I wrestle daily

See the source image


I wrestle daily + additional reading after my brief comments …


by Ken Pullen

ACP— A Crooked Path

Thursday, March 7th, 2019


I wrestle daily, asking God continually, “Is this pleasing to Your heart, to Your will, am I working according to Your will,” with everything I post here on A Crooked Path.

I wrestle with myself. The inward battle of thoughts grabbling with what is most important, and working to not become overly political, worldly, straying from having Jesus Christ the Lord and Saviour being the uppermost focus of this place.

I am convinced, through the Holy Spirit’s working within me, not of my own finite knowledge, not of anything of myself other than what and how God our Father created me and my hearing His voice turning to Him — that we are living in the last of the last Biblical times. The times which the prophets wrote of, the times of which Jesus spoke of, the times which are written in the Book of Revelation, Daniel, Joel, Isaiah, Matthew, and the letters of the apostle Paul to the churches.

These are the last Biblical days before the Lord returns to defeat the evil within nations and the hearts of men and women and to set His foot upon the Mount of Olives and fulfill the remainder of Biblical prophecy.

That said, I also believe it is imperative in such times to not place politics — coming to the realization and understanding that EVERYTHING is politics and political in its nature — but rather the understanding to not place the politics as it is understood by most people to be either left vs. right, democrat vs. republican, liberal vs. conservative with such weight as is carried by so many these days — but to broaden the understanding, which all genuine believers ought to have, knowing their priorities to make Jesus, God our Father, the Holy Spirit and Their inerrant living and active word uppermost in our lives.

Therefore it is imperative to know and strike BALANCE, DISCERNMENT and PRIORITY while also being a vigilant watchman on the wall. Not turning a blind eye, a deaf ear to all that is unfolding before us these days.

We need to READ THE TIMES, KNOW THE TIMES, DISCERN THE TIMES and this is not accomplished by ignoring current events, news and information available to us in these times.

It is a delicate balance for me. As I said, I wrestle daily. What to include, what is important, what isn’t, what to ignore?

The United States of America, as well as almost every nation and people on earth have taken swift and dramatic course changes in the past 10, 15 years. Complete about faces. Turnarounds. Evil is gaining and righteousness is being pushed aside. Thus, as is foretold in the apostle Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, God has given over the people to reprobate minds since they despise Him, despise His Son, despise His word and they turn from Him. Most of those claiming to know Him and love Him perverting and corrupting His word and the truth making the laws lawlessness:

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Isaiah 5:20 — King James Version Holy Scripture

God’s Wrath against Sin

(Jeremiah 6:10-21; Jeremiah 25:15-33; Jonah 1:4-10; Acts 27:13-26)

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Romans 1:18-32 — King James Version Holy Scripture

There have been times over the past eight years in administering this website I put out questions to subscribers, readers, if they thought I was getting to off course, to political, if what was being posted was more secular than that of a genuine disciple of Jesus Christ the Lord and Saviour.

The majority consensus was, and this is a paraphrase of many of the replies:  “No! This is a very unique website and we find out things here our pastors don’t tell us, you can’t find on TV or broadcast news, so please keep doing what you’re doing.”

Thus the daily wrestling within myself. Seeking, asking the Lord if this is apropos, important, necessary or should I move on from this and place this instead here?

I do this NOT as a republican or democrat. As a liberal or conservative. As a secular person of the world. It should be very clear to anyone even of cursory time spent here I am a very conservative person, but that is not to be confused or understood that I place party politics or respect for, favor for any man or woman above that which it should garner in the heart, mind and spirit of a disciple of Jesus Christ. Earthly politics, party politics, political affiliations do not trump our being foremost, uppermost children of God, followers of Jesus, dedicated to the word of God and not anything of this world. Keep this in mind whenever reading any article posted here by a secular writer, passing as news, information and current events. What is posted here is to help others see the puzzle pieces all coming and fitting together. To witness the age. To witness these are the last of the last days — and if a genuine believer? To take delight in the knowledge all Biblical prophecy is unfolding and the Lord is going to return, perhaps not in our lifetime, but in the knowledge this world cannot continue much longer on the course it has taken — and for the scoffers, deniers, unbelievers? That the power of the Spirit of God work in them while God the Father is gracious, merciful to still give them breath, a beating heart and opportunity to seek Him, know Him, trust Him, obey Him, serve Him while the door of grace is still open and they have fleshly breath and life before their eternities begin and they left the most important thing they could have ever done in their lives undone.

That said, with the radical changes which have occurred in America over the past few years, and since the last election, I feel compelled to include the following for all subscribers, readers, and casual visitors to read through for these are the ‘signs of the times’ of which we should not merely read, but TRULY READ TO UNDERSTAND and prepare our hearts, our minds, our spirits, our lives. For eternity. For the return of our Lord Jesus Christ.

There are 12 articles posted here below these comments. I hope readers will scroll down and read at least a few of them.


The Post-Child Democrats

Kill 100,000 babies a year and maybe global temperatures will drop.

Reprinted from: FRONTPAGE Mag

“Is it okay to still have children?” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez wondered while making a salad.

“It’s basically like, there is a scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult and it does lead, I think young people, to have a legitimate question.”

It’s easy to dismiss her, but the loudest proponent of a Green New Deal doesn’t come up with original ideas, she just snatches extreme lefty ideas already being mainstreamed, and dumbs them down into a ridiculous and easily digestible form. Cortez hadn’t come up with the idea of cracking down on air travel or cows. And she hadn’t invented environmentalist proposals for human extinction on her own.

“Is It Cruel to Have Kids in the Era of Climate Change?” the New Republic had asked.

“If the looming 12-year deadline is missed,” the formerly liberal, and now radically leftist publication, suggested, “what purpose could life have in the face of an unavoidable, collective downfall?”

“Bringing children into a decaying world, without even the opportunity to do something about it, seems a cruel fate to inflict on someone, especially your own child.”

It was the very same argument about the cruelty of bringing unwanted children into the world that had been used for abortion that was now being deployed for a preemptive national infanticide.

But infanticide, personal or societal, of a child that exists or of all the children that never will, is not about compassion for the child. It is about the perception that the existence of the child is an evil.

The New York Times put that idea forward when it ran an op-ed asking, “Would human extinction be a tragedy?”

“It may well be, then, that the extinction of humanity would make the world better off,” it pondered.

More children mean more plane trips, more cows and more carbon emissions. Like the cows and the planes, the children must go for the environment to be saved to go on existing in splendid isolation.

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? If there isn’t a single human being left on the planet, does it matter how pristine the woods, lakes and skies are?

New York State rolled out a law legalizing abortion up to birth. Governor Cuomo called it a, “historic victory for… our progressive values”. New York’s birth rate had already been dropping steadily.

In 2015, black women in New York had over 25,000 abortions and only 23,116 births.

New York’s progressive values have made it a place where birth rates keep dropping and the death rate keeps rising. It’s progressively aging while its youth population fell 4% since the 2010 census.

Virginia’s Governor Northam backed an infanticide bill that would allow abortion up to birth.

“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” he told a radio show. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue.”

Virginia’s birth rate hit a low in 2017. The state’s fertility rate trails national averages. Before Obama, the state had seen 108,884 births. In 2017, that number had fallen to 100,248 births.

Rhode Island’s Gov. Gina Raimondo backed its version of an infanticide bill. The state already has the lowest fertility in the country. It also has the country’s highest rates for out of wedlock births and births by welfare mothers.

Vermont debuted an infanticide bill declaring that a, “fetus shall not have independent rights under Vermont law.” In 2016, Vermont had the lowest number of babies born since before the Civil War.

Present day Vermont has 5,903 babies being born, fewer than the 6,538 babies born to an 1857 population of 300,000. Current Vermont birth rates are 30% below birth rates in the eighties.

This is what progressive values look like.

Nationally, every Senate Democrat, except three, refused to back the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act compelling doctors to preserve the lives of babies born after a botched abortion.

“I want to ask each and every one of my colleagues whether or not we’re OK with infanticide,” Senator Ben Sasse asked.

The answer was given.

Politicians were once known for kissing babies. Now, if they’re Democrats, they kill them.

The Democrat political calculus of infanticide is so brutally grim that it makes the infant exposure of their spiritual pagan forebears seem almost humane.

Population increases in states like New York are driven by immigration. First generation immigrants are the safest political bets for Democrats. As the generations pass, the immigrants become worse bets.

The safest pathway to a permanent Democrat majority is abortion and open borders.

Global Warming provides the perfect political cover for a policy of suppressing births and promoting migration. Abortion will reduce our carbon footprint even as we welcome in “climate refugees”.

The central idea put forward by Cortez, the New Republic and the New York Times is an ancient one.

When drought and famine struck, the Pre-Greek Pelasgians would sacrifice every tenth child in an appeal to their gods. As with modern infanticide, ideology served as cover for pragmatic policy.

Judaism gave the pagan world the prohibition against infanticide. As Judeo-Christian influences wane, our pagan ruling class which puts its faith in the apocalypses of its PhD priesthood turns once more to murdering children in a ritual cleansing to appease the anger of Mother Earth at our unclean science.

Kill 100,000 babies a year and perhaps global temperatures will drop. If not, let’s kill 200,000.

Having children is an act of faith, in the future and in ourselves. But what if you believe, like Rep. Cortez, that there is no future worth having? That the world is nothing more than the narcissistic carpe diem of the moment in which all that matters is the moment of fame and the instant rush of experience.

An interesting thing happens when we look at the children of the 2020 field.

President Trump has five children. Mitt Romney, the previous Republican nominee, also had five children. McCain, the GOP nominee before him, had four children by his two wives. Barack Obama has two children. His Democrat predecessors, Bill and Hillary Clinton, had one daughter.

Of the 2020 Democrat front runners who have officially announced that they are running, Senator Kamala Harris has no children. At her current age, she probably never will. Senator Cory Booker is unmarried and will probably stay that way. Senator Elizabeth Warren has two children. Senator Amy Klobuchar has one child. Governor Inslee has three. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has two children. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has been married twice. She appears to have no children. Julian Castro has two children. Pete Buttigieg is gay and has no children.

Senator Bernie Sanders has one son with whom he appears to have almost no relationship.

There are more prolific candidates in the wings. Beto O’Rourke has three children and Joe Biden has four. But those numbers make them well above average for a 2020 field that is light on children.

Individual lives are complicated. That is no less true of politicians than it is of anyone else. And so this is not about passing judgement or making assumptions about the personal lives of individuals. But the statistical trend lurking in these numbers paints a picture of the Democrat political elite.

Four of the 2020 candidates are childless. Only three have families that are above replacement rate. Replacement rate means that two people are doing more than replacing their own numbers. A society whose childbirth rates are at replacement rate isn’t growing. One that is below replacement rate is dwindling away. That’s true of much of Europe. It’s also true of the Democrat political elite.

The average number of children of the 2020 Dem field is 1.5. That’s below replacement rate.

By contrast, the Republican primary field average in 2016 was 3.1 Above replacement rate. The most fertile Republican in 2016 had twice as many children as the most fertile Democrat in 2020.

The Dem 2020 candidates have a total of 18 children. The Republican 2016 field had a total of 50.

These demographic snapshots are also philosophical trends. They show that on average, Republican leaders still believe in the future and their Democrat counterparts don’t. The enthusiasm for abortion is mirrored in their own lifestyles and beliefs. The future is doomed. A prematurely short amount of time from now the waves will roll over their beachside mansions. Starving refugees will flood Marin County. The future will belong to climate refugees from El Salvador and Somalia who will run the country. All the old white Democrats can do is graciously show them the ropes and implement socialized medicine.

And then have a chardonnay, short some energy stocks and watch the tide of change roll in.

Make America Great Again infuriates them with its assertion that the decline at the heart of the selfish nihilistic philosophy to which they have given their lives isn’t inevitable. And they will do everything to prove it wrong, and that their wreckage of their duty and country was right, by destroying America.


Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez Stands With Rep. Omar and Anti-Semitism

Reprinted from: FRONTPAGE Mag

Of course she does.

The Corbyn wing of the Democrats is firmly united around anti-Semitism and will keep throwing around excuses and collaborators with Jewish last names.

Cortez backed Julia Salazar, an anti-Israel activist who tried to pass herself off as Jewish. She’s tight with Rep. Omar. So onwards.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Tuesday said she sees hypocrisy in Democratic leaders’ planned rebuke of Rep. Ilhan Omar over her controversial remarks about Israel, adding that Omar shouldn’t have been “called out” publicly before the issue was addressed privately.

The issue had been addressed privately and then publicly, to no avail.

But, any excuse in a storm for Rolling Stone cover buddies.

“One of the things that is hurtful about the extent to which reprimand is sought of Ilhan is that no one seeks this level of reprimand when members make statements about Latinx + other communities (during the shutdown, a GOP member yelled ‘Go back to Puerto Rico!’ on the floor),” the congresswoman tweeted.

Cortez is predictably dabbling in Labourite anti-Semitic dog whistles suggesting that anti-Semitism is getting too much attention. While searching for distractions. No Democrats yelled, “Go back to Puerto Rico”. If they had, they would have lost committee assignments, careers and probably their lives.

Meanwhile anti-Semitism gets you a cushy seat among the DNC elite.

Alexandria Ocasio Cortez tweeted, “It’s not my position to tell people how to feel, or that their hurt is invalid. But incidents like these do beg the question: where are the resolutions against homophobic statements? For anti-blackness? For xenophobia? For a member saying he’ll “send Obama home to Kenya?”

I’m not going to tell Jews it’s all in their heads, but why are they so privileged?


Do Pakistan’s Blasphemy Laws Trump America’s 1st Amendment?

The new globalization of Sharia.

Reprinted from: FRONTPAGE Mag

The religious police who patrol the precincts of Twitter recently slapped Jamie Glazov, the editor of Frontpagemag.com and the author of Jihadist Psychopath: How He Is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us, with anti-free speech blasphemy codes. The social media giant threatened Glazov with the Section 37 of PECA-2016, Section 295 B and Section 295 C of the Pakistan penal code.

Jihad Watch‘s Robert Spencer has documented how Twitter, along with other leading social media venues, is enforcing Sharia compliance. In the new world of Western dhimmitude, Twitter, acting on behalf of the Pakistan government, is informing American citizens that they could be imprisoned or hanged for insulting Islam.

This new global imposition of Islamic blasphemy law is the handiwork of a leftist playboy on a Muslim prayer mat. This figure of utter incongruity, loved by liberal Westerners, was once a world-class cricketer and Pakistan’s most successful cricket captain—and cricket, a sport foreign to Americans, is the quintessential sport of the gentleman.

As a cricket-loving boy growing up in Bombay, my walls were plastered with posters of Imran Khan. The cricket captain is now Pakistan’s Prime Minister and a poster boy for his nation’s barbaric blasphemy laws – search no further for a striking study in cognitive dissonance.

Oxford-educated Imran Khan, dressed in a mink coat and Mao cap, is equally fluent in the double-speak of radical Islam to his in-house audience and moderate Islam as a mode of public relations discourse. Since his time at Oxford University, Khan also learned to speak the progressive tongue of the social justice warrior tribes.

Khan’s carefully cultivated and calibrated image of incongruity is directed at reinforcing and expanding Islamic hegemony over the West. In the last few days, while the Western politicians were fast asleep like Rip van Winkle and the media were dancing like witches around John McCain’s coffin, Khan nuked free speech in Europe and at the United Nations. And nobody said a mumblin’ word.

In June 2018, Geert Wilders, Dutch Member of Parliament, invited artists to submit cartoons of Muhammad, the prophet of Islam. He offered a prize of £7,700 ($10,000) for the winner. The competition was due to be held in November. Wilders received over 200 entries.

Pakistan, the powder keg of Asia, erupted with outrage. Tehreek-e-Labbaik, the main political party organising the protests, called for jihad against the West. Its leader, Khadim Rizvi, had earlier said he would order a nuclear strike against the Netherlands (if he came to power in the elections) were the cartoon contest to go ahead.

The elections went ahead. Imran Khan was elected prime minister. The useful idiots walking European corridors of power all thought that Imran Khan was “our man” because he was a Western-educated “moderate Muslim” who was three times divorced and married to a sex bomb like Jemima Goldsmith.

Instead, Khan turned the volume of Islamic fundamentalism to a full fortissimo and resoundingly affirmed that he’d defend Pakistan’s blasphemy laws to the hilt if his party won the elections. At the end of August 2018, Pakistan’s senate passed a resolution condemning the competition and Khan turned his firepower on the West vowing to take the matter to the UN General Assembly in September.

Khan is asking Islamic countries to create laws against blasphemy similar to those against Holocaust denial in European countries. He said: “Our government will raise the matter in the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and ask the Muslim countries to come up with a collective policy that could then be brought up at international forums.”

Another Pakistani cricketer, Khalid Latif, has joined Khan’s chorus of “death to free speech” and “death to the West.” Latif, who was banned from cricket for five years for his role in match fixing during Pakistan Super League 2017, has placed a three-million-rupees bounty on the head of Geert Wilders.

To top it all, Pakistani pop star Rabi Pirzada, who dresses like a Westerner in modern clothing and pretends to be a “moderate Muslim,” has used her verified Twitter account to call for cartoonists who draw the Prophet Mohammed to be “hanged immediately.” This prima donna in Pakistan’s opera buffa claims that drawing Islam’s founder is “the worst act of terrorism.”

Pirzada’s tweets are a compendium of contradictions. She parrots the mantra of “Islam is peace” and tweets, “We never did never will do such a barbaric act ever (sic). In islam (sic) we are not allowed to kill innocent people, women or children.” But it’s fine to bump off Wilders because he isn’t innocent. “But that doesn’t mean we can let any dog bark on our Prophet…” is how Pirzada justifies killing blasphemers.

And Twitter never says a mumblin’ word to the threats of violence issued in the name of the religion of peace.

Geert Wilders cancelled the cartoon contest “to avoid the risk of victims of Islamic violence.” While Wilders has stuck out his neck for free speech and continues to do so, what is staggering beyond belief is the pusillanimous acquiescence of the West to the fatwas of religious fanatics in a backward nation stuck in seventh-century Arabia.

Instead of the civilized West civilizing Pakistan, backward and barbaric Pakistani hotheads led by a turncoat Prime Minister are de-civilizing the freedom-loving Western world. Islam sentences apostates to death. But apostates are Muslims, to begin with. With blasphemy, Islam sentences even non-Muslims to death, thus declaring its rule over everyone who is not a Muslim. This is an outrage against the most basic tenets of liberty and justice and free speech.

By not standing up to Imran Khan and his bloodthirsty hate-mongers and by acquiescing to Islam’s blasphemy laws, we in the West are submitting to the religion of Islam and to the rulings of its four schools of law (within Sunni practice)—all of which prescribe the death penalty for blasphemy.

If only we could look in the mirror, we will see an even more striking study in incongruity—our cowardly, spineless selves. By and large, we in Western Europe have rejected religion—i.e. Christianity, the religion of our heritage and culture. Paradoxically, we have capitulated to the authority of another religion “Islam”—which does not mean “peace” but “submission.”

Khan’s strategy is perilously clear for all who have eyes to see. And it just isn’t cricket, it just isn’t fair, it’s just isn’t sportsmanlike. Our response is pathetically obvious for Pakistan and the rest of the Islamic world to see. It is a response of silent submission. And that is just what Islam means: submission.


Princeton Identity introduces outdoor iris reader

05 March 2019

Reprinted from: Planet Biometrics

Princeton Identity, an identity management company, has announced the new IOM Access200w iris recognition reader, an environmentally sealed and impact resistant model designed for use outdoors as part of the company’s IOM Access200 biometric identity product family.

The IOM Access200w is the first outdoor solution of its kind, which when integrated with access control platforms, allows customers to unlock exterior building doors without removing gloves or reaching in pockets to find access cards while delivering the superior security of iris recognition authentication. The IOM Access200w features an easily configurable PIN pad, integrates with external card readers, and provides immediate feedback to users with face capture. The reader is suitable for use in heat, cold, humidity, direct sunlight and low light conditions.

With its patented technology, the IOM Access200w processes subjects almost as quickly as the blink of an eye. Ideal for a wide range of applications, including college and corporate campuses, critical infrastructures, correctional facilities, airports, data centers and more, the IOM Access200 system’s distributed architecture allows users to network any number and combination of indoor and outdoor readers throughout a facility or multi-site environments.

“Princeton Identity is pleased to be first to market with a biometric identity solution that offers the convenience, speed and security of iris recognition for use on building exteriors. Outdoor entryways are often the first areas of concern when designing a security program, and now our customers can leverage the use of this golden biometric on these exterior locations as well as for securing internal spaces,” said Bob McKee, Princeton Identity’s VP of Sales and Marketing. “With the addition of our new IOM Access200w reader, Princeton Identity offers a true end-to-end identity management system that’s unparalleled in its accuracy, security, convenience and flexibility, and an ideal enhancement to any facility’s access control and physical security solutions.”


House Dems Cave In to Islamist Lobby

Reprinted from: Clarion Project

Linda Sarsour (shown here at a rally for Syrian women) (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Linda Sarsour (shown here at a rally for Syrian women) (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)


Democratic members of the House have missed an opportunity to stand tall against bigotry and its public perpetrator – anti-Semitism and Congresswoman Ilhan Omar.

Beginning with the correct intention to swiftly pass a resolution against Omar’s recent spewing of vile anti-Semitic tropes, they have now stalled – and instead shown their true colors. Resolution 2.0 will now be watered down. It will not call out Omar by name and most likely contain condemnations of anti-Muslim sentiment, among other possible modern-day crimes.

The new resolution will be proposed at some undisclosed time in the future, thus rendering virtually meaningless (if it even happens). If our politically correct world won’t allow a condemnation of the oldest bigotry in the book as a stand alone, then whatever does end up being passed will be disingenuous.)

As President Trump rightly pointed out:

“It is shameful that House Democrats won’t take a stronger stand against Anti-Semitism in their conference. Anti-Semitism has fueled atrocities throughout history and it’s inconceivable they will not act to condemn it!”

The stall on the resolution was just the opening the Islamist front in America needed to jump into the fray, distorting the conversation and making it all about Islamophobia.

(As if there is some balance – or a push-pull between Judaism and Islam. Yet for Islamists there is.)

No matter what Omar’s real words were (you can read those here and here), Islamists and their enablers are now busy reframing Congress’ now-failed condemnation of Omar.

It is now “anti-Muslim sentiment that is driving the attacks on her.”

Never to miss an opportunity to bring in as many victim groups as possible to lap up the sympathy, sharia-apologist Linda Sarsour stated about Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (perceived to be one of the driving forces behind the condemnation), “Nancy is a typical white feminist upholding the patriarchy doing the dirty work of powerful white men. God forbid the men are upset – no worries, Nancy to the rescue to stroke their egos.”

Nihad Awad, founder and executive director of the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), whines about Israel and the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC having “undue influence in our Congress and on our foreign policy,” playing the victim card again.

(Ironically, if Israel and AIPAC had that kind of influence, you would think it wouldn’t be so difficult to get a resolution passed against anti-Semitism.)

Notably, Awad’s organization, CAIR, is the same organization that allegedly devised a “thinly disguised money-laundering scheme” to hide millions of dollars of donations from foreign entities.

Those entities most likely included Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who themselves have spent billions of dollars on congressional lobbying and investments in America’s top academic institutions.

Last time I checked, lobbying was legal in America, thus making it acceptable. Yet in the words of founding father George Washington, writing to the first Jewish congregation in the New World, “happily the Government of the United States gives to bigotry no sanction.”

Unfortunately, the Democrats in the House have missed an opportunity to prove that to be true.



Islamist Thugs Abuse Muslim Reformist Women Calling Out Ilhan Omar

Ilhan Omar Rages Anti-Semitism; Pelosi Whimpers ‘Apologize’

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar Compares Israel to Iran


Omar’s Jew-Hate Gone Wild

While Dems bow in deference.

Reprinted from: FRONTPAGE Mag

The Democrat freshman Representative Ilhan Omar (D-Minn) has proven again and again her anti-Semitic bent. She continues to caricature American citizens who support the Jewish state of Israel, including such supporters serving in Congress, of harboring dual loyalties and “allegiance to a foreign country.” While some Democrat leaders in Congress have called her out for her remarks, none appear willing to discipline her. Unlike the Republicans’ actions in stripping Representative Steve King (R-Iowa) of his House committee seats after he made remarks that appeared to defend white nationalism, Congresswoman Omar is still a member of the influential House Foreign Affairs Committee, with no current intention by Democrat House leaders to remove her. Democratic House leaders also appear to be caving in to demands from Omar’s supporters that a clear-cut House resolution against anti-Semitism, which would not have called out Omar by name even in its original version, be even further watered down by adding generic condemnations of hatred in all forms, including of so-called Islamophobia.

Omar, a Somali-American, has regularly demonized Israel and sought to delegitimize it, hallmarks in themselves of her anti-Semitism. In the past, she has accused Israel of “evil doings” and of hypnotizing the world.  Earlier this year, she compared Israel to the murderous, terrorist sponsoring Iranian regime and said she “almost chuckle[s]” when the Jewish state is described as a democracy. Omar criticized Israel for instituting laws that “recognize it as a Jewish state and does not recognize the other religions that are living in it.”

Israel, like the United States, is in fact a pluralistic democracy that honors freedom of worship and religious tolerance. That’s certainly much more than can be said for Omar’s native Somalia, where Islam is the official religion and Islamic sharia is the basic source for national legislation. Employing a double standard when falsely accusing Israel of intolerant behavior that her own native country and other Islamic countries display is yet another hallmark of Omar’s anti-Semitism.

In castigating the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and its supposed influence in swaying U.S politicians to favor Israel, Omar claims she is holding fast to her stated position on “the problematic role of lobbyists in politics, whether it be AIPAC, the [National Rifle Association] or the fossil fuel industry.” Somehow, however, she is not worried about the role of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR representatives have regularly lobbied members of Congress and their staff, as well as having conducted closed door meetings with members of the Obama administration. Its agenda is not merely to protect American Muslims’ civil rights, as it claims. The group, like Omar, is stridently anti-Israel. It has accepted foreign donations from radical Muslim countries such as Qatar. CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad proclaimed two decades ago that “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran … should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”

Omar will be speaking at a fund-raising event for CAIR later this month, hosted by CAIR-LA, whose chief executive director, Hussam Ayloush, has compared Israel to the Islamic State. This same CAIR leader claimed after the 2015 San Bernardino, California terrorist attack, in which Islamist terrorists had murdered 14 people and wounded 31 others, that the United States itself was partly to blame for the attack. He said, “let’s not forget that some of our own foreign policy as Americans, as the West, have fueled that extremism.”

This is the company that Omar keeps – her kind of lobbyists. She is not only an anti-Semite, who deserves at minimum to be kicked off the House Foreign Affairs Committee immediately and censured if she continues accusing her fellow representatives and others who support Israel of dual loyalties. Like the Islamist group she will be fund-raising for, Omar is an apologist for Islamic terrorism.

Shortly after four armed members of al-Shabab, the Somalian jihadist terrorist group, stormed the Westgate mall in Nairobi, Kenya in 2013, resulting in nearly 70 people dead and 200 wounded, Omar said that terrorist acts were the “byproducts of the actions of our involvement in other people’s affairs.” Is that how she justifies the slaughter by al Qaeda of thousands of innocent people who were going about their own business on 9/11?

In 2016, when Omar was serving as a Minnesota state representative, she pleaded for “compassion” in a letter she sent to a judge considering the sentences for a group of Minnesota men accused of trying to join the Islamic State. She blamed their attraction to the Islamic State and preparations to fight for the Islamist terrorists on the flimsy excuse of “systematic alienation.”  Lets just show these would-be murders some “distributive justice,” she said, instead of the harsh prison sentences they deserve.

Finally, when it comes to complaining about “dual loyalties” and “foreign allegiances,” Representative Omar would do well to speak with her colleague, Palestinian-American Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich). Tlaib said that much of her “strength comes from being Palestinian.” To show where her real allegiance lies, she wore a Palestinian gown, said to be a symbol of Palestinian nationalism, at her swearing-in ceremony. She explained, “Throughout my career in public service, the residents I have had the privilege of fighting for have embraced who I am, especially my Palestinian roots.”

A double standard once again. And today’s Democrat Party is all in, bowing to its radical progressive base.


Ocasio Cortez’s Venezuela on the Hudson

New York’s socialist experiment is already falling apart.

Reprinted from: FRONTPAGE Mag


Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez cost 25,000 Amazon jobs that New Yorkers could ill afford to lose. The year that Cortez won her election, New York suffered the worst population decline of any other state.

Why are they leaving?

Some, like Alexandria Ocasio Cortez’s mother, are leaving because of high taxes. “I was paying $10,000 a year in real estate taxes up north. I’m paying $600 a year in Florida,” Blanca Ocasio-Cortez explained.

Some claim that nobody leaves New York because of the taxes. Cortez’s mother proves them wrong.

But millennials are leaving in record numbers because there are no jobs. New York’s under eighteen population is down 4%. That’s not surprising since their unemployment rate is 78% higher than the New York City average. That leaves 100,000+ New York millennials with no jobs and no future.

New York City offers few options for a middle class outside government work. The formerly working-class city has been retooled to cater to hipster expat millennials. Cortez, child of a Westchester architect who parlayed a hipster gig into a spot in Congress and a social media following, is the perfect representative of the wealthy millennials treating working class neighborhoods as their playground. Cortez is popular because she’s living out their narcissistic fantasy of a slacktivist revolution.

But the Cortez crowd comes and goes. New York City isn’t a permanent destination, but an entertaining stop on their journey. They’re a reliable source of lefty chaos, but not a remotely reliable tax base.

Millennials who want a middle-class life are leaving for cities like Houston where they can still find it. Those left behind are stuck between the soap bubble economy of trendy restaurants and boutiques catering to expats that may pick up and go at any moment, and the dreary realities of an economy where millennial workers earn less at the bottom than they do anywhere else in the country.

New York City’s unemployment rate is already worse than the state and the national average.

City Hall’s solution is gulping more socialist snake oil. After the $15 minimum wage passed, restaurants responded by cutting hours and staff, and 3,000 restaurant jobs vanished. Instead of learning the lesson, Venezuela on the Hudson is doubling down with regulations preventing workers from being fired.

New York City can prevent employees from being fired, but it can’t prevent eateries from shutting down. Just as it can’t build a social justice wall high enough to stop millennials from fleeing New York for Texas. But its Venezuelan strategy doubles down on every bad regulation while destroying its own economy.

Restaurants closing down might not be that big a deal in some places, but hospitality and leisure are the closest thing that New York City has to a major non-government industry. Its other major sources of employment, health care and education, are heavily subsidized, directly or indirectly, by taxpayers.

Meanwhile publishing, one of those major expat industries whose employees throng hip urban hotspots, took a severe beating. Without niche industries like publishing and finance, New York City becomes thoroughly dependent on tourism, all those restaurants and bars, plus some terrible theater, to bring in the tourists to help employ its millennials and subsidize its huge public sector.

New York is the state with the highest ratio of full-time government employees to people in any state with a population of over a million. There are 316 government employees to every 10,000 New Yorkers. Those 632,162 people have to be subsidized by its wealthy and what’s left of its middle class.

But the wealthy are also leaving as the city and state bleeds millionaires headed, like Cortez’s mother, for the sunnier and friendlier financial climes of Florida.

“Tax the rich, tax the rich, tax the rich,” Governor Cuomo said. “The rich leave, and now what do you do?”

Cuomo had to start rethinking the $176 billion budget after the revenue shortfalls began kicking in.

With 40,000 wealthy taxpayers covering half the taxes, that’s an even bigger issue for the city whose politics Cortez has carpetbagged her way into with socialist selfies and a dumb smirk.

Those 632,162 government employees are being carried by 40,000 taxpayers, many of whom have been joining Alexandria’s mother in Florida which has a higher population, but 200,000 fewer gov employees.

The most expensive thing about government employees isn’t when they’re working, it’s when they’re not. New York City has $142 billion in unfunded pension liabilities. It’s on the hook for $100 billion in retiree health care benefits with only $5 billion to show for it. While Mayor Bill de Blasio offered free health care for illegal aliens, health care for retiring workers was raided to pay for everything else.

New York City has around 300,000 employees, the most in its history, and 200,000 retirees. Anyone who works for only ten years is entitled to free health care on retirement.

And it’s only getting worse. Mayor Bill de Blasio has been going on a hiring spree, stuffing lefty activists and allies into places like the Sanitation Department, which doesn’t need them, with top salaries. New York City’s streets still aren’t being cleared of snow, but the Department is full of environmentalists promoting composting to a population living in one of the densest urban areas in the United States.

Who’s going to pay for all that with older wealthier residents fleeing, while the city is retooled into a lefty utopia for a shiftless millennial expat elite that has no plans to stay long term, while New York City’s native millennial middle class flees, leaving behind unemployed and poor millennials in an aging city with a huge pile of pension debt for more gov workers than the entire population of Atlanta?

There’s barely a middle class left. What’s left of it is weighed toward government workers and taxpayer-subsidized professions which can no more cover their costs than a man can lift himself by his own belt. The wealthy are losing their sense of humor about higher taxes for worse services. And the welfare class doesn’t contribute to revenues, it drains them dry. To say nothing of the city’s 500,000 illegal aliens who use all the services they can, from hospitals to prisons, but who don’t pay anything except sales tax.

If that.

As the New York Post’s Michael Goodwin points out, city government spending is up 25%. To the DSA political class, to which Cortez belongs, any cutbacks or spending slowdowns smacks of austerity. Spending, in their minds, is as detached from actual currency and revenues as it is in Venezuela.

When asked how she would pay for any of her proposals, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez spouted meaningless gibberish. The theoretical version of meaningless gibberish is the farce misleadingly named Modern Monetary Theory which, in layman’s terms, believes that there’s a giant money tree.

Modern Monetary Theory follows the Venezuela principle that all economic problems can be solved by printing more money. Venezuela’s finance minister, a left-wing sociologist, insisted that “Inflation does not exist in real life.” Back then the inflation rate was 3,000%. A year later it had passed a million. No amount of minimum wage increases, nationalizations, rationing and other socialist gimmicks worked.

Food became unaffordable. People starved in the streets. The military began to be paid with food.

On Wall Street, leftists rallied in support of Venezuela’s socialist dictatorship. When asked about the Maduro regime, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez refused to denounce the socialist butcher and instead condemned America. “I am very concerned about U.S. interventionism in Venezuela and I oppose it.”

The political solidarity that made Rep. Cortez, her mentor, Senator Bernie Sanders, and assorted allies like Rep. Ilhan Omar, leery of rejecting the socialist tyranny, is also economic. Venezuela’s collapse shines a harsh and unflattering light on Modern Monetary Theory and socialist fantasy economics.

New York City isn’t Caracas, but its main advantages are an accident of history. Like Los Angeles, it was home to a culture industry that featured it in countless novels, plays and movies. But that culture industry is dying and a generation of gentrification and migration smoothed away its personality.

What remains are a lot of restaurants being regulated out of business, overpriced and overrated colleges, homes that none of the permanent residents can afford and homeless on every block. And the whole thing has been financed with bubbles, pyramid schemes and dangerous gimmicks. Since 2002, two progressive mayors have used the city to test their radical policies while plotting presidential runs.

They just forgot to pay for any of it.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is the latest radical to emerge from an urban incubator powered by expat millennials like her for whom New York City isn’t a home, but a place to act out a coming of age story.

When the bill comes due, they won’t be here to pay it. Nobody will.


As Democrats Normalize Anti-Semitism, a Jexodus Momentum is Building

Reprinted from: FRONTPAGE Mag

Rep. Ilhan Omar played a game of chicken with the Democrats, making a series of anti-Semitic statements and betting that they would blink. And the blink has all but happened. The second toothless resolution condemning anti-Semitism, but not Omar, is stalled.

A high pressure media campaign has rolled out across major papers, the New York Times, the Washington Post, not to mention the usual digital media smear sites, normalizing and defending Rep. Omar’s anti-Semitic comments.

The Progressive Caucus is standing by her. As is the Congressional Black Caucus, which has met with Farrakhan, and has its own issues with anti-Semitism. Look for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and some of her cohort, which have defended Omar’s anti-Semitism, to start claiming the heads of some of her Jewish critics, like Rep. Engel, as the Corbynization of the Democrats get underway.

The Corbynization of the Democrats will leave Jews with few options as the party turns not only anti-Israel, but overly anti-Semitic, as Corbyn’s Labour has. And it’s important to note that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and her DSA mothership are Corbyn allies.

When the process is properly underway, only the most radical leftists of Jewish origin, who are willing to work non-stop to defend anti-Semites, will be able to remain in the party.

Meanwhile the Jexodus momentum is slowly building. The process is partly generational. It will decisively split millennials between Jewish and leftist allegiances. There will be plenty of leftists with Jewish last names vocally defending the DNC’s anti-Semitism, but they will not consider themselves Jewish, except where briefly politically convenient, whose those who identify as Jewish will leave.

This will be a slow and ugly process. Jexodus would make it quicker. It’s the difference between leaving Egypt and having to be expelled.

Exile is a difficult condition. Some seek to escape it. Others desperately cling to it and have to be physically expelled from it. There is no future for the Jews on the Left. History amply testifies to that from the Soviet Union to Latin America. The Jexodus is inevitable. The question is whether it will be an honorable and dignified departure, or a cringing expulsion.

(Visit Jexodus.org to learn more)


Court Ruling: Opposing Child’s Transgenderism Is Committing “Family Violence”


By PNW Staff (Prophecy News Watch)

Reprinted from: Prophecy News Watch

March 7, 2019

News Image

The day is rapidly approaching here in Canada when the transgender ideology will entirely trump the rights of parents.
We’re seeing that with the sex education curriculums in schools, we’re seeing that in several provinces in regard to parents being able to seek therapy that helps their children become comfortable in their own bodies if they suffer from gender dysphoria, and now a truly terrifying judgement has been passed down from British Columbia’s top court.
From Parents As First Educators (PAFE):
A British Columbia Supreme Court judge ruled that a 14-year-old child has the capacity to consent to their own medical treatments, specifically to receive hormone injections to “transition”.
The child’s father had sought to block medical treatments until a fuller hearing could take place on the implications of the treatment, saying he believes his child does not understand the risks and consequences involved, and he is concerned about the harm that can come to the child.
The father, who says the case is not about transgenderism but is about parental rights, is planning on appealing the court’s decision.
Perhaps the most chilling declaration from the judge’s statement is that any attempt to persuade the child to abandon treatment … “shall be considered to be family violence” under the B.C. Family Law Act.
Not only has the court denied the father his right to stop his child from receiving a controversial medical treatment, it has declared that it would be considered abuse if the father tries to discuss the matter with his child with anything less than an affirming attitude.
(Doesn’t this rhetoric remind you of Ontario’s Bill 89, which was brought in under Kathleen Wynne and still remains today with the Doug Ford government?)
The judge also called the father’s request for scientific evidence to be introduced into the case “disingenuous” and suggested it was a delay tactic. Yet, scientific evidence is the exact same thing doctors who treat children with gender dysphoria say is needed in this controversial area of medicine.
Perhaps the judge hasn’t read about a recent study published in the medical journal Circulation that found “gender-affirming” hormone therapy is linked with an increased risk of strokes, blood clots and heart attacks.
Science is out, ideology is in, and parents who simply want the best for their children are being systematically cut out of the loop by dangerous ideologues who are deeply embedded in our education system, our courts, and our politics. It is a scary time to be a parent.
And don’t think this isn’t beginning to happen in the United States.
Late last year a Texas father who objected to his ex-wife pushing their 6-year-old son into identifying as a girl is in danger of losing custody of the child after he was accused of “abusive behavior.”  This “abusive behavior” was described as “non-affirming actions” such as cutting the son’s hair short and not wanting him to wear a dress.
In another story, parents of a 17-year-old girl in Ohio lost custody of their daughter for opposing her wish for transgender medical treatments. Judge Sylvia Sieve Hendon of Hamilton County, Ohio has allowed the girl to be taken into the custody of her grandparents – who support her medical transition – allowing them to make decisions that will further along her physical transition to the opposite sex.
Americans can expect to see more cases like these as government officials side with transgender activists to promote a radical view of the human person and endorse entirely experimental medical procedures that often have effects that are irreversible.

Amazon Crosses a Very Dangerous Censorship Line


By Michael L. Brown

March 6, 2019

Reprinted from: ASK Dr. Brown

With the news last week that Amazon has banned Mohammed’s Koran: Why Muslims Kill for Islam, co-authored by British activist Tommy Robinson and Peter McLoughlin, Amazon has crossed a very dangerous and precarious line.

Two immediate questions come to mind. First, why ban a book critiquing Islam when a host of other books critiquing – no, harshly attacking – other religious faiths are available on Amazon? Second, why ban this book and not other books that critique Islam? Why draw the line here?

When McLoughlin, who helped expose the “grooming” crimes committed by some British Muslims, received word that the book had been removed from Amazon, he wrote, “This is the twenty-first century equivalent of the Nazis taking out the books from university libraries and burning them.

“Can you think of another scholarly book on Islam that has been banned by Amazon? Mein Kampf is for sale on Amazon. As are books like the terrorist manual called The Anarchist Cookbook.”

Yet Mohammed’s Koran gets banned?

According to Robert Spencer, who has authored scholarly works critiquing the Koran, Robinson and McLoughlin’s book “endeavors to illustrate how violent jihadists justify their actions by referring to Islamic texts and teachings — and that’s all. Robinson and McLoughlin call for no violence. Their book is accurate.”

Indeed, one could readily ask, if their book was banned by Amazon, why not ban Spencer’s related books, such as: The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion; or, The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran; or The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (And the Crusades); or The History of Jihad: From Muhammad to ISIS? (Note that this last title, released in 2018, is currently #1 on Amazon under the category, “Muhammad and Islam.”)

Do you see where this is going?

More disturbingly, why ban Mohammed’s Koran while allowing books to be sold on Amazon like these, by Christian author Texe Marrs? Among his many books are: Holy Serpent of the Jews: The Rabbis’ Secret Plan for Satan to Crush Their Enemies and Vault the Jews to Global Dominion (published in 2016); and Blood Covenant With Destiny: The Babylonian Talmud, the Jewish Kabbalah, and the Power of Prophecy (published in 2018).

According to Marrs, “The Jews are on the fast track to their occult fate. They have made an agreement with hell, a covenant with death, and payments on their debt to Satan must be made in accordance with that contractual agreement.”

Yes, “The ultimate goal of the Jews is the annihilation of almost every Gentile man, woman, and child and the establishment of a satanic Jewish-led global dictatorship (the Jewish Utopia) encompassing the planet. This goal is expressed by the Jews in their most sacred books, the Babylonian Talmud and the Kabbalah.” (For the record, I’ll be addressing the writings of Marrs in the revised and updated version of my book Our Hands Are Stained with Blood: The Tragic Story of the ‘Church’ and the Jewish People, due out in September).

I own the Kindle version of Mohammed’s Koran, having purchased it in 2017. And although I haven’t read all of it, I can tell you that nothing I have seen in the book comes anywhere close to Marrs’s insidious attacks on the Talmud and Kabbalah.

Why are his books available while Mohammed’s Koran is not?

Is it that Robinson has become a marked man? Is it because of pressure from Islamic activists? Whatever the reason, it is not good enough.

By banning this book, Amazon is opening up one of two possibilities: Either Amazon will not be consistent, thereby demonstrating extreme hypocrisy. Or Amazon will start banning many other books, leading to a very dangerous precedent.

Which books and authors will be next? And what can conservative, Bible believers expect? Perhaps our books opposing lesbian, homosexual, bisexual and transgender activism or exposing the evils of abortion will be next?

Amazon has no problem publishing atheistic attacks on religion, like Richard Dawkins’ bestseller The God Delusion.

In this book, Dawkins famously claimed that, “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

How many Bible believers did this offend, including both Jews and Christians? How many find these words to be ugly and bigoted? Should Amazon then ban The God Delusion? And again, I found nothing in Mohammed’s Koran attacking Allah with this same level of vitriol.

An almost endless stream of objectionable volumes could be listed here, including books like, The Talmud Unmasked: The Secret Rabbinical Teachings Concerning Christians; or Jesus the Sorcerer; or There Was No Jesus, There Is No God: A Scholarly Examination of the Scientific, Historical, and Philosophical Evidence & Arguments for Monotheism.

If Mohammed’s Koran is banned, why not ban these?

To repeat: Amazon has crossed a very dangerous and precarious line, and this Bezos-owned mega-company needs to revere course quickly, issuing an apology and reinstating the book.

Anything less than this is a cause for real concern.

If you agree – even if you are a Muslim or an atheist – I encourage you to let Amazon know.


Poll: American sympathy for Israel lowest in nearly a decade

March 7, 2019

Reprinted from: World Israel News

Written by: World Israel News Staff

Poll: American sympathy for Israel lowest in nearly a decade

Protesters march through the streets of Chicago to protest President Trump’s announcement that he will move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, Dec. 7, 2017. A recent Gallup poll finds U.S. support for Israel at a low. (AP/Charles Rex Arbogast)


The poll says that liberal Democrats are no less favorable towards Israel but are also more favorable towards the Palestinians.


The majority of Americans remain partial toward Israel in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with 59 percent saying they sympathize more with the Israelis whereas 21 percent sympathize more with the Palestinians, according to a Gallup poll.

However, while still widespread, sympathy toward Israel is down from 64 percent in 2018 and marks the lowest percentage favoring Israel since 2009, says Gallup.

Meanwhile, the 21 percent sympathizing more with the Palestinians, statistically unchanged from a year ago, is the highest by one point in Gallup’s trend since 2001.

These results are based on Gallup’s annual World Affairs survey, conducted each February. The 2019 poll was conducted Feb. 1-10 prior to Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s recent remarks questioning U.S. support for Israel and suggesting that some supporters of Israel are pushing for “allegiance to a foreign country.”

The slight decline in U.S. sympathies toward Israel in the past year can be explained by drops among both Republicans and Democrats, says the polling company.

The percentage of Republicans saying they sympathize more with Israel in the conflict fell from an all-time high of 87 percent in 2018 to 76 percent today. Last year’s reading was taken as the Donald Trump administration was preparing to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, a change that highlighted Trump’s strong support of Israel.

The percentage of Democrats siding more with Israel fell less sharply, (49% to 43%); however, today’s figure approaches the lowest level of Democratic partiality toward Israel since 2005.

The views of political independents are unchanged.

In summarizing its data, Gallup says “Americans’ overall views toward Israel and the Palestinian Authority have changed little in the past year, with roughly seven in 10 viewing Israel very or mostly favorably and two in 10 viewing the Palestinian Authority in the same terms. At the same time…while liberal Democrats are no less favorable toward Israel today than they have been over the past two decades, they have grown more favorable toward the Palestinians and, perhaps as a result, less likely to side with Israel in the conflict,” says Gallup.


The War to Destroy Christian America

David Horowitz’s new book examines the secular left’s dark agenda.

Reprinted from: FRONTPAGE Mag

Order David Horowitz’s new book, Dark Agenda: The War to Destroy Christian America: CLICK HERE.

Today, the free exercise of religion has ceased to be a guaranteed right in America. Instead, it has become a battlefield. – David Horowitz

For years, Morris County in New Jersey had been giving historic churches money to make repairs under an historic preservation program. In 2015, the State Supreme Court ruled that taxpayer funds should not be used to repair places of worship. A challenge to this ruling recently went before the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case, but Justice Brett Kavanaugh pointed out that “[b]arring religious organizations because they are religious from a general historic-preservation grants program is pure discrimination against religion.” This “would raise serious questions under this Court’s precedents and the Constitution’s fundamental guarantee of equality.”


This seems like a relatively minor, local issue but it is yet another instance of the fierce conflict referred to in Horowitz’s quote above. As the Freedom Center’s founder notes in his brand new book Dark Agenda: The War to Destroy Christian America, we are engaged in “a war against this nation and its founding principles: the equality of individuals and individual freedom. For these principles are indisputably Christian in origin. They are under siege because they are insurmountable obstacles to radicals’ totalitarian ambition to create a new world in their image.”

Those totalitarian radicals are today’s progressives. “Since its birth in the fires of the French Revolution,” Horowitz writes, “the political left has been at war with religion, and with the Christian religion in particular.” He knows this from personal experience. As a “red-diaper baby,” he learned early on that his parents and their leftist friends were true believers in a faith, but not one concerned with the fate of souls. The label “progressivism” masked their true religion, which was Communism, and their “cause was the salvation of mankind” – but “they thought of themselves as the redeemers, not God.”

As Horowitz demonstrates in his slim but compelling and disturbing new volume, the left’s ruthless antagonism toward Christianity stems from its own arrogant determination to shape the world according to atheist Karl Marx’s utopian vision of perfect equality and social justice (with Edenic environmental harmony thrown in for good measure). “Those who believe they are changing the world, or saving the planet, or transforming the human race,” Horowitz writes, “are intoxicated with self-aggrandizing pride.” Those afflicted with this arrogance, such as the so-called New Atheists like political comedian Bill Maher, condemn the violence and bigotry spread in the name of religion (especially Christianity; Islam is usually off-limits to condemnation partly because it shares an anti-Western animosity with the left, and partly because open criticism of Islam tends to get the critic targeted for death). But they “are blind to all the positive influences religion has had on human behavior, and they ignore all the atheist-inspired genocides of the last 250 years,” Horowitz writes. He rightly points out that the danger lies not in religion but in human nature; it is our flawed humanity that sometimes poisons religion, not the other way around.

The left, however, is loath to acknowledge this because human nature is messy and incompatible with their utopianism; thus it must be either ignored, denied, or forcefully molded to fit the glorious collectivist dream. Similarly, our nation’s Christian roots must be denied or cut off to pave the way for the realization of that dream. Horowitz explains, for example, that “America is the logical, if not inevitable, development of the Protestant Reformation,” which “led directly to the principle at the heart of the Declaration of Independence, that ‘all men are created equal’ and endowed with rights by their Creator – rights no government has the authority to deny.”

But the statist left demands this authority for itself, so it seized upon the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to undermine American religious traditions, and found a willing instrument in an activist Supreme Court: “In one despotic decision after another, the Supreme Court inflated the Establishment Clause while letting all the air out of the Free Exercise protection. Again and again, the High Court jammed its radical redefinition of the First Amendment down the throat of an unwilling, unready society.”

“Once the left had built a wall of separation between church and state,” Horowitz continues, “it had to change history and make the past conform to the present.” Thus, for example, schools and textbooks began to reflect a de-emphasis on our Christian roots, such as referring to the early Pilgrims as merely “settlers” or “European colonizers.”

Horowitz identifies the weaponized Supreme Court as the principal villain in this drama:

In case after case – religious expression in schools, contraception, abortion – the Supreme Court handed down a string of earthshaking decisions founded on the flimsiest and even bogus constitutional reasoning. The unintended consequence of these decisions was to place the Supreme Court on the front lines of an epic culture war. It was not merely a war between left and right, but between secularism and religion, especially the Christian religion. The secular left had discovered an all-powerful instrument – the Supreme Court – with which it could impose its radical, anti-Christian agenda on an unwilling nation.

The cast of characters in Dark Agenda includes the rabidly anti-Christian activist Madelyn Murry (later O’Hair), who filed a lawsuit against school prayer which Horowitz calls “the Fort Sumter of the war over religious liberty.” Murray shrewdly found an ally in the Supreme Court, and the rest is history: “A circus put on by a calculating, truth-challenged anti-American crackpot, egged on by ACLU radicals, provided an opportunity for eight lifetime political appointees, elected by no one and accountable to no one, to reinterpret the Constitution, overturn nearly two centuries of precedent and tradition, and change the life of a nation.”

Horowitz also tells the tale of eugenicist Margaret Sanger, a feminist icon who declared in her manifesto Woman and the New Race that women could be liberated from what feminists perceived to be the bonds of motherhood by means of “reproductive freedom,” and may, “by controlling birth, lift motherhood to the plane of a voluntary, intelligent function, and remake the world.” [Emphasis added] Sanger strove to implement her aims by promoting the previously socially unacceptable tools of contraception and abortion.

Horowitz describes how, in order to get the Supreme Court to legalize abortion, feminists sought a sacrificial lamb, a woman whose case would be compelling enough to assure legal victory. That lamb was Norma McCorvey, manipulated into serving as the “Jane Roe” of the immeasurably damaging Roe v. Wade decision (McCorvey never actually had an abortion and became an anti-abortion advocate).

The cast also includes Horowitz’s friend Christopher Hitchens, the New Atheist author of God is Not Great; constitutionalist Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork, infamously demonized by Ted Kennedy and the anti-Christian left; Jack Phillips, the Colorado baker the left tried to destroy because he refused to compromise his Christian beliefs by baking a wedding cake for a gay couple; and of course, former president Barack Obama, whom one faith-based website declared “America’s Most Biblically Hostile U.S. President.”

Today, after eight years of Obama’s relentless castigation of Christian institutions and individuals as bigoted (Horowitz even provides a timeline of hostile acts toward people of Biblical faith during Obama’s tenure), President Donald Trump has been embraced by the religious right despite Trump’s problematic personal character because, as Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council put it, “My support for Trump has never been based upon shared values; it is based on shared concerns.” Predictably, in its obsessive hatred for Christianity and for the upstart political outsider who “stole” the White House from progressive icon (and Saul Alinsky protégé) Hillary Clinton, the left set out to delegitimize Trump by claiming the religious right’s backing is grounded in racism.

This critical front of the culture war that has riven our country still rages. David Horowitz’s Dark Agenda is a must-read for every citizen who wants to understand, and to fight back against, the radically secular drift of our country and the assault on America’s core values, traditions, and freedoms.

Mark Tapson is the Shillman Fellow on Popular Culture at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply, please --- thank you.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes