Overblog Follow this blog
Administration Create my blog
September 23 2017 7 23 /09 /September /2017 12:32

 

John R. Houk

© September 23, 2017

 

The Center for Security Policy (CSP) released an open letter that was also sent to President Trump pertaining to Obama’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). For clarity’s sake, the JCPOA was not a treaty confirmed by the U.S. Senate as the Constitution stipulates for binding international agreements. Rather Obama chose to by-pass the Senate and made largely Classified undisclosed agreement components (AIM – 9/8/16 and Fox News – 2/7/17) with Iran allegedly to prevent militarization of nuclear power for – GET THIS – only ten years.

 

Obama’s JCPOA is a classic 21st century version of pre-WWII agreements between Britain’s Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and Germany’s Fuehrer Adolf Hitler in 1938. Chamberlain declared he negotiated a successful peace for our time. That peace was delusional as Hitler was permitted to carve up Czechoslovakia in the name of peace which emboldened Hitler to invade Poland which began WWII.

 

Bolton’s alternative to the JCPOA is not a renegotiation with Iran, rather it’s a strategic alternative to check Iranian expansionism and nuclear militarization.

 

Trump has been falling for the lie Iran has been complying to the JCPOA and thus has recertified that idiotic agreement contrary to the campaign promises. I pray the President listens to the signatories of this letter.

 

JRH 9/23/17

************

45 National Security Experts Urge President Trump to Withdraw From Nuclear Deal with Iran Using the Bolton Plan

 

Email sent by Center for Security Policy

Email Contact Maya Carlin

Email Sent 9/21/2017 11:13 AM

PDF Version

 

(Washington, D.C.):  Today 45 national security experts, many of whom held senior positions in the nuclear weapons, arms control, nonproliferation and intelligence fields, sent a letter to President Trump urging him to withdraw the United States from the deeply flawed 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran (the JCPOA) using a comprehensive plan drafted by former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton.

 

The signatories believe President Trump was exactly right during the campaign when he said the JCPOA is one of the worst agreements ever negotiated.  They believe this agreement is dangerous because it allows Iran to continue its pursuit of nuclear weapons while the deal is in effect, has extremely weak verification provisions, and ignores Iran’s increasingly destabilizing behavior.  Because of the enormous risks the JCPOA poses to American and international security and the impossibility of convincing Iran to amend the agreement, the signers believe the only option is for the United States to withdraw and initiate a new, more comprehensive approach that addresses all of the threats posed by Iran – including its missile program and sponsorship of terrorism – with a broad alliance that includes Israel and America’s Gulf State allies.

 

The signatories endorse Ambassador Bolton’s plan to implement this approach by withdrawing from the JCPOA in coordination with America’s allies.  The signers believe the Bolton plan is the best way to reverse the damage done by the reckless concessions that Obama officials made to Iran to negotiate the JCPOA and to prevent the Iranian nuclear program from spinning out of control as North Korea’s nuclear effort has. 

 

Some of the eminent individuals who signed the letter include:

 

  • Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin, USA (Ret.), Former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence

 

  • Ambassador Henry F. “Hank” Cooper, Former Chief U.S. Negotiator for Defense and Space and SDI Director

 

  • Dr. Manfred Eimer, Former Assistant Director for Verification and Intelligence, U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency

 

  • Mr. Douglas J. Feith, Former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy

 

  • Dr. William R. Graham, Former Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy

 

  • Ambassador Robert G. Joseph, Former Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security

 

  • Ambassador C. Paul Robinson, former President and Director of Sandia National Laboratories

 

  • Admiral James A. Lyons, U.S. Navy (Ret.), Former Commander-in Chief, Pacific Fleet

 

The full text of the letter is below.

 

September 21, 2017

 

The Honorable Donald J. Trump

President of the United States

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Washington, DC

 

Dear President Trump:

 

We are writing to you as national security experts, many who worked in the nuclear weapons, arms control, nonproliferation and intelligence fields, to express our strong opposition to the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA) and to ask that you withdraw the United States from this dangerous agreement as soon as possible. 

 

We also call on your administration to declare to Congress next month that Iran has not been complying with this agreement and that it is not in the national security interests of the United States.

 

We strongly supported your statements during the 2016 presidential campaign that the JCPOA was one of the worst international agreements ever negotiated and as president that you would either withdraw from or renegotiate this deal.  Your campaign statements accurately reflected that the JCPOA is a fraud since it allows Iran to continue its nuclear weapons program while the agreement is in effect by permitting it to enrich uranium, operate and develop advanced uranium centrifuges and operate a heavy-water reactor.  Such limited restrictions as the deal actually imposes on Iran’s enrichment program will expire in eight years.  In addition, the JCPOA’s inspection provisions are wholly inadequate.

 

We also note that a joint July 11, 2017 letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson from Senators Cruz, Rubio, Cotton and Perdue outlined significant violations of the JCPOA by Iran, the most important of which is Iran’s refusal to permit IAEA inspections of military facilities. 

 

In addition, although the JCPOA did not require Iran to halt its belligerent and destabilizing behavior, President Obama and Secretary Kerry repeatedly claimed it would lead to an improvement.  This has not happened.  To the contrary, after the JCPOA, Iran’s behavior has significantly worsened.  Tehran stepped up its ballistic missile program and missile launches.  There was a 90% increase in Iran’s 2016-2017 military budget.  Iran has increased its support to terrorist groups and sent troops into Syria.  Harassment of shipping in the Persian Gulf and Red Sea also increased, including missiles fired at U.S. and Gulf state ships by the Houthi rebels, an Iranian proxy in Yemen. 

 

Moreover, in light of major advances in North Korea’s nuclear program, we are very concerned that North Korea and Iran are actively sharing nuclear weapons technology and that Iran is providing funding for North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.  CIA Director Mike Pompeo suggested this possibility during a September 11 Fox News interview.

 

We are unconvinced by doom-and-gloom predictions of the consequences of a U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA.  The sky did not fall when you withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Accord.  Claims that Iran will step up its nuclear program or engage in more belligerent behavior must be considered against the backdrop of what Iran is allowed to do under the JCPOA and its actual conduct since this “political understanding” was announced. 

 

Some Iran deal advocates argue that the United States should remain in the JCPOA and instead try to amend it to fix its flaws over several years.  A few contend you could decertify the agreement to Congress, but remain in the deal and then try to amend it.  Since Iran has made it clear it will not agree to changes to the JCPOA, we believe these proposals are unrealistic.  Continuing to legitimate the agreement is not conducive to its renegotiation.  The day will never come when the mullahs agree to amend the sweetheart deal they got in the JCPOA.

 

Ambassador John Bolton has drawn up a plan to implement a far more effective, comprehensive and multilateral approach to address the threat from Iran.  This approach includes strict new sanctions to bar permanently the transfer of nuclear technology to Iran.  He also calls for new sanctions in response to Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism and efforts to destabilize the Middle East, especially in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. 

 

Unlike the JCPOA, which was negotiated with no input from America’s allies in the Middle East, Ambassador Bolton outlines a multilateral campaign to forge a new comprehensive approach to the threat from Iran that includes the Gulf States and Israel to assure that their security interests are taken into account. 

 

We agree with Ambassador John Bolton that strong international sanctions, a tough negotiating strategy and a decisive American president who will not engage in appeasement is the best approach to rein in Iran’s belligerent behavior and induce it to joining negotiations on a better agreement. 

 

As national security experts who understand the urgency of addressing the growing threat from Iran, we urge you to implement the Bolton plan, withdraw from the dangerous Iran nuclear deal and not certify Iranian compliance to Congress next month.  It is time to move beyond President Obama’s appeasement of Iran and to begin work on a comprehensive new approach that fully addresses the menace that the Iranian regime increasingly poses to American and international security.

 

ATTACHMENT: “Abrogating The Iran Deal: The Way Forward” By Ambassador John Bolton [Blog Editor: The “ATTACHMENT” at the end of the signatures in this CSP email. But if you are impatient, here is the National Review version by John Bolton]

 

Sincerely,

 

Winston Lewis Amselem

U.S. Foreign Service Officer, Minister-Counselor (Ret.)

 

Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin, USA (Ret.)

Former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence

 

Ambassador Henry F. Cooper

Former Chief U.S. Negotiator for Defense and Space and SDI Director

 

Stephen Coughlin

Former Joint Chiefs of Staff intelligence analyst

 

Jack David

Hudson Institute Senior Fellow and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction and Negotiations Policy

 

Paula A. DeSutter

Former Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and Compliance

 

Joseph E. diGenova

Former U.S. Attorney District of Columbia

 

Jessie Jane Duff

Gunnery Sergeant USMC (Ret.)

Senior Fellow London Center for Policy Research

 

Dr. Manfred Eimer

Former Assistant Director for Verification and Intelligence, U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency

 

Fritz Ermarth

Retired CIA officer.  Former chairman of the National Intelligence Council

 

Douglas J. Feith

Former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy

 

Frederick Fleitz

Former CIA analyst and Professional Staff Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

 

Kevin D. Freeman, National Security Investment Counsel Institute

 

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.

Former Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy (Acting)

 

Daniel J. Gallington

Former General Counsel, U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and Member, U.S. Delegation to the Nuclear & Space Talks

 

D. Scott George

Brigadier General, USAF (Ret.). President/CEO, IN-Cyber Vision, Inc.

 

Dr. William R. Graham

Former Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and Science Advisor to the President; NASA Administrator and Chairman of the General Advisory Committee (GAC) on Arms Control and Disarmament

 

Larry K. Grundhauser

Brigadier General, USAF Retired

 

Philip Haney

Department of Homeland Security founding staff member and former U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officer

 

George William Heiser II

Former Director for Arms Control, Reagan National Security Council Staff

 

Richard T. Higgins

Former Director for Strategic Planning, Trump National Security Council

 

Peter Huessy

President, GeoStrategic Analysis, Former Special Assistant to the Secretary of the Interior for International Energy Security

 

Ambassador Eric M. Javits

Former US Permanent Representative and Ambassador to the Conference on Disarmament and to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons

 

Ambassador Robert G. Joseph

Former Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security; Assistant to the President on Arms Control and Nonproliferation; and Chairman of the ABM Treaty Standing Consultative Commission

 

Morton A. Klein

Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) National President

 

Dr. Charles M. Kupperman

Former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan; former Executive Director, General Advisory Committee to the President on Arms Control and Disarmament

 

Herbert I. London

President, London Center for Policy Research

 

Robert L. Luaces

Foreign Service Officer (Ret.). Former Director, State Department Office of Multilateral Nuclear and Security Affairs

 

Admiral James A. Lyons

U.S. Navy (Ret.).  Former Commander-in Chief, Pacific Fleet

 

Lt. Gen Thomas McInerney, US Air Force (Ret.)

Assistant Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force and Director of the Defense Performance Review

 

Vice Admiral Robert R. Monroe, U.S. Navy (Ret.).  Former Director, Defense Nuclear Agency

 

Daniel Pollak

Co-Director of Government Relations, Zionist Organization of America (ZOA)

 

Dr. Peter Vincent Pry

Executive Director, Task Force on National and Homeland Security; Senior Staff on the Congressional EMP Commission, Congressional Strategic Posture Commission, the House Armed Services Committee, and the CIA

 

George Rasley

Editor of ConservativeHQ and consultant

 

Major General Edward M. Reeder

U.S. Army (Ret.)

 

Ambassador C. Paul Robinson

Former President and Director of Sandia National Laboratories.  Head of the Nuclear Weapons and National Security programs at Los Alamos National Laboratory.  Chief Negotiator and Head of the U.S. Delegation to the U.S./Soviet Union Nuclear Testing Talks

 

Nina Rosenwald

Founder and President, Gatestone Institute

 

Mark Schneider

Senior analyst, National Institute for Public Policy.  Former Senior Director for Forces Policy and Principal Director for Strategic Defense, Space and Verification Policy, Office of the Secretary of Defense.  Former Senior Foreign Service Officer.

 

Tony Shaffer, LTC (ret)

Vice President for Strategic Initiatives and Operations, London Center for Policy Research.  Former CIA-trained senior intelligence operative

 

Sarah Stern

Founder and President, Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET)

 

Kenneth R. Timmerman

President and CEO, Foundation for Democracy in Iran

 

Victoria Toensing

Former Chief Counsel, Senate Intelligence Committee

 

Adam Turner

General Counsel and Legislative Affairs Director, Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET)

 

J. Michael Waller

Founding Editorial Board Member, NATO Defence Strategic Communications

 

David Wurmser

Former Senior Advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney

 

 

 

ABROGATING THE IRAN DEAL: THE WAY FORWARD

By Ambassador John Bolton

 

I. Background:

 

The Trump Administration is required to certify to Congress every 90 days that Iran is complying with the July 2015 nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — JCPOA), and that this agreement is in the national-security interest of the United States.1 While a comprehensive Iranian policy review is currently underway, America’s Iran policy should not be frozen. The JCPOA is a threat to U.S. national-security interests, growing more serious by the day. If the President decides to abrogate the JCPOA, a comprehensive plan must be developed and executed to build domestic and international support for the new policy.

 

Under the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, the President must certify every 90 days that:

 

(i)  Iran is transparently, verifiably, and fully implementing the agreement, including all related technical or additional agreements;

 

(ii)  Iran has not committed a material breach with respect to the agreement or, if Iran has committed a material breach, Iran has cured the material breach;

 

(iii)  Iran has not taken any action, including covert activities, that could significantly advance its nuclear weapons program; and

 

(iv)  Suspension of sanctions related to Iran pursuant to the agreement is –

 

(I)  appropriate and proportionate to the specific and verifiable measures taken by Iran with respect to terminating its illicit nuclear program; and

 

(II) vital to the national-security interests of the United States.

 

U.S. leadership here is critical, especially through a diplomatic and public education effort to explain a decision not to certify and to abrogate the JCPOA. Like any global campaign, it must be persuasive, thorough, and accurate. Opponents, particularly those who participated in drafting and implementing the JCPOA, will argue strongly against such a decision, contending that it is reckless, ill-advised, and will have negative economic and security consequences.

 

Accordingly, we must explain the grave threat to the U.S. and our allies, particularly Israel. The JCPOA’s vague and ambiguous wording; its manifest imbalance in Iran’s direction; Iran’s significant violations; and its continued, indeed, increasingly, unacceptable conduct at the strategic level internationally demonstrate convincingly that the JCPOA is not in the national-security interests of the United States. We can bolster the case for abrogation by providing new, declassified information on Iran’s unacceptable behavior around the world.

 

But as with prior Presidential decisions, such as withdrawing from the 1972 ABM Treaty, a new “reality” will be created. We will need to assure the international community that the U.S. decision will in fact enhance international peace and security, unlike the JCPOA, the provisions of which shield Iran’s ongoing efforts to develop deliverable nuclear weapons. The Administration should announce that it is abrogating the JCPOA due to significant Iranian violations, Iran’s unacceptable international conduct more broadly, and because the JCPOA threatens American national-security interests.

 

The Administration’s explanation in a “white paper” should stress the many dangerous concessions made to reach this deal, such as allowing Iran to continue to enrich uranium; allowing Iran to operate a heavy-water reactor; and allowing Iran to operate and develop advanced centrifuges while the JCPOA is in effect. Utterly inadequate verification and enforcement mechanisms and Iran’s refusal to allow inspections of military sites also provide important reasons for the Administration’s decision.

 

Even the previous Administration knew the JCPOA was so disadvantageous to the United States that it feared to submit the agreement for Senate ratification. Moreover, key American allies in the Middle East directly affected by this agreement, especially Israel and the Gulf states, did not have their legitimate interests adequately taken into account. The explanation must also demonstrate the linkage between Iran and North Korea.

 

We must also highlight Iran’s unacceptable behavior, such as its role as the world’s central banker for international terrorism, including its directions and control over Hezbollah and its actions in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. The reasons Ronald Reagan named Iran as a state sponsor of terrorism in 1984 remain fully applicable today.

 

II. Campaign Plan Components

 

There are four basic elements to the development and implementation of the campaign plan to decertify and abrogate the Iran nuclear deal:

 

1. Early, quiet consultations with key players such as the U.K., France, Germany, Israel, and Saudi Arabia, to tell them we are going to abrogate the deal based on outright violations and other unacceptable Iranian behavior, and seek their input.

 

2. Prepare the documented strategic case for withdrawal through a detailed white paper (including declassified intelligence as appropriate) explaining why the deal is harmful to U.S. national interests, how Iran has violated it, and why Iran’s behavior more broadly has only worsened since the deal was agreed.

 

3. A greatly expanded diplomatic campaign should immediately follow the announcement, especially in Europe and the Middle East, and we should ensure continued emphasis on the Iran threat as a top diplomatic and strategic priority.

 

4. Develop and execute Congressional and public diplomacy efforts to build domestic and foreign support.

 

III. Execution Concepts and Tactics

 

1. Early, quiet consultations with key players

 

It is critical that a worldwide effort be initiated to inform our allies, partners, and others about Iran’s unacceptable behavior. While this effort could well leak to the press, it is nonetheless critical that we inform and consult with our allies and partners at the earliest possible moment, and, where appropriate, build into our effort their concerns and suggestions.

 

This quiet effort will articulate the nature and details of the violations and the type of relationship the U.S. foresees in the future, thereby laying the foundation for imposing new sanctions barring the transfer of nuclear and missile technology or dual use technology to Iran. With Israel and selected others, we will discuss military options. With others in the Gulf region, we can also discuss means to address their concerns from Iran’s menacing behavior.

 

The advance consultations could begin with private calls by the President, followed by more extensive discussions in capitals by senior Administration envoys. Promptly elaborating a comprehensive tactical diplomatic plan should be a high priority.

 

2. Prepare the documented strategic case

 

The White House, coordinating all other relevant Federal agencies, must forcefully articulate the strong case regarding U.S. national-security interests. The effort should produce a “white paper” that will be the starting point for the diplomatic and domestic discussion of the Administration decision to abrogate the JCPOA, and why Iran must be denied access to nuclear technology indefinitely. The white paper should be an unclassified, written statement of the Administration’s case, prepared faultlessly, with scrupulous attention to accuracy and candor. It should not be limited to the inadequacies of the JCPOA as written, or Iran’s violations, but cover the entire range of Iran’s continuing unacceptable international behavior.

 

Although the white paper will not be issued until the announcement of the decision to abrogate the JCPOA, initiating work on drafting the document is the highest priority, and its completion will dictate the timing of the abrogation announcement.

 

A thorough review and declassification strategy, including both U.S. and foreign intelligence in our possession should be initiated to ensure that the public has as much information as possible about Iranian behavior that is currently classified, consistent with protecting intelligence sources and methods. We should be prepared to “name names” and expose the underbelly of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard business activities and how they are central to the efforts that undermine American and allied national interests. In particular, we should consider declassifying information related to activities such as the Iran-North Korea partnership, and how they undermine fundamental interests of our allies and partners.

 

3. Greatly expanded diplomatic campaign post-announcement

 

The Administration, through the NSC process, should develop a tactical plan that uses all available diplomatic tools to build support for our decision, including what actions we recommend other countries to take. But America must provide the leadership. It will take substantial time and effort and will require a “full court press” by U.S. embassies worldwide and officials in Washington to drive the process forward. We should ensure that U.S. officials fully understand the decision, and its finality, to help ensure the most positive impact with their interlocutors.

 

Our embassies worldwide should demarche their host governments with talking points (tailored as may be necessary) and data to explain and justify abrogating JCPOA. We will need parallel efforts at the United Nations and other appropriate multilateral organizations. Our embassies should not limit themselves to delivering the demarche, however, but should undertake extensive public diplomacy as well.

 

After explaining and justifying the decision to abrogate the deal, the next objective should be to recreate a new counter-proliferation coalition to replace the one squandered by the previous Administration, including our European allies, Israel, and the Gulf states. In that regard, we should solicit suggestions for imposing new sanctions on Iran and other measures in response to its nuclear and ballistic-missile programs, sponsorship of terrorism, and generally belligerent behavior, including its meddling in Iraq and Syria.

 

Russia and China obviously warrant careful attention in the post-announcement campaign. They could be informed just prior to the public announcement as a courtesy, but should not be part of the pre-announcement diplomatic effort described above. We should welcome their full engagement to eliminate these threats, but we will move ahead with or without them.

 

Iran is not likely to seek further negotiations once the JCPOA is abrogated, but the Administration may wish to consider rhetorically leaving that possibility open in order to demonstrate Iran’s actual underlying intention to develop deliverable nuclear weapons, an intention that has never flagged.

 

In preparation for the diplomatic campaign, the NSC interagency process should review U.S. foreign-assistance programs as they might assist our efforts. The DNI should prepare a comprehensive, worldwide list of companies and activities that aid Iran’s terrorist activities.

 

4. Develop and execute Congressional and public diplomacy efforts

 

The Administration should have a Capitol Hill plan to inform members of Congress already concerned about Iran, and develop momentum for imposing broad sanctions against Iran, far more comprehensive than the pinprick sanctions favored under prior Administrations. Strong congressional support will be critical. We should be prepared to link Iranian behavior around the world, including its relationship with North Korea, and its terrorist activities. And we should demonstrate the linkage between Iranian behavior and missile proliferation as part of the overall effort that justifies a national-security determination that U.S. interests would not be furthered with the JCPOA.

 

Unilateral U.S. sanctions should be imposed outside the framework of Security Council Resolution 2231 so that Iran’s defenders cannot water them down; multilateral sanctions from others who support us can follow quickly.

 

The Administration should also encourage discussions in Congress and in public debate for further steps that might be taken to go beyond the abrogation decision. These further steps, advanced for discussion purposes and to stimulate debate, should collectively demonstrate our resolve to limit Iran’s malicious activities and global adventurism. Some would relate directly to Iran; others would protect our allies and partners more broadly from the nuclear proliferation and terrorist threats, such as providing F-35s to Israel or THAAD resources to Japan. Other actions could include:

 

  • End all landing and docking rights for all Iranian aircraft and ships at key allied ports;

 

  • End all visas for Iranians, including so called “scholarly,” student, sports, or other exchanges;

 

  • Demand payment with a set deadline on outstanding U.S. federal-court judgments against Iran for terrorism, including 9/11;

 

  • Announce U.S. support for the democratic Iranian opposition;

 

  • Expedite delivery of bunker-buster bombs;

 

  • Announce U.S. support for Kurdish national aspirations, including Kurds in Iran, Iraq, and Syria;

 

  • Provide assistance to Balochis, Khuzestan Arabs, Kurds, and others — also to internal resistance among labor unions, students, and women’s groups;

 

  • Actively organize opposition to Iranian political objectives in the U.N.

 

IV. Conclusion

 

This effort should be the Administration’s highest diplomatic priority, commanding all necessary time, attention, and resources. We can no longer wait to eliminate the threat posed by Iran. The Administration’s justification of its decision will demonstrate to the world that we understand the threat to our civilization; we must act and encourage others to meet their responsibilities as well.

 

1. Although this paper will refer to “the JCPOA,” the abrogation decision should also encompass the July 14, 2015, statement by the Security Council’s five permanent members and Germany, attached as Annex B to Security Council Resolution 2231. The JCPOA is attached as Annex A to Resolution 2231.

 

[CLICK HERE FOR PDF COPY OF THIS RELEASE]

______________

National Security Experts Exhort JCPOA Abrogation

John R. Houk

© September 23, 2017

______________

45 National Security Experts Urge President Trump to Withdraw From Nuclear Deal with Iran Using the Bolton Plan

 

About The Center for Security Policy

 

The Center for Security Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security and then ensures that such issues are the subject of both focused, principled examination and effective action by recognized policy experts, appropriate officials, opinion leaders, and the general public. For more information visit www.securefreedom.org

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Politics Counterjihad
write a comment
September 22 2017 6 22 /09 /September /2017 14:06

Waged with Financial Institutions and Social Media

 

John R. Houk

© September 22, 2017

 

I don’t know if you have noticed the American Left has been trying to shut up Conservative and Counterjihad outlets by attack their pocketbooks based on the Marxist oriented SPLC hate list. The SPLC hate list places non-violent, Conservative/Biblically Christian values organizations as well as those that expose the violent nature inherent in Islamic revered writings on the same list as the violent KKK and the various Neo-Nazi organizations. Ironically the SPLC does not have violent ideologies like Antifa, Black Lives Matter, the New Black Panthers, Marxist-Racist Black Liberation Theology and the ilk on a Hate List.

 

If you are on the SPLC Hate List, financial organizations such as PayPal will terminate your account making it difficult to receive online donations from supporters of non-violent Patriot organizations, Christian Organizations, Counterjihadists, expose the Homosexual Agenda organizations and so on of non-violent charitable or non-profit organizations.

 

You could probably win a bet in saying the Leftist Mainstream Media (MSM) has not reported or extremely under-reported the Leftist attack on the financial situation of these organizations. This is the reason behind me wondering if you were aware of the financial attack.

 

Jihad Watch (Robert Spencer) and Pamela Geller were suspended. Then a few days later were reinstated (Jihad Watch & Geller) to PayPal. I suspect their following made such a big deal that PayPal felt compelled to reinstate them.

 

I use PayPal on my blogs. According to the SPLC I would be a propagator of hate because I would be categorized as a homophobe (Supportive Biblical Values), Pro-Life/anti-abortion thus categorized anti-women’s Rights, Islamophobic (Exposing violence in Islamic revered writings and correlating to today’s Muslim terrorism), Pro-Christian in government yet anti-government in Faith and probably lesser SPLC Marxist violations I can’t think of now at this moment.

 

If a Leftie complains to PayPal they would probably suspend my account. I don’t have a huge Spencer/Geller support base. I would be forced to look elsewhere for online support. Can any of you fellow small potatoes bloggers relate?

 

Bare Naked Islam (BNI) has a story on SPLC-hate related influence, listing other Leftist and Islamic-apologist websites creating their hate lists pushing financial institutions to dump ethical organizations that expose the Left and Pro-Islamist interests. For sure BNI does rub some folks the wrong way with their brusque literary style, but the info is valid.

 

I have found myself in Social Media jail with both Facebook and Google in the past. I always found the jail an interesting plight since I do not use profanity nor do I advocate any kind of violence especially murder, of those I highly disagree with. So, I was in Social Media jail for either being a Biblical Christian, the Leftist epithet of being a homophobe, the Islamic Apologist epithet of Islamophobe or whatever Conservative value upset a whiner who complained.

 

The pseudonymous Counterjihadist Bill Warner discovered Social Media jail recently and he has a much larger following than I. And CBN.com has a story on the effects of SPLC Christian-bashing. I am cross posting the Warner email and the CBN.com story.

 

JRH 9/22/17

******************

Strategy To Survive The Silencing Storm...

The Life Preserver for the New Censored Web

 

Bill Warner

 

By Bill Warner

Sent via PoliticalIslam.com

Sent September 15, 2017, 8:09:48 AM CDT

 

Twitter put me on a 12-hour ban for mentioning Islamic doctrine (see "offensive" tweet below) and Germany banned my account for good with no explanation as to why.

 

Twitter Censorship of Political Islam

 

Google, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter are no longer “friendly” to our message. Political correctness reigns on our major social media platforms and is suppressing free speech across the right and left spectrum of religion and politics. The Islamo-Left is adhering to the Sharia.

There is a distinct possibility that eventually I will be totally censored from these major social media platforms. We need to prepare for that day. The only method of communication that is entirely safe is newsletters. It is for this reason I ask you to forward my newsletters to others and urge them to sign up so the facts about political Islam can be known. I wish to thank those of you who do this now. We must be creative and stand firm for our rights of free speech and expression.

 

Here’s a great example by Pamela Geller & friends at AFDI. Seriously, "Can't we talk about this?"
 

 

Vimeo VIDEO: Can't We Talk About This?

Can't We Talk About This? from "Can't We Talk?" Homepage on Vimeo.


 

The true story of the Islamic Supremacist war on free speech as told by those on the front lines fighting for our First Amendment rights, including Mark Steyn, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Geert Wilders, Douglas Murray, Raheem Kassam, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, Ezra Levant, Paul Weston, Milo Yiannopolous and cartoonists living under death threat Lars Vilks and Bosch Fawstin.

 

[Blog Editor: The rest of the Warner email is further resource and product promotion which I will not post. Except the promotional for a teaching video entitled, “The Half Truth of the Islamic Golden Age of Spain”.]

 

VIDEO: Bill Warner PhD: Half Truth of the Islamic Golden Age in Spain

 

 

Political Islam

Published on Sep 16, 2017

+++

The Hate Machine: How the Southern Poverty Law Center Is Cashing in by Bashing Christians

 

By Dale Hurd

09-19-2017

CBN News

 

Once upon a time, the Southern Poverty Law Center served as a champion in the civil rights struggle. It's said that the SPLC helped put the Ku Klux Klan out of business. Klan membership used to be in the millions. Today it's only a few thousand.

 

But when you glance at the SPLC's map of hate groups in America today, there are so many that one might think America is consumed with hate. 

 

But is it?

 

Changing the Definition of 'Hate'

 

When you've put the Klan out of business and won all your battles, but you're not ready to close your doors, you've got to find new enemies to fight.

 

One of those new enemies is former Vanderbilt history professor Dr. Carol Swain. Swain grew up in the old South and fought poverty and racism to become a university professor. She's an expert on white nationalism. But she has publicly attacked the SPLC, and Swain, a conservative Christian, found herself on the SPLC's hate list as a supposed "apologist for white supremacists."

 

Other SPLC targets have included Dr. Ben Carson – who was later removed from its hate list – female genital mutilation victim Hirsi Ali, and even small charities like the Ruth Institute, whose mission is to help families and children. The Ruth Institute said, "If this makes us a 'hate group,' so be it."

 

The SPLC: A 'Money-Making Machine'

 

Among the list of Christian groups on the SPLC's Hate Map are many local churches. It's usually because they oppose the gay agenda.

  

The list includes the Family Research Council. FRC Executive Vice President General Jerry Boykin doesn't pull any punches, telling CBN News, "First of all, the SPLC, you have to understand, is probably one of the most evil groups in America. They've become a money-making machine and they've become an absolute Marxist, anarchist organization."

 

Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal group, is also on the list. Kerri Kupec, ADF legal counsel and communications director said, the Southern Poverty Law Center once did good work, "but the SPLC lost its way a long time ago."

 

Nothing 'Poor' About the Southern Poverty Law Center

 

Kupec dismisses the SPLC as a "direct mail scam," but marvels at the SPLC's revenues, with assets listed at $315 million.

  

"I have never heard of a group with 'poverty' in its name that has so much money," Kupec said.

 

Apple, JP Morgan, and actor George Clooney are just a few who have given millions to the SPLC; there's so much money coming in that some of it is going into offshore investments, a red flag for some, but offshore investing among charities is not uncommon.

 

The Link to Violence

 

What is more disturbing is what the SPLC's opponents call a link to deadly violence against Christians and conservatives. 

 

On August 15, 2012, Floyd Lee Corkins stormed into the Family Research Council's Washington offices intending to kill. He wounded the building manager before he was stopped. A bullet hole still remains in a console in the lobby.

 

After his arrest, Corkins told the FBI where he heard about the Family Research Council's Washington offices. On FBI video of his interrogation, Corkins says, "Southern Poverty Law lists anti-gay groups. I found them online, did a little bit of research, went to the website, stuff like that."

 

Boykin adds, "Our people know coming here, based on reality and based on what happened here, they're taking a risk."

 

James T Hodgkinson, who shot House Majority Whip Steve Scalise and injured several others at a congressional softball practice this year, had "liked" the Southern Poverty Law Center's Facebook page.

 

The SPLC later admitted, "We're aware that the SPLC was among hundreds of groups that the man identified as the shooter 'liked' on Facebook. I want to be as clear as I can possibly be: The SPLC condemns all forms of violence."

 

Is the SPLC Spreading Hate?

 

But after these attacks, some are asking the obvious: Does the Southern Poverty Law Center spread hate?

  

The SPLC did not respond to our invitation to be a part of this story and refute the claims made against it, but publicly remains unapologetic. The SPLC has stated repeatedly that their listing of Christian groups who oppose the LGBT agenda "is completely unrelated to religion, Christianity or the Bible. These groups are listed because they repeatedly lie in an effort to defame LGBT people."

 

In 2007 former SPLC spokeman Mark Potok told a conference in Michigan, "I want to say plainly that our aim in life is to destroy these groups, to completely destroy them."

 

D. James Kennedy Ministries, also on the hate list, is suing the SPLC, and the charitable arm of Amazon, AmazonSmile, for dropping the ministry from their lists of eligible religious charities.

 

The news media has begun using the SPLC's hate map in stories about racism and bigotry, giving the map even more clout and credibility.

 

CNN published the list under the headline "Here Are All the Hate Groups Active in Your Areabefore taking it down.

 

Forty-seven conservative groups and Sen. James Lankford have written the media demanding that it stop using the SPLC hate map as a source.

 

Boykin said, "The SPLC has no authority, except the authority they've given themselves, to build a hate map or to list people or organizations as haters."

 

But there is no sign the Southern Poverty Law Center is changing course when the Left supports it so strongly, the news media relies it, and the donations keep rolling in.  

_______________

Left’s Free Speech War

Waged with Financial Institutions and Social Media

 

John R. Houk

© September 22, 2017

______________

Strategy To Survive The Silencing Storm

 

Copyright © 2017 CSPI Publishing, All rights reserved.


You are receiving this, as you are a member of the CSPI Community or a friend of Dr. Bill Warner, PhD. We ask that you share this with a friend or colleague. Please visit us at www.politicalislam.com.

Our mailing address is:

CSPI Publishing

PO Box 90806

Nashville, Tn 37209

______________

The Hate Machine: How the Southern Poverty Law Center Is Cashing in by Bashing Christians

 

© 2017 The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc., A nonprofit 501 (c)(3) Charitable Organization.

 

CBN News

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Politics Conspiracy Theory
write a comment
September 21 2017 5 21 /09 /September /2017 15:04

John R. Houk

© September 21, 2017

 

VIDEO: Trump on Kim Jong-un: "Rocket man is on a suicide mission for himself"

  

 

 

Posted by The Telegraph

Published on Sep 19, 2017

 

On Monday, President Donald Trump gave one of the best speeches at the United Nations I have ever heard from an American since President Reagan. President Trump verbally spanked North Korea, Iran, the UN over sovereignty issues and members paying their fair share, Radical Islamic terrorism, the Maduro Socialist dictatorship in Venezuela, spanked Cuba over its Marxist dictatorship, International Multi-national trade agreements that place an undue financial burden on American taxpayers and in relation to those Multi-national deals, the President spanked unaccountable globalist bureaucracies that impose rules/laws that sovereign nation legislatures have not agreed to.

 

I felt like I was watching football team score touchdown after touchdown. I cheered and shouted throughout the roughly 40-minute speech.

 

Unsurprisingly, the Leftist Mainstream Media (MSM) acted as the opposing football team going hysterical with each point scored by Trump. Especially the President’s classic branding acumen in giving Kim Jong-un a new nickname: ROCKET MAN. I know of the ballistic Leftist MSM reaction not by observation but thanks to Fox News exposing Leftist propaganda of their competitors. I saw a clip on Fox News of George Stephanopoulos berating UN Ambassador Nikki Haley over the Rocket Man branding. Here’s the quote I heard from Ambassador Haley defending the NoKo branding to Stephanopoulos that I found on Business Insider:

 

Nikki Haley responds to Stephanopoulos Rocket Man quip 9-20-17

 

"I was talking to a president of an African country, and he actually cited 'Rocket Man' back to me. So, I will tell you that look — this is a way of getting people to talk about him, but every other international community is referring to him as Rocket Man."

 

Here’s a little Rocket Man fun that the American Left and Kim Jong-un will not appreciate – eh, so what.

 

VIDEO: Kim Jong Un sings "Rocket Man" at North Korean Karaoke Bar

 

 

Posted by Kenneth Webster

Published on Sep 20, 2017

 

Below is the entire Trump/UN speech courtesy of Global News on Youtube and below that is President Trump’s speech transcript at Breaking Christian News (BCN) but borrowed from the Leftist Vox news.

 

JRH 9/21/17

****************

VIDEO: Donald Trump delivers first speech to U.N. General Assembly

 

 

Posted by Global News

Streamed live on Sep 19, 2017

 

Donald Trump delivers his first speech as president in front of the United Nations General Assembly in New York.

 

For more info, please go to http://www.globalnews.ca

 

Subscribe to Global News Channel HERE: http://bit.ly/20fcXDc

 

Like Global News on Facebook HERE: http://bit.ly/255GMJQ

 

Follow Global News on Twitter HERE: http://bit.ly/1Toz8mt

___________

PRESIDENT TRUMP'S HISTORIC FIRST SPEECH TO THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY (FULL TRANSCRIPT AND VIDEO)

 

Transcript of Donald J Trump

Sep 19, 2017

Transcript from Vox.com

Breaking Christian News

 

In remembering the great victory that led to this body's founding, we must never forget that those heroes who fought against evil, also fought for the nations that they love. Patriotism led the Poles to die to save Poland, the French to fight for a free France, and the Brits to stand strong for Britain. Today, if we do not invest ourselves, our hearts, our minds, and our nations, if we will not build strong families, safe communities, and healthy societies for ourselves, no one can do it for us.

 

This transcript is provided by Vox.com; you can also watch President Trump's speech via YouTube, here. (Screengrab: YouTube/via Global News)

 

Mr. Secretary General, Mr. President, world leaders, and distinguished delegates, welcome to New York. It is a profound honor to stand here in my home city as a representative of the American people to address the people of the world. As millions of our citizens continue to suffer the effects of the devastating hurricanes that have struck our country, I want to begin by expressing my appreciation to every leader in this room who has offered assistance and aid. The American people are strong and resilient, and they will emerge from these hardships more determined than ever before.

 

Fortunately, the United States has done very well since Election Day last November 8. The stock market is at an all-time high, a record. Unemployment is at its lowest level in 16 years, and because of our regulatory and other reforms, we have more people working in the United States today than ever before. Companies are moving back, creating job growth, the likes of which our country has not seen in a very long time, and it has just been announced that we will be spending almost $700 billion on our military and defense. Our military will soon be the strongest it has ever been. For more than 70 years, in times of war and peace, the leaders of nations, movements, and religions have stood before this assembly.

 

Like them, I intend to address some of the very serious threats before us today, but also the enormous potential waiting to be unleashed. We live in a time of extraordinary opportunity.

 
Breakthroughs in science, technology, and medicine are curing illnesses and solving problems that prior generations thought impossible to solve. But each day also brings news of growing dangers that threaten everything we cherish and value. Terrorists and extremists have gathered strength and spread to every region of the planet. Rogue regimes represented in this body not only support terror but threaten other nations and their own people with the most destructive weapons known to humanity.

 

Authority and authoritarian powers seek to collapse the values, the systems, and alliances, that prevented conflict and tilted the world toward freedom since World War II. International criminal networks traffic drugs, weapons, people, force dislocation and mass migration, threaten our borders and new forms of aggression exploit technology to menace our citizens. To put it simply, we meet at a time of both immense promise and great peril. It is entirely up to us whether we lift the world to new heights or let it fall into a valley of disrepair. We have it in our power, should we so choose, to lift millions from poverty, to help our citizens realize their dreams, and to ensure that new generations of children are raised free from violence, hatred, and fear.

 

This institution was founded in the aftermath of two world wars, to help shape this better future. It was based on the vision that diverse nations could cooperate to protect their sovereignty, preserve their security, and promote their prosperity. It was in the same period exactly 70 years ago that the United States developed the Marshall Plan to help restore Europe. Those beautiful pillars, they are pillars of peace, sovereignty, security, and prosperity. The Marshall Plan was built on the noble idea that the whole world is safer when nations are strong, independent, and free. As president, Truman said in his message to congress at that time, our support of European recovery is in full accord with our support of the United Nations.

 

The success of the United Nations depends upon the independent strength of its members. To overcome the perils of the present, and to achieve the promise of the future, we must begin with the wisdom of the past. Our success depends on a coalition of strong and independent nations that embrace their sovereignty, to promote security, prosperity, and peace, for themselves and for the world. We do not expect diverse countries to share the same cultures, traditions, or even systems of government, but we do expect all nations to uphold these two core sovereign duties, to respect the interests of their own people and the rights of every other sovereign nation.

 

This is the beautiful vision of this institution, and this is the foundation for cooperation and success. Strong sovereign nations let diverse countries with different values, different cultures, and different dreams not just coexist, but work side by side on the basis of mutual respect. Strong sovereign nations let their people take ownership of the future and control their own destiny. And strong sovereign nations allow individuals to flourish in the fullness of the life intended by God. In America, we do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to watch.

 

This week gives our country a special reason to take pride in that example. We are celebrating the 230th anniversary of our beloved Constitution, the oldest constitution still in use in the world today. This timeless document has been the foundation of peace, prosperity, and freedom for the Americans and for countless millions around the globe whose own countries have found inspiration in its respect for human nature, human dignity, and the rule of law. The greatest in the united States Constitution is its first three beautiful words. They are "We the people." Generations of Americans have sacrificed to maintain the promise of those words, the promise of our country and of our great history.

 

In America, the people govern, the people rule, and the people are sovereign. I was elected not to take power, but to give power to the American people where it belongs. In foreign affairs, we are renewing this founding principle of sovereignty. Our government's first duty is to its people, to our citizens, to serve their needs, to ensure their safety, to preserve their rights, and to defend their values. As president of the United States, I will always put America first. Just like you, as the leaders of your countries, will always and should always put your countries first.

 

All responsible leaders have an obligation to serve their own citizens, and the nation state remains the best vehicle for elevating the human condition. But making a better life for our people also requires us to work together in close harmony and unity, to create a more safe and peaceful future for all people.

 

The United States will forever be a great friend to the world and especially to its allies. But we can no longer be taken advantage of or enter into a one-sided deal where the United States gets nothing in return. As long as I hold this office, I will defend America's interests above all else, but in fulfilling our obligations to our nations, we also realize that it's in everyone's interests to seek the future where all nations can be sovereign, prosperous, and secure.

 

America does more than speak for the values expressed in the United Nations charter. Our citizens have paid the ultimate price to defend our freedom and the freedom of many nations represented in this great hall. America's devotion is measured on the battlefields where our young men and women have fought and sacrificed alongside of our allies. From the beaches of Europe to the deserts of the Middle East to the jungles of Asia, it is an eternal credit to the American character that even after we and our allies emerge victorious from the bloodiest war in history, we did not seek territorial expansion or attempt to oppose and impose our way of life on others. Instead, we helped build institutions such as this one to defend the sovereignty, security, and prosperity for all. For the diverse nations of the world, this is our hope.

 

We want harmony and friendship, not conflict and strife. We are guided by outcomes, not ideologies. We have a policy of principled realism, rooted in shared goals, interests, and values. That realism forces us to confront the question facing every leader and nation in this room, it is a question we cannot escape or avoid. We will slide down the path of complacency, numb to the challenges, threats, and even wars that we face, or do we have enough strength and pride to confront those dangers today so that our citizens can enjoy peace and prosperity tomorrow.

 

If we desire to lift up our citizens, if we aspire to the approval of history, then we must fulfill our sovereign duties to the people we faithfully represent. We must protect our nations, their interests and their futures. We must reject threats to sovereignty from the Ukraine to the South China Sea. We must uphold respect for law, respect for borders, and respect for culture, and the peaceful engagement these allow.

 

And just as the founders of this body intended, we must work together and confront together those who threaten us with chaos, turmoil, and terror. The scourge of our planet today are small regimes that violate every principle [on which] the United Nations is based. They respect neither their own citizens nor the sovereign rights of their countries. If the righteous many do not confront the wicked few, then evil will triumph. When decent people and nations become bystanders to history, the forces of destruction only gather power and strength.

 

No one has shown more contempt for other nations and for the well-being of their own people than the depraved regime in North Korea. It is responsible for the starvation deaths of millions of North Koreans. And for the imprisonment, torture, killing, and oppression of countless more. We were all witness to the regime's deadly abuse when an innocent American college student, Otto Warmbier, was returned to America, only to die a few days later.

 

We saw it in the assassination of the dictator's brother, using banned nerve agents in an international airport. We know it kidnapped a sweet 13-year-old Japanese girl from a beach in her own country, to enslave her as a language tutor for North Korea's spies. If this is not twisted enough, now North Korea's reckless pursuit of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles threatens the entire world with unthinkable loss of human life. It is an outrage that some nations would not only trade with such a regime, but would arm, supply, and financially support a country that imperils the world with nuclear conflict.

 

No nation on Earth has an interest in seeing this band of criminals arm itself with nuclear weapons and missiles. The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea. Rocket man is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime. The United States is ready, willing, and able, but hopefully this will not be necessary. That's what the United Nations is all about. That's what the United Nations is for. Let's see how they do.

 

It is time for North Korea to realize that the denuclearization is its only acceptable future. The United Nations Security Council recently held two unanimous 15-0 votes adopting hard-hitting resolutions against North Korea, and I want to thank China and Russia for joining the vote to impose sanctions, along with all of the other members of the Security Council. Thank you to all involved. But we must do much more.

 

It is time for all nations to work together to isolate the Kim regime until it ceases its hostile behavior. We face this decision not only in North Korea; it is far past time for the nations of the world to confront another reckless regime, one that speaks openly of mass murder, vowing death to America, destruction to Israel, and ruin for many leaders and nations in this room.

 

The Iranian government masks a corrupt dictatorship behind the false guise of a democracy. It has turned a wealthy country, with a rich history and culture, into an economically depleted rogue state whose chief exports are violence, bloodshed, and chaos. The longest-suffering victims of Iran's leaders are, in fact, its own people. Rather than use its resources to improve Iranian live, its oil profits go to fund Hezbollah and other terrorists that kill innocent Muslims and attack their peaceful Arab and Israeli neighbors.

 

This wealth, which rightly belongs to Iran's people, also goes to shore up Bashar al-Assad's dictatorship, fuel Yemen's civil war, and undermine peace throughout the entire Middle East. We cannot let a murderous regime continue these destabilizing activities while building dangerous missiles, and we cannot abide by an agreement if it provides cover for the eventual construction of a nuclear program. The Iran deal was one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into. Frankly, that deal is an embarrassment to the United States, and I don't think you've heard the last of it. Believe me.

 

It is time for the entire world to join us in demanding that Iran's government end its pursuit of death and destruction. It is time for the regime to free all Americans and citizens of other nations that they have unjustly detained. Above all, Iran's government must stop supporting terrorists, begin serving its own people, and respect the sovereign rights of its neighbors. The entire world understands that the good people of Iran want change, and, other than the vast military power of the United States, that Iran's people are what their leaders fear the most. This is what causes the regime to restrict internet access, tear down satellite dishes, shoot unarmed student protesters, and imprison political reformers.

 

Oppressive regimes cannot endure forever, and the day will come when the people will face a choice. Will they continue down the path of poverty, bloodshed, and terror, or will the Iranian people return to the nation's proud roots as a center of civilization, culture, and wealth, where their people can be happy and prosperous once again? The Iranian regime's support for terror is in stark contrast to the recent commitments of many of its neighbors to fight terrorism and halt its finance, and in Saudi Arabia early last year, I was greatly honored to address the leaders of more than 50 Arab and Muslim nations. We agreed that all responsible nations must work together to confront terrorists and the Islamic extremism that inspires them.

 

We will stop radical islamic terrorism because we cannot allow it to tear up our nation and, indeed, to tear up the entire world. We must deny the terrorists' safe haven, transit, funding, and any form of support for their vile and sinister ideology. We must drive them out of our nation. It is time to expose and hold responsible those countries ... who support and finance terror groups like al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, the Taliban, and others that slaughter innocent people.

 

The United States and our allies are working together throughout the Middle East to crush the loser terrorists and stop the reemergence of safe havens they use to launch attacks on all of our people. Last month I announced a new strategy for victory in the fight against this evil in Afghanistan. From now on, our security interests will dictate the length and scope of military operation, not arbitrary benchmarks and timetables set up by politicians. I have also totally changed the rules of engagement in our fight against the Taliban and other terrorist groups.

 

In Syria and Iraq, we have made big gains toward lasting defeat of ISIS. In fact, our country has achieved more against ISIS in the last eight months than it has in many, many years combined. We seek the deescalation of the Syrian conflict, and a political solution that honors the will of the Syrian people. The actions of the criminal regime of Bashar al-Assad, including the use of chemical weapons against his own citizens, even innocent children, shock the conscience of every decent person. No society could be safe if banned chemical weapons are allowed to spread. That is why the United States carried out a missile strike on the airbase that launched the attack.

 

We appreciate the efforts of the United Nations' agencies that are providing vital humanitarian assistance in areas liberated from ISIS, and we especially thank Jordan, Turkey, and Lebanon for their role in hosting refugees from the Syrian conflict. The United States is a compassionate nation and has spent billions and billions of dollars in helping to support this effort. We seek an approach to refugee resettlement that is designed to help these horribly treated people and which enables their eventual return to their home countries to be part of the rebuilding process. For the cost of resettling one refugee in the United States, we can assist more than 10 in their home region.


Out of the goodness of our hearts, we offer financial assistance to hosting countries in the region and we support recent agreements of the G20 nations that will seek to host refugees as close to their home countries as possible. This is the safe, responsible, and humanitarian approach. For decades the United States has dealt with migration challenges here in the Western Hemisphere.

 

We have learned that over the long term, uncontrolled migration is deeply unfair to both the sending and the receiving countries. For the sending countries, it reduces domestic pressure to pursue needed political and economic reform and drains them of the human capital necessary to motivate and implement those reforms. For the receiving countries, the substantial costs of uncontrolled migration are born overwhelmingly by low-income citizens whose concerns are often ignored by both media and government.

 

I want to salute the work of the United Nations in seeking to address the problems that cause people to flee from their home. The United Nations and African Union led peacekeeping missions to have invaluable contributions in stabilizing conflict in Africa. The United States continues to lead the world in humanitarian assistance, including famine prevention and relief, in South Sudan, Somalia, and northern Nigeria and Yemen.

 

We have invested in better health and opportunity all over the world through programs like PEPFAR, which funds AIDS relief, the President's Malaria Initiative, the Global Health Security Agenda, the Global Fund to End Modern Slavery, and the Women Entrepreneur's Finance Initiative, part of our commitment to empowering women all across the globe.

 

We also thank—we also thank the secretary general for recognizing that the United Nations must reform if it is to be an effective partner in confronting threats to sovereignty, security, and prosperity. Too often the focus of this organization has not been on results, but on bureaucracy and process. In some cases, states that seek to subvert this institution's noble end have hijacked the very systems that are supposed to advance them. For example, it is a massive source of embarrassment to the United Nations that some governments with egregious human rights records sit on the UN Human Rights Council.

 

The United States is one out of 193 countries in the United Nations, and yet we pay 22 percent of the entire budget and more. In fact, we pay far more than anybody realizes. The United States bears an unfair cost burden, but to be fair, if it could actually accomplish all of its stated goals, especially the goal of peace, this investment would easily be well worth it. Major portions of the world are in conflict, and some, in fact, are going to Hell, but the powerful people in this room, under the guidance and auspices of the United Nations, can solve many of these vicious and complex problems. The American people hope that one day soon the United Nations can be a much more accountable and effective advocate for human dignity and freedom around the world.

 

In the meantime, we believe that no nation should have to bear a disproportionate share of the burden, militarily or financially. Nations of the world must take a greater role in promoting secure and prosperous societies in their own region. That is why in the Western Hemisphere the United States has stood against the corrupt, destabilizing regime in Cuba and embraced the enduring dream of the Cuban people to live in freedom. (Screengrab: YouTube/via Global News)

 

My administration recently announced that we will not lift sanctions on the Cuban government until it makes fundamental reforms. We have also imposed tough calibrated sanctions on the socialist Maduro regime in Venezuela, which has brought a once thriving nation to the brink of total collapse. The socialist dictatorship of Nicolás Maduro has inflicted terrible pain and suffering on the good people of that country.

 

This corrupt regime destroyed a prosperous nation—prosperous nation, by imposing a failed ideology that has produced poverty and misery everywhere it has been tried. To make matters worse, Maduro has defied his own people, stealing power from their elected representatives, to preserve his disastrous rule. The Venezuelan people are starving, and their country is collapsing. Their democratic institutions are being destroyed. The situation is completely unacceptable, and we cannot stand by and watch.

 

As a responsible neighbor and friend, we and all others have a goal—that goal is to help them regain their freedom, recover their country, and restore their democracy. I would like to thank leaders in this room for condemning the regime and providing vital support to the Venezuelan people. The United States has taken important steps to hold the regime accountable. We are prepared to take further action if the government of Venezuela persists on its path to impose authoritarian rule on the Venezuelan people.

 

We are fortunate to have incredibly strong and healthy trade relationships with many of the Latin American countries gathered here today. Our economic bond forms a critical foundation for advancing peace and prosperity for all of our people and all of our neighbors. I ask every country represented here today to be prepared to do more to address this very real crisis. We call for the full restoration of democracy and political freedoms in Venezuela. The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented, but that socialism has been faithfully implemented.

 

From the Soviet Union to Cuba to Venezuela, wherever true socialism or communism has been adopted, it has delivered anguish and devastation and failure. Those who preach the tenets of these discredited ideologies only contribute to the continued suffering of the people who live under these cruel systems. America stands with every person living under a brutal regime. Our respect for sovereignty is also a call for action. All people deserve a government that cares for their safety, their interests, and their well-being, including their prosperity. In America, we seek stronger ties of business and trade with all nations of goodwill, but this trade must be fair and it must be reciprocal.

 

For too long the American people were told that mammoth, multinational trade deals, unaccountable international tribunals, and powerful global bureaucracies were the best way to promote their success. But as those promises flowed, millions of jobs vanished and thousands of factories disappeared. Others gamed the system and broke the rules, and our great middle class, once the bedrock of American prosperity, was forgotten and left behind, but they are forgotten no more and they will never be forgotten again.

 

While America will pursue cooperation and commerce with other nations, we are renewing our commitment to the first duty of every government, the duty of our citizens. This bond is the source of America's strength and that of every responsible nation represented here today. If this organization is to have any hope of successfully confronting the challenges before us, it will depend, as President Truman said some 70 years ago, on the independent strength of its members. If we are to embrace the opportunities of the future and overcome the present dangers together, there can be no substantive for strong, sovereign, and independent nations, nations that are rooted in the histories and invested in their destiny, nations that seek allies to befriend, not enemies to conquer, and most important of all, nations that are home to men and women who are willing to sacrifice for their countries, their fellow citizens, and for all that is best in the human spirit.

 

In remembering the great victory that led to this body's founding, we must never forget that those heroes who fought against evil, also fought for the nations that they love. Patriotism led the Poles to die to save Poland, the French to fight for a free France, and the Brits to stand strong for Britain. Today, if we do not invest ourselves, our hearts, our minds, and our nations, if we will not build strong families, safe communities, and healthy societies for ourselves, no one can do it for us.

 

This is the ancient wish of every people and the deepest yearning that lives inside every sacred soul. So let this be our mission, and let this be our message to the world. We will fight together, sacrifice together, and stand together for peace, for freedom, for justice, for family, for humanity, and for the almighty God who made us all. Thank you, God bless you, God bless the nations of the world, and God bless the United States of America. Thank you very much.

______________

Rocket Man Verbally Spanked at UN

John R. Houk

© September 21, 2017

_____________

PRESIDENT TRUMP'S HISTORIC FIRST SPEECH TO THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY (FULL TRANSCRIPT AND VIDEO)

 

All articles on this site and emails from BCN are copyrighted property of Breaking Christian News. Permission is given to link to, or share a BCN story if proper attribution is given to both the original writer and summarizer of the story. Breaking Christian News 2005-2012. All Rights Reserved.

 

Disclaimer: Articles and links, as well as the source articles linked to; do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Breaking Christian News.

541-924-3906

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Politics
write a comment
September 20 2017 4 20 /09 /September /2017 17:10

The Republican Establishment is actually attacking Alabama Senate Candidate Judge Roy Moore for using a Christian analogy of the old Christian children’s song that uses the lines “Red, Yellow, Black and White; they are precious in His sight” in a Moore speech about divisiveness in America today. The Establishment twist Moore’s words to call him a racist.

 

JRH 9/20/17 (Hat Tip: Jim McCormack – Yahoo Group Conservative Christian Counselors [Restricted Group])

*****************

 

Establishment Attacks Roy Moore for Condemning Racial Strife Among ‘Black, White, Red, and Yellow,’ As Media Lose Minds

 

By IAN MASON

September 19, 2017

Breitbart Big Government

 

After a recording emerged Monday from a Judge Roy Moore campaign rally at which the Senate candidate called for racial reconciliation amid strife nationwide, the mainstream media and leftist and establishment activists dug into Moore for his choice of language.

 

In an extended discussion of the dangers of sectional, partisan, and racial divisions within America and the terrible bloodshed of the time our country allowed these divisions to boil over, the Civil War, Moore told rally-goers:

 

Now we have blacks and whites fighting, reds and yellows fighting, Democrats and Republicans fighting, men and women fighting. What’s going to unite us? What’s going to bring us back together? A president? A Congress? No. It’s going to be God.

 

Moore is locked in a tight GOP primary run-off for U.S. Senate with establishment-backed ex-lobbyist candidate Luther Strange. A “Republican monitoring the race” sent video of the event to The Hillwhich in turn began the media pile-on over what it said was Moore’s “racially insensitive terms to describe Native Americans and Asians.”

 

In response, the Moore campaign simply pointed out that his comments match a still-ubiquitous Sunday school rhyme. “Red, yellow, black and white they are precious in His sight. Jesus loves the little children of the worldThis is the gospel. If we take it seriously, America can once again be united as one nation under God,” the Moore campaign wrote in a Facebook statement.

 

It appears as though the “Republican monitoring the race” between Moore and Strange is from the GOP establishment, and attempted yet again to frame Moore’s comments here as some kind of mistake–similar to recent stories about 9/11 comments and shootings comments that Moore has made, referencing the lack of God in American society.

 

Within minutes of The Hill‘s story going live, Senate Leadership Fund (SLF) Communications Director Chris Pack tweeted the story and five others from mostly liberal journalists taking Moore to task for saying “red” and “yellow” people.

 

 

 

The SLF itself also quickly made hay with the video on their own website. The SLF, a political action committee connected to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), has already spent millions supporting Luther Strange in this race to the chagrin of Moore and Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL), the third-place finisher in the primary’s first round. Last week, Moore attacked a debate co-sponsor for failing to disclose his own ties to the SLF.

 

Slate’s Ben Mathis-Lilley, in one of the outrage-pushing articles Pack retweeted, mockingly calls for Moore to receive divine punishment for his word-choice:

 

Ironically, one way God could improve white Americans’ relationships with Native Americans and Americans of Asian ancestry is by coming down hard on people like Roy Moore who still refer to Native Americans and Americans of Asian ancestry by using racial terms that were already considered insulting and antiquated 50 years ago.

 

Please smite Roy Moore, God! Do it!

 

In another piece Pack cited, NBC News’ Alex Sietz-Wald dismisses Roy Moore’s reference to “Jesus Loves the Little Children” because it was “written in the 1800s.”

 

Mashable’s Gianluca Mezzofiore goes further than his colleagues, turning to former President Bill Clinton’s and failed 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton’s daughter Chelsea Clinton as arbiter of racial semantics. Referring to Moore’s words as “racial slurs,” Mezzofiore appears to believe the younger Ms. Clinton put the former Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court in his place, claiming: “Clinton used just one perfect tweet to shut him down.”

 

This is the tweet in question:

 

 

 

Interestingly, not one of the journalists quoted above made any objection to the use of “black” or “white” in the same Moore quotation.

________________

Copyright © 2017 Breitbart

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Politics Christianity
write a comment
September 19 2017 3 19 /09 /September /2017 11:32

John R. Houk

© September 19, 2017

 

Asia Bibi is a Pakistani Christian that has been languishing in a Pakistani jail for a better of a decade wondering if the Pakistan government will ever proceed on the death sentence passed against her for breaking the anti-religious freedom Blasphemy Law.

 

Asia has been nominated for a prestigious award from the EU that I pray places more pressure on the Pakistan government to release her with the ability of Asia Bibi and family to receive political asylum in a more civilized nation. The award is called the Sakharov Prize.

 

About the Sakharov Prize:

 

The European Parliament also supports human rights through the annual Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, established in 1988.  The prize is awarded to individuals who have made an exceptional contribution to the fight for human rights across the globe, drawing attention to human rights violations as well as supporting the laureates and their cause. (The European Parliament supports human rights; European Parliament)

 

The nominees were announced on September 14, 2017. Here is the nominee list which Asia Bibi is listed first:

 

The nominees for this year's Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought are: 

Asia Bibi (Aasiya Noreen), a Pakistani Christian woman sentenced to death in 2010 under the country´s blasphemy law. Bibi is on a death row for almost seven years and her appeal to the supreme court has been postponed to an undetermined date. She was nominated by ECR.

Aura Lolita Chavez Ixcaquic, a human rights defender from Guatemala. She is a member from the Council of Ki’che’ Peoples (CPK), an organisation that fights to protect natural resources and human rights from the expansion of mining, logging, hydroelectric and agro-industry sectors in the territory and has been subject to threats. She was nominated by Greens/EFA.

Selahattin Demirtas and Figen Yuksekdag, co-chairs of the pro-kurdish People's Democratic Party (HDP) in Turkey arrested in November 2016 on terrorism charges after their parliamentary immunity was lifted. They were nominated by GUE/NGL.

Democratic Opposition in Venezuela: National Assembly (Julio Borges) and all political prisoners as listed by Foro Penal Venezolano represented by Leopoldo López, Antonio Ledezma, Daniel Ceballos, Yon Goicoechea, Lorent Saleh, Alfredo Ramos and Andrea González. The situation in Venezuela has been seriously deteriorating as regards democracy, human rights and socio-economy, in a climate of growing political and social instability. Nominated by EPP and ALDE. Political prisoners in Venezuela as well as the democratic opposition in Venezuela were also shortlisted for the Sakharov Prize in 2015.

Dawit Isaak, a Swedish-Eritrean playwright, journalist and writer, who was arrested in 2001 by the Eritrean authorities during a political crackdown. He has been imprisoned without a trial since and was last seen in 2005. Isaak was Sakharov finalist in 2009. He was nominated by S&D as well as by Wikström and 46 other MEPs.

Pierre Claver Mbonimpa, a Burundian human rights activist and founder of the Association for the Protection of Human Rights and Detained Persons (APRODH). He was detained in 2014, escaped an assassination attempt in 2015 and is now living in Belgium. He was nominated by EFDD. (Sakharov Prize 2017: discover the nominees; EU affairs; 9/14/17 18:05)

 

 

In case you have been out of the loop or have forgotten the idiotic reason for Asia’s death sentence, here is an excerpt from a past post which was dated 7/25/15:

 

The women said in their charge that Bibi asked "My Christ died for me, what did Muhammad do for you?" — a statement considered blasphemous in the South Asian country. (Bold Text Mine Christian Post)

 

 

Asia life behind bars has not been a bowl of strawberries and cream. Check out this excerpt from a New York Post article in 2013 that encouraged people to buy Asia’s memoir to help her now persecuted family and to pay Pakistan lawyers to working legal issues for an appeal:

 

To her neighbors, Aasiya Noreen “Asia” Bibi, a poor mother of five in the tiny village of Ittan Wali in central Pakistan, was guilty — guilty of being Christian in a nation that is 97% Muslim. For four years she has languished in a prison cell for this, facing death by hanging. 

 

Her new memoir, “Blasphemy,” was dictated to her husband from jail, who relayed it to French journalist Anne-Isabelle Tollet. Fifty percent of the proceeds the book will go to support Bibi and her family. Tollet says the situation is dire.  

 

 Embarrassed by Bibi’s case but still refusing to release her because of angry protests by extremists, the Pakistan government has transferred her to a more remote prison, hoping the 42-year-old dies quietly behind bars, perhaps poisoned by another inmate. Already two government officials who have spoken out on her behalf have been murdered, including Minister for Minorities Shahbaz Bhatti, who was killed by the Taliban. In this excerpt, Bibi explains the simple “transgression” that led to her plight.

 

 

 I want the whole world to know that I’m going to be hanged for helping my neighbor. I’m guilty of having shown someone sympathy. What did I do wrong? I drank water from a well belonging to Muslim women, using “their” cup, in the burning heat of the midday sun.

 

 I, Asia Bibi, have been sentenced to death because I was thirsty. I’m a prisoner because I used the same cup as those Muslim women, because water served by a Christian woman was regarded as unclean by my stupid fellow fruit-pickers. 

 

 That day, June 14, 2009, is imprinted on my memory. I can still see every detail.

 

 That morning I got up earlier than usual, to take part in the big falsa-berry harvest. I’d been told about it by Farah, our lovely local shopkeeper. “Why don’t you go falsa picking tomorrow in that field just outside the village? You know the one; it belongs to the Nadeems, the rich family who live in Lahore. The pay is 250 rupees.” 

 

 

When I got to the field, around 15 women were already at work, picking away, their backs hidden by the tall bushes. It was going to be a physically exhausting day in such heat, but I needed those 250 rupees. 

 

 

A hard-faced woman dressed in clothes that had been mended many times came over to me with an old yellow bowl.

 

 “If you fill the bowl you get 250 rupees,” she said without really looking at me.

 

 I looked at the huge bowl and thought I would never finish before sunset. Looking at the other women’s bowls, I also realized mine was much bigger. They were reminding me that I’m a Christian. 

 

 The sun was beating down, and by midday it was like working in an oven.  

 

 But since the river was nowhere near, I freed myself from my bushes and walked over to the nearby well. Already I could sense the coolness rising up from the depths. 

 

 I pull up a bucketful of water and dip in the old metal cup resting on the side of the well. The cool water is all I can think of. I gulp it down and I feel better; I pull myself together. 

 

 Then I start to hear muttering. I pay no attention and fill the cup again, this time holding it out to a woman next to me who looks like she’s in pain. She smiles and reaches out . . . At exactly the moment Musarat pokes her ferrety nose out from the bush, her eyes full of hate: 

 

 “Don’t drink that water, it’s haram!” 

 

 Musarat addresses all the pickers, who have suddenly stopped work at the sound of the word “haram,” the Islamic term for anything forbidden by God. 

 

 “Listen, all of you, this Christian has dirtied the water in the well by drinking from our cup and dipping it back several times. Now the water is unclean and we can’t drink it! Because of her!”

 

 It’s so unfair that for once I decide to defend myself and stand up to the old witch. 

 

“I think Jesus would see if differently from Mohammed.”

 

 Musarat is furious. “How dare you think for the Prophet, you filthy animal!” 

 

(NY Post - 8/25/13 4:00am)

 

(Asia Bibi Gets Execution Stay - Now Push for Political Asylum; By John R. Houk; SlantRight 2.0; 7/25/15)

 

It’s been over two years since I posted the original excerpt above. As far as I know, NOTHING HAS CHANGED! Asia Bibi (or her less well-known name - Aasiya Noreen) is still languishing in jail.

 

The closest update I have found is from an online French Catholic publication called Aleteia which also publishes in English:

 

Condemned to death in 2009 for insulting Islam, the Pakistani Catholic is still awaiting her final verdict.

 

On June 14, 2009, Asia Bibi was thrown into jail. A year later she was sentenced to death for blasphemy, and since 2013, after two transfers, she has been languishing in one of the three windowless cells on death row in the southern province of Multan in the Punjab Penitentiary. A year after the Supreme Court of Pakistan postponed her appeal amid death threats by 150 muftis (Muslim legal experts) against anyone who would assist “blasphemers,” the case has not progressed by one iota. On August 30, Asia Bibi had spent 3,000 days in prison.

 

Her family lives underground. The only thing we know comes from her lawyer, the Muslim Saif ul Malook, who has visited her in recent months. He says she is doing well and is still hoping for her release. On the other hand, the Supreme Court seems to have forgotten the case, and has still not decided whether to confirm her death sentence or to release her.

 

During those 3,000 days Asia Bibi has never stopped praying and asking for prayers. As a tribute to this Christian who has become an icon for all those who struggle in Pakistan and the world against all violence in the name of religion, this is the prayer she composed last year on the occasion of the Easter celebrations, and which accompanies her in her detention:

 

Resurrected Lord, allow your daughter Asia to rise again with you. Break my chains, make my heart free and go beyond these bars, and accompany my soul so that it is close to those who are dear to me, and that it remains always near you. Do not abandon me in the day of trouble, do not deprive me of your presence. You who have suffered torture and the cross, alleviate my suffering. Hold me near you, Lord Jesus. On the day of your resurrection, Jesus, I want to pray for my enemies, for those who hurt me. I pray for them and I beg you to forgive them for the harm they have done me. I ask you, Lord, to remove all obstacles so that I may obtain the blessing of freedom. I ask you to protect me and protect my family.

 

After eight years of suffering, anguish and disappointed hopes, let us keep up our prayers and our actions of support for her, because through her we support all the persecuted Christians in their sacrifices. (Asia Bibi has spent more than 3,000 days in prison for blasphemy; By Isabelle Cousturie; Aleteia; 9/18/17)

 

The organization Prisoner Profile has a post tracking Asia Bibi’s Pakistan legal system difficulties/persecution with the dates 6/2009 through 5/2017.

 

Dan Wooding the Chief Editor of Assist News Service (ANS) sent the email alert notifying me of Asia Bibi’s Sakharov Prize nomination. Below is my cross post of that ANS article.

 

JRH 9/19/17

*****************

ASIA BIBI NOMINATED FOR EU’S PRESTIGIOUS SAKHAROV PRIZE

 

By Dan Wooding - Founder of ASSIST News Service 

September 17, 2017 23:58

Assist News Service

 

Free Persecuted Asia Bibi

 

Free Asia Bibi campaign

www.voiceofthepersecuted.org

 

PAKISTAN (ANS – September 17, 2017) -- Pakistan’s most famous Christian prisoner, Asia Bibi, has been nominated for the European Union’s high-status award, the Sakharov Prize.

 

Ms. Bibi, a mother-of-five, who is currently behind the bars waiting for a hearing of her appeal against capital punishment, was nominated by a group of European legislators.

 

According to Madeeha Bakhsh, writing for Christians in Pakistan (https://www.christiansinpakistan.com/), “Asia has been nominated for ‘Freedom of Thought’ by the legislators who form an influential group European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR). This European Conservatives and Reformists Group is the third largest group in the European Parliament,” she wrote. “The European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR), nominated Asia Bibi late on Wednesday, September 13.”

 

Sakharov on Time Mag Cover

 

Peter van Dalen, a Dutch European parliamentarian and member of ECR’s faction, ChristenUnion-SGP, said: “Her case is a symbol for others hurt in their freedom of expression and especially freedom of religion. It is good that my colleagues in the ECR and I continue to defend the rights of [Asia] Bibi and many others.”

 

Members of the entire European Parliament will soon be casting their votes in favor of their favorite candidate.

 

“If a majority casts [their] votes in favor of Asia Bibi; she could win the 50,000 ($59,670 USD) award for the Sakharov Prize, which is considered Europe’s most prestigious human rights award,” said Madeeha Bakhsh. “This award is named after Andrei Sakharov, a scientist and dissident hailing from the Soviet era.”

 

Sakharov died on December 14, 1989, and the award ceremony will be held in Strasbourg, France, on December 10.

 

Asia Bibi, a berry picker, was accused of committing blasphemy by her co-workers back in 2009. Later on, in 2010, a court in the Punjab district of Nankana found her guilty and she was sentenced to death by hanging, a verdict later challenged and upheld by a two-member bench of Lahore High Court in 2014.

 

Her appeal case is currently pending with the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

 

“Supposedly her final appeal hearing on October 13, 2016, was meant to wind up the most high profile case of the country, however, it was delayed as one of the judges refused to be a part of the three member bench that was to hear the case,” added Bakhsh.

 

Salman Taseer meeting with Asia Bibi

 

She said that on the date of the hearing, Justice Iqbal Hameed ur Rehman, one of the three judges due to hear Asia Bibi’s appeal case, suddenly withdrew saying, “I was a part of the bench that was hearing the case of Salmaan Taseer, and this case is related to that.”

 

Asia Bibi’s husband (Ashiq Masih) and family

 

The judge was referring to the case of the then governor of Punjab, who was assassinated on January 4, 2011, at the Kohsar Market in Islamabad by his bodyguard, Mumtaz Qadri, who disagreed with Taseer’s opposition to Pakistan's blasphemy law and his support for Asia Bibi. Qadri was later sentenced to death by a Pakistani Anti-Terrorist court at Islamabad for murdering Taseer, and was executed on February 29, 2016.

 

Consequently, the hearing was adjourned and Ms. Bibi is still on death row in her lonely prison cell.

 

Note: Christians in Pakistan is a non-profit organization and a leading source of news related to Pakistani Christians. They can be contacted by e-mail at: ChristiansinPak@gmail.com.

 

Photo captions: 1) Asia Bibi. 2) Andrei Sakharov on the cover of Time magazine. 3) Salmaan Taseer meeting with Asia Bibi after her arrest. Many believe that this meeting cost him his life. 4) Ashiq Masih, the husband of Asia Bibi with some of the children. 5) Dan Wooding

 

About the writer: Dan Wooding, 75, is an award-winning author, broadcaster and

journalist, who was born in Nigeria, West Africa, of British missionary parents, Alfred and Anne Wooding, who then worked with the Sudan Interior Mission, now known as SIM. Dan now lives in Southern California with his wife Norma, to whom he has been married for some 54 years. They have two sons, Andrew and Peter, and six grandchildren who all live in the UK. Dan is the founder/president of the ASSIST News Service (ANS), and is also the author of numerous books. He has a radio show and two television programs, all based in Southern California.

______________

Persecuted Pakistan Christian Sakharov Prize Nominee

John R. Houk

© September 19, 2017

_______________

ASIA BIBI NOMINATED FOR EU’S PRESTIGIOUS SAKHAROV PRIZE

 

** You may republish this or any of our ANS stories with attribution to the ASSIST News Service (www.assistnews.net). Please tell your friends and colleagues that they can receive a complimentary subscription to ANS by going to the above website and signing up there.

 

PO Box 609, Lake Forest, CA 92609

 

About ANS, excerpted from a Hub Pages post linked from ANS:

 

The ASSIST news site gives you access to stories that are of interest to Christians worldwide, some of them would never be told without Dan Wooding's help.  

 

Dan interviews people whether famous or intriguing every day.  He writes their stories, shares them on international radio shows, and videos as well.

 

If you have a heart for missions and helping Christians around the world, get to know Dan Wooding and his work at ASSIST Ministries today.

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Christianity Counterjihad Politics
write a comment
September 18 2017 2 18 /09 /September /2017 13:19

 

Either Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is working against the Trump agenda or he is not competent enough to drain the State Department Obama hold-over swamp. I believe it is the former more than the latter. Either way, President Trump needs to fire Tillerson and get a Secretary of State that can competently execute the Trump agenda in foreign policy. ESPECIALLY as pertaining to Israel!

 

JRH 9/18/17

****************

State Department Waging "Open War" on White House

 

By Soeren Kern

September 17, 2017 at 5:00 am

Gatestone Institute

 

  • "It's not clear to me why the Secretary of State wishes to at once usurp the powers of the Congress and then to derail his boss's rapprochement with the Israeli government." — Foreign policy operative, quoted in the Washington Free Beacon.

 

  • Since he was sworn in as Secretary of State on February 1, Rex Tillerson and his advisors at the State Department have made a number of statements and policy decisions that contradict President Trump's key campaign promises on foreign policy, especially regarding Israel and Iran.

 

  • "Tillerson was supposed to clean house, but he left half of them in place and he hid the other half in powerful positions all over the building. These are career staffers committed to preventing Trump from reversing what they created." — Veteran foreign policy analyst, quoted in the Free Beacon.

 

The U.S. State Department has backed away from a demand that Israel return $75 million in military aid which was allocated to it by the U.S. Congress.

 

The repayment demand, championed by U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, was described as an underhanded attempt by the State Department to derail a campaign pledge by U.S. President Donald J. Trump to improve relations with the Jewish state.

 

The dispute is the just the latest example of what appears to be a growing power struggle between the State Department and the White House over the future direction of American foreign policy.

 

The controversy goes back to the Obama administration's September 2016 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Israel, which pledged $38 billion in military assistance to Jerusalem over the next decade. The MOU expressly prohibits Israel from requesting additional financial aid from Congress.

 

Congressional leaders, who said the MOU violates the constitutional right of lawmakers to allocate U.S. aid, awarded Israel an additional $75 million in assistance in the final appropriations bill for fiscal year 2017.

 

Tillerson had argued that Israel should return the $75 million in order to stay within the limits established by the Obama administration. The effort provoked a strong reaction from Congress, which apparently prompted Tillerson to back down.

 

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) "strongly warned the State Department that such action would be unwise and invite unwanted conflict with Israel," according to the Washington Free Beacon.

 

Speaking to the Washington Examiner, Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) added:

 

"As Iran works to surround Israel on every border, and Hezbollah and Hamas rearm, we must work to strengthen our alliance with Israel, not strain it. Congress has the right to allocate money as it deems necessary, and security assistance to Israel is a top priority. Congress is ready to ensure Israel receives the assistance it needs to defend its citizens."

 

A veteran congressional advisor told the Free Beacon:

 

"This is a transparent attempt by career staffers in the State Department to f*ck with the Israelis and derail the efforts of Congressional Republicans and President Trump to rebuild the US-Israel relationship. There's no reason to push for the Israelis to return the money, unless you're trying to drive a wedge between Israel and Congress, which is exactly what this is. It won't work."

 

Another foreign policy operative said: "It's not clear to me why the Secretary of State wishes to at once usurp the powers of the Congress and then to derail his boss's rapprochement with the Israeli government."

 

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson (left) and President Donald J. Trump (right) on February 1, 2017. (Image source: Michael Reynolds-Pool/Getty Images)

 

Since he was sworn in as Secretary of State on February 1, Tillerson and his advisors at the State Department have made a number of statements and policy decisions that contradict Trump's key campaign promises on foreign policy, especially regarding Israel and Iran.

 

August 10. The State Department hosted representatives of the U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO), an umbrella group established by the Muslim Brotherhood with the aim of mainstreaming political Islam in the United States. Behind closed doors, they reportedly discussed what they said was Israel's illegal occupation of Palestine and the removal of all Israeli control of the Temple Mount and holy areas of Jerusalem. Observers said the meeting was part of larger effort by anti-Israel organizations to drive a wedge between the Trump administration and Israel. The USCMO includes a number of organizations, including American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), which promote "extreme anti-Israel views" and "anti-Zionist" propaganda, and which support boycotts of the Jewish state.

 

July 19. The State Department's new "Country Reports on Terrorism 2016" blamed Israel for Palestinian Arab terrorism against Jews. It attributed Palestinian violence to: "lack of hope in achieving statehood;" "Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank;" "settler violence;" and "the perception that the Israeli government was changing the status quo on the Haram Al Sharif/Temple Mount." The report also characterized Palestinian Authority payments to the families of so-called martyrs as "financial packages to Palestinian security prisoners...to reintegrate them into society."

 

Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) called on the State Department to hold the PA accountable in State Department Country reports: "The State Department report includes multiple findings that are both inaccurate and harmful to combating Palestinian terrorism.... At the highest level, the Palestinian Authority (PA) leadership incites, rewards, and, in some cases, carries out terrorist attacks against innocent Israelis. In order to effectively combat terrorism, it is imperative that the United States accurately characterize its root cause — PA leadership."

 

June 14. Tillerson voiced opposition to designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, saying that such a classification would complicate Washington's relations in the Middle East. During his confirmation hearings on January 11, by contrast, Tillerson lumped the Brotherhood with al-Qaeda when talking about militant threats in the region. He said:

 

"Eliminating ISIS would be the first step in disrupting the capabilities of other groups and individuals committed to striking our homeland and our allies. The demise of ISIS would also allow us to increase our attention on other agents of radical Islam like al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and certain elements within Iran."

 

June 13. During testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Tillerson said he had received reassurances from President Mahmoud Abbas that the Palestinian Authority would end the practice of paying a monthly stipend to the families of suicide bombers and other attackers, commonly referred to by Palestinians as martyrs. One day later, Palestinian officials contradicted Tillerson, saying that there are no plans to stop payments to families of Palestinians killed or wounded carrying out attacks against Israelis.

 

May 22. Tillerson sidestepped questions on whether the Western Wall is part of Israel, while telling reporters aboard Air Force One they were heading to "Tel Aviv, home of Judaism." Asked directly whether he considers the Western Wall under Israeli sovereignty, Tillerson replied: "The wall is part of Jerusalem."

 

May 15. In an interview with Meet the Press, Tillerson appeared publicly to renege on Trump's campaign promise to move the American embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem:

 

"The president, I think rightly, has taken a very deliberative approach to understanding the issue itself, listening to input from all interested parties in the region, and understanding what such a move, in the context of a peace initiative, what impact would such a move have."

 

Tillerson also appeared to equate the State of Israel and the Palestinians:

 

"As you know, the president has recently expressed his view that he wants to put a lot of effort into seeing if we cannot advance a peace initiative between Israel and Palestine. And so I think in large measure the president is being very careful to understand how such a decision would impact a peace process."

 

Critics of this stance have argued that moving the embassy to Jerusalem would, instead, advance the peace process by "shattering the Palestinian fantasy that Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel."

 

March 8. The State Department confirmed that the Obama administration's $221 million payment to the Palestinian Authority, approved just hours before Trump's inauguration, had reached its destination. The Trump administration initially had vowed to freeze the payment.

 

In July 2017, the Free Beacon reported that Tillerson's State Department was waging an "open political war" with the White House on a range of key issues, including the U.S.-Israel relationship, the Iran portfolio, and other matters:

 

"The tensions have fueled an outstanding power battle between the West Wing and State Department that has handicapped the administration and resulted in scores of open positions failing to be filled with Trump confidantes. This has allowed former Obama administration appointees still at the State Department to continue running the show and formulating policy, where they have increasingly clashed with the White House's own agenda."

 

A veteran foreign policy analyst interviewed by the Free Beacon laid the blame squarely on Tillerson:

 

"Foggy Bottom [a metonym for the State Department] is still run by the same people who designed and implemented Obama's Middle East agenda. Tillerson was supposed to clean house, but he left half of them in place and he hid the other half in powerful positions all over the building. These are career staffers committed to preventing Trump from reversing what they created."

 

Notable holdovers from the Obama administration are now driving the State Department's Iran policy:

 

Michael Ratney, a top advisor to former Secretary of State John Kerry on Syria policy. Under the Trump administration, Ratney's role at the State Department has been expanded to include Israel and Palestine issues. Ratney, who was the U.S. Consul in Jerusalem between 2012 and 2015, oversaw $465,000 in U.S. grants to wage a smear to oust Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from office in 2015 parliamentary elections, according to the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Ratney admitted to Senate investigators that he deleted emails containing information about the Obama administration's relationship with the group.

 

Thomas A. Shannon, Jr., a career foreign service officer who serves as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. Shannon, the State Department's fourth-ranking official, has warned that scrapping the Iran deal would lead to a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. "Any effort to step away from the deal would reopen a Pandora's box in that region that would be hard to close again," he said. His statement indicates that Shannon could be expected to lead efforts to resist any attempts to renege or renegotiate the deal; critics of the deal say that Iran's continued missile testing has given Trump one more reason to tear up his predecessor's deal with the Islamist regime.

 

Chris Backemeyer is now the highest-ranking official at the State Department for Iran policy. During the Obama administration, Backemeyer made his career by selling the Iran deal by persuading multinational corporations to do business with Iran as part of an effort to conclude the Iran nuclear deal.

 

Ratney, Shannon and Backemeyer, along with Tillerson, reportedly prevailed upon Trump twice to recertify the Iran nuclear deal. The Jerusalem Post explained:

 

Washington was briefly abuzz on the afternoon of July 17 when rumors began to circulate that President Trump was eager to declare that Iran was in breach of the conditions laid out in the 2015 Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA).

 

Those receptive antennas were further heightened given the previous signals sent. After all, the State Department already released talking points to reporters on the decision to recertify Iran. The Treasury Department also had a package of fresh sanctions on over a dozen Iranian individuals and entities ready to announce to appease the hawks who were eager to cut loose from the deal.

 

But Trump didn't want to recertify Iran, nor did he want to the last time around in April. That evening, a longtime Middle East analyst close to senior White House officials involved in the discussions described the scene to me: "Tillerson essentially told the president, 'we just aren't ready with our allies to decertify.' The president retorted, 'Isn't it your job to get our allies ready?' to which Tillerson said, 'Sorry sir, we're just not ready.'" According to this source, Secretary Tillerson pulled the same maneuver when it came to recertification in April by waiting until the last minute before finally admitting the State Department wasn't ready. On both occasions he simply offered something to the effect of, "We'll get 'em next time."

 

______________________

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.

 

Follow Soeren Kern on Twitter and Facebook

 

© 2017 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

 

[Blog Editor: Unfortunately, I did not wait to get permission. You may wish to get permission to use any portion of this GI cross post.]

 

About Gatestone Institute

 

"Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write."
— John Adams

 

Gatestone Institute, a non-partisan, not-for-profit international policy council and think tank is dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:

 

  • Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;

 

  • Human Rights

 

  • A free and strong economy

 

  • A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world

 

  • Energy independence

 

  • Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.

 

Gatestone Institute conducts national and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with world leaders, journalists and experts -- analyzing, strategizing, and keeping them informed on current issues, and where possible recommending solutions.

 

Gatestone Institute will be publishing books, and continues to publish an online daily report, www.gatestoneinstitute.org, that features topics such as military and diplomatic threats to the United States and our allies; events in the Middle East and their possible consequences, and the transparency and accountability of international organizations.

 

Gatestone Institute is funded by private donors and foundations. We are grateful for your support. Gatestone Institute is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization, Federal Tax ID #454724565.

 

Ambassador John R. Bolton, Chairman

 

Nina Rosenwald, President


Naomi H. Perlman, Vice President

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Politics
write a comment
September 16 2017 7 16 /09 /September /2017 15:36

John R. Houk

© September 17, 2017

 

 

The ungodly LGBTQ must be concerned if sentient non-earth people will be offended if a Family/Biblical values person heads NASA. Apparently, the homosexual lobby fears space aliens might be influenced in the space exploration of the final frontier.

 

Rep. Jim Bridenstine’s (R-OK) NASA nomination is being opposed because he is wise enough to not agree with a Gay lifestyle. Of course, the Leftist MSM is lining up behind the godless LGBTQ. How can a group of people who ONLY represent 4.1% of the population (Pew Research 2016) have that kind of political clout? If you can’t agree that the LGBTQ is a special Rights group of people you must be a racist evil homophobe. As if homosexuals are a race of people rather than a group of people that chose a deviant lifestyle.

 

Yup, I said “deviant”. I don’t care if Medical organizations, Psychologist organizations, and/or Psychiatric organizations were essentially pressured decades ago into normalizing homosexuals rather than keeping with their original analysis that same-sex relations is deviant.

 

The American Psychiatric Association (APA) was harassed by political pressure rather than scientific data to end the mental deviancy listing of homosexual practices:

 

They [i.e. Rogers H. Wright and Nicholas A. Cummings] got established and revered practitioners to write chapters which explore these important issues. The following regarding the removal of homosexuality from the DSM in 1973 was written as a matter of verifiable fact:

 

“The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association yielded suddenly and completely to political pressure when in 1973 it removed homosexuality as a treatable aberrant condition. A political firestorm had been created by gay activists within psychiatry, with intense opposition to normalizing homosexuality coming from a few outspoken psychiatrists who were demonized and even threatened, rather than scientifically refuted. Psychiatry’s House of Delegates sidestepped the conflict by putting the matter to a vote of the membership, marking for the first time in the history of healthcare that a diagnosis or lack of diagnosis was decided by popular vote than by scientific evidence”(page 9) - The truth on how homosexuality was removed from the DSM by APA – Commentary on Dr Yik’s response to Lawrence Khong; POSTED BY CONCERNEDSGCITIZEN; Homosexuality and Science; 9/14/13

 

I can’t blame the article writer using a pseudonym. Homosexual activists use both defamation - to shame - and violence - to strike fear - against truth tellers to silence them from the American public.

 

Here is a brief description when science was abandoned for submission to political pressure:

 

  • 1973 – Board of Trustees of The American Psychiatric Association (APA) approves the deletion of homosexuality from the DSM-II and substitutes a diagnosis of “sexual orientation disturbance.” Intense discussion and debate followed.

 

  • On Dec 15 1973, the Board of Trustees of the APA voted to delete homosexuality altogether from the DSM. Opposition from several psychiatrists immediately followed. A referendum on the Board’s decision was called.

 

  • 1974 – the entire membership of the APA was polled for their support or rejection of the Board’s decision. žOf the 10,000 voting members, nearly 40% opposed the Board’s decision to normalize homosexuality. Decision was hardly unanimous. (Controversially, a survey conducted in 1979 asked 10,000 psychiatrists if they felt homosexuality “usually represented a pathological adaptation.” ž69% of respondents said “yes,” and 60% said homosexual men were less capable of “mature, loving relationships” than heterosexual men.)

 

The author of Destructive Trends in mental health was right to conclude:

 

“Diagnosis today in psychology and psychiatry is cluttered with politically correct verbiage, which seemingly has taken precedence over sound professional experience and scientific validation.” (Ibid.)

 

Since the APA barely removed homosexuality as a deviant mental disorder, the American Left and Homosexual Activists were well armed with the needed propaganda to slowly persuade the American public to accept ungodly homosexuality.

 

Even a recent scientific study revealed by Life Site circa November 2016 show homosexuality is not normal:

 

Those who are setting our so-called “values”, such as the small but powerful group of academics, mainstream media, and homosexual activists, do so by attempting to impose strange myths and ideas that have no scientific basis.

 

These myths include the one that homosexuals are “born that way”, can’t change, and must be accepted for “who they are”. Further, those claiming they are a different gender than that with which they were born, i.e. the transgendered, who “feel” they belong to other than their gender at birth, must be accepted as such.

 

The public is supposed to put aside its intelligence and common sense, and respectfully bow collectively in obeisance to these “expert” opinions. These opinions, however, are complete and utter hogwash.

 

However, the myth-makers attempt to force their nonsense on us by the heavy hand of the law, claiming that it’s “discrimination” to refuse to accept the myths as truth.  Jurisdictions which don’t obey their rulings are economically punished, parents are forbidden to protect their children from the monstrous “bathroom” laws that permit males to use girls’ showers, lockers and change rooms.  It’s all a fraud based on propaganda with no scientific legitimacy.

 

Bombshells Explode The Myths

 

 

The first bombshell was a landmark study published in The Journal – The New Atlantis, (August 23, 2016). The Journal is a well-known journal of science, technology and ethics based in Washington D.C.  This article analysed [sic] the scientific evidence of LGBT issues published to date in scientific journals.

 

Dr. Mayer stated he supports every sentence in this report without reservation since it is about science and medicine.  He also stated he was alarmed to learn during his review of over 500 scientific articles that the LGBT community bears a disproportionate rate of mental health problems compared to the population as a whole.

 

  • The other author is Dr. Paul McHugh, one of the leading psychiatrists in the world. These scientists reviewed hundreds of peer reviewed studies on sexual orientation and gender identity from the biological, psychological and social sciences.  Their conclusions were as follows:

 

  • The belief that gender identity is an innate, fixed human property independent of biological sex – so that a person might be a ‘man trapped in a woman’s body’ or ‘a woman trapped in a man’s body’ – is not supported by scientific evidence.

 

  • Only a minority of children who express gender-atypical thoughts or behaviour will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood. There is no evidence that all such children should be encouraged to become transgender, much less subjected to hormone treatments or surgery.

 

  • Non-heterosexual and transgender people have higher rates of mental health problems (anxiety, depression, suicide), as well as behavioral and social problems (substance abuse, intimate partner violence), than the general population. Discrimination alone does not account for the entire disparity.

 

The second bombshell was exploded by a top researcher for the American Psychological Association (APA), lesbian activist, Dr. Lisa Diamond, co-author-in-chief of ‘the APA Handbook’ of sexuality and psychology and one of the APA’s most respected members.  She admitted that sexual orientation was “fluid” and not unchangeable.  By doing so, Dr. Diamond confirmed that the myth that “homosexuals can’t change” is now a dead-end theory.  She summarized the relevant findings in a lecture at Cornell University stating that abundant research has now established that sexual orientation – including attraction, behaviour and self-identity – is fluid for both adolescents and adults for both genders. (The LGBT fraud has been exposed, and they’re definitely not happy about it; By Claire Chretien; Life Site News; 11/15/16 1:37 pm EST)

 

The Multiculturalist Left and the lying Homosexual activist-lobbyists have been brainwashing Americans for decades. Even now I am guessing NO one has heard the recent science confirming the brainwashing lies.

 

ERGO, the reality of the Will of God found in His Word shows the purpose of the Creator of one male and one female is the standard He intends for His creation. If God’s Word calls same-sex relations an abomination in His sight, then it is so - Leviticus 18: 22; 20: 13 NKJV:

 

22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.

 

13 If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.

 

God in Christ is no less approving -Romans 1: 18-19, 26-27 NKJV:

 

God’s Wrath on Unrighteousness

 

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.

 

26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

 

And yet, it is not God’s will that any human should perish in eternal separation from His Presence. All humanity is born in a sin nature. That is the reason the Almighty emptied Himself of Divine prerogatives and became fully human to born as a perfect human to be the sacrificial lamb for Adam’s hereditary disobedience.

 

Jesus the infant was conceive in the womb of a human female by the power of the Holy Spirit (not human copulation as the Muslims erroneously believe). The infant Jesus became a man. Jesus as the Son of God and the son of man simultaneously, ministered His Divine purpose for three years then became the Lamb of God dying for humanity’s sin nature so that all that believe in the Resurrection of Jesus are re-united with God Almighty in spirit now and in our resurrection from the dead our natural appearance will be changed spirit, soul and body -Galatians 3: 10-14 NKJV:

 

The Law Brings a Curse

 

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.”[a] 11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for “the just shall live by faith.”[b] 12 Yet the law is not of faith, but “the man who does them shall live by them.”[c]

 

13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”[d]), 14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

 

I have no idea how those of the Jewish faith handle the brutal punishments of the Law in this modern era, but for Christians the punished prescribed in the Law in this life has eternally been paid for by the Lamb of God. That includes the numerous sin punishments that is also applied to heterosexuals and as to the subject of this post, those who have made the choice of a homosexual lifestyle.

 

I am fairly certain that homosexual apologists and Leftist Multiculturalists will try to disarm God’s Word by attempting to twist it to bend to human academics to fit their world view. That is unfortunately the problem with Humanist thinking. Humanism intentionally dismisses the Divine paradigm because world order darkness blinds Humanists unable to see the Light of Salvation of Jesus Christ the Son of God/Lamb of God that can Redeem those stuck in Humanist darkness.

 

That is the plus of Rep. Jim Bridenstine, President Trump’s nomination to lead NASA. If Bridenstine is a good Christian, he will not make a person blinded in homosexual darkness suffer for their social choices but rather direct them according to merit. That is probably unlike a virulent homosexual that would make it their life’s aim to persecute a Christian employee for their beliefs with shaming or worse – violence.

 

In essence, the Left and Homosexual activists are actually attempting to utilize a religious test to disqualify Jim Bridenstine from being the next NASA Administrator. I like the observations made by Mark Whittington on the Bridenstine nomination:

 

However, it appears that Bridenstine is being subjected to a religious test for the position that he has been nominated for. Many people oppose some items on the LGBT agenda out of sincere religious conviction. Bridenstine’s private and political beliefs are being used as a disqualifier for becoming head of NASA, even though those views would not affect his conduct as administrator. The space agency has no influence whatsoever on whether or not people of the same sex have the right to marry. That issue was decided by a ruling of the Supreme Court and is now the law of the land.

 

One wonders if these questions are going to come up during the hearings when they finally take place. Bridenstine will likely reply that he will follow the law, as he is obligated to do, and perhaps openly wonder what these issues have to do with returning to the moon and re-establishing American dominance in space. (Now Jim Bridenstine is in trouble with the LGBT community; By Mark Whittington; Blasting News; 9/14/17)

 

The LGBTQ ungodly nuts are trying to same political muscle they used way back in 1973 to disqualify Jim Bridenstine in 2017. The Left-Wing Washington Post actually has a news story of those that are supportive of the Bridenstine nomination largely due to the fact his Congressional record demonstrated a huge support for NASA’s space exploration agenda with the addition of private capital cooperation:

 

 

Bridenstine’s nomination comes as NASA is increasingly relying on the private sector to perform tasks that were once the exclusive domain of the government. 

 

Now, under Trump, the growing private sector is looking to capitalize on its momentum and partner with NASA to go even farther — to the moon and deep space. And it regards Bridenstine as someone who would be good for business.

 

“NASA needs dedicated and inspired leadership, and Representative Bridenstine is an outstanding choice to provide precisely that,” said S. Alan Stern, chairman of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation, an industry group representing many space companies and start-ups.

 

The Coalition for Deep Space Exploration, representing many of the big legacy contractors, said it also welcomed the nomination, saying Bridenstine “has been an active and vocal advocate for space on Capitol Hill.”

 

 

NASA is poised to ask the private sector for proposals to develop a lunar lander that could take experiments and cargo to the surface of the moon, with flights starting as early as 2018. Bridenstine, who serves in the Navy Reserve, has advocated a return to the moon, writing in a blog post last year that “from the discovery of water ice on the moon until this day, the American objective should have been a permanent outpost of rovers and machines, with occasional manned missions for science and maintenance.”

 

 

In addition to backing work with younger, entrepreneurial firms, Bridenstine has also voiced his support for the traditional industrial base, made up of behemoths such as Lockheed Martin and Boeing. They want to ensure that programs such as the Space Launch System, the massive rocket being developed by NASA, and the Orion crew capsule continue

 

 

Mike Gold, the chairman of a commercial space advisory committee for the Federal Aviation Administration, said that Bridenstine would be able to unite the industry with “his support for a diverse array of activities such as deep-space exploration, private-sector partnerships, Earth science and technology development.” (Support builds for Bridenstine to lead NASA despite past skepticism on climate change; By Christian Davenport; WaPo; 9/11/17)

 

WaPo gravitates to the Left so it is unsurprising that the article continues by stating that in Congress Bridenstine was critical of Obama spending more on Climate Change than on weather forecasting.

 

The Senate will be involved in the confirmation hearings for Bridenstine. The Multiculturalist Dems in the Senate were extremely displeased that Bridenstine does not share the concerns of the immediacy of a doomed earth from constantly fudged statistics pointing toward Climate Change disasters.

 

Between Homosexual activists and Leftist Eco-Marxists, Bridenstine at the very least can be grilled by Leftist Senators about issues that have zero to do with the science of space exploration.

 

My fellow Okies, write, email or phone Senators Inhofe and Langford to make a stir about the real issues that Jim Bridenstine should be judged as a capable Administrator of NASA.

 

JRH 9/16/17

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Politics Christianity
write a comment
September 15 2017 6 15 /09 /September /2017 13:37

 

John R. Houk

© September 15, 2017

 

I found a series of emails from Judicial Watch that exposes the workings of the Deep State that is working to thwart the promises of President Donald Trump.

 

Per the emails, I have three cross posts:

 

  1. A video on the Comey memos.

 

  1. Thanks to FOIA and Law suits, the revelation of more Crooked Hillary emails revealing classified materials on her nefarious private email server which includes Huma Abedin and the exposure actual Pay-To-Play deals with the Clinton Foundation.

 

  1. Ending with a Judicial Watch Facebook video of On Watch with Chris Farrell exposing more details of Crooked Hillary’s State Department silencing private security contractors in relation to the Benghazi Islamic terrorist attack.

 

All these Judicial Watch information reporting relating to Crooked Hillary shows good reasons for her to be locked up. ALSO, you should realize if any DOJ courage exists to take on the Deep State protection of Crooked Hillary, then the Obama Deep State “Resistance” means all clandestine options will be made to protect Obama and his nefarious minions. Why? The answer is obvious! If Crooked Hillary begins to go down for any of her crimes including her husband, then Obama’s Deep State Resistance will be exposed. Crooked Hillary will take the whole Manchurian Left down with her if she is prosecuted. That would mean all things Barack Hussein Obama would tumble like a reverse domino theory.

 

JRH 9/15/17

*************

VIDEO: Inside Judicial Watch: The Comey Memos

 

 

Posted by Judicial Watch

Published on Sep 13, 2017

 

In this installment of "Inside Judicial Watch," Carter Clews joins Mark Tapscott, the Executive Editor of the Daily Caller News Foundation, to discuss the missing memos of James Comey and the controversy surrounding the former FBI director.

 

Keep up with Judicial Watch: Donate today!

https://www.judicialwatch.org/donate/thank-youtube   

 

Sign up for the JWTV Club http://subscribe.judicialwatch.org/subscription/join-the-video-club  

 

Check out our website http://www.judicialwatch.org

 

"Like" us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/JudicialWatch

 

Follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/JudicialWatch

 

Subscribe to our YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/user/JudicialWatch/featured?view_as=public  

 

++++

Judicial Watch: New Clinton Emails Uncovered, Reveal Additional Mishandling of Classified Information

 

Press Room

SEPTEMBER 14, 2017

Judicial Watch

 

Documents also show more instances of pay to play with Clinton Foundation donors

 

Abedin’s controversial mother advised Clinton speechwriter to exclude references to ‘democracy/elections/freedom’ and ‘empowerment of women’ for Clinton speech in Saudi Arabia

 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released 1,617 new pages of documents from the U.S. Department of State revealing numerous additional examples of classified information being transmitted through the unsecure, non-state.gov account of Huma Abedin, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, as well as many instances of Hillary Clinton donors receiving special favors from the State Department.

 

The documents included 97 email exchanges with Clinton not previously turned over to the State Department, bringing the known total to date to at least 627 emails that were not part of the 55,000 pages of emails that Clinton turned over, and further contradicting a statement by Clinton that, “as far as she knew,” all of her government emails had been turned over to department.

 

The emails are the 20th production of documents obtained in response to a court order in a May 5, 2015, lawsuit Judicial Watch filed against the State Department (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00684)). Judicial Watch sued after State failed to respond to a March 18, 2015, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking: “All emails of official State Department business received or sent by former Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin from January 1, 2009 through February 1, 2013 using a non-‘state.gov’ email address.”

 

On September 11, 2009, the highly sensitive name and email address of the person giving the classified Presidential Daily Brief was included in an email forwarded to Abedin’s unsecure email account by State Department official Dan Fogerty.

 

The State Department produced many more Clinton and Abedin unsecured emails that were classified:

 

 

  • On April 16, 2009, Deputy Assistant Secretary Jeffrey Feltman sent to Abedin’s unsecure email account classified information about an unknown subject.

 

  • On June 18, 2009, Abedin sent classified information summarizing a June 18, 2009, “Middle East Breakfast” meeting between various senators, representatives and State Department officials, at which Deputy Secretary Jack Lew and George Mitchell briefed the congressmen with “an update on our discussions with the [Middle East] parties.”

 

  • On June 23, 2009, U.S. diplomat Martin Indyk, who had his security clearance suspended in 2000 for “possible sloppiness” in the handling of classified information, sent a memo containing classified information to Abedin’s unsecure email account.  The memo, written for Clinton, pertained to Indyk’s discussions with top Israeli officials:

 

Could I ask you to review the memo below that I wrote yesterday on my return from Israel?  If you think it worthwhile, I’d be very grateful if you showed it to HRC (I have already shared it with Mitchell and Feltman). A confrontation with Bibi appears imminent.  I’ve never been one to shy away from that, as she may know.  But it has to be done carefully, and that doesn’t appear to be happening.  And I’m concerned that she will be tarred with the same brush if this leads to a bad end.  So I think she needs to make sure that the friction is productive.  I’ve made some suggestions at the end of the memo

 

  • On August 1, 2009, Abedin forwarded classified information from State Department official Richard Verma to her unsecure email account.  The email from Senator Russ Feingold was sent to Hillary Clinton regarding her upcoming Africa trip.

 

  • On August 4, 2009, Assistant Secretary Jeffrey Feltman sent classified information about discussions with Kuwaiti officials to Abedin’s unsecure email account.  Feltman noted that the Kuwaitis felt a lunch they had with Obama was “chilly.”  The discussions concerned Guantanamo as well as Kuwait’s treatment of detainees.

 

  • On Sept 20, 2009, Abedin forwarded classified information to her unsecure email account. The email was from State Department official Esther Brimmer and concerned foreign leaders’ discussions regarding a UNESCO leadership appointment.

 

  • On November 1, 2009, U.S. Ambassador to the UAE Rick Olson sent classified information to Abedin’s unsecure email account. The email shows that Olsen was traveling with Hillary in the Middle East, and Abedin asked him to “work on a list of everything covered in the mbz [presumably Mohammed bin Zayed bin Sultan Al-Nahyan, the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi] meeting for Hillary.” Olson asks: “do you want it on this system (I can sanitize), or on the other system.” She replies: “This system easier. We are staying without class[ified] computers. Thx.”

 

  • On December 1, 2009, Abedin sent classified information about foreign military contributions to the Afghanistan war effort to her unsecure email account. The email originated with State official Sean Misko who wrote to Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan that he first “accidentally” sent it on the “high side” (secure) but was resending.

 

  • On December 25, 2009, Abedin sent to her unsecure email account classified information prepared by Deputy U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Francis Ricciardone concerning the Afghan elections.

 

  • On December 26, 2009, U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Carlos Pascual sent a memo to Clinton, which was found on Abedin’s unsecure email account. It contained extensive classified information involving U.S. and Mexican counter-drug operations in Mexico.

 

  • On March 22, 2010, Abedin forwarded to her unsecure email account classified information about a telephone conversation between President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon.

 

  • On April 13, 2010, Abedin forwarded to her unsecure email account classified information from Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman regarding diplomatic discussions with the foreign ministers of Algeria and Morocco.

 

  • On May 24, 2010, Abedin forwarded to her unsecure email account classified information about the minutes of a State Department senior staff meeting regarding State Department officials’ meetings in Uganda.

 

  • Among Abedin’s unsecure email records is a document that is simply titled “NOTE” with the date September 12, 2010. The contents are entirely redacted as classified.

 

  • On January 28, 2011, Abedin sent Clinton an unsecure email containing classified information relating to a briefing White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs gave.

 

  • On March 21, 2012, Clinton received a memo from State Department officials Joseph Yun and Derek Mitchell marked “Sensitive But Unclassified” and sent to Abedin’s unsecure email account. It contained classified information about elections in Burma.

 

  • Jake Sullivan emailed to Hillary’s unsecure email account classified information in which Sullivan discussed the content of conversations with UK Prime Minister Gordon regarding “the situation” in Northern Ireland. The date of this email is not included on the document.

 

  • On April 8, 2012, Abedin sent classified information to her unsecure email regarding a call sheet and an “Action Memo” for Clinton relating to a call with Malawi President Joyce Banda. On April 9, 2012, Monica Hanley again forwarded the classified information to Clinton’s unsecure email account.

 

Other emails contain sensitive information that was sent via Hillary Clinton’s unsecure email servers.

 

On August 18, 2009, confidential assistant Monica Hanley provided Abedin with laptop and fob (a physical device that provides a login code) logins and passwords to log onto a laptop, as well as a secure State Department website at https://one.state.gov. Included were a PIN number and instructions on how to access her email from the secure State Department website. Abedin forwarded this information to her unsecure account.

 

(The FBI interviewed Clinton’s confidential assistant Monica Hanley in its probe of Clinton’s email practices, and State’s Diplomatic Security staff reprimanded her after she left classified material behind in a Moscow hotel room. Hanley was the staffer tasked with finding BlackBerry phones for Clinton to use.)

 

On August 19, 2009, Hanley asked Abedin to call her and provide Abedin’s computer password so that she could download a UN document for Cheryl Mills from Abedin’s computer. Instead of calling Hanley, Abedin apparently provided the computer password in her unsecure reply email, saying, “Its [redacted].”

 

On April 17, 2009, Clinton aide Lona Valmoro emailed Clinton’s sensitive daily schedule for April 18 to various Clinton Foundation officials, including Doug Band, Terry Krinvic and Justin Cooper. She also forwarded Clinton’s daily schedule for July 16 to numerous Clinton Foundation officials. She did the same thing on September 8, 2009. She did so again on January 10, January 14 and April 11, 2010.

 

The details of Hillary’s arrival on November 18, 2009, in war-torn Kabul, Afghanistan, for the inauguration of President Karzai, were found on Abedin’s unsecure email account. Included were precise times of landing at Kabul Airport, the occupants of her vehicle, arrival and departure times at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, and meeting times with U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

 

The new documents show that Clinton donors frequently requested and received special favors from the State Department that were connected to the Clinton Foundation.

 

On July 14, 2009, Gordon Griffin, a XL Keystone lobbyist, sent an email to Clinton Foundation executive Doug Band, asking if Band could get him into a Council on Foreign Relations dinner at which Clinton was speaking. Band forwarded the email to Abedin, saying, “Can u get him in?” Abedin replied: “Yes will get him in.” Band was a top aide to President Bill Clinton and co-founder of Teneo. Griffin was a major donor to Hillary Clinton’s Senate and presidential campaigns.

 

On July 16, 2009, Zachary Schwartz asked Band for help getting visas to travel to Cuba for a film production crew from Shangri La Entertainment. Band forwarded the request to Abedin, telling her, “Please call zach asap on this. [Redacted.] Important.” Abedin responded, “I’ll call zach when we land in India.” Abedin concludes with “Enjoy. Cuba is complicated. Am sure you aren’t surprised to hear that.” Schwartz worked for Steve Bing, a mega-donor to the Clintons and owner of Shangri La Entertainment. Bing has reportedly donated $10-25 million to the Clinton Foundation and paid Bill Clinton personally $2.5 million a year to be an adviser to a green construction company Bing owned.

 

On September 11, 2009, Terrence Duffy, chairman of futures brokerage firm CME Group, a donor to the Clinton Foundation, asked Clinton to arrange “government appointments” for him in Singapore and Hong Kong. Clinton, using her HDR22@clintonmail.com address, forwarded the request to Abedin, “fyi.” Abedin responded to Duffy’s email, saying she would “follow up” with Duffy’s secretary, Joyce. Duffy gave $4,600 to Hillary’s 2008 presidential campaign; CME Group paid Hillary $225,000 for a speaking fee and has donated between $5,001 and 10,000 to the Clinton Foundation.

 

Abedin, using her huma@clintonmail.com address, later told Joyce, “Would like to get some more information and details so we can try to help.” Further along in the exchange, Joyce responds “We would also like some help in arranging meetings with some key govt officials in both locations, such as the Prime Minister of Singapore, and would appreciate any help you may be able to provide.”

 

On September 29, 2009, Abedin followed up with Duffy, telling him that “we are happy to assist with any and all meetings” and that she had “discussed you and your trip with our assistant secretary of state for east asia and pacific affairs,” suggesting that Duffy write the assistant secretary, Kurt Campbell. Duffy replied, “Thank you very much. I did connect with Kurt Campbell today.”

 

On May 5, 2010, major Clinton Global Initiative member, Clinton Foundation donor and real estate developer Eddie Trump forwarded to “Dougie” Band a request for assistance from Russian American Foundation Vice President Rina Kirshner to get the Russian American Foundation involved in a State Department program. Band forwarded the request to Abedin, saying, “Can we get this done/mtg set.” As Judicial Watch previously reported, the State Department doled out more than $260,000 to the Russian American Foundation for “public diplomacy.”

 

Major Clinton donor Bal Das, a New York financier who reportedly raised $300,000 for Hillary’s 2008 presidential campaign, asked Abedin on November 11, 2009 if Hillary Clinton could address the Japan Society at its annual conference in 2010. Clinton did speak to the Japan Society’s annual conference in 2011.

 

The emails also provide insight on the inner workings of the Clinton State Department, in particular her engagement with her staff.

 

In a May 19, 2009, “Global Press Conference” memo, Clinton was given in advance the “proposed questions” of four of the seven foreign reporters. Examples include: “What is the Obama administration’s view of Australian PM Rudd’s proposal to form an Asia-Pacific Community” and “Why can’t American drones not find, detect and destroy the insurgency supply line?”

 

In a document entitled “HRC Pakistan Notes” prepared for Clinton by her staff, Clinton apparently had to be reminded about all her trips to Pakistan and of “stories that you have told/remember.” Her reminder instructions include: “You loved Faisal mosque, and it was especially meaningful to have CVC [Chelsea] with you.” And: “Your first Pakistani friend was in College. She introduced you to Pakistani food and clothes.” And: “You have had lots of Pakistani and Pakistani American friends over the years. From Chicago to California to Washington, DC, you have friends all over the country. They know how much you love Pakistani food

 

On February 12, 2010, Case Button, a Clinton speechwriter, asked Abedin if her mother, a professor at Dar Al Hekma, a women’s university in Saudi Arabia where Clinton held a town hall meeting, would be willing to give him advice on talking points he was preparing for Clinton. Abedin responded, “Talk to my mom for sure. She will have good points for you.” After reviewing Hillary’s draft remarks, Huma’s mother, Saleha Abedin, (a controversial Islamist activist), offered some advice: “Do not use the political terms such as ‘democracy/elections/freedom.’ Do not use the term ‘empowerment of women’ instead say ‘enabling women’ Do not even mention driving for women! Don’t sound sympathetic to ‘women’s plight’ or be ‘patronizing’ as other visitors have done and made the students extremely annoyed. They rightly consider these as in-house issues ” No references to these issues appear in Clinton’s speech.

 

Abedin’s involvement in a major appointment at the State Department is controversial given that Abedin’s mother was an Islamist activist. On July 24, 2009, Cheryl Mills forwarded to Abedin a CV for someone being considered for the position of Special Envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. It had been sent to Mills from State Department recruiter Margaret Carpenter. Rather than forwarding the resume on to Clinton for her approval, Abedin simply responds to Mills: “I’m a hundred percent fine with him.”

 

Abedin also offered her opinion to Clinton on administration leaders: On January 21, 2011, while on a trip to Mexico, Abedin emailed Hillary that “Biden is a disaster here.”

 

On February 20, 2012, Clinton expresses outrage over an apparent wardrobe miscommunication for a meeting in Mexico and sent an email to Abedin with the subject line “I’m venting.” Clinton admonished:

 

So, here I sit in the meeting surrounded by ever other person dressed in a white shirt provided by the Mexicans. Patricia is not wearing the exact style that all others are but her own white shirt. But, since no one ever told me about this, and instead assumed I didn’t need to know, I had no idea about any of this until I just walked into the large meeting in front of the entire press corps and I’m wearing a green top. So, what’s my answer when asked why I think I’m different than all my colleagues and why I’m dissing our hosts?

 

I am sick of people deciding what I should know rather than giving me the info so I can make a decision. This really annoys me and I told Monica [Hanley] I just didn’t understand.

 

“The emails show ‘what happened’ was that Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin obviously violated laws about the handling of classified information and turned the State Department into a pay for play tool for the corrupt Clinton Foundation,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The clear and mounting evidence of pay for play and mishandling of classified information warrant a serious criminal investigation by an independent Trump Justice Department.”

 

To read more about Huma Abedin’s emails, click here.

 

+++++

Via Judicial email alert:

 

On Watch: Return to Benghazi

Sent: 9/14/14 4:34 PM

Sent by Judicial Watch

 

The latest edition of Chris Farrell's On Watch. 

 

On this edition of On Watch, Judicial Watch Director of Investigations and Research Chris Farrell discussed the September 11, 2012, Benghazi terrorist attack. New reports show just how dire security at the compound really was and how security officials charged with protecting the compound were later pressured by the Clinton State Department to keep quiet. 

 

Facebook VIDEO: Video was live on Facebook Judicial Watch

September 14, 2017 11:29am

 

 

 

__________________

How Crooked Hillary Can Bring Down Deep State

John R. Houk

© September 15, 2017

________________

Judicial Watch Posts

 

© 2017 Judicial Watch, Inc.

 

Judicial Watch is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Contributions are received from individuals, foundations, and corporations and are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law.

 

425 Third Street SW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20024
888-593-8442

 

DONATE

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Conspiracy Theory Politics Counterjihad Crime
write a comment
September 12 2017 3 12 /09 /September /2017 17:33

 

John R. Houk

© September 12, 2017

 

Any [fundamentalist] view of Islam positing the traditional norms of Islamic jurisprudence as absolute [should] be rejected out of hand as false. State laws [should] have precedence. - Yahya Cholil Staquf (In Interview, Top Indonesian Muslim Scholar Says Stop Pretending That Orthodox Islam and Violence Aren't Linked; By Marco Stahlhut; Time.com; 9/7/17)

 

Fellow Community member Viana posted an excerpt of the Yahya Cholil Staquf interview at Time.com (of all the ironic Left Wing MSM places) who is an Islamic scholar from Indonesia. The reason the interview is significant is because the Muslim scholar proclaims the violence perpetrated by Islamic terrorists has EVERYTHING to do with Islam!

 

Yahya Cholil Staquf is the General Secretary of Nahdlatul Ulama a Sunni Islam organization in Indonesia. Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) may be located in Indonesia, but it is the largest Islamic organization in the world. Here is a Wikipedia excerpt on NU to give you a bit of a backgrounder:

 

Nahdlatul Ulama (also Nahdatul Ulama or NU) is a traditionalist Sunni Islam movement in Indonesia following the Shafi'i school of jurisprudence.[3] NU was established on January 31, 1926 in Surabaya as a response to the rise of Wahabism in Saudi Arabia and Islamic modernism in Indonesia.[4][5]:59[6] The NU is the largest independent Islamic organization in the world[7] with membership of 40 million in 2003.[1][2]NU also is a charitable body funding schools and hospitals as well as organizing communities to help alleviate poverty.

 

Nahdlatul Ulama is known as an ardent advocate of Islam Nusantara; a distinctive brand of Islam that has undergone interaction, contextualization, indigenization, interpretation and vernacularization according to socio-cultural condition of Indonesia.[8]Islam Nusantara promotes moderation, compassion, anti-radicalism, inclusiveness and tolerance.[9]

 

READ THE REST (Nahdlatul Ulama; Wikipedia; last edited on 9/7/17 03:51)

 

Take Multicultural Diversity Leftists in America and Europe. When the leader of the largest Islamic organization in the world says Islamic violence is directly related to the tenets of Islam, you should really pay attention!

 

Now I do find it interesting that Time Mag published an interview that is essentially anti-Multiculturalism and irritating to Muslim Apologists. Loraine County Community College has published a guide on where various publications lean toward politically. Fascinating to me LCCC labels Time as centrist but with a proviso which I do concur:

 

Time.  Similar in content and format to the two other major U. S. newsmagazines, this periodical covers the news from a centrist point of view. [NOTE: Others label Time liberal or leftist.] (Bold text is Blog Editor’s but the brackets are the proviso by LCCC - Leanings of Magazines, Newspapers; LCCC Library - LibGuides - Detecting Bias; Last Updated 9/7/17 1:21 PM)

 

Media Bias/Fact Check has this evaluation of Time:

 

Notes: Time is an American weekly news magazine published in New York City. It was founded in 1923.  Time has the world’s largest circulation for a weekly news magazine. Time Magazine is factual in reporting and well sourced.  Has a left-center bias in story selection. (5/18/2016) Updated (1/12/2017) (Time Magazine; Media Bias/Fact Check)

 

Yes friends, if the word “Left” is there, there is a promotion of the evil of Multiculturalism. This is the reason I consider it incredulous that Time.com has such a counter-Multiculturalist interview.

 

Below is Viana’s excerpt of the Time.com interview of Yahya Cholil Staquf. But if you get a chance you should read the entire article at Time.com.

 

JRH 9/12/17

*****************

Posted by Viana

Google + Community Americans against Jihad

Sep 11, 12:59 PM

 

Appropriate on this, the 16th anniversary of 9/11. More and more Muslim leaders are making this admission. Indonesia is the world’s most populous Islamic nation. -Viana


Yahya Cholil Staquf states: “Western politicians should stop pretending that extremism and terrorism have nothing to do with Islam. There is a clear relationship between fundamentalism, terrorism, and the basic assumptions of Islamic orthodoxy. So long as we lack consensus regarding this matter, we cannot gain victory over fundamentalist violence within Islam. Within the classical tradition, the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims is assumed to be one of segregation and enmity. To the extent that Muslims adhere to this view of Islam, it renders them incapable of living harmoniously and peacefully within the multi-cultural, multi-religious societies of the 21st century. we live in a world of nation-states. Any attempt to create a unified Islamic state in the 21st century can only lead to chaos and violence.

 

 

Any [fundamentalist] view of Islam positing the traditional norms of Islamic jurisprudence as absolute [should] be rejected out of hand as false. State laws [should] have precedence.

 

 

Too many Muslims view civilization, and the peaceful co-existence of people of different faiths, as something they must combat. There’s a growing dissatisfaction in the West with respect to Muslim minorities, a growing fear of Islam. In this sense, some Western friends of mine are “Islamophobic.” They’re afraid of Islam. I understand their fear

 

The West cannot force Muslims to adopt a moderate interpretation of Islam. Western politicians should stop telling us that fundamentalism and violence have nothing to do with traditional Islam. That is simply wrong.

 

Europe, and Germany in particular, are accepting massive numbers of refugees. Don’t misunderstand me: of course you cannot close your eyes to those in need. the fact remains that you’re taking in millions of refugees about whom you know virtually nothing, except that they come from extremely problematic regions of the world. there's an extreme left wing whose adherents reflexively denounce any and all talk about the connections between traditional Islam, fundamentalism and violence as _de facto_ proof of Islamophobia. This must end. A problem that is not acknowledged cannot be solved.

http://time.com/4930742/islam-terrorism-islamophobia-violence/

_____________

Edited by John R. Houk

Viana’s excerpt has been arbitrarily edited for what I believe is better readability.

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Counterjihad
write a comment
September 11 2017 2 11 /09 /September /2017 14:34

 

John R. Houk

© September 11, 2017

 

I came across a video with a sensationalist title sent from of all places I Support Israel: “Watch: Buddhist woman raped by sharia police in Pakistan as punishment for having a child”. Thank God the video does not actually show a woman being raped by Muslims.

 

The video is actually the Christian testimony and journey of Imran Firasat. Imran was born a Muslim in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. In adulthood he met a gal from Indonesia (Jenny Setiawan) was a Buddhist in Pakistan. I had to wonder why a Buddhist gal would be in Pakistan where some of the most vicious Muslims live who believe in violently protecting the Religion of Peace from non-Muslim religions and ideologies.

 

Here’s a mystery I have grown weary of searching to solve. I have had difficulty finding anything Imran Firasat. The latest post I could find is dated 5/2/16 found at Jan Sandviks blogg, but the information is only up to date to 2014. The mystery is Imran has disappeared from normal Internet searches for a guy like me that only knows how to use Google, Bing, Yahoo and a few less known search engines.

 

The I Support Israel website sent an alert of this Imran video on 9/10/17. The Youtube video itself is dated 6/14/14. I have no idea of the reason a Pro-Israel website showing a three-year-old video to garner support for a person that seems to have disappeared from the Internet.

 

I can tell you the reason I believe you should watch this video. The summary of Imran’s story which I began above, is this: A Muslim falls in-love with a non-Muslim from another nation other than Pakistan. Sharia prevents marriage so they cohabitate. A child is born of the relationship in Pakistan. Pakistan’s Sharia police show up at the door and rape the mother of his child because she is a non-Muslim living with a Muslim. The incident challenges Imran’s belief in Islam. He eventually becomes an atheist. For safety, they move to Spain. Imran eventually converts to Christianity and becomes a Counterjihad writer. Spain exercise its idiotic Multiculturalist hate speech laws which always exonerates Islam of hate speech and convicts the critics of hate speech against Islam. Spain moves to deport Imran. Imran tries Norway. Norway doesn’t want him for the same reasons Spain wants to deport Imran back to Pakistan. A deportation back to Pakistan would be a death sentence for breaking the Islamic Republic’s Blasphemy Law. I probably left out some details but I think you get the gist of what happens to an ex-Muslim refugee in Europe and in the Muslim world.

 

The reason then for watching this video: to understand Islam and the idiocy of the West’s Multiculturalist Left to emphasize diversity over Western Culture that will lead to the West’s destruction.

 

ERGO, here’s the Youtube Channel’s version of Imran’s journey from 2014:

 

VIDEO: From Sharia suffering Muslim to Atheist to Christ

 

 

Posted by Light of Christ

Published on Jun 14, 2014

 

Please pray for Brother Imran: http://www.ibtimes.com/fighting-words/islam-critic-imran-firasat-i-am-going-die-1286539

 

If anyone can solve the mystery of what is going on with Imran Firasat or what has happened to him, please let me know in the comment section. I’d love to post an update.

 

My last post on Imran Firasat in 2013: “Are Western Governments Volunteering Dhimmitude?

 

JRH 9/11/17

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Counterjihad Christianity Immigration
write a comment

Overview

  • : ubiquitous8thoughts
  • ubiquitous8thoughts
  • : This is a Christian Right blog. This means there is religious freedom, free speech, Constitutional Original Intent, Pro-Israel, Anti-Islamist and a dose of Biblical Morality (Pro-Life & anti-homosexual agenda) content in this blog.
  • Contact

Search

Links