicz’s novel Quo Vadis from the family bookshelf last week, when I was looking for a next book to read for enjoyment.  (How desperately we all need such reading now!)

But it wasn’t really by chance. I asked my guardian angel to guide me, as I often do, and nothing happens by chance anyway. Everything is under God’s providence. So, I thought, I’ll write something about this providential book.

I confess that I chose it against my inclination because, well, it has sold tens of millions of copies; movies have been based on it; and my children have been assigned it in school.  Someone might think these are all good reasons to read it.  But my personal inclination runs against the common and obvious. Maybe yours are against this book too, for other reasons?

Even after selecting it, I needed a couple of good rationalizations to get me started. And I found them: “Any book you have not yet read is the same as a book that has just been published” (Samuel Johnson).  And, “As the grandson of peasants from a village outside Warsaw, you ought to learn more about Polish things whenever you can.”

Sienkewicz was a Nobel-prize winning author of a great trilogy of Polish historical novels. But Quo Vadis, as you probably know, is about Rome in the time of Nero.  It tells a story of widespread, underground conversion to Christianity, from the viewpoint of the decadent and powerful pagans in control.

Sienkewicz researched ancient Rome extensively for the book, down to the smallest details of daily life.  With a writer’s eye he weaves these details into his narrative, so that the book, while telling a great story, deftly imparts historical instruction about Rome, too.  You might recommend Quo Vadis for pilgrims planning a visit to Rome; it makes the ancient city come alive.

But you can recommend it above all for Christians in the West who feel that some kind of insidious, post-Christian ideology is growing in power and threatens to oppress and persecute us.  I do not mean merely that the book offers us consolation. Yes, Nero did dress as a bride in drag to marry a man, Pythagoras, in a big public ceremony (which Sienkewicz does not neglect to mention).  But for all their corruption, the ideologues of our own Babylon the Great are not yet Nero.

I mean, rather, that the book gives us a picture of early Christians, whom we would do well to imitate. Let me draw attention to three notes.

First is the passion of those early converts. To become a Christian at the time of Nero was to fall in love with Christ so completely as to identify with him and prefer to die “with him” rather than to fail to live in his commandments.  Sienkewicz conveys this passion ingeniously, by making a love-affair between a Roman patrician, Vicinius, and a Christian convert, Lygia, the central story of the novel.

How to convey what the love of Christ was for these first Christians?   Tell a story of a man who would give up the whole world to possess a woman, and make that man’s love for that woman, and his love of Christ, one and the same.  We need to love Christ, and one another, especially our spouses, in the same way.

Second is what I want to call the “self-sufficiency” of Christian fellowship and life for those early converts.  For them, as Vicinius tells his pagan mentor Patronius, it’s as if Rome and Nero do not exist.  All their thoughts are Christ, who is their sole Lord.  They have discovered a path of life in Christ, and they live in the way Christ commands, and this gives them joy and is enough.

By contrast might, today we might affirm theoretically that “the Church is a perfect society” but – how much we still complain! How much we speak as if we cannot be happy unless the times were other than they are! We do not seem overjoyed and fully satisfied that the love of Christ is already ours.  (Yes, we should want to improve the world too – but as a sharing of what we already have been fully given.)

Third is the sense that the Christian life is de novo (“starting anew”) wherever it is found.  What I mean is this.  Perhaps some of us suppose unconsciously that things must get worse because we think of Christianity as akin to physical transmission, where each copy loses something of its original. A photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy, etc., eventually loses its information.  But part of the miracle of baptism and the Eucharist is that the life of Christ is entirely, fully, and perfectly conveyed to any convert at any time.

In Quo Vadis you see that the Roman Christians have exactly the same devotion as the disciples did in the Holy Land, 2500 miles away. Take any saint, say, Angela Merici, whose memorial we celebrated last week – a humble girl called in the 15th century to love the Lord, as if out of nowhere, in a small town on the shores of Lake Garda. This is the life de novo of an alter Christus (“another Christ”).

Remember what St John Paul II insisted on conveying to the Church at the turn of the millennium: Iesus Christus heri et hodie ipse et in saecula, “Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday, today, and tomorrow.” (Heb. 13:8).  These words still stand and always will.

Quo vadis as a Latin phrase is usually rendered “where are you going?” But the verb has the sense “rushing to.”  And the phrase emphasizes the end point, not the motion. Am I agitated, distracted, working frenetically, or putting off work?  Whatever I am doing: the end of all my activity, what is it?  The novel suggests: If I am not putting away everything else to move quickly towards Christ, I am going away from him.


Michael Pakaluk

Michael Pakaluk, an Aristotle scholar and Ordinarius of the Pontifical Academy of St. Thomas Aquinas, is a professor in the Busch School of Business at the Catholic University of America. He lives in Hyattsville, MD with his wife Catherine, also a professor at the Busch School, and their eight children. His acclaimed book on the Gospel of Mark is The Memoirs of St Peter. His next book, Mary’s Voice in the Gospel of John: A New Translation with Commentary, forthcoming in February, 2021 from Regnery, is now available for pre-order.

EDITORS NOTE: This The Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2021 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

How the Biden Administration Will Impact Israel and the Middle East

Anthony Blinken is the incoming US Secretary of State. The State Department executes American foreign policy.

Blinken was Obama’s Deputy Secretary of State.  Out of office, he founded a strategic consultancy firm called West Exec Advisors. They represented global corporations, foreign governments, gain access to the White House and top Government officials. His website boasted that “West Exec conveys our shared commitment to our country, to each other, and to our clients.”

Anthony Blinken reflects what Trump euphemistically called “the Washington Swamp.”

In office, Blinken made human rights a cornerstone in formulating foreign policy. Let’s see how that worked out;

Libya. Under Hillary Clinton and Obama and Biden in the White House, a decision was made to remove Muammar Gaddafi from power and let the Libyan people set their own destiny. This, despite the fact that Gaddafi had renounced his nuclear ambitions and was reaching out to the West.  In 2011, The United States led a NATO military attack against Libya on the pretext of “protecting civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack.”

The result was a disaster. Gaddafi was deposed and killed, Libya descended into a warring hellhole of rival Islamist and nationalist groups, and Ambassador Stephens was murdered at the Benghazi US Consulate. The State Department failed to rescue the ambassador and his security team. When news of their fate was released, Blinken’s State Department employed a fake human rights story to cover up their fatal failure by blaming the assault on a bunch of protester angry at an amateur video that insulted Islam. And the person who went on TV to sell that fabrication, Susan Rice, has been rewarded with a White House appointment running domestic policy.

The “Arab Spring.” As protests spread across the Muslim world against corrupt leaders, the State Department celebrated it as a positive expression of human rights. They called it the Arab Spring. In Israel, strategic experts, who understand the undercurrents of the Muslim world, told American and European diplomats, “You’ve got your seasons wrong. This is the start of the Islamic Winter.”

As protests grew in Egypt, Blinken, then Vice President Joe Biden’s national security adviser, and others urged Obama to get “on the right side of history” by supporting the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Muslim Brotherhood had hijacked students’ peaceful protests and violently targeted the police and government institutions that eventually toppled Mubarak’s regime. They imprisoned thousands and, in less than two years, had ruined Egypt’s economy driving millions into poverty.

The Obama Administration and State Department failed to feel the mood of the Egyptian people. One month after Mohamed Morsi, the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood leader, was sworn in as Egyptian President, protesters pelted Clinton’s motorcade with tomatoes during her July 2012 visit to Cairo.

The army, under General al-Sisi, staged a popular coup. They arrested the Muslim Brotherhood leadership, restored law and order, and begin to forge a more stable Egypt.

This did not sit well with Obama who said of America’s response to Sisi’s popular victory, “We can’t be seen as aiding and abetting actions we think run contrary to our values and ideals.”

US military aid to Egypt was stopped. It led to a divide between the White House, the State Department and a Defense Department that advocated maintaining US aid to Egypt.

By 2015, General Sisi had reached out to Russia for a large military aid program to be paid by Saudi Arabia and the UAE, Egypt’s allies in the region. Obama’s team wilted and renewed US military aid to Egypt. Sisi celebrated by flying the first delivery of American F-16s over Cairo. A triumphant gesture perceived in Egypt as Sisi’s victory over Obama.

SyriaBy the fall of 2013, Syria had plunged into a sectarian civil war and Assad was slaughtering his people with chemical weapons.  Obama threatened Assad against using such weapons. A deal was struck to remove chemical reserves from Syria.

Blinken, as Deputy Secretary of State under John Kerry, said, “Imagine what Syria would look like without that deal. It would be awash in chemical weapons, which would fall into the hands of ISIS, Al Nusra or other groups.”

He may have been right, but that did not stop the devious Assad from inflicting a sarin attack, killing an estimated 80 civilians. Obama was tested but failed to respond.

“We always knew we had not gotten everything,”Blinken admitted.

It took President Trump to punish Assad when he launched combined attacks in 2016 and 2017 destroying Syria’s chemical weapon facilities. Obama blinked. Trump acted.

Iran. If human rights were a cornerstone of the Obama Administration, it was sadly missing when it came to Iran. When mass protests erupted across Iran, Obama kept silent. The State Department in which Blinken served failed to stand affirmatively with the Iranian protesters. The opposition Green Movement was brutally crushed and has never been reconstituted. Instead, they bent over backward to appease the Tehran leadership with a highly criticized nuclear deal cemented by the delivery of $150 Billion that enabled the Republic Guard to brutally advance Iranian hegemony across the Middle East and down into Yemen.

This issue is the most consequential one for Israel with Iran spreading its hegemony and forward bases throughout the Middle East. In 2020 alone, Israel launched over 500 attacks against Iranian bases and weapon storage facilities in Syria.

Israel insists that the new Administration keep the chokehold on the Iranian economy but this is hardly likely after Biden selected Wendy Sherman to be his Deputy Secretary of State. She waso ne of the principle architects of the disastrous 2015 nuclear deal.

There is nothing that gives us hope that Blinken will maintain Trump’s tough stance on Tehran.

Israel and the Palestinian Problem. Donald Trump has been the most pro-Israel president since Harry Truman. His achievements have been many and Trump’s Abraham Accord initiative is sufficient reason to reward him with a Nobel Peace Prize. That is a hard act to follow and it is doubtful that Blinken can help Biden achieve that status, not with Biden’s declared aim of refunding an unapologetic Palestinian Authority that continues to promote their ‘Pay to Slay” policy which rewards their killers. This despite the Taylor Force Act, named after an American stabbed to death by a rampaging Palestinian on Tel Aviv’s beachfront, a bill introduced by President Trump to disincentivize the PA from this heinous policy.

The Democrat Manifesto also declared it would reopen the PA Washington bureau and the US consulate in Jerusalem to serve Palestinians, despite having a new Embassy there, thanks to Trump. All this with no demand for the Palestinians to desist from promoting terror and instead recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Former Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, said of Biden, “I think he has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.” 

By default, one can say the same about Anthony Blinken. Policy meetings took place in the White House Situation Room in which Anthony Blinken participated. The results were poor.

Blinken, as US Secretary of State, must insist that Iran removes its powerful precision missiles from Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.  A nuclear Iran poses an existential threat to the existence of Israel, but the presence of these lethal weapons pose an immediate danger to Israeli civilian centers and vital infrastructure.

Perhaps Blinken can spend the next four years trying to convince the Palestinian leadership to change its behavior and ideology, and recognize and normalize their relationship with Israel, as moderate Arab and Muslim states have done, rather than push Israel into a corner, because peace with the Palestinians is impossible without it.

Foreign Policy for America is an influential policy advocacy group in Washington. They push their foreign policy proposals into Congress and the White House. They have some disturbing perspectives on Israel.

Avril Haines, Biden’s CIA Chief, and others signed a public letter earlier in 2020 urging the Democratic Party to adopt a more pro-Palestinian language in its platform. By pro-Palestinian Haines did not clarify if the language should be that of the PLO, Hamas, or Islamic Jihad in Gaza. If she means the language of the Palestinian Authority, it is an aggressive anti-Israel language back by violence and shared by other malevolent Palestinian factions.

Equally troubling is that Jeremy Ben Ami, the founder of JStreet, a Jewish group with the overriding policy of creating a Palestinian state on unacceptable (for Israel) 1967 borders, sits on the FPA board of directors to impose his views onto Israel.  He sees Israel as the obstacle to peace, not PA rejectionism, nor Hamas denial of the right of Israel to exist.

The Foreign Policy for America section on the ‘Israel-Palestinian Conflict’ is copy-paste drawn from JStreet literature. It includes tips on how to persuade Congress to be more sympathetic to the Palestinians, and angry against the Israeli Government.

FPA published a history of the conflict. According to them it began in 1949. They conveniently forgot that Arabs have been murdering Jews since the 1920s.

The Oslo Accords was ruined, they say, “by growing settlements in the West Bank, continued Israeli military presence, and a blockage on Gaza.”No mention of decades of Palestinian terrorism, rockets and suicide attacks. Nor does it mention incessant anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement, and a stubborn refusal to accept a Jewish presence in Judea & Samaria or in the Jewish state anywhere.

FPA avoids mention of the ultimate Palestinian ambition of a state “from the River to the Sea” as if it doesn’t exist. And their top personnel are moving into decisive positions in the Biden Administration.

Democrat anti-Israel activists have seeped into the Biden White House.

Reema Dodin has been an apologist for Palestinian suicide bombers. She is the Deputy Director of the White House Office for Legislative Affairs. She is alleged to have blamed the 9/11 attacks on US support for Israel, and she supported the anti-Israel BDS Movement.

Karen Jean-Pierre was selected to be the White House Deputy Press Secretary. She was the national spokesperson for the George Soros-sponsored anti-Israel She has accused Israel of “war crimes,” called AIPAC “severely racist” for supporting Israel against Palestinian terrorism, and praised Democrats who wimped out of attending the last AIPAC annual conference.

Jeremy Ben Ami tweeted this is “Exactly the type of leadership this country deserves.”

As their agenda unfolds, Israel must be prepared for cold winds to blow in our direction under such a Biden Administration.

©Barry Shaw. All rights reserved.

Chilling: Democrat Cynthia McKinney Discusses ‘Jewish Problem’ With White Supremacists

Watch. Your blood will run cold.

Chilling: Cynthia McKinney Discusses Jewish Problem With White Supremacists

As someone who monitors Jew-hatred on an almost daily basis, I thought I’d seen everything.

By David Lange, Israelly Cool, January 29, 2021:

Then I watched this video.

In it, former US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney – an African American – pow-wows with some White supremacists (including the detestable Angelo John Gage) about the Jewish problem.

I’ve distilled the worst parts out of the hour long video in to about ten minutes. What you’ll see, amongst other things, is:

  • The Black McKinney speaking about the need for Blacks to unite with the KKK to defeat the Jewish enemy
  • McKinney calling the Jews “really evil people,” “Khazarians,” and “bloody”
  • McKinney claiming the Jews used the Civil Rights movement solely as a tool for their own advancement
  • McKinney lamenting you “can’t wipe [the Jews] out”
  • McKinney alleging Covid is a bio weapon invented by the Jews

This is truly Kafkaesque, but goes to show how the immense power of Jew hatred leads to the strangest bedfellows.


In Tweets, Ex-US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney Questions Number of Holocaust Victims

Why Haven’t the 9/11 Jihad Plotters Been Tried Yet?

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

VIDEO: Georgetown Professor — Islamic Slavery is Freedom?

“Slavery cannot be intrinsically evil in Islamic law,” Georgetown University professor Jonathan Brown stated during a July 20, 2020 webinar. This disturbing assessment came during a 2019-2020 series of presentations on his 2019 bookSlavery & Islam, whose theses have hardly improved upon this Muslim convert’s past scandalous comments on slavery.

On February 7, 2017, Brown had caused furor while presenting a paper on slavery and Islam at the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT). Thereby he noted the traditional Islamic doctrine expressed in Quran 33:21 that Islam’s prophet Muhammad is an “excellent pattern” of behavior. Therefore this example sanctified the slavery practiced by him and his companions, including sex slavery, a doctrine that had justified slavery throughout Islamic history.

Once public, such views completely negated Brown’s disclaimer at the presentation’s beginning. “I always make some hyperbolic statement that really makes sense in the context,” he noted, such that he would face accusations of “calling for slavery.” Given such concern over criticism, he expelled this author from the presentation before it started.

Brown’s elaboration of his views during his subsequent book tour has been hardly more reassuring, for slavery is “simply a fact of life in the Quran” and perhaps even “part of the DNA of Islam.” “Every area of Islamic law is permeated by slavery,” something that “sharia, without exception until the 20th-century, validated.” Muslim scholars have even speculated about a “time when the laws of slavery will actually be needed again,” such as in a post-apocalyptic Mad Max-like world, he has noted.

For centuries, “Muslims were neck-deep in the trade of slaves,” Brown has observed. As others have estimated, this trade included 17 million black Africans, more than the 12 million taken to the Western Hemisphere in the transatlantic slave trade. As the Ghanaian historian John Azumah has noted, while the transatlantic trade enslaved mostly men for labor, Muslim slavers favored seizing women for use as sex slave concubines.

In this regard, Brown has unsettlingly reprised his 2017 comments on sex slavery. Thus any norm that sex be consensual “is fairly unusual in world history.” This corresponds to Islamic doctrine’s proprietary understanding of female sexuality, which, he has noted, denies any recognition of rape in marriage.

Slavery in Islam is faith-based, Brown has explained. Under sharia the “only way that someone can lose their freedom is if they are a non-Muslim who lives outside the Muslim state and is then captured by Muslims.” Slavery therefore “is a reduction in legal status that is caused by unbelief,” whose “vestigial effect” can remain even for an enslaved convert to Islam or a child born into slavery.

Yet Brown has argued that Islam is “obsessed with emancipation.” Islamic doctrine’s numerous biases towards freeing slaves, such as a means to expiate sin, means that Islam “does not have an equal in any religious or philosophical tradition” from the premodern world. “The Quran and Sunna are unprecedently adamant about emancipation.”

However this emancipation should not help a slave return to unbelief in Islam. “Freedom is not the most important thing in Islamic law,” Brown has noted, although Muslim scholars have historically argued that “slavery is intrinsically harmful.” Rather, true freedom comes from submission to Islam, an “emancipatory force.” Seventh-century Arab Muslim conquerors, for example, before subjugating the Persians, announced that they would be free only as “slaves of God alone.”

Correspondingly, Brown has described Islamic civilization as a “vacuum cleaner, just sucking in people.” Muslim scholars have historically advocated enslavement of non-Muslims as a means of introducing them to Islam. Then “Muslims are always manumitting slaves, which means they need new slaves,” in an “emancipation turbine.”

Brown has correctly described how Christians led the revolutionary movement against a once universal acceptance of slavery to create the “abolitionist consensus that is held worldwide today.” “Muslims talking about the issue of slavery and abolition of slavery doesn’t happen until they encounter essentially Western abolitionism,” a development true of the Westerners themselves. In his assessment, Christians had in the process to “desacralize scripture” in the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament with its numerous references to forms of servitude.

Jewish rabbis and scholars would beg to differ with Brown, for as McGill University Professor David Aberbach has written, “Judaism is intrinsically an abolitionist religion.” “In Jewish belief, every human life matters.” Contrary to superficial readings, Rabbi Dov Linzer has noted, the “Torah only accepts slavery as a deeply entrenched societal institution.”

The late Jewish sage Rabbi Jonathan Sacks delved into this deeper understanding of the Torah’s position of slavery. God’s intends “slavery is to be abolished, but it is a fundamental principle of God’s relationship with us that he does not force us to change faster than we are able to do so of our own free will.” Nonetheless, in the “Torah’s value system the exercise of power by one person over another, without their consent, is a fundamental assault against human dignity.”

This analysis requires that non-Jews such as Brown properly understand Jewish scripture. “Jews have always read the Torah through a rabbinic interpretive lens and not simply on the plain meaning of its words,” the website My Jewish Learning has observed. Thus Jews cannot “read every mitzvah as an ideal” that allows for no further development, Linzer has cautioned.

Accordingly, in various stipulations the “Torah indeed sees slavery as a problematic phenomenon,” Shmuel Rabinowitz, rabbi of Jerusalem’s Western Wall and holy sites has noted. “Although it sanctions the institution of slavery, biblical law begins the process toward abolition,” University of Waterloo Professor James A. Diamond has observed. “Rules limiting slavery challenged the way society was built and prompted Jews to question an institution perhaps so natural it was invisible,” Rabbi Laura Janner-Klausner has confirmed.

The Torah’s restrictive regulation of slavery indeed manifested a Jewish “light to the Gentiles” in the ancient slave-holding world. As the Chabad-Lubavitch organization has noted:

At a time when Romans had literally thousands of slaves per citizen, even the wealthiest Jews held very modest numbers of servants. And those servants, the Talmud tells us, were treated better by their masters than foreign kings would treat their own subjects.

Particularly the Bible’s Exodus narrative of Jews escaping bondage in Egypt imprints upon Jewish consciousness emancipation’s value. Diamond has noted that the Passover “commemorates the exodus, anchoring the relationship between God and Israel as Liberator and slave.” As Sacks commented, “Jews were the people commanded never to forget the bitter taste of slavery so that they would never take freedom for granted.”

Tellingly, Brown has noted that Islamic tradition rejects the Torah’s narrative of a gracious God emancipating Jews in ancient Egypt and equates them with Muhammad’s early Muslim followers in pagan Mecca. “The Muslims in Mecca are like the Jews in Egypt, but they are not slaves, they are oppressed.” Thus the Israelite exodus “is not a story of emancipation, it’s a story of victory over oppression,” symbolizing Islam’s triumph.

The contrast between beliefs held by Muslims such as Brown and the Judeo-Christian tradition clearly indicates why Muslims have struggled to reject slavery. Confronted with this moral evil, Muslim reformers have argued that slavery is an artifact of jihadist doctrines inapplicable in modernity, or that rulers have discretionary power to prohibit human bondage. Nonetheless, Brown has recalled that jihadists going to Muslims’ defense during Bosnia’s 1990s sectarian carnage had asked Saudi clerics about taking slaves, only to hear warnings that this would create bad publicity.

These Islamic realities reflect Brown’s moral relativism. Although the Ottoman Empire’s slave trade “was undeniably brutal,” he has argued that slavery and other often onerous labor relations such as indentured servitude have widely varied across human history. Following therefore his dubious claim that slavery is not really objectively definable, any slavery-induced “disgust is a cultural construct” and “just custom; it’s just urf.” By analogy, he has noted that China’s brutal dog meat trade horrifies many non-Chinese, although increasing domestic opposition to dog meat consumption undermines his cultural relativism arguments.

Despite grappling with slavery’s moral problems for Islam’s legitimacy, Brown has failed to find a solution. In recent years Islamic State jihadists in their mercifully brief caliphate have “really caused a crisis for young Muslims” by piously invoking Islamic canons to justify the enslavement of Mesopotamia’s non-Muslims. But as the foregoing analysis has proven, he is wrong to claim in Islam’s tu quoque defense that slavery’s abolition “is not indigenous to any religion or any philosophy.”

Contrary to traditional Islamic understandings of an aloof, arbitrary Allah, the biblical God’s natural law ultimately revealed slavery’s injustice to Jews, Christians, and the wider world. Church historian John B. Carpenter has noted as much in the relationship of America’s famed escaped slave and 19th-century abolitionist Frederick Douglas to the Jew Jesus Christ:

Christianity’s commitment to freedom was so pronounced that Frederick Douglass, who decried the hypocrisy of slave-holding religion vividly, did not convert to Islam and become “Frederick X,” but professed, “I love the religion of our blessed Savior.”

While Brown’s exculpation for slavery in Islamic doctrine is unconvincing, he has nonetheless provided valuable insight into this previously “taboo subject.” As Azumah has written, a “critical approach is reserved for the Christian past but forbidden for the Muslim past.” However inadvertently and awkwardly, Brown has helped uncover Islam’s dark slavery legacy.



US condemns beheading of two women by the Islamic State in Syria

Turkey: Islamic State jihadis from Russia, China and elsewhere were trained in Istanbul Islamic school

Foreign Policy calls for adopting definition of ‘Islamophobia’ as ‘rooted in racism’

Pope Francis set to travel to Iraq to meet with Ayatollah Sistani, who called unbelievers unclean

Pakistan: Muslim falsely accuses Christian nurse of blasphemy, hospital staff tortures her, turns her over to police

Will Biden increase Palestinian rigidity, pushing them even further into the abyss?

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

QUESTION: Who First Told You About Jesus?

I first learned about Jesus from my mother and father.  It is important that everyone everywhere learn about Jesus. The question is who will tell them?
The group is working to tell all of the 2.6 billion people who don’t know about Jesus the truth about Him.
Watch Within Reach: notes:

A Third of Our World has not yet heard the Good News of Jesus
We live in a time where many of those are within reach of a local church. Through our simple and effective strategy of training and coaching, believers share the Gospel in their own nations and cultures.
We understand it’s impossible to accomplish alone.
That’s why we partner with 1,600 groups of churches in 62 nations.

Learn more at about how to reach out to the world to tell them about the glory of Jesus.


In November 1995, leaders from several discipleship and mission training programs met for a day of prayer and fasting. Drawn together by a common mission, each also shared a common desire: to respond to the need expressed by clusters of churches worldwide to provide discipleship-mission training for their own young people.
As the Holy Spirit moved, these leaders began to see that the barriers separating them and their ministries from each other had fostered competition and pride instead of collaboration. Through confession, brokenness and prayer, God birthed Global Disciples and the initial training model now known as Global Disciple Training (GDT). Since then, Global Disciples has added training for trainers in small business development (SBD) and leadership development (LEAD).
Today, Global Disciples has grown to serve in partnership with over 928 church organizations, fellowships, or denominations in 46 countries, providing training which enables them to equip and send out their own mission workers to multiply Christ-like believers and plant new, locally-sustainable fellowships and churches. The global nature of our ministry is also reflected in the 26 nationalities represented in our facilitators, trainers, and support staff.
As Global Disciples,

  • OUR VISION is to see every person have an opportunity to choose and follow Jesus Christ.
  • OUR PRAYER is that disciples of Jesus Christ, from many nations and vocations, will embrace this vision and do their part.
  • OUR MISSION is to make it possible for clusters of churches to multiply Christ-like disciples and locally-sustainable fellowships among least-reached people.
  • OUR CENTRAL FOCUS is to equip leaders selected by their churches to multiply Christ-like disciples, who multiply churches among least-reached people.
  • OUR PHILOSOPHY is that local expressions of the Body of Christ in close proximity to least-reached people are best able to reach them—and we all can help.


  • Intimacy with Jesus. Who we are and what we do flows from our relationship with Christ.
  • Trusting Relationships. Building trust with our co-workers, partners, and donors is essential.
  • Risk-taking Obedience. Obeying Christ requires the courage to risk all for our God-given mission.
  • Unwavering Integrity. Being authentic, accountable, and truthful in our words and actions.
  • Serving with Humility. Modeling the way of Jesus is our goal, living selflessly for God’s glory.
  • Transforming by Prayer. We want our work to be conceived, birthed, and carried out in prayer.

I am a global disciple of Jesus.
My allegiance is to Jesus Christ. He is the Living Word of God, as revealed by the Holy Spirit and through the Bible.
I want to do my part so everyone has the opportunity to hear the Good News of Jesus and to choose if they will believe and follow Him.  My desire is to see each person experience the transforming love of Jesus, live in the fullness of the Spirit and enjoy God forever.
As a participant in a local expression of the global Body of Christ, I am united in heart and purpose with sisters and brothers of many nations, ethnic groups, languages and churches to glorify God and to make Him known.
I believe my part as a global disciple of Jesus Christ is to:

  • Pursue Intimacy with God as my Creator, Provider and Father, through Jesus my Savior, Lord and Friend.    
  • Love others as Jesus loves them, relating and serving as witnesses in word and deed, loving even enemies.
  • Pray diligently for people who do not yet know Christ, especially those unreached with the Good News.
  • Live generously as a steward of all God has entrusted to me, being an ambassador of our generous Master.     
  • Rely on the Holy Spirit and the Bible to lead, guide and empower me to live, love and serve for God’s glory.

© All rights reserved.

Hamas-linked CAIR sues U.S. government, claiming terrorism watchlist is unconstitutional

“They said many Americans experience such delays during travel, often at random.”
Yes, and often not at random: American Airlines, for one, is far more hostile to foes of jihad terror than to Sharia supremacists and advocates of Sharia-based oppression of women and others.
Anyway, this case has a good chance of succeeding given today’s political climate, but the Terrorism Screening Database is unlikely to be scrapped altogether; it will just be filled up with opponents of Biden’s handlers’ regime.

“Is the Terrorism Watchlist Legal? Appeals Court Hears Virginia Case,” Associated Press, January 27, 2021 (thanks to Henry):

FALLS CHURCH — On Tuesday, a panel of federal appellate judges expressed concerns about ordering wholesale changes to a government terrorism watchlist. A lower court previously found the list of roughly 1 million individuals was constitutionally flawed.
The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond heard arguments Tuesday on the constitutionality of the watchlist, also known as the Terrorism Screening Database.
Government lawyers urged the judges not to intervene in the executive branch’s administration of the list and its national security judgments.
Fundamentally, they said the problems encountered by those on the list, like enhanced screening at airports and delays at border crossings, were too insignificant to merit intervention on constitutional grounds. They said many Americans experience such delays during travel, often at random.
‘Far From Insignificant’
Gadeir Abbas, a lawyer with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which brought the suit on behalf of roughly two dozen Muslim clients, said the burden faced by those on the list is far from insignificant. He cited accounts from plaintiffs of being shackled and having guns pointed at them in front of their children at border crossings when agents encountered their names in the database.
“They are not just inconveniences,” Abbas said.
But J. Harvie Wilkinson, one of three judges who heard the case, said that while some plaintiffs experienced significant issues, others experienced only minor problems. He suggested it might be better for individual plaintiffs to file suits based on their own experiences, rather than just attacking the watchlist as a whole.
He also questioned whether the judiciary branch was able or qualified to require revisions to a program that the government insists is vital to national security….

Indonesia: Gay couple whipped for Sharia-banned sex
Palestinian Supreme Fatwa Council: Calls to follow the ‘modern Abrahamic religion are tantamount to apostasy’
Iran threatens to block short-notice inspections of its nuclear facilities by UN atomic agency
Iranian military top dog: ‘If we face the smallest mistake from the Zionist regime, we will raze Haifa and Tel Aviv’
Pentagon chief may increase number of US troops in Afghanistan and Iraq
Biden’s policy towards Iran could leave Israel no choice but to use military force
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Vatican Fails to Override Bishop’s Biden Statement — Prelates say Biden’s policies advance ‘moral evils’

“There can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children.”Nelson Mandela

The Biden administration supports codifying abortion on demand into federal law.

VATICAN CITY ( –  The Vatican was unsuccessful in softening the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB’s) statement that spotlights heretical positions of self-identifying Catholic Joe Biden.
Interference from two pro-LGBT American cardinals, Joseph Tobin of Newark and Blase Cupich of Chicago, triggered the Holy See to attempt changes to the USCCB’s statement penned by its president, Abp. José Gomez of Los Angeles.
The involvement coming from outside the USCCB was reported by three sources close to the USCCB, according to The Pillar, an outlet covering Catholic news. In addition to Tobin and Cupich, the sources added other unnamed bishops were involved in the meddling.
Slated for release at 9 a.m. Wednesday morning, the statement clarified points of contradiction between perennial Catholic teaching and some of Biden’s policies. Though the Vatican succeeded in delaying the timing, the statement remained intact and has been published on the USCCB website.
Sources revealed the statement was debated on Tuesday evening, with various bishops objecting it was overly critical of the incoming administration. But it was the Vatican that ultimately caused the delay of its release.

Our new president has pledged to pursue certain policies that would advance moral evils and threaten human life and dignity.Tweet

The “USCCB Statement on the Inauguration of Joseph R. Biden” states:

[A]s pastors, the nation’s bishops are given the duty of proclaiming the gospel in all its truth and power, in season and out of season, even when that teaching is inconvenient or when the gospel’s truths run contrary to the directions of the wider society and culture. So, I must point out that our new president has pledged to pursue certain policies that would advance moral evils and threaten human life and dignity, most seriously in the areas of abortioncontraceptionmarriage and gender. Of deep concern is the liberty of the Church and the freedom of believers to live according to their consciences.

Gomez’s statement also addresses abortion:

We have deep concerns about many threats to human life and dignity in our society. But as Pope Francis teaches, we cannot stay silent when nearly a million unborn lives are being cast aside in our country year after year through abortion.
Abortion is a direct attack on life that also wounds the woman and undermines the family. It is not only a private matter, it raises troubling and fundamental questions of fraternity, solidarity and inclusion in the human community. It is also a matter of social justice. We cannot ignore the reality that abortion rates are much higher among the poor and minorities and that the procedure is regularly used to eliminate children who would be born with disabilities.

Gomez Does ‘Not Go Far Enough’

Under condition of anonymity, one priest told Church Militant this Vatican intervention is unsurprising.
“The Vatican has been compromised for decades,” he said. “They’re allied with the worst elements in the USA.”
Asked if he thinks Pope Francis is supportive of Biden and wanted him to be president, Father answered, “Of course. They’re all of the same globalist ilk.”

Both of these cardinals should be down on their knees praying that this scourge against the unborn in our nation is brought to an end.Tweet

Another priest, who also asked to remain anonymous in comments to Church Militant, said:

At this point in time the United States is near to having aborted 70 million babies, and frankly, Abp. Gomez’s statement does not go far enough to address Biden’s and the Democrats’ unflagging support of this grave evil. At this moment in our history as a nation, the number of dead by abortion exceeds every and all of the wars ever fought.

As to the two American cardinals involved, Father said, “Cdls. Cupich and Tobin are concerned about ruffling the Biden administrations’ feathers! What rot! Both of these cardinals should be down on their knees praying that this scourge against the unborn in our nation is brought to an end and not concerned about kissing up to the new administration.”
He explained the interest in playing nice with the Biden administration is financial.
“As a priest, I am all in for cutting off all federal funding to so-called Catholic charities,” Father said. “U.S. taxpayers paying for so-called social programs is not a good thing for the country when the funds go towards subverting and circumventing the gospel.”

William Mahoney, Ph.D.

© All rights reserved.

VIDEO: The World Just Changed — Now, the war begins.

Church Militant (a 501(c)4 corporation) is responsible for the content of this commentary.
This is the day the world changed. It’s best to simply own up to that and get down to the business of changing it back. Recall that, in 2016, the Marxist forces that thought Hillary had it all sealed up were thrown into chaos and despair at Trump’s victory. All that they had so desperately labored for, put into place, worked like termites to destroy, was suddenly brought to an abrupt halt.
They spent about two or three weeks in mourning, wondering and lamenting what went wrong, how it went wrong. And they got back up off the mat and started getting organized. And boy, did they ever organize, setting out on a four-year witch hunt to destroy Trump, and when that didn’t work, they stole an election.
Okay, so here we all are today, the beginning of a very dark winter, and then some. So now what? Well, to begin with, realize that we have lost about two months compared to the 2016 Marxist Democrats. We foolishly thought that simply having mountains of evidence proving the steal would be sufficient.
We’d get our day in court; word would spread like wildfire; the GOP would step forward and do the right thing; judges would do their job — all of it. And every single entity we put our trust in completely and utterly betrayed us — before, during and after the election.
We essentially wasted two months in a delusional hope (two months that the Democrats did not in 2016), waiting for this day to come and that somehow, someway, the illegitimately “elected” Biden would not take the oath. It was somewhat of a reasonable hope, one based on an expectation that people who had sworn to uphold the Constitution as well as the duties of their offices would, in fact, do so. They didn’t.
So here we are, betrayed and angry — betrayed by both the hierarchy and public leaders. But amidst the betrayal and anger, there is one shining truth: We are the wiser and now comprehend the entire depth of the evil swamp — Church as well as State.
Even President Trump didn’t grasp that, perhaps until it was too late. He absolutely understood the goal of the communist bastards in the Democratic Party was to make America socialist. He even made a point of it in his State of the Union speech. What he (and let’s be truthful here, we) had not sufficiently understood was the massive penetration into the Republican party that various cowards and eventual traitors had made.
When the chips were down, they showed their true colors. Now, for faithful Catholics, this has been true for decades: The betrayal of us, not to mention Our Lord, by our bishops has been a daily reality for anyone willing to look at it (not to mention the betrayal by bishops of faithful priests as well).
To look at these two sets of betrayal as somehow unrelated would be willing blindness at this point. For decades, American bishops assisted the Marxists up the ladder of power (many of them being turncoat Catholics), and that applies to not just the politicos.
They let them claim to be Catholic, played footsie with them, pretending that immigration was just as important as chopping and slicing up a child in the womb. They gave them sacrilegious Holy Communion like candy and went along with virtually every single step of their agenda, all in a phony virtue-signaling attempt to pretend they care about the poor and advancing social justice.
Judas is the patron saint of social justice; never forget that. But they spent everlasting amounts of time covering up for each other’s sexual proclivities, rape of altar boys and stealing from the faithful to pay outrageous legal bills to protect themselves from being imprisoned. And now they are declaring bankruptcy to freeze their assets and files from becoming discovered.
So if you are an American patriot and a faithful Catholic, you’ve been betrayed not once, but twice. We have a two-front war to fight. So we better get to fighting it. Any good fight requires a good battle plan, which means structure, discipline, communication and organization.
It means never taking your eye off the prize, with everything you do being a way to advance the ball down the field. Period. And a word here — Church Militant has no desire to be associated with people who don’t grasp the imminent threat to your souls and liberty and who aren’t willing to change their lives accordingly.
As we said before, the good guys have been way too passive. Signing petitions and thinking you’ve done something real is stupid and a waste of time. “Liking” a headline is, likewise, completely futile. While too many good guys were clicking and liking, the Marxists were out in the streets, knocking on doors, taking over the institutions of power, and anything else you can name.
They became so powerful that, we must admit, the war we are about to engage in may simply not be winnable, at least not in earthly, temporal ways. But that doesn’t mean it must not be fought. In fact, that it is this desperate means precisely that it must be fought. It must be fought with our intellects and our gumption.
We must commit to it totally, just as the Marxists did for decades. They were relentless, and so must we be. Life as we understood it and lived it is now over. If there is any hope of any restoration, this must involve every bit of energy we can throw at it. Again, that’s what they did.
Let’s start with organization and communication, something you will notice the Marxists are racing to deny us the opportunity to do. Whatever you want to say about the ongoing purge, it’s a good strategy on their part. So, as we said last week, stop acting like the world hasn’t changed, like you can just do what you used to do.
While we were all comfortable and living “the American Dream,” they were hard at work laying the groundwork to destroy America and the Church. In various ways, Church Militant has seen all this coming. We were actually afraid of it in 2016 but obviously were relieved when we were spared. The storm petered out.
But a more ferocious one gathered off the coast and reached landfall last November. So all of this means someone has got to step up, someone who has the understanding, the insight and the presence to speak to it. Church Militant videos have been viewed tens of millions of times and our footprint has grown substantially in the past three years. At first, we were mocked. They aren’t mocking anymore.
No one has pursued the intersection of religion and politics like we have — no one. Some other (perhaps) well-intentioned Catholic groups were simply late to the game, some even trying to capitalize on the drama. Likewise, some well-intentioned conservative media outlets have simply failed to understand that behind all of this is a spiritual war, and if you don’t have that understanding, you’ll never do anything more than simply report the news.
Only Church Militant has understood the dual nature, the dual reality of what’s going on, and that understanding has dictated our every move, whether it’s been our election coverage during the campaign or our reporting on the globalist view of multiple churchmen.
It’s one giant war, but it’s being fought on two fronts, and unless you are experts in each, you’re going to miss the big picture. So what we are saying is this: We are asking you to join Church Militant in the fight and help us be the tip of the spear in the restoration of both Church and State.
We want to be the source where you come for everything — Church and Nation. We lead the Rosary every morning along with morning prayer at 8 ET. You should be praying with us if at all possible. We churn out information every day in multiple programs, soon to be culminating in our weekday Church Militant Evening News, for which we have been preparing for months. That debuts on Monday, Feb. 8 at 6:30 p.m. ET.
We are moving away from the Marxist-dominated social media platforms and going onto whatever is available, but most importantly, we are asking you to get proactive and come to our website. Sign up to receive our emails. Join our Church Militant Resistance, which has thousands of members all over the country. Get active. Channel your justified anger.
Come to the site every day; tune into our programs. Fight for the truth with whomever will give you an ear. Organize rallies at your local chancery. Organize rallies and team with others to get these treasonous, backstabbing RINOs flushed from office. And prayer should be integral to all of those public scenes.
Primary any of them that did not do the right thing, which, frankly, is almost all of them. Likewise, CINOs — Catholics in name only, the Catholic equivalent of RINOs — need to be purged as well.
Now obviously, bishops can’t be voted out of office, but they can be frustrated by faithful laity at every turn. Every bishop hates bad publicity because it touches their bottom line. They, for the most part, are the wimpiest men you will ever encounter. Again pray that the successors of the Apostles, at least some of them, will respond to the grace you are asking to be imparted.
For too long, they have caved to the pressure put on them by fake Catholics. Well, it’s high time they start hearing loudly from faithful Catholics.
In truth, many of them should have resigned long ago, but they’ve profited from your ignorance. Enough is enough in both the culture and the Church. Too few leaders have stepped forward to fight all this. Support Church Militant, and help us take the lead: For God, Church and Country!
©Church MilitantAll rights reserved.

New York Times Details Horrors of Trump’s ‘Muslim Ban,’ Ignores Victims of Jihad Attacks

The New York Times story opens with a scene of unmitigated horror: “On May 30, 2019, Mohamed Abdulrahman Ahmed should have been in class preparing for exams. Instead, neighbors found the gifted high school senior hanging lifeless from a beam in his home in the Dadaab refugee camp in northeastern Kenya. He had taken his own life.” Since this is the New York Times, it comes as no surprise that the ultimate culprit is none other than Donald J. Trump, and his nefarious “Muslim Ban” that his wise successor’s handlers have now consigned to the dustbin of history.
Times author Ty McCormick does his best to tug at our heartstrings as he describes Dadaab, “a sea of sand and thorn scrub and makeshift tarpaulin dwellings” that is “home to more than 200,000 people — a city the size of Richmond, Va., or Spokane, Wash., except without electricity or running water.”
It’s a place absolutely mired in despair, but “over the years, refugees in Dadaab have clung to one hope: resettlement overseas, sometimes in Europe or Canada but mostly in the United States. Tens of thousands of Dadaab’s residents have come to the United States; in 2015, for instance, more than 3,000 people from the camp were resettled there.”
But then came the reign of the Evil One: “Those hopes of a better life were dashed on Jan. 27, 2017, when on his eighth day as president, Donald Trump suspended all refugee admissions and banned entry to citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries, including Somalia. (Restrictions were eventually applied to 13 countries in all.)”
It’s a predictable sob story about how hard the residents of Dadaab have had it since they have been unable to come to America. One is moved to tears, but when one begins to consider the issue rationally, other considerations inevitably intrude: there are people who are having hard times all over the world. In fact, there are even people who are having hard times in the United States of America. There are people who are suffering economically, like the people in Dadaab. There are people who are suffering physically, emotionally, mentally, and in other ways. All over the world, there is suffering and pain. Why, then, is it the moral responsibility of the United States of America to alleviate the suffering of the people of Dadaab? No one in Kenya or Somalia or France or China or Australia or anywhere else is doing a thing to alleviate the sufferings of Americans; why is it up to Americans, all of whom are suffering in various ways themselves, to alleviate the suffering of everyone else?
Meanwhile, what about the suffering of those whose lives were destroyed by Somali migrants who came into the country before Trump’s travel ban came into effect? Can we get a New York Times article on them? Somali Muslim migrant Mohammad Barry in February 2016 stabbed multiple patrons at a restaurant owned by an Israeli Arab Christian. When is the New York Times going to interview the people whom Barry stabbed, and publish a piece about how they have suffered, and how their lives forever changed that day? When is the New York Times going to write a piece about the other people who were in the restaurant that day, and explore their trauma, their horror, their terror, and the nightmares and anxiety they have experienced since then?
When does the New York Times plan to profile the victims of Dahir Adan, another Somali Muslim migrant, who in October 2016 stabbed mall shoppers in St. Cloud while screaming “Allahu akbar”? Do Adan’s victims get a New York Times article about their injuries, their healing processes, any operations they may have had to undergo, and their own ongoing trauma and fear?
How about the victims of Abdul Razak Artan, yet another Somali Muslim migrant, who in November 2016 injured nine people with car and knife attacks at Ohio State University? Does the New York Times plan to explain to us how the victims whom Artan tried to run down with his car (in an instance of the common phenomenon of vehicular jihad) now find their hearts racing at the prospect of having to cross the street?
Of course, the New York Times is not going to publish even a single line about the suffering of those people and others like them, or even consider the possibility that Trump’s travel bans did anything but harm. Only the suffering of the people of Dadaab and others like them, not the suffering of victims of jihad attacks, matters to the Times. The suffering of the people of Dadaab is very real, and should be addressed, but is the only solution, or the best solution, really the resettlement in the United States of large numbers of people among whom is an unknowable number of jihad terrorists, who will enter undetected since any vetting to try to discover them will be deemed “Islamophobic”?
There will soon be new victims of Biden’s handlers’ marvelous, multicultural discarding of the “Muslim Ban.” The New York Times will ignore them, while congratulating themselves on how they helped install a president who strikes back against “racism” and “xenophobia.”
Biden Puts Anti-Israel BDS Activist in Charge of NSC Intel
Texas: Man converts to Islam, plots jihad massacres at CIA, FBI and DEA headquarters
Polish Catholic Church holds ‘Day of Islam’ to ‘overcome prejudices’
Islamic Republic of Iran strengthening ties with Communist China, both denounce US sanctions
Turkey: 284 women killed in domestic violence in 2020, 56 because they wanted a divorce
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Jordanian Publication Al Bawaba: ‘Is ISIS Being Empowered by The Biden Administration?’

And the answer is: of course it is. Remember: under the Obama administration, ISIS established a caliphate in Iraq and Syria that was larger than Britain, and on January 20, 2017, looked as if it was here to stay. Now ISIS knows it is the time to strike again.
“Is ISIS Being Empowered by The Biden Administration? Deadly Terrorist Attacks Follow The US Inauguration,” Al Bawaba, January 24, 2021:

Only hours after the US welcomed a new president into the White House, the Iraqi capital was rocked with two deadly suicide bombings that resulted in at least 32 deaths and hundreds of injuries. The attack which was attributed to ISIS sparked discussion over the new administration policy towards Iraq and whether or not the terrorist group has timed its attack to coincide with the start of the Biden administration….
Social media users widely shared news of the Baghdad attacks since Thursday, labeling it as one of the worst in the city over the last few years, wondering whether or not it carries any political messages to the new US administration.

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

VIDEO: Misinformation — Political, but most importantly, theological.

Church Militant (a 501(c)4 corporation) is responsible for the content of this commentary.
If you watch any of the mainstream media, meaning the Marxists, you’ll notice the astonishing amount — and it truly is an astonishing amount — of misinformation.
For example, just in politics, the Marxists are more than happy to just push on pretending the 2020 election was perfectly legitimate — as though 80 million Americans went out to vote for Biden in the face of boatloads of evidence to the contrary.
Joe Biden did not win the election, period.
But thanks to the massive amount of misinformation, he and others get to pretend he did. He didn’t. And no amount of playacting changes that. Talk about the emperor having no clothes. The Biden administration is that fairy tale come to real life.
But in this Vortex, it is the larger topic of misinformation itself, as its own thing, we’d like to touch on.
Since Campaign 2020 really heated up last fall and then, getting really intense in the aftermath, Church Militant has been contacted by countless non-Catholics who recognize the truth of what we talk about politically.
They are men of goodwill — people who recognize truth, if even somewhat dimly — because they are committed to wanting to know the truth, wherever it takes them. Goodwill, in fact, is precisely what the process of conversion begins with.
Here’s a little side story if you will permit me.
My father, Russ Voris, grew up as a Nazarene in southwestern Ohio. He converted to Catholicism a few years after marrying my mother. God rest both their souls.
I asked him once in my youth about being at one time Protestant and what he thought of people of goodwill who are Protestant today. I was struck by his answer — one of those “never forget” comments. He said, “Even though my Mother, Michael, was Protestant, it was from her that I first learned about Jesus and the Bible. Without her, I might never have eventually found the One True Faith.”
His answer was so beautiful, it cemented in my mind.
He went on to tell me about when he was in the process of converting and he took his mom, my grandmother, into the local Catholic Church where he was taking instruction. He walked her around, pointing out and trying to explain the Stations of the Cross and candles lit before statues and all that sort of thing. He told me her response was, “Oh, Russell, it’s all so pagan — praying to statues and so forth, worshiping bread.”
And then my dad added to me, “She just didn’t know. Everything or most of what she knew about the Church was just wrong. She was misinformed.”
And this story is what I’d like to ask you to ponder for a moment or two — misinformation. The point of misinformation is to create a pretend world, a fake universe, an alternate reality. That’s why CNN and the rest of them are so proficient at it.
80 million people didn’t vote for Biden. Votes were added to his totals in key battleground states. Likewise, a heck of a lot more than 75 million voted for Trump. Votes were subtracted from his total in those same states.
So an alternate world now exists. The man who is president should not be. And the man who should be is not.
In this alternate world, many horrible things will happen. And though it may seem simple, we must ask ourselves the question: In an alternate world, what precisely is alternated from? Simple questions come with a simple answer — truth.
Misinformation begets an antipathy for truth. Over time, that antipathy grows so deep and intense that the truth is nearly impossible to discern. The misinformation gets repeated so often with such regularity that the alternate world begins to appear as the real world.
Hold on to that thought now for a moment and let’s move into the realm of the theological.
Misinformation about Our Blessed Lord, repeated often enough with enough regularity, can create an actual antipathy toward the truth about Him.
This is what my father was saying to his mother, God rest her soul. I pray for her eternal rest every day without ever having met her. She died before I was born.
There is an ocean of misinformation out there about Christ, simply accepted by not only Protestants but also many Catholics — Catholics who were poorly instructed over the past 60 years — for which yes, many bishops will be burning in Hell.
In this Vortex, Church Militant would like to extend an invitation for Protestants and poorly instructed Catholics — all of whom are living in an alternate universe regarding Our Lord — to embark with us on a friendly mission of discovering the fullness of Christ.
Every honest believer in Christ must know at the bottom of his heart that all this division among the baptized is a deception of the Devil. For all men of goodwill, we ask you ponder this. Really ponder it.
Communism has come to America for the simple reason that Christ’s followers are divided. This is what division brings. It brings Antichrist. The nation can never be won back until Christianity is once again united. Too many evils have been allowed to proliferate by both Protestants and poorly trained Catholics.
While it is necessary to formulate and execute political plans, a truly honest man will admit — if only to himself — that if all involved do not have an authentic understanding of Christ, that plan will fail. It is a spiritual war that is raging. Politics is only the arena where the war is playing out, but it is a spiritual war, at the close of the day.
The challenge in coming to break free of the misinformation is that things internally will have to change. Certain admissions of being wrong will have to be made — not wrongs born of malice, but born of ignorance coming from misinformation. It’s difficult to admit fault. It’s even more difficult to admit you’ve been fooled.
This Vortex is for all men of goodwill, whether you’re a poorly trained Catholic (of which the vast majority are), or an Evangelical, or non-denominational or Baptist or whatever. There is no division in God, and therefore there cannot be within His body on earth. The cracks, the spits, the divisions are where the serpent has slithered in. These cracks must be located, addressed and sealed shut.
It’s going to be a tough job, but we are inviting any men of goodwill to look at the world around us and ask: Could all of this come about because I was sold a bill of goods? If your answer is yes, then the only Christlike response is to go on a hunt for the truth. There can be no other authentic response.
Many thousands of you have signed up to be Premium members of Church Militant, especially in the wake of the devastation now facing the nation and the world.
We have too many productions to even keep track of — thousands of hours. So we are going to recommend certain programs for you to watch and think about as you embark on this truth-seeking mission.
The first is a documentary we produced called God’s Lamb: Tracing the Theological History of the Eucharist — the central point of Catholicism. Please — if you are Premium, watch it. The link is below.
If you are not, please sign up and watch it.
Those who want to see justice reign in the land cannot be divided by competing understandings of Jesus Christ.
We are all in this work together, so let’s get together and profess the same Faith in its fullness.
©Church MilitantAll rights reserved.

Grab the Popcorn: Free Speech Foe Gets Threatened with Prison for ‘Blasphemy’

The threat is not surprising, given the authoritarian Islamic character of Pakistan’s government and its vicious hostility to the Ahmadiyya movement, as it forbids Ahmadis to call themselves Muslims and persecutes them in numerous ways. The website presents Ahmadi Islam as the pure and genuine form of the religion, despite the fact that the Ahmadiyya movement is regarded as heretical by mainstream Muslims and represents an infinitesimal percentage of the worldwide Muslim population. Zafar and his colleague Amjad Mahmood Khan, who was also threatened, must have known that such a site would ruffle the Pakistani government’s feathers.
But what made this more than just another story about the repressive Pakistani government is the fact that back in January 2013, Zafar published an op-ed in the Washington Post entitled, “Making Islamic Sense of Free Speech.” In it, Zafar offered a manifesto for the destruction of the freedom of speech worthy of a true totalitarian.
“The difference between Islam’s view on free speech and the view promoted by free speech advocates these days,” Zafar asserted, “is the intention and ultimate goal each seeks to promote. Whereas many secularists champion individual privileges, Islam promotes the principle of uniting mankind and cultivating love and understanding among people. Both endorse freedom for people to express themselves, but Islam promotes unity, whereas modern-day free speech advocates promote individualism.”
The unity Zafar envisioned involved restrictions on the freedom of speech: “In order to unite mankind, Islam instructs to only use speech to be truthful, do good to others, and be fair and respectful. It attempts to pre-empt [sic] frictions by prescribing rules of conduct which guarantee for all people not only freedom of speech but also fairness, absolute justice, and the right of disagreement.”
So we can have the freedom of speech as long as “fairness” is ensured by Islamic “rules of conduct.” With evident distaste, Zafar continued by claiming that “the most vocal proponents of freedom of speech, however, call us towards a different path, where people can say anything and everything on their mind. With no restraint on speech at all, every form of provocation would exist, thereby cultivating confrontation and antagonism. They insist this freedom entitles them the legal privilege to insult others. This is neither democracy nor freedom of speech. It fosters animosity, resentment and disorder.”
Note the sleight of hand: “With no restraint on speech at all, every form of provocation would exist, thereby cultivating confrontation and antagonism.” Zafar was implying that the Muslims who riot and kill because of perceived affronts to Islam were not responsible for their own actions, but that those who supposedly provoked them were.
This is an increasingly widespread confusion in the West, willfully spread by people such as Zafar. In reality, the only person responsible for his actions is the person who is acting, not anyone else. You may provoke me in a hundred ways, but my response is my own, which I choose from a range of possible responses, and only I am responsible for it.
But having established that if someone riots and kills in response to someone else’s speech, the fault lies with the speaker, not the rioter, Zafar drove his point home: speech must be restricted in the interests of “world peace”: “Treating speech as supreme at the expense of world peace and harmony is an incredibly flawed concept. No matter how important the cause of free speech, it still pales in comparison to the cause of world peace and unity.”
And who will decide what speech accords with “world peace and harmony,” and what speech does not? Why, Zafar and his friends, of course. But what if the Pakistani government claimed that right for itself, and decided that what Zafar himself was saying did not accord with “world peace and harmony”?
Harris Zafar could well become the Nikolai Yezhov of our age. Yezhov was the Soviet secret police chief who sent innumerable people to their deaths in the gulag before Stalin decided it was his turn. Nowadays, Zafar has become the first advocate of restrictions on the freedom of speech to run afoul of people who want to take his own freedom of speech away. But as the silencing continues, he will by no means be the last.
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Wife of Hamas-linked CAIR top dog Hassan Shibly accuses him of beating her, he resigns, may be disbarred

No surprise here in Shibly’s behavior. He is clearly a true believer, a Sharia-adherent Muslim. What is surprising is that Imane Sadrati actually has dared to complain. The Qur’an teaches that men are superior to women and should beat those from whom they “fear disobedience”: “Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.” — Qur’an 4:34
Muhammad’s child bride, Aisha, says in a hadith that Muhammad “struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: ‘Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?’” — Sahih Muslim 2127
It will be interesting now to see if Shibly attempts a religious freedom defense, as did doctors in Michigan who were accused of practicing female genital mutilation. They succeeded with this defense. Maybe he will, too.
CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case — so named by the Justice Department. CAIR officials have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups. Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. CAIR’s cofounder and longtime Board chairman (Omar Ahmad), as well as its chief spokesman (Ibrahim Hooper), have made Islamic supremacist statements about how Islamic law should be imposed in the U.S. (Ahmad denies this, but the original reporter stands by her story.) CAIR chapters frequently distribute pamphlets telling Muslims not to cooperate with law enforcement. CAIR has opposed virtually every anti-terror measure that has been proposed or implemented and has been declared a terror organization by the United Arab Emirates. CAIR’s Hussam Ayloush in 2017 called for the overthrow of the U.S. government. CAIR’s national outreach manager is an open supporter of Hamas.

“CAIR Executive Shibley [sic] Beats Wife, Resigns, and Could Get Disbarred,” by Javier Manjarres, The Floridian, January 24, 2021:

Former Executive Director of the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Florida, Hassan Shibly (pictured) has literally taken what the Qur’an says about beating your wife and applied it to his own family.
Verse 4:34 in the Qu’ran allows for Muslim men to “strike” their wives, and that is exactly what Hassan Shibly did to his wife Imane Sadrati, who has accused him in a fundraising video of beating her in front of her children, causing her living situation with Shibly as “unbearable.”
“My children and I are in desperate need of your help,” stated Sadrati. “For years I’ve been in an abusive relationship, and the situation at home has become unbearable. I’ve finally decided to build the courage to start over.”
This is the same Syria-born Shibly that hosted Rep. Ilhan Omar at a CAIR fundraiser in California, where he infamously stated, “some people did something” about the 9/11 Islamic terrorist attacks against the U.S….
Shibly is a devout Islamists [sic] that defended the “ISIS bride”, has called the terror group Hezbollah a “resistance movement,” tweeted that “Israel and its supporters are enemies of God,” and praised Palestinian terrorist Marvan [sic] Barghouti as a “hero.”
In addition, Hassan Shibly for the last two years has engaged in a high-profile spat with Conservative journalist and former Republican nominee for Congress, Laura Loomer.
Loomer sued Hassan Shibly and CAIR FL in a Florida court for tortious interference for their role in getting her banned from Twitter and other social media sites.
In a statement to The Floridian, Loomer stated that she had long sounded the alarm about Shibly.
“I’ve been warning people about the national security threat Hassan Shibly poses to Florida and our nation for years. I’m happy to see that the leader of  CAIR- FL, CAIR’s largest branch in the country, which has been designated as a terrorist organization by the UAE, has resigned over a domestic violence dispute. His resignation should have been submitted in 2019 when he advocated for Hoda Muthana, an ISIS bride who fled to Syria to be readmitted to the US despite her Murderous threats against Americans. fled to Syria to be readmitted to the US despite her Murderous threats against Americans.”…

New York Times: “The ‘Muslim Ban’ Is Over. The Harm Lives On.”
Turkey: Pro-Erdogan ‘journalist’ says Biden’s ‘Jewish-majority’ cabinet is a cause for concern
An Arab Israeli Asks ‘What Apartheid’?
Hamas-linked CAIR files appeal to decision to dismiss case against professor for criticizing Islam
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The ‘Muslim Ban’ Is Gone. Now Come the Reminders of Why We Needed It.

Joe Biden had barely been in the Oval Office long enough to exile the Winston Churchill bust yet again when he repealed the notorious “Muslim Ban,” and so now Americans can rest easy. We have repudiated one of the hallmarks of the Bad Orange Man’s administration, put “racism” and “Islamophobia” behind us, and resumed our role as a refuge for the tired, the poor, the woke masses. And so as a glorious new multicultural era dawns in America, after a four-year-long speed bump, will come the reminders that virtue-signaling is never a risk-free proposition.
For besides cementing Old Joe’s role as the errand boy for his party’s ascendant hard-Left wing, that was all the repeal of the “Muslim Ban” was: virtue-signaling. The executive order his handlers had ready for him to sign on Wednesday made that clear. “Beyond contravening our values,” it said, “these Executive Orders and Proclamations” — that is, the ones instituting the bans – “have undermined our national security. They have jeopardized our global network of alliances and partnerships and are a moral blight that has dulled the power of our example the world over. And they have separated loved ones, inflicting pain that will ripple for years to come. They are just plain wrong.”
That “moral blight” bit is the key, as it would be hard for Biden’s handlers to whisper into his earpiece a coherent argument for how a ban on travel from such upstanding members of the international community as Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, North Korea, Venezuela, Nigeria, Myanmar, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Sudan and Tanzania undermined, rather than strengthened, national security.
But even the “moral blight” business runs into a major problem: there never really was a “Muslim Ban” at all. From beginning to end, that was just propaganda designed to smear Trump as a racist (even though Islam is, contrary to popular belief, actually not a race), bigoted, “Islamophobe.” It had no basis in reality. For as you may be aware, North Korea, Venezuela, and Myanmar are not actually Muslim countries at all. Eritrea has about a fifty percent Muslim population. Tanzania is about 35% Muslim.
What’s more, the world’s largest Muslim populations are (in descending order) in Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Egypt, Iran, Turkey, Algeria, and Sudan. Iran, Nigeria and Sudan are the only ones on the “Muslim Ban” list. If Trump had really wanted to bar Muslims from entering the United States, he would have banned travel from Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Egypt, Turkey, and Algeria. He made no attempt to do so. If he had intended to impose a “Muslim Ban,” barring travel from North Korea but not Pakistan was a remarkably inefficient way to go about it.
What led to the grouping of countries in the Trump “Muslim Ban” was not that they were Muslim at all. The travel bans were on countries that could not or would not provide adequate information about who was entering. It was a national security move from start to finish. But now Obama’s dotty old puppet and his handlers have made sure that any consideration of national security issues in connection with mass migration will be dismissed as “racist” and “Islamophobic.”
And so now the reminders of why we needed Trump’s travel bans will start coming. Here is a preview: Somali Muslim migrant Mohammad Barry in February 2016 stabbed multiple patrons at a restaurant owned by an Israeli Arab Christian; Ahmad Khan Rahami, an Afghan Muslim migrant, in September 2016 set off bombs in New York City and New Jersey; Arcan Cetin, a Turkish Muslim migrant, in September 2016 murdered five people in a mall in Burlington, Washington; Dahir Adan, another Somali Muslim migrant, in October 2016 stabbed mall shoppers in St. Cloud while screaming “Allahu akbar”; and Abdul Razak Artan, yet another Somali Muslim migrant, in November 2016 injured nine people with car and knife attacks at Ohio State University.
Seventy-two jihad terrorists had entered the U.S. from the countries listed in Trump’s initial immigration ban before it was instituted. But once the travel bans came into effect, suddenly we didn’t see as much of this as we had before. Yes, this was no coincidence.
There are warning signs from Europe as well. All of the jihadis who murdered 130 people in Paris in November 2015 had just entered Europe as refugees. Numerous other Muslim migrants since then have committed “lone wolf” jihad attacks on the streets of several European countries.
But to consider such matters is now officially “racist” and “Islamophobic.” The problem with virtue-signaling by our moral superiors in Washington, however, is that they never have to deal with the consequences of their actions; ordinary Americans do. Anyone who is the victim of a crime or a jihad attack perpetrated by a migrant from one of the countries on Trump’s travel ban list can expect no sympathy from Biden’s handlers. Their constituency has been served, and it isn’t the Americans who have to deal with criminal migrants. As a nation, we are no longer “racist,” at least in this particular, and that’s all that matters.
Khamenei posts photo of Trump playing golf in drone’s shadow, vows ‘Revenge is Definite’
UK: Muslim migrant who murdered 3 was free and not deported despite 7 convictions for 19 previous offenses
Palestinian Islamic Jihad top dog says Soleimani gave ‘direct orders,’ Iran supplied rockets to hit Israel
Germany: 200 Muslims allowed to pray in mosque but only 70 Christians in church
Denmark’s Integration Minister: ‘A large part of Islam today is represented by extremists’
UK: Muslim accused of having explosives, detonators and documents referring to jihad and combat
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Notorious Antisemite Robert Malley joining Biden team as special Iran envoy

You may recall that Malley was foreign policy adviser to then-presidential candidate Barack Obama in 2007, and was fired from his campaign team in 2008 because of his notorious ties to Hamas, the PLO and other jihadist, anti-Israel groups.

Atlas readers are long familiar with this subversive jihad operative. As early as 2007 and  2008 (and repeatedly throughout the campaign and in my book), I warned Geller Report  readers of the troubling relationship between Robert O. Malley and Barack Hussein Obama.


2007 and further:
[Malley] was part of the American negotiating team that dealt with Yasser Arafat at Camp David. He has presented a revisionist history of those negotiations since then:
presenting a view that blames Israel for the failures of the negotiations. His version has been radically at odds with the views of Americans and Israelis (including the views of American Middle East negotiator Dennis Ross-also an adviser to Obama- and President Clinton). He has spent years representing the Palestinian point of view, co-writing a series of anti-Israel articles with Hussein Agha-a former Arafat adviser. Palestinian advocate. These have appeared in the New York Review of Books a publication that has served as a platform for a slew of anti-Israel advocates from Tony Judt to the aforementioned George Soros to the authors of the Israeli Lobby book Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer. Malley has also called settlements “colonies” — implicitly condemning Israel as a “colonial” state. His writings have been so critical of Israel that the media-monitoring group CAMERA has a “dossier” on him.
Discover the Networks:
In a July 2001 op-ed (titled “Fictions About the Failure at Camp David”) which was published in the New York Times, Robert Malley (whose family, as noted above, had close ties to Yasser Arafat) alleged that Israeli — not Palestinian — inflexibility had caused the previous year’s Camp David peace talks (brokered by Bill Clinton) to fail. This was one of several controversial articles Malley has written — some he co-wrote with Hussein Agha, a former adviser to Arafat — blaming Israel and exonerating Arafat for that failure.
One security official at the time said, “We are noting with concern some of Obama’s picks as advisers, particularly Robert Malley who has expressed sympathy to Hamas and Hezbollah and offered accounts of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations that don’t jibe with the facts” (here).
Because of the exposure of Malley by the blogs, he was removed from Obama’s campaign team. But the mask is off, and Obama has no need to pretend to be something he is not. Malley is back and in charge of the Obama “war” against ISIS.

This guy is dangerous. Robert Malley is one of the architects of the radical JCPOA (Iran Nuclear Deal) with Iran. In addition, Malley was one of lead advisors for President Obama’s disastrous ISIS policy. Malley is also a rabid hater of Israel, and will often write viciously anti-Israel screeds in various publications. In fact, In 2008 Malley was actually removed from Obama’s election committee due to his meetings with Hamas officials.
President Biden’s foreign policy team is absolutely horrendous. The Middle East is very likely going to become a far more dangerous place in the next four years.
Related – Major Jewish Group ‘Concerned’ by White House Appointment of Robert Malley as Middle East Coordinator
Related – What would hiring Robert Malley say about Biden’s plans on Iran?
“Ronald Radosh, adjunct fellow at the Hudson Institute, who provided some background on Malley in 2015, recalled that Malley was removed from Obama’s 2008 election committee after “protests from the Jewish community about his private meetings with Hamas.”
“In articles primarily appearing in The New York Review of Books, he regularly focused on Israel’s supposed sins and responsibility for lack of peace between Israel and the Palestinians. A profile of him in Discover the Networks has links to his articles, many of which were co-authored with Hussein Agha, a former advisor to Yasser Arafat.”
“Malley’s parents were rabidly anti-Israel and counted Yasir Arafat as a personal friend. Indeed, Arafat was among those ‘leaders’ (for want of a better word) who had intervened with the French government to readmit the Malley family to France after being expelled for their radical activities,”

Robert Malley reportedly joining Biden team as special Iran envoy

By World Israel News, January 22, 2021
Robert Malley is rumored to be in line for a position on Biden’s team as special envoy on Iran, the Jewish Insider reports on Jan. 20, a source of concern for Israel supporters.
President Joe Biden has made no secret of his desire to return to the 2015 Iran deal, an agreement bitterly opposed by Israel and described by former President Donald Trump as “the worst deal ever” and one which paved the way for Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. Trump exited the deal in 2018.
Former State Department official Aaron David Miller told Jewish Insider that appointing Malley would be a “smart move,” saying he understands the issues surrounding the agreement and has a close relationship with incoming Secretary of State Tony Blinken and National Security Advisor-designate Jake Sullivan.
However, Malley’s background is troubling to others, who point to his history of criticizing Israel.
Ronald Radosh, adjunct fellow at the Hudson Institute, who provided some background on Malley in 2015, recalled that Malley was removed from Obama’s 2008 election committee after “protests from the Jewish community about his private meetings with Hamas.”
Radosh writes, “In articles primarily appearing in The New York Review of Books, he regularly focused on Israel’s supposed sins and responsibility for lack of peace between Israel and the Palestinians. A profile of him in Discover the Networks has links to his articles, many of which were co-authored with Hussein Agha, a former advisor to Yasser Arafat.”
Jeff Dunetz, founder of The Lid Blog, says “For those who are unfamiliar with Mr. Malley, he is a second-generation Israel hater. I do not believe the father’s sins are visited on the son, but this son has chosen to follow in his dad’s footsteps.”
“Malley’s parents were rabidly anti-Israel and counted Yasir Arafat as a personal friend. Indeed, Arafat was among those ‘leaders’ (for want of a better word) who had intervened with the French government to readmit the Malley family to France after being expelled for their radical activities,” Dunetz writes.
As President Clinton’s special assistant for Arab-Israeli Affairs, Malley appears to be the only one who blamed Israel for the failure of the 2000 Camp David peace talks.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

A Different Inauguration

Fr. Paul D. Scalia: “Repent” is the foundational Gospel command. It’s always timely. Sin is the construction of one’s own petty little kingdom.

Saint John Henry Newman once observed that men always think of their own day and age as the worst. In every time, he said, “serious and anxious minds, alive to the honour of God and the needs of man, are apt to consider no times so perilous as their own.” Indeed, we see this from Cicero – O tempora! O mores! – to Thomas Paine – These are the times that try men’s souls! – to today’s political hyperboles.
Ironically, Newman made this observation on the way to claiming that the trials of his own day were indeed the worst. They were such that “would appall and make dizzy even such courageous hearts as St. Athanasius, St. Gregory I, or St. Gregory VII. And they would confess that dark as the prospect of their own day was to them severally, ours has a darkness different in kind from any that has been before it.”
One sympathizes.
As we look at the cultural, political, and ecclesiastical wreckage around us, we are tempted to conclude the same. Political division and cultural relativism, simmering religious persecution, widespread infidelity, and ecclesiastical confusion – these make our times arduous and presage more difficulties ahead.
Still, it’s of little use and of frequent distraction to try to pinpoint our time’s exact location on the chart of woeful times. What matters is not how today’s evils compare to yesterday’s, but how we respond to them. In such circumstances, it’s good to go back to basics. And basics are just what today’s Gospel gives us. (Mk 1:14-20)
Last week the world was focused on the presidential inauguration. Today’s Gospel presents another – a very different and more important – inauguration: the beginning of our Lord’s public ministry. “After John had been arrested, Jesus came to Galilee proclaiming the gospel of God.”
Our Lord even gives a brief inaugural address: “This is the time of fulfillment. The kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.” Unlike the typical timebound, agenda-laden inaugural address, our Lord’s words focus on eternal truths. They are timeless and thus apt for every moment in history, including our own.
He declares, “This is the time of fulfillment.” For the ancient Israelites, that had a very specific meaning: the realization of all that had been promised and prophesied for centuries. The long-awaited Messiah has come. The kingdom of God is no longer a desire, but at hand.
More broadly, we can take the “time of fulfillment” to indicate that all time and all times have meaning only in relation to Christ and His Kingdom. He relates all of history to Himself and thus sets it in proper perspective. If we try to interpret and respond to our times apart from Him, we tragically misread them.
This is the proper supernatural outlook: to measure our current circumstances not according to the world’s standard and solutions, but according to the reality and power of the Kingdom of God that is at hand no less today than 2000 years ago. And that Kingdom requires two things: repentance and faith.
“Repent” is the foundational Gospel command. It’s always timely. Sin is the construction of my own petty little kingdom. It might be a squalid, selfish, peevish place, but at least it’s mine. Admission into the Kingdom of God requires that I repent and renounce this miserable rival kingdom.
This repentance takes on greater significance as we are called to confront the evils of our day. The greatest danger in war is to adopt the immoral tactics of the enemy. So, in opposing the culture of death, we risk growing bitter, hardened, and resentful. Our response to evil must always be seen in relation to the “time of fulfillment,” and thus preceded by our own repentance. Only a heart set right with Christ can see with clarity and speak with charity.
The prophets of Israel never considered themselves exempt from the sinfulness of their people. “Woe to me! For I am lost,” says Isaiah, “For I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips.” (Is 6:5) The first step in speaking the truth is repentance for our own actions against it. As we have an obligation to bear witness to the truth, so we should understand ourselves as rebellious, sinful, and in need of the truth we proclaim.
Next, “believe in the Gospel.” Repentance cleanses our souls; faith opens them to God’s grace and truth. Again, this takes on greater significance in our trying times. Against increasing darkness, the light of faith enables us to judge wisely, so that the world’s deceits will not mislead us. That faith also makes us stouthearted, able to stand fast and persevere, because we know the one in Whom we have believed. (cf. 2 Tim 1:12)
An exchange between Frodo and Gandalf is helpful for this consideration. The poor hobbit has just learned that the evil Sauron was rising again and menacing Middle Earth. He says, “I wish it need not have happened in my time.” Again, one sympathizes. But Gandalf responds, “So do I, and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”
For us, the first and most fundamental thing to do with the time that is given us is to repent and believe in the Gospel.

Fr. Paul D. Scalia

Fr. Paul Scalia is a priest of the Diocese of Arlington, Va, where he serves as Episcopal Vicar for Clergy. His new book is That Nothing May Be Lost: Reflections on Catholic Doctrine and Devotion.
EDITORS NOTE: This The Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2021 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.