JIHAD: Violent Rioters Chant ‘Allahu Akbar’ as They Torch France, Vandalize Churches, ‘The Last Prophet is Mohamed’ thumbnail

JIHAD: Violent Rioters Chant ‘Allahu Akbar’ as They Torch France, Vandalize Churches, ‘The Last Prophet is Mohamed’

By The Geller Report

More news the media will never report because Islam is peace and if you think otherwise, you’re a racist-Islamophobic-anti-Muslim bigot.

SHOCKING: Race rioters chant ‘Allahu Akbar’ as they torch France, 719 arrested

By: Katie Daviscourt, Human Events, July 3, 2023:

On the fifth consecutive night of civil unrest in France over the police-involved shooting death of a teenage boy, a shocking video has emerged of rioters chanting “Allahu Akbar” as they torched the European country.

“Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar,” rioters chanted as they torched vehicles and launched mortar-style fireworks at buildings and police, according to video.

They’re chanting Allahu Akbar as they torch France pic.twitter.com/57yqbmoRQd

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) July 2, 2023

The interior ministry said 719 people had been arrested on Saturday night, compared to 1,311 arrested on Friday and 875 on Thursday night, Associated Press reports. More than 3,000 rioters have been arrested since Tuesday.

The French government deployed 45,000 police to cities across the country in preparation for a potential increase in unrest following Saturday’s funeral for Nahel, a 17-year-old Algerian immigrant, who was shot and killed by police during a traffic stop on Tuesday. Nahel was laid to rest in a Muslim ceremony in the Paris suburb of Nanterre, according to the outlet.

Over the past few days, rioters have clashed with police as they ransacked stores and set fires to famed French cities in protest of alleged racial discrimination by French police agencies.

Hundreds of police officers were deployed to the Champs-Elysees, in the heart of Paris, and guarded its boutiques and city streets with batons and shields. Video shows riot police chasing down protesters and making multiple arrests.

Macron doesn’t like this video, he censored it. One more reason to publish it: “Allah Akbar! We are Muslims, if the police kill us we have the right to kill. It is written in the Koran!” France has fallen. In a few years it will become the first Islamic Republic in Europe. pic.twitter.com/IVPF20KyZc

— RadioGenova (@RadioGenova) July 3, 2023

Read more.


Pamela Geller


France’s Pied Piper of Jihad

French President Macron Imposes Total Ban on Social Media Reporting of Events in France

WARNING GRAPHIC: Scenes From War Torn France, “APOCALYPTIC”, Mayor and His Family Escape Assassination

France: Muslim Rioters Threaten Jews with New Holocaust

FRANCE IS BURNING: The Leftist-Islamic Alliance Makes Its Move In France

Muslim rioters attack LGBT bar, ‘We burn the whores, by the Qur’an’

France: Muslims ransack church, smash windows, write ‘The last prophet is Mohamed’ on white board

RELATED VIDEO: Katie Hopkins of the Aufheben (Cancelation) of people for being counter revolutionary.


It turned out that the person who was beaten by MusIims in France was the president of the “Angels for Peace” association, which works to keep refugees in France. #FranceRiots #FranceHasFallen #FranceOnFire pic.twitter.com/6sQUnlNKQW

— Paul Golding (@GoldingBF) July 3, 2023

‘Allahu Akbar’ Riots Erupt in France After Police Shooting of 17-Year-Old Nahel with a Lengthy Criminal History

Once again, Islamic migrant communities unleash their destructive potential with riots, attacks, fires, looting, and rampant destruction of public services funded by… pic.twitter.com/cK5CITg1ub

— Amy Mek (@AmyMek) June 29, 2023

Allahu Akbar: France’s Child Soldiers…

At just 8 years old, this child soldier is already prepped to wage Jihad on the French police, bred to harbor a deep hatred for France. Are these the hopeful faces of France’s future? Islamic groups view children as potential ‘soldiers’… pic.twitter.com/nCQStUX7Op

— Amy Mek (@AmyMek) July 2, 2023

France is what happens when you remove God from society. pic.twitter.com/BxcVFpMis5

— Jackson Hinkle 🇺🇸 (@jacksonhinklle) July 3, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

U.S. Islamic Scholar: Muslim alliance with the Left was a mistake, ‘they’re going to delete us’ thumbnail

U.S. Islamic Scholar: Muslim alliance with the Left was a mistake, ‘they’re going to delete us’

By Jihad Watch

Which does not mean that patriots should think that they should now ally with Islamic groups on social issues. The supremacist imperative of Islam will remain.

MEMRI, May 19, 2023:

American Islamic scholar Shadee Elmasry of the New Brunswick Islamic Center in New Jersey said in an episode of the “Blood Brothers” show that was posted on the 5Pillars YouTube account on June 7, 2023 that Muslims made a mistake by aligning with the political Left because their beliefs contradict Islam and will inevitably lead to “utter war”. Elmasry said that if a liberal army were to liberate Gaza, it would be “trading one problem for another” because the Muslims would then have to “tiptoe” in accordance with the liberal agenda. He said that the Left wants to kill the Islamic faith, that if the political right had wanted to exterminate the Muslims it already would have, and that the Right is better suited for an alliance with Islam because they at least believe in objective truth. In addition, Elmasry said that the true interfaith initiative is to explain to Christians that they are wrong. The 5Pillars channel is a U.K.-based Islamic media platform.

In a May 19, 2023 video posted to the Utica Masjid YouTube account, Elmasry also said that once the Left gets over the Muslims’ “minority badge”, it will “hunt them down” faster than it hunts down Christianity.

Interviewer: “There has been some accusations levied, that you know, quite frankly, we made the mistake – by ‘we’, I mean the Muslim community and our faith leaders – made a gamble allying in with the left. Do you agree with the observation?”

Shadee Elmasry: “Yeah the observation is sound, and deciding that yeah the left is the one that is going to help us, right? They may have helped you in some fringe things, but the root of the matter is that their philosophy’s rooted in their desires. Eventually you are going to cross paths, you have to cross paths with them eventually. But when you do cross paths with them, it’s utter war, right? So, why go into that conflict in the beginning? Cut it from the beginning.”


Interviewer: “The left seemed, or appeared to be, and some would argue still are, more plausible natural allies because they don’t want to kill you, they don’t want to exterminate you…”

Elmasry: “But they do want to kill your faith.”

Interviewer: “But they don’t want to physically kill you and exterminate you.”

Elmasry: “Okay, fair enough.”

Interviewer: “Now whether we have a generation of apostates or not is another conversation, right? Because the other argument is that the right want to kill, they literally want to exterminate you.”

Elmasry: “Is that really true?”

Interviewer: “I don’t think it is.”

Elmasry: “They may have a lot of hatred but there are Muslims in Alabama, there are Muslims in Texas, there are Muslims in those places. Wouldn’t it have happened already? Wouldn’t some violence have already happened?


“I think that we eventually will come to an agreement, personally speaking, because these are people who believe in an objective truth, right? And they believe in right and wrong, so we already have something in common.”

Interviewer: “You are talking about what’s generally perceived as the right.”


Elmasry: “But I wouldn’t get too cozy with anyone who I know, in the future, we are going to cross paths. So what? Do I have to not speak out against atheism now? I can’t speak out against anything? I have to censor myself too much. It’s not a good deal.


“If a liberal army marched on Israel and said: ‘We are liberating Gaza, we are making Gaza a state.’ I would say we are just trading one problem for another. We are just trading one problem for another because when those people liberate you, you owe them now, right? I don’t want you liberating me, I will liberate myself. Because if you liberate me, now I owe you. Now I have to tiptoe with your agenda.


“But the idea here that we want to harmoniously – that’s why I don’t like interfaith – it cancels doubt in a sense. If I am going to be all fuzzy wuzzy with you as a priest… but the truth is I want to give you doubt. I need to tell you that you are wrong about Jesus.”

Interviewer: “And is that the only interfaith that Islam acknowledges, where we convey the theme to them? I mean let’s be honest about it. Interfaith [dialogue], from a Quranic perspective, even when Allah tells us to come to a common word with the Christians, is to nearly always tell them that they’ve got it wrong and to worship Allah alone, right?

Elmasry: “Correct, you’re undermining doubt by a lot of those types of interfaith.”


Interviewer: “We’re assuming that they’re going to do some kind of favor for us down the road or they’re going to protect our rights. If they come into power, it’s game over. They are the last people who are going to care about our rights to have a legal marriage, or a religious marriage, or to have this or that or the other. The last people who are going to care.”

Elmasry: “And they’re going to delete us. They will delete. And why? Because they have done it before. Let me ask you, how many times have Christians backspaced other cultures and other religions? Let’s see… If something’s going to happen, it’s not going to happen just like that. You would have muqaddimah [a prologue]. Like, you’re not going to win at the major league level unless you first succeeded at the minor league level, then single A, double A, triple A, majors, right? You don’t just come out of nowhere.

“Who, which group of people has silenced people, got them fired, ended their careers, controlled industries? Which group of people? And I am not saying the right is our friend, but who has done it? I think that the left has done it far more times, just from my casual observation. Ending careers, controlling industries, on this subject, where it comes to an intersection of this subject, canceling people.


“Muslims still have the minority badge.”

Interviewer: “Yeah”

Elmasry: “So they tiptoe around Muslims a little bit, right? Because they still got the minority badge in many ways. We have refugees, we have darker skin colors, generally speaking, and Islam is like a minority thing in itself. Get past all that stuff, right, they are going to hunt it down faster than they hunted down Christianity, right?”

Interviewer: “And we’ve seen it.”

Elmasry: “It’s going to be a very interesting future as they obtain more power.”

Read more.

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

Wanted: A New Birth of Freedom thumbnail

Wanted: A New Birth of Freedom

By The Catholic Thing

John M. Grondelski: The ethic of radical freedom says Adam’s and Eve’s “disobedience” was a free choice and, therefore, it’s God, not they, who sinned, punishing them for choosing freely.  But this is neither Judaism nor Christianity.

For most Americans, the Fourth of July is a celebration of American “freedom.”  Freedom is an iconic word for us.  It’s also a foundational principle for Judaism and Christianity.  But the political/philosophical and the theological meanings of the term are growing ever more equivocal.  Perhaps of even greater concern, the average Christian or Jew doesn’t realize what’s happening or what’s at stake.

Is freedom an end or a means?

For many people, the former is problematic.  The Judeo-Christian message is that God created us for the good, ultimately for the Summum Bonum, the Highest Good, i.e., God.  Thomist philosophy identified the “ends” of the intellect as truth and of the will as “good.”  When a person chooses to do something, he chooses to do what he regards as good.  He may be mistaken, but human action always operates under the attraction of the “good.”

The very structure of language reveals this in-built bias: “Why did you choose A over B?”  “Because A was better.”  We understand why “better” justifies the choice.  Someone who answered that he chose what was “worse” would raise the question, “Then why did you choose it?”

If the end of human action is the good, and not freedom, this also suggests some objective order of good and value that exists independently of the individual actor, towards which one has obligations to “do good and avoid evil.”  The person does not stand neutrally before good and evil as equally legitimate choices, of equal weight on the moral scale.  Man has a built-in, healthy orientation towards the good.

What, then, in the Judeo-Christian tradition, is freedom for?  That question is actually quite acute because, in recognizing freedom as a means rather than an end, it recognizes freedom has a further goal.  It’s for something.  It’s for the good.

Human action has two effects: it does things in the world and shapes me.  Taking my neighbor’s property without his consent does two things. It’s stealing and it shapes me: it makes me a thief.  Moral action has both objective and subjective effects.

God gave us freedom as part of His image and likeness so that not only would things get done, but so that people would share in the goodness of what is done.  Freedom is sine qua non to man as a moral being.

But this concept also entails the understanding that freedom put in the service of evil is not freedom.  Such a use of freedom is self-destructive, eventually simply enslaving the doer and those he affects.  Rather than expanding freedom, it destroys it.

The modern apotheosis of false freedom, treating freedom per se rather than good as the end of human action, denies all this.  If such a notion even acknowledges the good (as opposed to “my good” and “your good”), any such good ultimately collapses into freedom itself: freedom is the good.

But, shorn of a further referent, there’s no basis on which to judge freedom: what was chosen is self-referentially “good.”  There’s no “good” or “evil” out there to be chosen: the act of choosing itself defines good and evil.

This ethic has been most prominent in the debate over abortion and, more broadly, sexual ethics, largely because people have vested interests in the outcomes and the unborn don’t vote.  Its implausibility as an ethical system is far more glaring in other areas, like property rights and “important things.”  On life issues, the jury’s still out, depending on the convenience to be gained if a handicapped newborn or senile senior loses those things Jefferson quaintly styled “inalienable rights.”

To this ethic of radical freedom, Adam’s and Eve’s “disobedience” was a free choice to reject external constraints.  In that perspective, it’s God, not they, who sinned, punishing them for choosing freely.  This is neither Judaism nor Christianity.

This is why so many find Catholic former Supreme Court justice Anthony Kennedy’s “mystery of life” passage in Planned Parenthood v. Casey simultaneously so ludicrous and so monstrous:  “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept. . .of meaning, of the universe, and the mystery of human life.”

If we all self-defined meaning, Babel would look like a mere translator’s conference compared with the ensuing madhouse.  It’s doubtful that many folk try to self-define the universe. . .or that the universe cares about the ravings of those who do.  As for self-defining the mystery of human life, 60 million-plus infants slaughtered since Roe demonstrate the truth of Thomas Hobbes’ insight about unadulterated freedom: homo homini lupus. (“Man is a wolf to man.”) And so is a woman.

And yet the “freedom ethic” goes on, perhaps because the “dictatorship of relativism” balks at calling anything unequivocally good.

When I visited Central Europe in the early 1990s, just after the fall of the Iron Curtain, I argued that the local churches needed to undertake a catechesis of freedom.  Many had successfully spent decades teaching people how to survive under slavery.  But those people were unprepared for the moral challenges of freedom, especially because the freedom the West was selling was most often untethered to any objective good.  “Liberal democratic freedom” traded on people’s aspirations for real freedom but gave them Esau’s mess of pottage for Jacob’s birthright.

What happened in Central Europe since has become a pan-Occidental crisis of freedom.  We use the old word while wondering why modern “freedom” doesn’t fill us up, why it’s more like junk food empty of nutrition. Politicians trade on “defending freedom” in ways our forebearers would have recognized as degeneracy.

To promote religious liberty, the American bishops used to mark a “Fortnight for Freedom” just before Independence Day.  It’s shrunk to “Religious Freedom Week.”  We’re just three years away from the Semiquincentennial of the United States, the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

Perhaps what we really need as we approach that landmark is a multi-year International Freedom Revival.

You may also enjoy:

Robert Royal’s Liberty, License, Gratitude

Elizabeth A. Mitchell’s For Such a Time as This


John M. Grondelski

John Grondelski (Ph.D., Fordham) is a former associate dean of the School of Theology, Seton Hall University, South Orange, New Jersey. All views herein are exclusively his.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. © 2023 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

World Arsonist: The Islamic Republic of Iran thumbnail

World Arsonist: The Islamic Republic of Iran

By Amil Imani

Iranians are the proud spiritual descendants of King Cyrus the Great, the author of the first Charter of Human Rights. Some of Cyrus’ children live in a patch of land called Iran. The overwhelming majority—free humans with human beliefs—live in every country, city, and village on the earth. These worldwide people, one and all, irrespective of nationality, color, or creed, are Iranians because they all adhere to the Cyrus Charter; they practice and defend its lofty tenets; and transfer this precious humanity’s treasure to the next generation.

Islamic invasion

Fact. Muhammad died and did not leave a written will (he was illiterate, that’s understandable). So, his high-ranking disciples began scheming for leadership. The Shi’as claim that Muhammad verbally indicated that Ali was to lead his Ummah. Well, 90% of the Muslims say he did not, and the Caliphate system was the way to go.
Fact. Shortly after Muhammad’s death, Ali was killed by some disgruntled Muslim for whatever reason. Violence was part and parcel of Islam from the word go.

Then there was a battle between Yazid’s forces and Hussein. Wasn’t there? Hussein and his band of relatives-followers got butchered. Well, friends, that’s the nature of the beast called war.

To this day, Shia’s bloody themselves, their children, and even their babies with self-flagellation in a horrid way in “aza dari” (mourning) for what happened to Hussein. What good does this do other than perpetuate a sense of defeatism and fanaticism that mitigates against Iranians freeing themselves from the yoke of the conniving mullahs?

The long-suffering Iranian people must put the past behind them and use their excellent talents to join and lead the advanced world. What a shame to remain stuck in this horrid mentality of victimization. Iranians deserve better than being manipulated by many mullahs who have been having a great ride on the back of the ignorant poor.

Forget the afterlife and pay attention to the plight of the suffering masses. Stop playing politics with the lives of the people. Those responsible for this sham have no heart and no shame. Let the bygones be bygones and use the tremendous human potential of Iranians to provide them with opportunities to better themselves and their families.

In most other lands conquered by Islam, the conquered peoples have lost their own identity and heritage and embraced the ways of their new rulers under an “Arab” identity. Conversely, in Iran, a band of indigenous victims, “infected” by Islam, have mindlessly turned on their Iranian countrymen and tried to rob them of their remaining ancient heritage. It is precisely this savage minority that has established an oppressive, tyrannical rule and wields power against the Iranian people. Yet, even under the rule of the Mullahs, most Iranians of various ethnicities and religions remain faithful to their ancient creed – a creed given to the world by Zoroaster.

The most crucial step in the direction of emancipation of our people is establishing the rule of law — not barbaric sharia — to grant all Iranians, male and female, young and old, of all beliefs equal rights.

We, the Persians, have no dog in this long-dead Islamic fight. Let’s look forward and do something about the sorry plight of our people today so that future generations recall this generation of Iranians as trailblazers who dared to break from the tragic past and launch a bright future.

As far as Western Civilization is concerned, they have been appeasing these packs of wolves. Appeasement inevitably emboldens aggressors. The wanton Islamic Republic of Iran has been on a murder and mayhem path for decades, encouraged by an appeasing world.

Just a few reminders. The murderous villains took the life of several thousand Americans during the Iraq conflict without being punished for it. Not long ago, they downed an American drone in international air space without even getting a slap on their long blood-stained wrist.

Then, they started piracy in the Persian Gulf. Nothing happened. The murdering arsonists are on an ever-escalating path of death and destruction to achieve their deadly objective of ruling the region and destroying Israel.

Looking the other way and appeasing aggression will inevitably bring about more significant pain. When the aggressor is even provided with a hundred and fifty billion dollars, as Obama did, it is no surprise that the empowered Mullahs are continuing their rampage.

Continue appeasing? Wait until they get their bloody hands on their long-cherished ultimate weapon. To state an overused cliché: keep kicking the can down the road, as both George Bush and Obama did, and let someone else worry about it.

Well, that someone else now is Mr. Biden. Will he follow suit or do the painful thing his predecessors had eschewed? We already know the answer…

©2023. Amil Imani. All rights reserved.

D.E.I. Curricula versus Catholic Education thumbnail

D.E.I. Curricula versus Catholic Education

By The Catholic Thing

David G. Bonagura, Jr.: If Catholic schools want to end racism, they don’t need more diverse authors and perspectives. They need more theology faithful to the Magisterium – this is the essence of Catholic education.

Afriend – a professor at a leading Catholic university – was one of only two members of the faculty senate not to vote for adopting anti-racist measures to shape the school’s curriculum. The senate consists of thirty-two members.

These overwhelming numbers showcase the trend that has enveloped many Catholic universities and schools: promoting D.E.I. (diversity, equity, inclusion) and its more aggressive counterpart, anti-racism, have become the overarching goal of academic curricula.

In their most benign forms, D.E.I. curricula seek to introduce students to “diverse perspectives” by means of being “more inclusive” of “diverse authors.” “Diverse” and “inclusive” sound harmless, but are code words for authors who are racial or sexual minorities. Their perspectives are taught to increase empathy for these groups and, in some cases, to point students toward political action to benefit them, not only in secular politics but the Church.

The more contentious anti-racism pedagogy, as clearly explained, for example, in this frightening video from another leading Catholic university, “seeks to acknowledge and confront: The fundamentally racist underpinnings of our society and educational systems.” The narrator continues:

The necessary starting place in our thoughtful use of anti-racist pedagogy is a deep appreciation for how racism and white supremacy have informed and built all components of our social lives. From there we can turn to reckoning with this reality through deliberate action to dismantle racism in our institution and our classrooms.

As if these declarations have not wandered far enough afield from the essence of Catholic education, the video includes a slide: “Jesuit Values necessitate Anti-Racist Pedagogy.” (Emphasis in original.)

In truth, neither the thinly veiled political posturing of anti-racist pedagogy nor the gentler D.E.I. curricula that promote racial and sexual diversity measure up to Catholic curricula steeped in the liberal arts. In fact, if we wish to end racism – an authentic goal that all Catholics should support – the best way to do that is through traditional Catholic education.

For a liberal arts education to be effective, its overarching goal has to be transcendent rather than temporal. “Ending racism” or “promoting diversity” are temporal goals that reduce liberal arts education to vocational training, as in the teaching of a trade such as accounting or plumbing. Of course, trades have their place for individuals so inclined. But as ends in themselves, temporal goals for education close students off to the “big picture” that the liberal arts exist to convey.

Temporally driven curricula have another limitation: they turn teachers and students into naval gazers who subject the wisdom of the past – including revelation and Church teaching – to the Inquisitors of the Present who confirm their superiority by pronouncing anathema any former idea or practice in conflict with current orthodoxies. This approach not only eschews intellectual humility for a narcissistic Presentism, but, with the speed at which intellectual fashions change, sets students up to be rudderless in an ever-shifting world. As the saying goes, “He who marries the Zeitgeist (the spirit of the age) is soon to become a widow.”

So lessons and books on temporal topics of any kind are not, and cannot be, ends in themselves. They are most effective when they are set within a broader, transcendent vision of God, Creation, and truth. Catholic education exists to convey this vision.

One of Vatican II’s most famous sentences declares that everything temporal takes its starting point and end from Christ, the eternal Word: “The Lord is the goal of human history, the focal point of the longings of history and of civilization, the center of the human race, the joy of every heart and the answer to all its yearnings.” (Gaudium et Spes 45) Catholic school curricula, therefore, also take shape from Christ. If we desire peace and justice, then our curricula and programming must be shaped by, and lead students to, the Prince of Peace who “loved justice and hated wickedness.” (Hebrews 1:9)

Whether we teach science, mathematics, history, languages, or literature, the particulars of each should have one eye on God from whom all these things come. Particular lessons on, say, World War I or botany can highlight the destructive nature of pride or the wonder of God’s creation. They should not be used to contradict Catholic teachings, as a determinist historicism or atheistic theory of evolution would.

The same goes for teaching about racism and the experiences of minority groups. These have their place along with other topics and should be chosen because they emanate from the Church’s teachings on God and the human person. Books should not be read merely because an author is a racial minority; students are keen to notice this and will belittle the book if they perceive it is being forced on them for ideological reasons.

Obviously, books should not contain graphic sexual content, and an author’s minority status cannot justify including such material in courses, especially secondary school courses – Toni Morrison’s The Bluest Eye and Beloved are the two most frequently chosen offenders here.

Lastly, Catholic curricula should never showcase authors who try to normalize abnormal sexual desires, such as James Baldwin, Alice Walker, and George M. Johnson. Catholic schools must present God’s plan for human sexuality while both identifying aberrations as sinful and teaching charity toward all those who struggle with irregular sexual desires.

If Catholic schools want to end racism and incorporate students of all backgrounds into their communities, they don’t need more diverse authors and perspectives. They need more theology faithful to the Magisterium, more sacramental opportunities, more prayer, more grace – this is the essence of Catholic education. For it is only Christ, and not any human creation or program, that can make all things new.

You may also enjoy:

Francis J. Beckwith’s The Diversity Paradox

+James V. Schall, S.J.’s Diversity


David G Bonagura, Jr.

David G. Bonagura Jr. an adjunct professor at St. Joseph’s Seminary, New York. He is the author of Steadfast in Faith: Catholicism and the Challenges of Secularism and Staying with the Catholic Church: Trusting God’s Plan of Salvation.


As of July 1st, DEI is over in the state of Florida. pic.twitter.com/yhZWOQlSCM

— Ron DeSantis (@GovRonDeSantis) July 2, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. © 2023 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

WARNING GRAPHIC: Scenes From ‘Apocalyptic’ War Torn France thumbnail

WARNING GRAPHIC: Scenes From ‘Apocalyptic’ War Torn France

By The Geller Report

Mayor of Paris Vincent Jeanbrun and his family escape assassination attempt.

Muslim and left-wing rioters continued to rampage cities and town and attack police. Violent riots continue to spiral out of control in Paris suburbs: They targeted a mayor’s home with a burning car as France saw a fifth night of unrest sparked by the police killing of career criminal.

#FranceRiots: Overnight as race riots descended into the fifth day in France, the family home of @VincentJeanbrun, Mayor of Paris suburb L’Haÿ-les-Roses, was attacked. Rioters set a car on fire & rammed it into his home, trying to burn it down. His wife & young children were… pic.twitter.com/VDzsomUpVM

— Andy Ngô 🏳️‍🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) July 2, 2023

WATCH 🚨 Rioters have reportedly set a residential building on fire in Grigny, France


— Insider Paper (@TheInsiderPaper) July 2, 2023

French nationalists on the streets of Lyon ready to defend their city. #FranceRiots #FranceHasFallen #FranceOnFire pic.twitter.com/kOEDLiiuuW

— Paul Golding (@GoldingBF) July 3, 2023

France: ‘It’s one thing to read about it, another to see it with your own eyes’


I arrived in Paris yesterday and traveled to a city in the south of France. It’s one thing to read about it, another to see it with your own eyes. I walked through the streets of that southern city today. Shops destroyed, emptied of all contents: Swarovski, Orange, Apple stores. Most stores now boarded up. Will they dare to open on Monday? I don’t know. So far, 100 million euros of damage has been estimated; the amount is bound to rise.

An attempt to burn down the house of a mayor in the north; he happened to be at his office, but his wife and two small children were inside and escaped — just barely — with their lives.

About 50,000 extra police now on the streets. The Macron government still refuses to declare a state of emergency as politicians to his right have demanded.  Macron condemned the policeman — a much decorated officer, with several medals for bravery — as guilty of an “inexplicable” and “unforgivable” act.  As far the policeman is concerned, there is no presumption of innocence.

France last night: 41 police stations attacked 79 police injured 2560 fires in streets 1360 cars burnt 234 buildings burnt 45,000 police deployed pic.twitter.com/i8josykl1f

— 🦅 Eagle Wings 🦅 (@CRRJA5) July 1, 2023

More to come soon.


Pamela Geller


It Begins: France to Shut Down Internet in “Certain” Neighborhoods to Prevent Use of Social Media to Organize Violence

France Has Fallen: 17-year-old “Victim” was Gangbanger with 15-Count Rap Sheet and History of Running Police Stops

FRANCE IS BURNING: The Leftist-Islamic Alliance Makes Its Move In France

France: Muslim Rioters Threaten Jews with New Holocaust


There was once a man who warned us about France


— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) July 2, 2023

‘Allah Akbar! We are Muslims, if the police kill us we have the right to kill. It is written in the Koran!’
France has fallen. In a few years it will become the first Islamic Republic in Europe. #FranceRiots #FranceHasFallen #FranceOnFire pic.twitter.com/vhfeFfIZGQ

— Paul Golding (@GoldingBF) July 3, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

France: 719 arrests, rioters ram burning car into mayor’s home, injuring his wife and children thumbnail

France: 719 arrests, rioters ram burning car into mayor’s home, injuring his wife and children

By Jihad Watch

France has brought this upon itself, and it will by no means be the only country in the West where it happens.

Police make 719 arrests as France burns for a fifth night: Rioters ram mayor’s home with a burning car ‘in assassination attempt’ that left his wife and children injured as protests sparked by police ‘execution’ of boy, 17, escalate

by Natasha Anderson, Daily Mail, July 2, 2023:

Rioters rammed a burning car into the home of a mayor of a town outside Paris, injuring his wife and child in what he has branded as an ‘assassination attempt’.

The attack in the early house of Sunday on Vincent Jeanbrun’s home in the Paris suburb of L’Hay-les-Roses came as 719 people were arrested in France following widespread rioting.

Mayor Vincent Jeanbrun wrote on Twitter that protesters had ‘rammed a car’ into his home before ‘setting a fire’ while his family slept. Following the attack, he vowed to ‘not back down’ and said his ‘determination to protect and serve the Republic is greater than ever’.

It was the fifth consecutive night of disturbances since the death of Nahel Merzouk, 17, who was allegedly ‘executed’ by police during a traffic stop.

Merzouk’s death on Tuesday has spawned anger across the country. He was laid to rest Saturday in a Muslim ceremony in his hometown of Nanterre, a Paris suburb where emotion over his loss remains raw.

The fast-spreading chaos is posing a new challenge to President Emmanuel Macron’s leadership and exposing deep-seated discontent in low-income neighbourhoods over discrimination and lack of opportunity.

Mr Jeanbrun said his wife and one of his children were injured in the ram-raid, which he believed was attempted murder.

He said: ‘Last night, a milestone was reached in horror and ignominy. My home was attacked and my family was the victim of an assassination attempt.

‘At 1:30 a.m., while I was at the town hall, as for the past three nights, individuals launched a car at my home before setting it on fire, so as to set fire to my house, in which my wife was sleeping and my two young children.

‘All of this was skillfully orchestrated, without consideration for the lives inside the house.’…

Read more.




France: ‘It’s one thing to read about it, another to see it with your own eyes’

Germany: Muslims screaming ‘Allahu akbar’ attack Jewish visitors to Holocaust memorial

Islamic scholar: ‘The Jews are not the enemies of the Palestinians alone,’ but ‘of humanity as a whole’

India: Muslim Instagram influencer calls on Muslims to smash the skulls of those who are anti-Islam

Netherlands: Muslim father and daughter send over $5,450,000 to Hamas

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

France: Leftist and Muslim rioters savagely beat 80-year-old priest, leaving him unconscious thumbnail

France: Leftist and Muslim rioters savagely beat 80-year-old priest, leaving him unconscious

By Jihad Watch

There is no room for Christian priests in the France that is coming.

Father Francis Palle beaten up and left unconscious,” translated from “Le Père Francis Palle tabassé et laissé inconscient”

by Marie Delorme, Tribune Chretienne, June 30, 2023:

Father Francis Palle, 80 years old and member of the congregation of Saint Vincent de Paul in Saint-Étienne, was brutally attacked by rioters. The events unfolded on Friday, June 30, leaving Father Palle seriously injured and unconscious.

According to eyewitnesses, a group of rioters suddenly attacked Father Palle, surrounding and targeting him for no apparent reason. They hit him with extreme force, knocking him hard to the ground. Worse still, these individuals continued to beat him when he was already on the ground, leaving the priest in critical condition.

In addition to this brutal attack, the attackers also committed a theft by taking Father Palle’s mobile phone and wallet.

Local authorities were quickly alerted and dispatched an emergency team to the scene. Father Palle was immediately taken to the nearest hospital, where he is currently receiving intensive care for his serious injuries.

This brutal attack sparked outrage and dismay within the local community and beyond. Members of the Congregation of Saint Vincent de Paul, as well as many residents, rallied to condemn this act of inexcusable violence and expressed their support and prayers for Father Palle’s speedy recovery.

Read more.




France: Rioters threaten Jews with new Holocaust

France: Muslim rioters attack LGBT bar, ‘We burn the whores, by the Qur’an’

France: In lieu of the jizya, hijab-wearing looter carries off free stuff

France: Muslims ransack church, smash windows, write ‘The last prophet is Mohamed’ on white board

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

Multiculturalism Umbrella: Islam’s Manufactured Wool thumbnail

Multiculturalism Umbrella: Islam’s Manufactured Wool

By Amil Imani

Ever since the massive arrival of Muslims to the Western hemisphere, our Western culture and world have been forever altered, thanks to the ceaseless attempts of the left to create a failing Utopian Multiculturalism paradise while forcefully jamming it down the throats of its unsuspecting citizens. As every recent election has shown, multiculturalism in Europe is dead in the water. Even the politicians are admitting it now. Then why are they still insisting that we must coexist and keep importing more Muslims who will NEVER assimilate? Let me be clear; multiculturalism spells the demise of our Western culture. Is that what we want?

The controversy is ongoing: whether in Europe or the US, the leftist intelligentsia and elitists continue to demand that they have seen the truth, that all people can live peaceably together so long as we are tolerant and have the right laws in place.

The West has been tolerant, but “tolerance in the face of evil is not tolerance. It is a crime.”  We were defending ourselves at the Gates of Vienna from a Muslim invasion not long ago. Now, we welcome Muslims with open arms and generous welfare policies. Any pushback to these open immigration practices is labeled Islamophobia, racism, bigotry, etc. But what cost do these changes bring?

The battle with these barbarians has been proven to be arduous and lengthy. It is the duty of every enlightened individual to work their hardest to fumigate these leeches from the body of humanity.

Billboards have been popping out and sneakily reminding the viewers about their kinship with Muslims: “Islam: The message of Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Mohammad.” Well folks—Christians and Jews—the overwhelming majority of the people in the United States, you need to relax about Islam. Muslims are family. They are your kindred through your shared progenitor, Abraham, so they claim. Having Abraham as an ancestor would demand that the “children” be loving siblings. That’s the message the American Muslims try to convey. And that’s how they aim to keep us in the deadly slumber of complacency and the delusion of multiculturalism. For one, multiculturalism and multi-religionism are not interchangeable or one and the same.

Muslims and their frequently well-paid apologists use the multiculturalist umbrella only in non-Islamic lands to shield themselves from the torrent of legitimate criticisms that those who know Islam better shower on this cult of violence peddled as the religion of peace. You don’t need to listen to me, and don’t listen to these conniving dissimulators. Please search for it for yourself. See if the euphemism of multiculturalism is ever even mentioned by any Islamic leader, ever printed in the Islamic press, or ever appears in any form anywhere in Muslim countries.

This multiculturalism gambit is Islam-manufactured wool to pull over the eyes of the non-Muslims. At the same time, Muslims carry on with their unrelenting campaign of eradicating anything or anyone non-Islamic anywhere and everywhere in the world.


Allahu Akbar France!

Imam brags: “France WILL become an Islamic country through Jihad; The entire world WILL be subject to Islamic Rule”

The French will: “Convert to Islam, be Forced to pay Jizya poll tax, or be fought against for the sake of Allah”

In 2017, France… pic.twitter.com/aBVT90V8gV

— Amy Mek (@AmyMek) July 1, 2023

Trust me, people like us, through reason and a tremendous act of will, who have freed ourselves from the enslaving yoke of Islam placed around our necks from birth, know about all the heinous inside dirt of this plague of humanity. We have experienced Islam first-hand and up close from the inside. We have studied the Quran, the Hadith, and the Sunna. We have seen Islam in action where it wields sway. Yet, the more we studied and experienced Islam, the more our efforts to remain in the fold became untenable. We broke away from Islamic slavery and found it our solemn duty to expose this fraud of a religion, help other Muslims free themselves from it, and warn the good-hearted and gullible non-Muslims of the world against falling prey to it.

The Muslim organizations in America, generously financed by the oil-rich Muslim governments and Sheikhs, are directed to sell Islam Lite long enough until this ideology runs deep roots and real Islam is introduced. One can see how the scheme played out in Europe. Much of Europe is already past the stage of Islam Lite and knee-deep into the quagmire of real Islam. And that’s precisely where things are headed in America.

Some non-Muslims, good-hearted tolerant people tend to overlook all the terrible things Islam perpetrates by pointing to some of its good teachings. These folks contend that the world should direct its effort not at combating Islam but at those individuals and groups that commit heinous acts in the name of Islam.

There are others who disagree with this gentle approach. This latter group sees all the so-called aberrations as an inherent part and parcel of Islam. They believe Islam actively promotes and is terribly out of sync with the best interests of the 21st-century world.

I say humanity must remain strong and resolute; they must stop deluding themselves. Islam will never ever coexist with infidels. We must move on. Move away from an exclusionary, primitive, and tribal mentality to a vision of all humanity being one, with justice and liberty for all.

While we frivolously waste our precious time talking about it without any drastic action taken, Islam and Sharia continue to creep into every aspect of our American culture furtively. But only too few dedicated freedom-loving people are sounding the alarm. That’s not enough. Why most of our fellow citizens don’t get it? Because the liberal elites have conditioned Americans to be tolerant and compassionate, embrace multiculturalism and respect each other’s beliefs, ideals, and values.

That’s wonderful in a utopian world, but the fact is, Islam, doesn’t embrace any aspect of Western civilization—much less American culture. We are rapidly and methodically being dismantled as a nation, and our freedom and liberty are more fragile than ever since WWII. And while we fight the enemy abroad with combat troops, intelligence, and drone strikes, we’re doing nothing to combat the same exact enemy that resides on our own soil in broad daylight.

In short: I cannot emphasize enough the urgency of this threat. We must confront Islamic ideology and its expansionism, close down all of its chapters across America, and declare the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. All of us must pressure our government, at all levels, to abandon the practice of ‘political correctness’ and protect the American people and act to safeguard liberty against the truly deadly assault that is reprehensive of Islamic ideology.

It is long past time for our elected officials to wake up.

©2023. Amil Imani. All rights reserved.


France: Leftist and Muslim rioters savagely beat 80-year-old priest, leaving him unconscious

France: Rioters threaten Jews with new Holocaust

France: Muslim rioters attack LGBT bar, ‘We burn the whores, by the Qur’an’

France: In lieu of the jizya, hijab-wearing looter carries off free stuff

A Conversation with Allah thumbnail

A Conversation with Allah

By Amil Imani

It is axiomatic that to be a Muslim, you must: believe in Allah by taking him as your one and only lord, accept Muhammad as Allah’s beloved messenger, and take the Quran as a literal work of Allah and a perfect prescription for living.

As hard as I tried, I had a terrible time being a Muslim at the entry-level. I, therefore, decided to write this open letter in the hope of receiving some satisfactory answers to the many questions that trouble humanity considerably.

From the first breath of life to the last pang of death, Islam relentlessly bombards us: surrender yourself fully to Allah, pray for his help, let him make all the decisions for you and run your life, don’t ever question anything, since questioning is the whisperings of the accursed Satan who strives to take you astray.

Islam says that Allah is the javaab-ul-doaa (answerer of supplications/prayers) and that to him, we should supplicate for any help in all matters.

Well, I am doing strictly like I was told. I am supplicating Allah in the form of this open letter to provide me with answers to some of my numerous and troubling questions.

It must be a peculiarity about me. I am loath to surrender my inquiry about things and allow others, divine or not, to think for me. If I am to let Allah do all the review and decide for me, then why am I given my own brain? I have challenged the Islamic divines.

See, I have already failed the test since I have not surrendered fully to Allah and, by questioning, did not place my total faith in him.

I have been studying much of my life, trying to get some satisfactory answers to my questions about Islam from Islamic scripture and authorities without success. More often than not, I get conflicting answers, confusing responses, and even outright contradictory statements.

Hence, I decided to pose some of my perplexing questions in this open letter directly to the god of Islam, Allah, earnestly hoping for deliverance from the anguish of doubt.

I will do my very best to conduct myself with decorum and courtesy toward Allah. At no time will I behave rudely toward him, just in case he is indeed the sole author of this incredible universe, as Islam claims? To be discourteous and rude is not my habit. I don’t even behave rudely toward anyone, much less so in dealing with a purported, unfathomably magnificent being.

The list of my questions is long indeed. Here are some of my questions, not necessarily in order of importance, presented in all meekness to Allah, the Lord of Islam. To me, all questions are essential, and assigning relative importance to them is arbitrary. So, I get started.

I have no illusions of grandeur and no pretense of knowing very much. I am a sincere seeker of truth; in this spirit, I humbly compose this missive to you, Allah. I hope I am not discourteous by simply addressing you as Allah. I mean without preceding invocation of your name by honorifics.

I fully realize that I am most insignificant in the grand scheme of things. But, again, you have created me, so I must be worth something. This realization gives me the courage to address you with my questions, your Lordship.

Without further ado, I have some questions for you here.

  • Islam says that you are the uncreated creator. I have a tough time with that claim. Of course, I am finite, and my intellect can hardly imagine that something comes from nothing. There is that old refrain, “Nothing comes from nothing, nothing ever could,” that humans take as an article of faith and fact. But, again, we humans can hardly fathom things that transcend the limits of our finite rational minds. Any clarification of this assertion would be beneficial.
  • Speaking of creating, Islam says you made the universe by the command: kon va yakoon (become and became). The universe appeared instantly in obedience to your order. There are different views about this whole topic of creation that I don’t want to trouble you about. For now, my simple question is: Lord, by this simple command of kon va yakoon, you brought about this indescribably magnificent universe, yet you took some twenty years to write your little book, the Quran. Why did it take you so long to write it? I fear a thunderbolt might strike me dead for posing this intrusive question. I hope you hold off and allow me to continue.

So, I can supply a rationalization, not a plausible reason, for it. I told myself, your lordship, perhaps it took you twenty years because Muhammad was illiterate and slowed in getting your dictates and taking them to a scribe to jot them down. That’s why. Yet, finding someone who could write things down among the horde of savages was not easy.

A follow-up question! Why a supremely august being, as you are, with all the indescribably exulted powers and attributes, chose an illiterate Arab, a hired hand of a wealthy widow, as your messenger is a mystery. Couldn’t you have selected a Rabbi from nearby Medina, a Zoroastrian Mobed (priest), a Christian Priest from Mecca itself, a Hindu Monk, or a Buddhist Clergy? These were people who had specialized in matters of religion, rather than an Arab whose only skill was helping drive caravans of camels.

I have seen Islam’s pat answers to all questions: no one is given the right to ask Allah about his doings. He does what pleases him and ordains what he wants. But this is no answer. It is a copout.

  • Are you male, your Lordship? Pardon me for asking a personal question. The reason I ask is that you have much against women. You stipulate that women are worth one-half of men. You ordain that men are rulers over women and much more. I don’t see that. My lifelong experiences with women have convinced me that women are every bit as worthy as men, if not even better in many respects. For one, women are the life-givers and nurturers of life. Men, by contrast, are forever in the business of life-taking.

Science tells us that women are as capable as men in every sphere other than those that require brute force. But machines are much superior to men in brute force, and women can and do operate those machines as well as men.

Is there something inherently inferior or evil about women? If so, then pardon me, your lordship. It is you who designed them that way. Didn’t you?

Is it, not a fact that the savage chauvinist Arabs of Muhammad’s time are the ones who instituted this oppressive scheme against women, and Muhammad stamped his approval of the fraud in your name?

*My next question is about the role of religion. My limited understanding is that the primary function of religion is to bring disparate people together. That is, bring unity and amity among the diverse and quarreling human groups. Islam needs to improve on this significant point. While Muhammad was alive, he kept preaching the gospel of divisiveness. He taught a gospel of us against them, believers against the unbeliever. Since his death, Muhammad’s followers have doggedly followed his gospel of divisiveness.

How can fueling the fire of polarization bring about peace of unity after Muhammad and his disciples continue to kill the unbelievers in mass and without the slightest bit of mercy?

The problem is that as Muhammad was still gasping for his last breath, his senior disciples were busying themselves with killing one another in their lust for power and leadership. And Islam has been on a mission with internecine and infidel killing ever since.

Whether or not I receive answers to these questions, I will persist in posing more of them in the future. Who knows? As unlikely as it may seem, Allah may indeed deem it appropriate to send another of his archangels with a Quran addressing these and other troubling questions. Remember that he does what pleases him and ordains what he wants.

©2023. Amil Imani. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Jihadi Reactions To Quran Burning In Stockholm: Condemnation, Calls To Execute Perpetrator, Expel Swedish Ambassadors, Carry Out Attacks Inspired By 2015 ‘Charlie Hebdo’ Shooting

Supreme Court Sides With Christian Web Designer In Compelled Speech Case thumbnail

Supreme Court Sides With Christian Web Designer In Compelled Speech Case

By The Daily Caller

The Supreme Court sided with a Christian graphic designer Friday, clarifying that a Colorado law cannot compel her to create websites for same-sex couples with messages that violate her religious beliefs.

In a 6-3 ruling, the Court sided with Lorie Smith in her lawsuit challenging the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA), a law that prohibits public accommodations from restricting services based on sexual orientation. Smith, owner of 303 Creative and represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), challenged the law as a violation of the First Amendment: while she wants to create websites that reflect her deeply held belief that marriage is between one man and one woman, the law would compel her to also create wedding websites for same-sex marriages.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, that “tolerance, not coercion, is our Nation’s answer.”

“The First Amendment envisions the United States as a rich and complex place where all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands,” he wrote.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor wrote that Smith’s position is “profoundly wrong” in the dissenting opinion, which Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined, stating the Constitution “contains no right to refuse service to a disfavored group.”

“Around the country, there has been a backlash to the movement for liberty and equality for gender and sexual minorities,” Sotomayor wrote. “New forms of inclusion have been met with reactionary exclusion. This is heartbreaking.”

The ruling is also good news for Christian baker Jack Phillips, who remains in court despite his own Supreme Court victory in 2018. The limited grounds of the decision, which found the Colorado Civil Rights Commission demonstrated “impermissible hostility” in Phillips’ case but did not answer whether the law itself violated the First Amendment, allowed another activist to sue Phillips in 2021 after he declined to make a cake celebrating a gender transition.

A Colorado Court of Appeals judge ruled against Phillips in January.

Other ADF cases challenging similar public accommodation laws, like those brought by wedding photographers in Kentucky, New York and Virginia, will likely also be impacted by the Supreme Court’s decision.

“This is a win for all Americans,” said ADF President Kristen Waggoner in a statement. “The government should no more censor Lorie for speaking consistent with her beliefs about marriage than it should punish an LGBT graphic designer for declining to criticize same-sex marriage.”





Don’t Say Gay, Say Groomer Instead

California Agrees To Pay Christian Doctors $300,000 After Attempting To Mandate Assisted Suicide Treatment

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

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

Islamic State Promotes Migration to the West for the Purpose of Waging Jihad thumbnail

Islamic State Promotes Migration to the West for the Purpose of Waging Jihad

By Jihad Watch

“Whoever emigrates for the sake of Allah will find much refuge and abundance in the earth, and whoever forsakes his home, a refugee for Allah and his messenger, and death overtakes him, his reward is then obligatory upon Allah. Allah is always forgiving, merciful.” (Qur’an 4:100)

ISIS Supporters Provide Security Tips For Planning Travel To Wage Jihad

MEMRI, June 23, 2023 (thanks to The Religion of Peace)

On June 14, 2023, a pro-Islamic State (ISIS) Telegram Channel shared an Arabic-language post promoting hijrah (migration for the purpose of waging jihad) and offering tips for securing the route to the destination. Tips include acquiring a stolen cellphone number and using it with two-step authentication, gradually changing one’s appearance, and contacting a facilitator recommended by reliable people….

Read more.




Texas: Police arrest ‘Iranian, Moldovan, Chinese migrants’ illegally crossing the border

Italy: Muslims and Leftists enraged over law to shutter Muslim prayer spaces that lack formal approval

Palestinian Leaders Alarmed That Israel Wants to Improve Conditions for Palestinians

Sweden: Iraqi man fills Qur’an with bacon, tears it up, burns it outside mosque on Eid

Swedish authorities approve Quran-burning demonstration outside of Stockholm mosque

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

Is the Tide Beginning to Turn? Reclaiming of our sanity around sex and gender. thumbnail

Is the Tide Beginning to Turn? Reclaiming of our sanity around sex and gender.

By The Catholic Thing

Jayd Henricks: Authentic happiness is hampered by confusion about human nature. Reclaiming of our sanity around sex and gender is a necessary first step to the happiness we all desire.

We are all designed to seek meaning – which has historically been informed by faith. But in recent decades, religion has been rapidly disappearing from the public square. As faith has been pushed out of culture, politics, and education, it has left a void in countless hearts and minds. Nature never permits a vacuum to linger long, however, and the need for meaning now often finds an outlet in the fight for social justice. The cause inevitably changes, but this decade has been marked above all by the fight for the social approval – even outright affirmation – of one’s chosen sexual identity.

Any controversial movement, especially a replacement for something as deep-seated as religion, begins by seeking tolerance for itself, moving over time to implicit acceptance and virtue signaling, and ultimately requiring explicit celebration. LGBTQ+ has become a virtual state religion now, requiring the affirmation of everyone’s sexual identity – whatever form it may take, and regardless of how opposed it may be to anyone else’s individual beliefs.

To recognize this is not to obsess about all things sexual, but simply to recognize what is now at the heart of American society. All Americans are expected to offer incense at the altar of not just sex, but disordered sex. We are told not to impose our faith, but the religion of LGBTQ+ is imposed on all.

From its places of power, this ideology demands full obeisance at all times, but particularly – and forcefully – every June. Every time Pride Month rolls around, schools, businesses, and government organizations preach the goodness of any and all sexual choices. LGBTQ+ clothes, flags, and library books come out front and center. To fail to bow low at this altar is to risk being accused of “rainbow washing” or being outright canceled.

This is how we’ve arrived at Bud Light and Target promoting LGBTQ+ in some absurd ways, and why the Dodgers/MLB turned the country’s national pastime into a sacramental for the new order. Why else would Bud Light hire a marketing executive that labeled the brand [read: its traditional customer base] as “fratty” and “out of touch”? Why else would Target put out a line of LGBTQ+ kids clothing? Why else would the Dodgers give a Community Hero Award to an organization that openly mocks the Catholic Church when half of the fans who attend their games are Latino, a historically Catholic group?

We have arrived at a strange place, where holding what has historically been understood as commonsense now feels like a last stand for sanity. Beliefs such as that men should use men’s bathrooms and only women should be allowed to play in women’s sports leagues are now berated as bigoted and discriminatory.

One can only wonder how much longer we will celebrate Mother’s and Father’s Days (a push has already begun in Canada to do away with both) in a culture where a Supreme Court justice can’t explain what a woman is or where saying “mom and dad” is too exclusive.

The Church, which exists to spread the Gospel, now must also preach the obvious: that there is something more than the individual and his or her desires. She reminds us that there is order in the universe and in human society. And she stands firmly behind the truth that there is a human nature, and that we honor the Creator by honoring the truths He built into the world and into our bodies.

A recent poll shows that the tide is gradually turning back toward the most basic truth about the human person: that there are only two genders. Sixty-five percent of Americans believe this truth, up from 59 percent two years ago. It is especially encouraging that there is a positive trend across all demographics – more Democrats, Independents, and Republicans believe in two genders than only two years ago and likewise for Generation Z, Millennials, Generation X, Baby Boomers, and the Silent Generation.

These numbers show that we are in an opportune moment to correct our cultural craziness, but it will require continued commitment and energy. It also requires the certainty that doing so is necessary and good. Some within the Church pit the pastoral response against claims to truth – but the pastoral is founded upon the truth about the human person. Recognizing two genders is a necessary first step in our ministering to those who identify as non-binary or “gender queer.”

The absurdity of slavery was exposed through a movement that was largely led by people of faith, and now is the moment for people of faith to stand up again. The current absurdity has gone too far, and Americans are beginning to recognize it. We can and must rally them.

And we can do so by remembering this is not a solely religious issue. Justice Brown Jackson may not be a biologist, but even biologists who are “pro-rainbow” recognize that there are only two sexes.

So let us continue to proclaim this truth, lovingly but loudly. For authentic happiness is always hampered by misunderstandings about human nature. And reclaiming our sanity around sex and gender is a necessary first step to the happiness we all desire.

You may also enjoy:

Michael Pakaluk’s Humane Vitae’s Singular Vision

Brad Miner’s Further Thoughts on Transgenderism


Jayd Henricks

Jayd Henricks is the president of Catholic Laity and Clergy for Renewal. He previously served as the executive director of government relations at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and holds a STL in systematic theology from the Dominican House of Studies.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2023 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

CHAMPIONS OF FREEDOM: Reza Pahlavi and Donald J. Trump thumbnail

CHAMPIONS OF FREEDOM: Reza Pahlavi and Donald J. Trump

By Amil Imani

Why should we support Reza Pahlavi? Because the Iranian people support him. He has the full support of Iranians inside Iran, and we must unconditionally respect their will. It would be a colossal mistake if we didn’t stand with him. Despite other opposition groups resorting to violence, Prince Pahlavi repeatedly has stated that “non-violent change is the only way to go.” “Change must come to Iran by civil disobedience and non-violence. I stress that. We can’t have change at any cost.”

Surprisingly, I have noticed some similarities between Prince Reza Pahlavi and President Donald Trump.  He was a successful billionaire who was happy with his empire and did not need the headache of becoming the President of the United States. But, it was his avocation, passion, and destiny to Make America Great Again.

Prince Pahlavi also led a comfortable life and did not need this distress. But something big, something more powerful, was calling him to fulfill his destiny. Although he pledged his oath to become the next in line as the Shah of Iran, he has spoken that he is not seeking the crown unless and until the Iranian people decide in his favor to do so. For now, his focus is not the revival of the Pahlavi dynasty, and on numerous occasions has stated that it is up to the people of Iran to decide their future form of government.

Pahlavi said, “After 45 years, he still finds exile painful. “I remember my childhood, I remember my country’s scenery, wherever I am in the world, I am reminded of it. I live and breathe my country. I want to do something for that piece of real estate I call home. That is my duty.”

Neither President Trump nor Prince Pahlavi was obligated to engage, endanger and inconvenience their lives. But, they both were destined to be the agents of change. It would be fantastic to see a meeting between these two men, a landmark step toward regime change in Iran.

Iran has seen demonstrations before, but there was something extraordinary about the recent events: many protesters called for Reza Pahlavi to return and even chanted: “Bring back the Shah.”

This is incredible

Pahlavi believes the people in Iran have “trust” in his “vision” for a future in Iran. He adds, ” They look up to me somehow because of my track record.” Indeed, his track record is impeccable, and he has always stated that it is up to the people of Iran to decide their destiny. Perhaps, most Western media are unaware, but Pahlavi’s popularity in Iran has skyrocketed. They love him.

Like President Trump’s slogan ‘Make America Great Again,’ Iranians want to make Iran great again. Compelled by the inalienable right of the people to institute their government and replace it when it fails to serve its citizens in the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. Millions of Iranians representing the entire spectrum of society are demanding change from a repressive theocracy to an open secular democracy.

President Trump has been an inspiration to all freedom-loving people around the world. In a very short time, he has become a symbol of liberty. The Iranian people, with Reza Pahlavi at the helm, hope to repeat Trump’s motto of MAGA. More than four decades of rule by the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) has not only failed to advance the security and well-being of the people. It has ensnared the nation in a stifling theocracy where the rights of the governed are routinely violated for the benefit of the governing. Regime change is the only option to bring Iran back to the civilized world.

Prince Pahlavi guarantees equality to all its citizens, therefore, demands no less than total adherence to the principle of unity in diversity, a unity of purpose that draws from the strength and uniqueness of its people.

Pahlavi said he wanted to see Iranians “determine their own fate out of their own free will” and praised U.S. President Donald Trump and his cabinet members for supporting the Iranian protesters.

For the past six months of continued protests, “Iranians have made it very clear that they do not want the current regime, but they are unarmed and will not use violence. And so, civil disobedience becomes the best means of confrontation. When diplomacy fails, and war becomes an unfavorable option, people need to pressure the regime from the inside.”

Both President Trump and Prince Pahlavi want to make their country great. President Trump asked the American people to work together to make America great again. Let’s restore America to her rightful place as the exceptional leader of the free world rather than just another nation amongst many nations. He has already achieved his goal in under two years. Despite Prince Pahlavi’s love to make Iran great, the civilized world must realize that their interests are not with a group of frantic rapists and murderers but with a rational man who understands world diplomacy and will lead the Middle East to a beacon of peace. The Western world, including the United States, must fulfill Iran’s destiny. After all, they should take some responsibility for wreaking havoc on Iran.

Pahlavi will protect the legitimate rights of all minorities within Iran as enshrined and outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We have had enough of parochialism, discrimination of all sorts, and oppression of minorities. No one in Iran will be disenfranchised based on any personal belief whatsoever.

In short, once this regime falls, it would be the greatest thing since the fall of Soviet communism. It would remove political Islam by creating a genuinely democratic secular, and strong nation in tandem with Israeli democracy in the heart of the Islamic Ummah. It would answer a prayer just as much for the world as for Iranians.

©2023. Amil Imani. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Majority of Arab Youth in UAE, Egypt and Morocco Strongly Support Normalization with Israel, New Poll Shows


TRUMP: “I will totally obliterate the Deep State” 🔥🔥🔥 pic.twitter.com/ENc4ZV3dY8

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) June 25, 2023

The Left Can Have Islam or LGBTQA+. Not Both. thumbnail

The Left Can Have Islam or LGBTQA+. Not Both.

By Jihad Watch

The Democrat coalition is falling apart.

Regenbogen, Vienna’s ‘rainbow’ gay pride parade, began with the announcement that three Muslim teenagers with roots in Bosnia and Chechnya, were arrested for planning an attack using axes and knives. The alleged Muslim terrorists were reportedly supporters of ISIS.

Dominik Nepp, the leader of Austria’s conservative Freedom Party, blasted a “completely misguided red-green-pink mass immigration policy that promotes radical Islam in Vienna and throughout Austria.”

“Perhaps at some point the self-proclaimed left-wing moralizers will realize that they are inviting exactly those groups to our country that are in fact their greatest opponents and represent exactly the opposite of what they always preach.”

There’s little chance of that. Austria, like America, still lives in a fantasy world in which the black flags of Islam can co-exist with the rainbow flag, but the fantasy is rapidly coming apart.

Not long ago, the media was hailing Hamtramck as a model with its first all-Muslim city government. Now it’s shocked when the Michigan city banned pride flags on public property.

“There’s a sense of betrayal,” former mayor Karen Majewski complained. “We supported you when you were threatened, and now our rights are threatened, and you’re the one doing the threatening.”

Majewski has no reason to be surprised. Neither does the media. She broke a city council tie in 2021 between Muslim and non-Muslim city council members in support of the LGBTQ flag.

Asm Kamal Rahman, the president of the local NAACP and a member of the Michigan Coalition for Human Rights, had compared homosexuality to bestiality and pedophilia.

After hailing the all-Muslim council in a city overrun by Yemenis and Bangladeshis as a sign of progress, the realization has arrived that Democrats can have Islam or LGBT, but not both.

How is a party based around building coalitions of minorities supposed to choose?

Islamic teachings were always incompatible with the sexual politics of its new leftist allies. Muslim Brotherhood groups, eager to capitalize on their newfound status after 9/11, avoided directly addressing those issues. CAIR signed letters and appeared at events alongside gay rights groups like HRC. Muslim candidates running for public office even invoked sexual identity

Rep. Ilhan Omar has an entire page dedicated to the “fight for LGBTQIA+ rights”. But local Muslim officials, like those in Hamtramck, are breaking away from the rainbow coalition.

Muslims vocally protested at a school board meeting in Dearborn, Michigan. Dearborn, like Hamtramck, has a nearly 50% Muslim population. And that appears to be the tipping point. At a quarter of the population, Muslims generally toe the liberal line in public, while approaching the halfway mark, the masquerade ends and Democrats have to make some difficult choices.

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the country’s biggest gay rights group, has a page promoting homosexuality’s compatibility with Islam. The Institute for Social Policy & Understanding (ISPU), under Dalia Mogahed, a former Obama adviser and Islamist ally, with an office in Dearborn and backing from Rep. Rashida Tlaib, however released a survey claiming that 0% of Muslims are lesbian or gay.

Even while the visual language of wokeness seen in innumerable ads and stock photos depicts women in hijabs next to gay and transgender people, the reality on the ground is very different.

When Omar Mateen, an Afghan Muslim terrorist opened fire at a gay nightclub in Orlando, a cover-up was launched that persists to this day in which the annual anniversary of the Pulse massacre is marked each year as a testament to homophobia, not Islamic terrorism.

While Omar may not have even known that he was in a gay nightclub before he began killing people, other Islamic terrorists have set out to target gay pride events in the United States.

Elvin Hunter Bgorn Williams, a Muslim convert who joined ISIS, discussed driving a “semi-truck” through “the gay pride parade in downtown Seattle”. Amer Alhaggagi, a Berkeley High School graduate, a Yemeni Jihadi whose lawyer called him an “all-American boy”, had declared, “I’m going to place a bomb in a gay club, Wallah or by Allah.”

The media treats Muslim terror attacks as meaningless outliers, but it’s harder to dismiss events in Dearborn and Hamtramck the same way. Or to ignore the fact that Muslims and the LGBT movement have incompatible values and agendas. And the Left can’t claim to champion both.

The Democrats believed that they could build a ‘rainbow coalition’, a majority of minorities that would swamp the nation, overthrow the old America and replace it with their new alliance. The strategy appeared to be working as long as the minorities were united by their opposition to a majority. But the cracks are spreading, and not just among Islamists and gay rights activists.

Urban Democrats are being forced to come to terms with the fact that they may not be able to secure the support of both black community groups and Asian voters at the same time. Latinos are displaying a growing tendency to go their own way. Even the Jewish electorate, once a reliable rubber stamp, is turning conservative and religious in strongholds like New York City.

Immigrants, once seen as a vanguard of demographic transformation, are securing cities and states for the Democrats, but those groups whether Latino, Muslim, Asian or even African, are proving to have their own agendas that are at odds with a party that claims to be diverse, yet has become politically monocultural, imposing a ruthless ideological discipline that has purged non-black religious conservatives, traditional feminists, immigration restrictionist environmentalists and working class whites in pursuit of the ideal leftist collective.

But the new immigrants are much more likely to hold traditional values on matters of sexual morality: to be opposed to abortion, pride parades and everything white lefties love so much.

Muslim Democrats, like Rep. Omar and Rep. Tlaib, who built their national political power to implement an anti-American agenda based on this big intersectional lie, are caught in the middle.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib, whose district includes parts of Hamtramck, responded to the gay pride flag ban by tweeting, “I can’t imagine how it feels for our LGBTQ+ neighbors in Hamtramck to watch their own elected reps decide their existence doesn’t matter. This is painful to see in a city that has always fought for equal justice for all. This action divides our communities.”

Hamtramck legalized animal sacrifice in homes, and made Eid a paid holiday, as did Dearborn. Despite their protestations, Muslim elected officials in cities on track to have an Islamic majority are representing their community and not anyone else’s. They are the most obvious example that the notion of multicultural “communities” that transcend identities through collective solidarity is a myth. And so is the entire majority of minorities coalition that claims “brown people” or the “oppressed” have anything in common beyond a hostility toward white people.

Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan lashed out at Hamtramck by declaring, “The City of Detroit proudly raises our Pride Flag at the start of every Pride Month.” And it will until it has a Muslim majority.

Democrats have dismantled tolerance and opened the door to a gold rush by members of its coalition to impose their most extreme agendas on the public with no regard to everyone else.

A leftist majority will force pride flags and LGBT pornography in schools on everyone. A Muslim majority will force sharia on everyone. That is what happens in a country that has abandoned both its traditional consensus on values and its respect for individual beliefs leaving regions with a choice between female genital mutilation and transgender masectomies, between marrying 7-year-old girls and grooming first graders.

America has three choices, either imposing sharia or sexual identity politics, or returning to what we were before we had to choose which group of extremists to allow to abuse our children.




NYC Drag Marchers Chant ‘We’re Coming For Your Children’

Celebrate Diversity! Muslims in Europe: The Latest News Round-Up 

Afghanistan: Taliban diverts foreign humanitarian aid to its own members and causes

India: Muslim abducts Hindu woman, boasts to family ‘will take your other daughter with me too’

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

Puppets and Puppeteers thumbnail

Puppets and Puppeteers

By Amil Imani

The human mind is a battleground of contending forces where the two most potent are reason and emotion: where reason assesses the life and produces measures that are adaptive to the best of its ability, while emotion, by and large, operates on feelings. Ordinarily, an uneasy truce prevails between the two generally incompatible powers.
Islam is an intensely emotional authoritarian system of belief. Hence, Islam induces powerful, vibrant imprinting in many of its adherents. From this segment of the Muslim population, fanatic jihadists arise and pose existential threats to the “other.” The jihadists are rigidly-imprinted foot-soldier Islamic automatons with little choice but to carry out the fatwa and dictates of their high-ranking religious leaders, such as the Ayatollahs in the case of the Shi’a and Muftis for the Sunni.

The authoritarian type poses numerous problems and presents many ramifications — ramifications much too significant and complex to be comprehensively treated here. For now, it is essential to understand that a person with an authoritarian personality is an extremist.

Understanding that the human mind could be a better discerner of objective reality is essential. Truth is in the sense of the beholder. The outside world only supplies bits and pieces of raw material that reason puts together to form its existence. Depending on the type and number of bits and pieces a given mind receives, its reality can be very different from that of another.

The campaign of death waged by the Islamist jihadist, be he a puppet or a puppeteer, is energized by the belief in delectable rewards that await the faithful implementer of Allah’s dictates. Through highly effective indoctrination, the jihadist believes firmly in Islam’s grand delusion. He believes that Allah is the supreme creator of earth and heavens; it is his duty and privilege to abide by Allah’s will and carry out his plans at all costs. He believes firmly in a magnificently immortal afterlife in paradise, for which a martyr’s death is the surest, quickest admission. Although the dominating theme of the delusion is quasi-spiritual, the promised rewards of the afterlife awaiting the martyr are sensual and material. All the things and activities that the jihadist desires and cannot attain or practice and rejects in his earthly life will be purified and proffered to him in the paradise of the next life. Thus, goes the hallucination.

The more prescribed and homogeneous a group, the greater the group’s consensual reality since the members share much in standard experiential input and reinforce each other’s mindset. Thus, members of a given religious order, for instance, tend to think much more similarly to one another than to members of other groups with different experiential histories.

Various approximations of objective reality, therefore, rule the mind. The degree to which these approximations deviate from the larger group’s consensual truth determines their delusional extent and severity.

Therefore, it is understandable that many higher-up Islamic puppeteers, who are usually brainwashed from early childhood, devote their fortunes and persons to implementing their deeply ingrained hallucinations.

Deluded by the threats and promises of Islam, poor or rich Muslims vie with one another to further the violent cause of Allah.

And right here in America, the suffocating tentacles of Islamic bigotry are beginning to reach out to people. A few years ago, for instance, a teenage girl had to run away from her Muslim family and fear the threat of death at her own father’s hand for her conversion to Christianity.

Over the years, Islamic leaders have found it expedient to feed the masses, mainly the toxic ingredients, to further their interests. Individuals and groups, for instance, have used the immense energizing power of hatred to rally the faithful; the cohesive force of polarization creates in-group solidarity and the great utility value of blaming others for their natural and perceived misfortunes. Jews have been their favorite and handy scapegoats from day one. To this day, as actual fascists, like the Nazis, Muslims blame just about everything on the Jews.

Remember that Islam not only condones but encourages lying and dissimulation—Taqiyah—in dealing with non-Muslims. No, it is not the Zionists and fundamentalist Christians who are misrepresenting Islam. The left and the Islamic institutions are guilty of dissimulation and fraud.

A German immigrant wrote this to me: “I love America, but its political correctness is suffocating and shows too much tolerance towards its enemy at home.”

These are trying times for all of us. Free people must prioritize their priorities with wisdom and avoid shortsighted simplistic solutions. It is far more prudent to face the implacable Islamofascists on the march now than go through another 9/11.

©2023. Amil Imani. All rights reserved.

America: Willful Blindness thumbnail

America: Willful Blindness

By Amil Imani

It is hard to believe how quickly we’ve forgotten the most significant terrorist attack on American soil. So, let me remind our readers once again.

On September 11, 2001, nineteen Islamic terrorists, primarily Saudi Arabian citizens, hijacked four commercial aircraft. In a synchronized attack, the hijackers deliberately flew two planes into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center and a third into the Pentagon. The passengers on the fourth plane launched a counterattack, spurring the hijacker pilot to crash the plane into a field in Pennsylvania.

Approximately 3,000 died that day, the single most significant loss of life resulting from a terrorist attack on American soil.

After these attacks, I saw many car stickers saying, “Everything I Needed to Know About Islam I Learned on 9/11.” Well, not.

Islam and Sharia continue to creep into every aspect of American culture stealthily. And too few people know it or are talking about it. Why? Because Americans have been conditioned to be tolerant and compassionate, embrace multiculturalism and respect each other’s beliefs, ideals, and values. That would be wonderful in a Utopian world, but the fact is, Islam doesn’t embrace any aspect of Western civilization—much less American culture. We are rapidly and methodically being dismantled as a nation, and our freedom and liberty are more fragile than ever since WWII. And while we fight the enemy abroad with combat troops, intelligence, and drone strikes, we’re doing nothing to combat the same enemy residing on our soil and in broad daylight.

This is no longer an alarm. Our enemies are already here and planning to make America like another European country. Suppose we don’t defeat Islam politically, lawfully, and swiftly. In that case, our children and grandchildren may well be engaged in an endless religious and ideological bloody war, the likes of which have never been seen on American soil.

Islam is a theocratic political violent ideology that hides behind the mask of religion to accomplish its mission of a worldwide caliphate. Americans must understand Islam is a totalitarian “theo-political” belief system and a social doctrine (the two go hand-in-hand) based on the Quran, Sira, and Hadith, what Dr. Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam aptly coins the “Trilogy.” It has mandates on every aspect of life, enforced and regulated by the barbaric criminal and civil codes known as Sharia Law. The precise definition of a Muslim becomes crystal clear when you read the trilogy of Islam. Bottom line: you are to be an Allah-fearing, Quran-believing, and Mohammed-following zealot that forces people to submit, convert, and comply with Islam and Sharia or be killed. Those are the facts.

Does every Muslim follow the commands of the Quran? No, thank God. But as they superficially assimilate into communities and increase in numbers, they become more militant and less tolerant of that community’s laws and regulations.

Any religion or ideology whose “holy book” commands its followers to commit crimes that are antithetical to the laws of this country should not only lose its tax-exempt status but lose its 1st Amendment protections and be banned from the United States altogether. In case you are not familiar with some of the condoned atrocities of Islam and Sharia law, let me tell you a few facts.:

Are you aware that women are stoned to death for committing adultery, and according to the interpretation of Islam, gays should be thrown from a high building and then stoned if they are not dead when they hit the ground? Or that the genitals of little girls are mutilated(Female genital mutilation or FGM) in an attempt to control their sexuality, and that children may be murdered in the name of family honor? And last, Islam does not recognize the separation of church and state and doesn’t follow our Constitution or any artificial laws. They have their laws: Sharia or Islamic laws.

In countries where Islamic enclaves and ghettos have emerged, like France, Britain, Sweden, Belgium, and North African countries, local Imams or mullahs enforce Sharia law regardless. Most Americans fail to understand that Sharia law is the foundation of Islamic theocracy and totalitarianism. The establishment of global Sharia law is their final goal. The Quran is unequivocal in its directive to Muslims to establish an international Islamic state (Caliphate) over which the Islamic messiah, or Mahdi, will rule with Sharia as the only law of the land. Make no mistake that is the intent of influential Islamic elements in America.

Organizations such as the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) fully exploit our naiveté and lenient laws to install Sharia law. Moreover, Islam starkly contrasts the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and what the First Amendment was designed to protect—our God-given, unalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Sharia law is complex and derived from multiple Islamic sources: the Quran, considered the “unmitigated word of Allah,” is the primary source of Sharia law. The Hadith (sayings and actions of Muhammad) is the second most crucial document in Sharia and Sira (the life of prophet Muhammad). Historic rulings by jurists over the years and so-called reasoning by analogy make up the other two less-influential sources of Sharia. Together they constitute Islam’s theological core and result in a totalitarian way of life for Muslim followers and non-Muslims (kafirs and infidels). Sharia law completely contradicts American values because it enslaves people and encourages acts of violence and barbaric behavior. Sharia demands the death of those who renounce Islam.

In short: Mild Islam may not appear too obtrusive to some since it is like the early stages of pregnancy. Yet, pregnancy it is. And before long, the full-term beast will make its appearance. If we don’t want to deal with the beast, we need to prevent the pregnancy in the first place.

©2023. Amil Imani. All rights reserved.

The Synodal Church of “Me, Myself, and I” thumbnail

The Synodal Church of “Me, Myself, and I”

By The Catholic Thing

Fr. Gerald E. Murray: A Church in which each person recognizes himself in his personally curated set of beliefs, may promise satisfaction. But it’s a make-believe, delusional religion of self-worship.

The Instrumentum Laboris [IL] (Working Document) for the October Synod on Synodality, released June 20, embodies the now familiar pattern seen in the various stages of the synodal process. Certain questions are asked, others are ignored, predictable answers are given, and expectations are raised that a new Church, the Holy Spirit-inspired Synodal Church, will emerge in which everyone will feel seen, recognized, welcomed, accepted, accompanied, cared for, listened to, valued, not judged, and so on. “[A] synodal Church is open, welcoming and embraces all. . .[t]he radical call is, therefore, to build together, synodally, an attractive and concrete Church: an outgoing Church, in which all feel welcome.”

The motto for this new Synodal approach could easily be “People, not Doctrines, Я Us.” This emotion-centered focus is the template for the hoped-for “soft” revolution in the Church in which Catholic doctrines that contradict decadent Western sexual mores and radical feminist claims of oppression in the Church are framed as obsolete, regrettable, and needless sources of discord and alienation, as holdovers from a cruel past. These doctrines, of course, need to be jettisoned, lest anyone feel unwelcome.

At the press conference presenting the IL, Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, General Rapporteur for the October General Assembly, responded to this question from Diane Montagna: “[In the IL] two questions are asked: How can we create spaces where those who feel hurt and unwelcomed by the community feel recognized, received, free to ask questions and not judged? In the light of the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia, what concrete steps are needed to welcome those who feel excluded from the Church because of their status or sexuality (for example, remarried divorcees, people in polygamous marriages, LGBTQ+ people, etc.) Isn’t the only possible answer to these questions that, for these people to feel accepted, the Church must change her teaching on the inherent immorality of any use of the sexual faculty outside of a lifelong and exclusive monogamous union of one man and one woman?”

Hollerich’s response reveals why this Synodal process is a disaster that is bringing great damage and sorrow to the Church: “We do not speak about the Church’s teaching. That is not our task and not our mission. We just speak to welcome everybody who wants to walk with us. That is something different.”

Different indeed. Proclaiming Catholic doctrine is not the Synod’s task or mission? What is the mission then? The IL states that the Synod “represents an opportunity to walk together as a Church capable of welcoming and accompanying, accepting the necessary changes in rules, structures and procedures. The same applies to many other issues that emerge in the discussion threads.”

Among the “issues that emerge,” contested Catholic doctrines will undoubtedly be unfavorably scrutinized and found wanting by those in favor of “accepting the necessary changes.”

The IL observes that:

[s]ome of the questions that emerged from the consultation of the People of God concern issues on which there is already magisterial and theological teaching to be considered. To give just two examples, we can note the acceptance of remarried divorcees. . .or the inculturation of the liturgy. . . .The fact that questions continue to emerge on issues like these should not be hastily dismissed, rather, it calls for discernment, and the Synodal Assembly is a privileged forum for so doing. In particular, the obstacles, real or perceived, that have prevented the steps indicated by previous documents from being realized should be considered and reflections offered on how they can be removed. . . .If, on the other hand, the problem stems from the difficulty of grasping the implications of the documents in ordinary situations or an inability of persons to recognize themselves in what is proposed, a synodal journey of effective reception by the People of God could be the appropriate response. Another instance could be the reappearance of a question which emerges as a sign of a changed reality or situations where there is a need for an “overflow” of Grace. This requires further reflection on the Deposit of Faith and the living Tradition of the Church.

Is the judgment of the truth of Catholic teaching dependent upon everyone’s ability “to recognize themselves in what is proposed”? What does the concept of “effective reception by the people of God” mean? Who decides that there is a “changed reality or situations” that “requires” what is euphemistically called “further reflection on the Deposit of Faith and the living Tradition of the Church?” What is an “overflow” of grace? Does it mean “going beyond” what has always been taught by the Church?

In the new synodal Church it is the people who instruct the bishops on the meaning of the Faith: “Since consulting the local Churches is an effective way to listen to the People of God, the Pastors’ discernment takes on the character of a collegial act that can authoritatively confirm what the Spirit has spoken to the Church through the People of God’s sense of faith.”

Indeed, the Synodal Assembly’s “task will be to open the whole Church to welcome the voice of the Holy Spirit.” What if a bishop does not go along with a supposed manifestation of the Holy Spirit’s will, expressed through the voice of the people? The IL responds with these revealing questions: “How can we deal constructively with cases in which those in authority feel they cannot confirm the conclusions reached by a community discernment process, taking a decision in a different direction? What kind of restitution should that authority offer to those who participated in the process?” Restitution? Will a bishop owe some form of reparation to a group of advisors when he disagrees with their advice?

The IL does not want such uncooperative behavior on the part of bishops to happen: “in order not to remain merely a paper exercise or to be wholly dependent on the goodwill of individuals [read here: bishops], co-responsibility in the mission deriving from Baptism must take on concrete structural forms. Adequate institutional frameworks are therefore necessary, along with spaces in which community discernment can be practiced on a regular basis. This should not be read as a demand for a redistribution of power, but the need for the effective exercise of co-responsibility that flows from Baptism.”

Really? It is blatantly such a demand.

The IL lists topics that have come up in the various stages of synodal consultations. Included are: war, climate change, “an economic system that produces exploitation, inequality and a throwaway culture,” cultural colonialism, religious persecution, “aggressive secularization,” sexual abuse and “the abuse of power, conscience and money.”

It’s striking that abortion, euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, the spread of atheism, relativism, subjectivism, religious indifference, gender ideology, the redefinition of marriage in the laws of many Western states, coercive programs to impose contraception in the global south are not listed. Neither are the crises regarding sacramental practice in the Church today: the steep decline in Mass attendance, the practical disappearance of sacramental confession in many places, the decline in baptisms, confirmations and marriages, and the serious decline in the number of priestly ordinations in the Western world. Did none of these topics surface during the lead-up to the Synodal Assembly in October?

Nowhere do we find any mention of the Church’s paramount mission: the salvation of souls. There is not a hint that what is most important in the life of the Church is the preaching of God’s gift of eternal life, Christ’s call to conversion and repentance.

The IL also calls for an “effort to renew the language used by the Church in its liturgy, preaching, catechesis. . .[without] demeaning or debasing the depth of the mystery that the Church proclaims or the richness of its tradition, the renewal of language must aim instead to make these riches accessible and attractive to the men and women of our time, rather than an obstacle that keeps them at a distance.”

The expression “renew the language” here is plainly a calming euphemism for “change the words and thus the meaning” of contested teachings. What keeps some people “at a distance” from the teaching of the Church is not the supposedly incomprehensible words that are used, but rather the well-understood meaning of those words, which meaning they simply do not accept.

This calls to mind the effort underway to remove this teaching from the Catechism of the Catholic Church [CCC]: “Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.” (#2357)

The IL states that “the final documents of the Continental Assemblies often mention those who do not feel accepted in the Church, such as the divorced and remarried, people in polygamous marriages, or LGBTQ+ Catholics.” As we saw above, the IL follows up with this question: “How can we create spaces where those who feel hurt by the Church and unwelcomed by the community feel recognized, received, free to ask questions and not judged? In the light of the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia, what concrete steps are needed to welcome those who feel excluded from the Church because of their status or sexuality (for example, remarried divorcees, people in polygamous marriages, LGBTQ+ people, etc.)?”

The use of the acronym LGBTQ+ is wrong; it gives the mistaken impression that the Church teaches that God created distinct categories of human beings with the intention that they would engage in sexual acts that are non-procreative, or would be trapped in the wrong body, or whatever + stands for.

The trendy conceit of “creating spaces” for people who reject various teachings of the Church gives the impression that they are not “safe” whenever they are reminded that their behavior is immoral according to God’s law. Is being hurt by the truth a problem? Is not such pain a purifying moment, a grace from God, who challenges us to examine ourselves according to the demands of his law, and not according to our own often mistaken choices? People who reject the Church’s teaching may claim to be unwelcomed by fellow believers. It is not they who are rejected, but rather it is their immoral behavior that is rightly stigmatized.

Why should the Church create a “space” where polygamists may feel “not judged?” The CCC teaches this about polygamy: “polygamy is not in accord with the moral law. [Conjugal] communion is radically contradicted by polygamy; this, in fact, directly negates the plan of God, which was revealed from the beginning, because it is contrary to the equal personal dignity of men and women who in matrimony give themselves with a love that is total and therefore unique and exclusive.” (#2387)

What more is there to discuss?

The IL endorses the discontent of those women who want to be ordained to the diaconate: “Most of the Continental Assemblies and the syntheses of several Episcopal Conferences call for the question of women’s inclusion in the diaconate to be considered. Is it possible to envisage this, and in what way?” The Church has already studied this proposal, and rejected it as not being possible. The IL also issues a wider call for the inclusion of women in “governance, decision-making, mission, and ministries at all levels of the Church.” Why wasn’t the modifier “non-ordained” placed before the word ministries?

There is a call for a discussion to end mandatory celibacy for priests in the Latin Church: “As some continents propose, could a reflection be opened concerning the discipline on access to the Priesthood for married men, at least in some areas?” This persistent agitation for married priests seeks a result that would do grave damage to the mission of the Church as Pope Emeritus Benedict and Cardinal Robert Sarah demonstrated in their book From the Depths of Our Hearts.

The IL does issue this excellent warning: “There are forces at work in the world that oppose the mission of the Church, based on philosophical, economic and political ideologies that are founded on assumptions that are inimical to the faith.” Sadly, the IL reveals that those forces are also at work within the Church.

And the IL asks this important question: “How can the Churches remain in dialogue with the world without becoming worldly?” The clear answer is: remain faithful to Christ and his doctrine, especially when it is opposed by those who want to change various teachings of the Church in the name of making people feel welcomed and accepted.

The Church of “Me, Myself and I,” where each person recognizes himself in his personally curated set of beliefs, may promise satisfaction. In fact, it’s a make-believe, delusional religion of self-worship in which God is relegated to the role of the Divine Affirmer of whatever each one decides to believe. God spare us from such an outcome.

You may also enjoy:

Robert Royal’s Who Needs Synodality?

Brad Miner’s Homosexuality in Scripture


Fr. Gerald E. Murray

The Rev. Gerald E. Murray, J.C.D. is a canon lawyer and the pastor of Holy Family Church in New York City. His new book (with Diane Montagna), Calming the Storm: Navigating the Crises Facing the Catholic Church and Society, is now available.

EDITORS NOTE: This The Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2023 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Politicians Legitimize Islam thumbnail

Politicians Legitimize Islam

By Amil Imani

Never in the history of America has a group of power-hungry wolves, known as the Democrat Party, done so much damage to America. Establishment Republicans are not far behind!

Forms of Government

There are several different forms of government in the present world. One such form is Democracy. Democracy is supposed to be a form of government voted into power by the people to serve the best interests of the people. However, translating this superior ideal into reality is complicated and problematic. Yes, it is said that the voter is king in democracy. But this assertion is more of a slogan than a reality. What is left unsaid is that no country can have every voting citizen as king, only one king per country. Besides, in a true democracy, a king is only a symbolic figure with no significant executive or legislative powers.

The actual king in democracy is not the voter but the forces or powers that steer him into voting. The voter must know who he should vote for and what is in it. Potentially, there can be as many differences in vote exercises as there are voters: a recipe for chaos. To avoid confusion and partly to enhance the likelihood of attaining their objectives, like-minded people coalesce by forming interest groups such as labor unions and political parties.

Once this grouping happens, conflict is only one step behind. Different parties compete for their interests with little regard or care for other groups. It is at this point that funds begin to influence the outcome significantly.

The Golden Rule means he who has the gold makes the rule, it is said cynically, yet there is a hefty dose of truth in it.
Democracies are plutocracies—the rule of money. We all know that America is a Republic, not a Democracy. We are closest to the Founder’s intent when we refer to the form of federal government planned and inserted in our Constitution as a “representative republic.” This explains two essential parts of our federal structure: (1) the role of citizens is to vote for representatives and hold them responsible; and (2) the functions of our elected representatives – Congress and the Executive – are to legislate and govern.

Tricky Representation

No community of any size can constitute itself in such a way that every member directly participates in every decision and action of the community. This impracticality, a lesson learned from the early New England settlers’ Town Hall meetings, necessitated electing individuals to represent those people. Money enters the fray with an even more significant impact at this juncture.

An aspirant of any elective office needs funds in proportion to the importance of the office he is seeking. For instance, a person running for a seat in a small town council may require modest funds for handbills, possible newspaper ads, etc.

In contrast, an aspirant for the office of a country’s presidency would need a war chest of hundreds of millions of dollars. And all elected officials are staffing the government from the bottom to the top. And all these people depend on funds to promote themselves and their platforms.

Often, the candidate with a bigger war chest wins the prize—and gets elected. A troubling question is where the person secured the funds and what kind of IOUs he had to issue.
Another troubling question is the person’s true aim to run for office. There must be something in it for him- whatever that may be. We want to think that he is altruistic and devoted to serving his constituents. But who are his actual constituents?

Sadly, many elected or appointed politicians are often driven by ambitions other than serving the people. Volumes can be produced in such cases in democracies. The attainment of office may be merely a means to an end, and the top end is self-serving monetarily or otherwise.

Money and Funds

It is sad that money drives politicians to power and keeps them there. Without money, they would never make it to first base. Without more money, they may languish at first base. To advance further to absolute power, politicians need large sums of money. And people who have money do not give them money without extracting payback. The higher the politician moves, the greater his IOU is to the people and the organizations that own him.

Like every transaction in life, dealing with moneyed people is a barter system. The politician becomes an employee of the funder (s). As is generally the case, the contract favors the employer—the money. The employee, the politician, often finds himself in a trap. He is, in effect, a purchased agent with little or no leeway. If he deviates in the least from his commitment, he may find himself out of work and more.

Moneyed Muslims and Muslim organizations with vast interests in promoting Islam are thoroughly familiar with the power of money to recruit people to do their bidding. That’s why many non-Muslims work at all levels of government and society to further Islam. In short: they are paid to do a job.

And it is the case that powerful institutions and organizations have the means and personnel to accomplish their objectives—whatever they may be.

We are individuals; more often than not, we are outmanned and outgunned by these group forces. Lone Rangers win only in make-believe movies. In real life, governments, institutions, and organizations are the ones who prevail. They have the funds to buy the services of the media; employ lawyers, politicians, and mercenaries of all stripes.
I have been asked to run for the US Congress and try to save our republic against the encroachment of Islamic ideology. America desperately could use a national security expert in the US Congress. As for me, I leave it up to the people to decide. In this business, you need name recognition and considerable funds.

©2023. Amil Imani. All rights reserved.

Justifying ‘Islamophobia’ thumbnail

Justifying ‘Islamophobia’

By Amil Imani

All phobias are, by definition, irrational fears. I’m not an Islamophobe because my “fear” of Islam is entirely rational. Avoiding a poisonous snake is a rational fear. Not a phobia. The emotion of fear, when utilized rationally, is of immense value. The critical point is that the person, as well as the society, must base their assessment on facts.
My assessment of Islam, conclusively supported by indisputable facts, is that it is a dangerous, destructive, and death-bearing belief system of a long-ago savage people that has inflicted and continues to inflict misery and death on people. According to Christopher Hitchens, Islamophobia is a word created by fascists and used by cowards to manipulate morons.

Let me add this. I will speak the truth about Islam. In no way am I falsely defaming Islam. Islam is its own best defamer. Telling the truth usually entails risks. I’m aware of that. Sharia law stipulates that any Muslim who turns his back on Islam should be allowed to revert to the religion. For an un-repenting male apostate, death is the punishment, and life imprisonment for a female apostate.

“Kill whoever changes his religion.” Sahih al-Bukhari 9:84:57

Some Muslims call us Islamophobes, while others call us racists; even though they know Islam is not a race, they know how to get under the skin of Americans by calling us racist.

Ever since the massive arrival of Muslims to the Western hemisphere, our Western culture and world have been forever altered, thanks to the ceaseless attempts of the left to create a failing Utopian multiculturalist paradise while forcefully jamming it down the throats of unsuspecting citizens. Here is the problem:

The West has been tolerant, but “tolerance in the face of evil is not tolerance; it is a crime.” It wasn’t long ago; we were defending ourselves at the Gates of Vienna from a Muslim invasion. Now, we welcome Muslims with open arms and generous welfare policies. Any pushback to these open immigration practices is labeled Islamophobia, racism, bigotry, etc. But what cost do these changes bring?

The battle with these barbarians has been proven to be arduous and lengthy. All enlightened individuals must work their hardest to fumigate these leeches from the body of humanity. Civilized people refuse to accept that Muslims have not evolved. They are at least 2,000 years behind society. The conflict between Islam and Muslims is due to evolution. Evolution takes time.

That is precisely why the percentage of rape has gone from non-existent in Europe to 5,000%. Whether we like to accept it or not, the reality is reality. We will eventually come to terms with the fact that Islam and its adherents cannot live in a civilized world. It is impossible to co-exist with this 7th-century mentality.

People fear Islam because Islam kills you. They fear Islam because they don’t want to lose their heads. Islamophobia is entirely justified. We must closely examine the Quran, Islam’s inviolable, immutable charter since it enjoys such sanctified standing. Muslims believe that Allah himself writes the Quran. Allah handed down the book, piece by piece and chapter by chapter, to the Archangel Gabriel. Gabriel, in turn, whispered these words to Muhammad himself over some 23 years.

Allah is so angry in the Quran. It seems that Allah is angry at himself. Much of the little book, the Quran, he authored over 23 years, is devoted to expressions of displeasure, anger, threats, and violence. Didn’t Allah create people, animals, and everything else? Didn’t he instill in us and everything else his own design? Then why all these venomous expressions in the Quran? Why not devote the book to saying that which would make us better, if possible, since Muslims claim his work is perfect?

Islam is anything but a religion of peace. Violence is at the very core of Islam. Violence is institutionalized in the Muslims’ holy book, the Quran, in many Suras. That is why people fear Islam; hence, Islamophobia is justified.

©2023. Amil Imani. All rights reserved.