Declassified document shows Obama DID know he was creating ISIS

Declassified document proves Obama DID know he was creating ISIS

 

by Don Hank

A recent column appearing at zerohedge.com confirmed that a tweet by Donald Trump hinting that Obama knew he was creating a terror group when he sent arms to “rebels” in Syria was on the money.

 

QUOTE:

The tweet included a link to this story that appeared on Breitbart: an account of a 2012  intelligence report from the Defense Intelligence Agency predicting the rise of the Islamic State in Syria – and showing how US policy deliberately ignored and even succored it. Secured by Judicial Watch thanks to the Freedom of Information Act, the document says it’s very likely we’ll see the creation of “an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria.” And this won’t just be a grassroots effort, but the result of a centrally coordinated plan: it will happen because “Western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey are supporting these efforts” by Syrian “opposition forces” then engaged in a campaign to “control the eastern areas (Hasaka and Der Zor) adjacent to Western Iraqi provinces (Mosul and Anbar).”

 

The author reminds us that “Western countries” includes the US.

Whether Obama and Hillary are Muslims or not is hardly the issue here. They are an important part of the Saudi Rat Pack (SRP) and that is all we need to know. If there were any justice in our country, they would both hang for treason.

BTW, a lot of hullabaloo is made over the “evil Muslims,” and Christians are some of the most vociferous in condemning all Muslims for what the Saudi Rat Pack does. I agree that Islam is not the religion of peace and that Mo was basically a fraud.

However, I have interacted with Muslims lately and am getting a much more-nuanced impression of things.

Two anecdotal pieces of evidence:

I attended a local English-speaking church on Easter Sunday here in Panama, and after the service they offered free food in the church basement. We sat at a table with a guy who turned out to be Indonesian, a really nice, respectful guy who had taken part in the service. When he told us where he was from, I said aren’t you folks Muslims? He smiled and said they were. My family and I gathered that he was admitting that he was a Muslim, and for me that was no surprise. I had lived in Asia for over 3 years and had made friends and acquaintances there. I learned early that Southern Asians are open to various religions and can confess more than one religion. In fact, the Buddhists believe that there are 5 great religions and Christianity is one of them. They deeply respect Christianity. Sounds insane to most Westerners, but that is how they are.

So I told the young Indonesian Muslim church goer that I had understood that Indonesian Muslims are different from their Middle Eastern brothers. He was quick to let me know that his countrymen want nothing to do with the Saudi violence and intolerance. He was definitely sincerely incensed about this and about the fact that people might mistakenly think his countrymen might largely sympathize with radical Islam. He said there was only one small region in Indonesia where the Muslims were radical like the Saudis.

The next piece of evidence came in today. I was seated in a lounge area of a large department store waiting for my wife and daughter to finish spending their money and noticed a gent sitting beside me who was looking about as bored as me and we struck up a conversation. He turned out to be an Albanian, one of 2 diplomats opening an embassy in Panama, and he had lived in Kosovo. Many of you know that I have written a piece on Kosovo, mostly a translation about the horrors that Serbs face there. He did not deny that this had happened in the past but said that the Serbs had really abused the Albanians for years. He pointed out that over 100 years ago, Serbia had tried to illegally annex Albanian territory. I told him I didn’t think any of that justified mistreating Serbs in Kosovo, but I saw he was not to be persuaded, so I decided to change the subject a bit and told him I had heard that the Saudis had sent money to Kosovo after the war was over.

He said that Kosovars do not like Saudi interference and that he knew they were causing trouble in Kosovo.

I was shocked to hear that he and I could agree that the Saudis were behind much of the mischief in the Middle East. In fact, he was clearly disgusted by it. He insisted that no one wants terrorism (meaning Muslims) and he sounded sincere.

Clearly the Islamic world is not a monolith and we owe it to ourselves to learn from individuals like my Indonesian and Albanian friends.

I had noticed a while back that there are certain groups of people who want us to believe that Muslims are all cookie cutter copies of each other, and what I noticed about these folks is important, so please pay attention:

These folks who want us to hate ALL Muslims are by and large Neocons. Now why would the Neocons want Americans to simply hate all Muslims and not just terrorists and potential terrorists?

I cannot say for certain, but I suspect that this is because it is easier to convince Americans of the righteousness of a misguided military action by the Pentagon if the target audience of the war propaganda is a bunch of cattle who accept the notion that all Muslims are equally evil and represent an unnuanced homogeneous group. They could use this excuse to take out any leader, such as Ghadaffi, Mubarak, Saddam, and of course, Assad.

I strongly suspect this slyly implanted idea that all Muslims are evil is what is motivating many Americans to support US military engagements that, without the blanket hatred of all Muslims, would make no sense. Indeed, I have read opinions critical of Assad based on the fact that he is a Muslim and therefore is evil and not worthy of consideration. The people who expressed this opinion did not seem to care that if the US takes him out, he will be replaced by ISIS. To them there is no difference between ISIS and Assad. They are tragically wrong. Assad belongs to a subgroup of Shia Islam that is almost perfectly tolerant of other religions. Despite whatever sins he may be guilty of, he is the perfect choice for protection of minorities and has done an amazing job of creating a tolerant society in Syria. Only the made-in-USA terror groups like Al-Nusra and ISIS have changed this situation and turned groups against each other who once had learned to tolerate each other under the leadership of Assad.

I do not suspect that Trump will use hatred and suspicion of Muslims to such an untoward end. I think he was just shooting from the hip when he said we need to stop the immigration of Muslims until we can figure out what is going on.

But Hillary is another story.

Meanwhile my Albanian acquaintance was surprisingly open minded about Trump and said that Trump no doubt was not referring to all Muslims but only to people from terror-exporting countries. He said that if Trump became president Albanians would support him, but that likewise they would support Hillary if she won the presidency because her husband Bill had “helped” the Albanians in Kosovo. In other words, contrary to the doomsday warnings of both liberals and GOP higher-ups, Trump would not destroy the US’s rapport with all Muslim countries but may only sully the most radical ones, like Saudi Arabia, which is in fact the enemy of the American people and does not deserve to be coddled.

I also told him I thought Kosovo had become more unstable after the war and that NATO was just indiscriminately killing people.

Incredibly, while he disagreed on the first point, he seemed to agree that NATO was just having itself a rowdy shooting match in Kosovo!

Finally, he told me that Kosovo and Albania saved the lives of many Jews in those places. Here is that story confirmed by the Jewish Post http://www.jewishpost.com/news/Why-Albania-A-Nation-of-Muslims-Christians-Saved-Every-Jew.html.

The world is a big place and there are all sorts of nuances that we are best served to examine and try to understand. More-precise knowledge of groups of people can help both avoid unnecessary military intervention and/or make sure the groups targeted by the Pentagon and/or the State Department really are enemies and not in fact friends or potential friends of We the People. We really ought to have noticed by now that groups or nations that Washington declares to be enemies routinely turn out to be friends and vice-versa and that overly strident propaganda against anyone is generally an excuse for a needless war.

I am only just beginning to understand the Muslim world but God has allowed me to make just the kind of contacts that are helping me fill in the blanks.

 

Slapdown of Erdogan propagandist

The owner of a Turkish web site recently wrote the pro-Islamist email shown below to a group of his readers. I responded as follows and as shown in brackets and bold typeface in his message:

Ahmet,

In our quaint culture, when a person like you presents arguments to us, it is our custom to respond with arguments of our own — unless, of course, your side has a knife at our throat, as has typically been the case in the past.

Unfortunately, despite the best efforts to beautify the pig’s face, there is a gradual shift in Western opinion toward Russia and against Turkey in the issue of the downing of the Russian plane over northern Syria.

The story of Recep Tayyip Erdo?an and son Bilal’s funding of ISIS is now firmly implanted in our Western consciousness (your unconfirmed diversionary assertion that Assad also participated in trade with ISIS is irrelevant to the emerging narrative regarding Turkey because Turkey is our coalition “partner” and fellow NATO member, thanks to the suicidal tendencies of our “leaders”). BTW, it is interesting how similar your arguments are to those of our own Neocons, who also make liberal use of diversionary tactics.

To tell you the truth, Ahmet, Islam is such an absurd idea to most Westerners that it can only be spread by terror, as you well know and as Mohammed also knew. That is how the Turks managed to spread it in the 14th century, not by means of intellectual arguments but by murdering Byzantine Christians and other kafir wholesale, as laid out masterfully by Bill Warner in his book and in this video.

The early Muslims knew that if they relied solely on apologetics in an appeal to the intellect and the spiritual senses (ie, the approach taught by Jesus), they would never have gotten to first base with Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, etc, which is why you folks massacred us. You were wise enough to know that dead people don’t debate.

As for why Muslim apologetics is ineffectual, I have shown here why the message of Islam fails to convince unless the sword is applied generously by our debating opponents.

My responses to your attempted arguments are in red typeface below.

I can see that you read some of the Western press in order to formulate your arguments. I would like to see at least some deeper thought go into your pro-terror propaganda in the future, because for one thing, I like a challenge and your diversionary Neocon arguments are anything but intellectually challenging, and secondly, if you start analyzing more deeply, you will realize that you can’t provide to sentient Westerners any attractive arguments in favor of Muslim terror and countries that fund and support it. I am sorry that you compel me to point out the obvious.

I am hoping and praying that you and your fellow Muslims –  and especially your allies in NATO – will open their eyes to the truth and heed the clear message of President Vladimir Putin and foreign minister Sergey Lavrov, the only leaders in the world sincerely and effectively opposing terror — even as Washington and Brussels dither and slither.  If you still think you can create propaganda to defend your terror-supporting regime through an appeal to the intellect of the non-brainwashed, you will need to find out what the civilized side says that is swaying world opinion. You may try this site. Once you have heard the other side, you may then be better informed in preparing your truth-resistant arguments.

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this topic. I look forward to your disingenuous and ineffectual response.

Best,

Don Hank

 

 

PUTIN: “The breakup of the USSR was the greatest tragedy of the 20th century.” [Westerners don’t say this, so it is irrelevant to us, although in terms of fighting terror and barbarism, if the countries of the former Soviet Union could back today’s re-Christianized Russia in defending the West, we probably would not be seeing such an uncontrollable proliferation of terror, the hordes of “refugees” flooding Europe or the US-style wars that sow chaos everywhere]

FACT: As a matter of fact, the greatest tragedy of the 20th century was the breakup of the Ottoman Empire. With the empire gone, flocks of sheep numbering millions of people and inhabiting a geography that extends from Bosnia-Hercegovina to Yemen and from Morocco to Iraq, were left without their shepherd. All of the man-made catastrophes and crises in recent history are directly connected with the power vacuum left behind by the Ottoman Empire. These include the Yugoslav civil war, the Iraqi civil war, the Syrian civil war, the Libyan civil war, Greece’s bankruptcy, the Crimea crisis, the rise of the Wahhabi/Salafist creed and so-called “Islamic” terrorism. [The Ottoman Empire was created by massacring our fellow Christians, as shown above. I am amazed that you think the revival of this cruel despotic empire could be an attractive idea to civilized people at all, let alone Christians. Whom did you think you were addressing here?]

PUTIN: “The Russian jet never violated Turkey’s air space and was shot down without warning.”

FACT: In the last 18 months, the Russians had intentionally violated the air space of many allied countries including the UK. In Turkey’s case, they had been bombing Turkey’s allies in Syria [The coalition was formed to fight terror. If by your “allies,” you are referring to the Turkish speaking Syrian minority (erroneously reported to be descended from the people of Turkmenistan), these are people fighting the troops of Bashar Al-Assad, the legitimate, duly elected president of the Syrians. These allies of yours were an ethnic minority fighting the Syrian people and their government. The peoples of the Western world have no interest in supporting their illicit and criminal behavior — such as the cold blooded murder of a coalition pilot. Further, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov had already made it clear that Russia does not accept the absurdity of “good” terrorists vs “bad” terrorists, and Obama knew that when he allowed Russia to form the coalition. Turkey had to know it as well. The Turkish speaking fighters in Syria are terrorists, and given Erdo?ans known support for ISIS, it is not surprising that he would have warm feelings toward these terrorists in northern Syria. He is clearly the friend of all Sunni Muslim terrorists and is completely out of place in NATO], then flying over Turkish air space and thumbing their noses at the Turks. They needed the lesson. The warnings issued by the Turkish fighter jet were heard by US pilots flying in the region. One of the recordings circulating in the Internet was supplied by a pilot flying for the Lebanese airline MEA.

[The problem for you is that when coalition planes are participating in a shared mission, it is absurd on its face for one coalition member to intentionally shoot down another coalition member’s plane and the UN has already condemned the Turkish action on these grounds, so that’s that. The self-defense argument is moot. Turkey knew that its own country was not threatened by planes of its own coalition. Nor did coalition members have the mission of protecting certain terror groups in Syria].

PUTIN: “Turkey arms Isis, buys Isis oil.”

FACT: This week the US published a report saying that Russia’s ally Assad was buying most of the Isis oil to supply its troops. The Americans also identified and blacklisted the middle man who made this trade possible. As Putin knows well, Turkey’s leading energy supplier is none other than Russia. That is not all. The tanks and infantry vehicles used by Isis fighters are Russian. The rifles they hang over their shoulders and the AA guns they mount behind their pickup trucks are also Russian. This equipment can only be maintained with Russian spare parts and loaded with Russian ammunition. [There were Russian weapons all over the Middle East and they fell into the hands of terrorists. Unless you have concrete evidence that the Russians knowingly supplied these weapons to their own enemies (which you know very well they did not), this argument only serves as a distraction. (It is strangely similar to the kind of childish arguments regularly made by US Neocons). In the case of the Turkish purchase of oil, there is satellite imaging proving beyond any doubt that Turkey purchased ISIS oil, whereas here is no such evidence that Assad bought the ISIS oil. Putin showed these images to all members of the G20. This enraged Erdo?an at the time but it also led to the destruction of the oil trucks that were enriching him and his son, enraging him beyond his limits of self control. These were key factors in his desperate decision to shoot down a coalition plane and murder its pilot. He then made the stupid blunder of defending the murder, making him look complicit in a war crime. Finally, it is clear to anyone with knowledge of US military and foreign policy that our “leaders” also clandestinely support terror, in tandem with your country (as evidenced, for example, here,  here and here or by googling, for example, the terms: benghazi turkey gun running.) Therefore, the peoples of the West are locked in a death grip with our own renegade governments and also with Muslim terror groups and countries like Turkey that fund them. We can only win with God’s help and with the pure unadulterated truth as our weapon of choice. But while your master has endorsed the use of lies (taqiyya) when dealing with non-believers, our Master has said: ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.]

 

Are Muslims God’s enforcers?

Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against Him.

Daniel 9:11

by Don Hank

In the comments section of our article “My friend Abdul,” our Muslim reader Alif gave us some things to ponder.
Firstly, he pointed out how immoral the West has become and in so doing presented an uncomfortable argument as to why Muslims would have the moral authority to rule the West and the rest of the world.
Secondly, however, he ignored my question as to why Islam favors the Koran over the Bible — and specifically, why the Bible, parts of which were written thousands of years before the Koran, and most of the historical content of which was written by contemporaries, should be given short shrift or even be ignored by Islam, which is based on the writings of one man who has never met any of the protagonists of the Bible, whom he nonetheless claims to revere. I have posed this question to Muslims for years and never receive an answer.
Thirdly, Alif, like all good Muslims, defends cruel punishment, and to read his words is shocking to anyone with humanitarian instincts, regardless of their religious beliefs, and it echoes those of Abdul in our story:

“Punishments like amputation of hand, whipping, stoning to death and beheading have the dual impact of preventing the individual from committing the same crime in future and serving a stern warning to others.”

Given the tenuous position of the Western world at this critical time in history, all of these points deserve careful analysis.  I will attempt such an analysis herein.
Many secularists and liberal “Christians” who oppose the cruelty and terrorism displayed by Islamists do so on an untenable basis, namely, either  a denial of the existence of God or the claim that God does not intervene, or no longer intervenes, in the affairs of men and has no interest in their morality or lack thereof.  Thanks to such thinking, Muslims will always be able to point out how the West has failed in all possible ways through its loss of morality. For example:
Economically, because politicians, capitalists and bankers, for example, no longer feel constrained to be honest. They think honesty is for suckers. What would anyone expect since they deny the power of God and believe that life ends at physical death? Grab what you can, Boys!
Politically, because they, having no respect for God, think man must be in charge even of natural phenomena such as the weather, and hence, must make and enforce harsh laws to punish “carbon emitters.” Further, like the atheistic Soviet Union, they believe that only technocrats can solve our political and economic problems and even control nature, and hence, the common man (who, they think, isn’t smart enough to grasp their high-minded ideas) must be muzzled, enslaved and impoverished in a modern-day feudal system, which is now in place. The European Union, for example, now rules Europe with almost no input from the ruled. The US is slowly following suit, with politicians ignoring the will of the people (for instance, 90% of us opposed the bailout, but both parties rammed it through).
In the Old Testament, God chose the cruel enemies of the Jews to punish them for their immorality. He can be expected to act similarly today in dealing with us, using Muslims to punish the West for our open immorality.
Now the fact that Muslims cannot account for why they ignore the original accounts of the prophets and rely almost exclusively on a book written by one man on the basis of dreams to which only the author was witness, shows a serious lack of intellectual justification for that religion. Without the Bible, Mohammed would never have heard of the prophets he claimed to honor. Yet he spoke scornfully of the “People of the Book.” Despite its reliance on the Judeo-Christian scriptures for much of its teachings, Islam therefore remains outside Biblical history and, in those areas where it mentions the Jewish and Christian prophets yet portrays them differently from the original accounts, can be considered religious and historical revisionism.
Yet, if God so chooses, He can use Islam to enforce His laws in the West, just as He used the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar – unbeknownst to him — as an enforcer against the wayward Hebrews (see the book of Daniel).
Many solutions have been tried by ordinary people to end the Muslim invasion of Europe, but all have failed.  For example , Harry Taylor mocked Islam and was fined and jailed; secularist Geert Wilders made a movie “Fitna,” critical of Islam and has proposed banning the Koran, but that suggestion opens the door to the banning of other expressions as well, including potentially the Bible. He too was threatened with prison and will be tried soon.

Many other activists, including celebrities and high-ranking politicians, such as Nigel Farage, have railed against the EU and its out-of-control immigration policies that fill Europe with Muslims who refuse to integrate. Though an intelligent and fiery speaker, Farage is largely ignored by the media and EU leaders.

Many “intellectuals,” ignorant of history, declare that Christianity starts wars – ignoring that 100 million innocents were slaughtered by atheistic communism in the 20th Century. Others absurdly declare that Hitler was a Christian . This is all grit for Muslim mills.

So from a secular standpoint, you have a completely incomprehensible phenomenon: a Ruling Class insisting on importing Muslims and according them special status (welfare payments, enclaves of their own where police are not allowed to enter).

Such behavior does nothing but harm the ruled class (now reduced de facto to increasingly impoverished serfs), the economy, law and order, and makes no sense from a human standpoint.

But from a biblical standpoint, it is perfectly comprehensible that amoral Westerners, who reject God and accept moral relativism, even deliberately protecting sinful sexual behavior (eg, homosexuality, see, Romans 1:25-28), should be subject to the whims of a group that insists on a rigid set of moral rules and even threatens them with physical harm or annihilation if they continue to disobey.

God allowed the disobedient Jews on several occasions to be banished from their homeland and enslaved.  The Old Testament (Tanakh) is in fact mainly the story of man’s disobedience to God and the dire consequences thereof.

Our situation here in the West is astonishingly analogous.

There is one solution out of this conundrum, but it is one few Europeans and not all that many Americans can countenance (many, for example, have been brainwashed into believing Christianity is evil and causes war): return to our Christian roots and stop playing at religious relativism, atheistic Marxism and atheistic or secular libertarianism, the same ideologies that have failed since the beginning of recorded history.  

To answer Islam intelligently and effectively, Christianity must be strengthened morally and Christians must follow their Book in their daily actions, but avoid interpreting it in a way that allows them to practice sinful and self-destructive hedonism. Specifically, we must stop promoting abortion, prostitution, drug abuse, dishonesty in business, finance and government, sexual libertinism such as divorce, adultery and homosexuality, and be pure and above reproach, like the Hebrew captives Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in Babylon, who ultimately led King Nebuchadnezzar to the Lord. Only in that way — that is, by walking the straitened and narrow — can westerners restore their honor and prestige in the world, and more importantly, find their way through the narrow gate.

The West has a long way to go in returning to a Biblical worldview. In fact, we are running, not walking, in the opposite direction, gleefully tossing aside the moral principles that once set us apart and made our country great. Most churches have ignored or distorted Biblical teachings, betrayed Christ and sinned mortally in so doing. Many churches of America, the Church of England and the evangelische Kirche in Germany, to name but a few, are on the verge of accepting homosexual marriage and ordaining homosexual clergy.  Many churches have support groups where not only divorced, but also separated – and still-married – men and women can meet people of the opposite sex for the purpose of finalizing the breach in their marriages. This open, festering sin is encouraged by the church leaders, most of whom never once encourage separated couples to renew their vows, considering it passé and psychological incorrect to do so. Some US churches openly support abortion. To avoid supporting the openly anti-Christian policies of apostate churches, house churches may be the only solution for many. We can do that — just as the Chinese do.

Many of us will be persecuted. We can do persecution. We’ve done it for 2,000 years.

But what we can’t do is continue to wallow in our sins and call ourselves Christians.
There is no way loveless, man-centered religion — false Christianity and the harsh militant religion of Islam — can be defeated except through a rigorous return to the religion of love in a genuine heart-felt and lasting revival, complete with weeping and heartfelt repentance. Not just a return, but a renewed devotion and commitment to the Lord of Lords and to His commandments. Though apostate leaders, touting the “Age of Grace,” insist that “Christians” can continue their sinful, disobedient lifestyles and still be saved, Jesus said “I am come not to abolish the law but to fulfill the law.” By this he is not referring to those parts of the law that were abused by the legalists of his day, such as the Levitican dietary laws, but rather to those biblical laws that, as Paul implies in Romans 1:18-20, all human beings deep down know to be righteous and true, laws which Cicero, for example,  called “natural law.”  In so saying, Christ makes it crystal clear: The Ten Commandments and other godly principles still apply.

He can save us from our past sins, but, as he said to the woman at the well, “go and sin no more.” That last part of the story is the part modern church leaders want us to forget.

Rigorous adherence to Biblical teachings on the part of kind and gentle Christians would put Christianity far above the legalistic, rigid and violent Islam, if it were taken as seriously as it deserves to be taken. Muslims would convert by the millions if they saw Christians behaving like Christians: humble, gentle, kind, patient, morally pure but wise. But thanks to false teachers, pastors and other religious leaders, Christianity has come to mean for many: Play first, pray later, pay never.
This is tragically out of keeping with the teachings of Christ and will lead our Western culture, and many souls, to irremediable perdition.

By putting aside all the secularist, psychological brainwashing of and by their leaders over the last half-century, true Christians can still muster the moral authority to assert themselves in the West.

They can, and they should.

Because if they fail to accept God’s moral laws in their own lives, then those laws will be brutally forced on them by God’s enforcers.

It’s already happening.

Muslim brutality documented in MSM:

Journalist Daniel Pearl beheaded

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/12/iraq/main616901.shtml

Nick Berg beheaded

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,119615,00.html

Briton beheaded

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1190477/British-man-Edwin-Dyer-beheaded-Al-Qaeda-terrorists.html

This just in (Olavo de Carvalho):

http://financialsense.com/contributors/jr-nyquist/a-philosopher-warning

The EU wants unlimited fines for Christian speech

EU targets Christianity and free speech

I have sometimes heard American conservatives say that what happens in other parts of the world is of no consequence to us. They get impatient with those of us who look at what is happening in Europe and say “well, they made their bed. Now they must lie in it.”

While it is true that our founders spoke against “entangling alliances” and we should have avoided such a long time ago, the fact remains that the US and Europe are virtually joined at the hip thanks to the alliances our past leaders have established. And thanks in no small part to the blindness of voters in the last presidential election.

Thus we see the European Union poised to destroy Christian speech in what appears to be an imitation of the ACLU this side of the Atlantic. But it is not. Though no monolith, the Left eyes the same ends everywhere. The Fabian Socialists in the UK (Tony Blair was a prominent one) and the Frankfurt School from Germany (now firmly implanted in the US) have the same end: eradicate our culture and replace it with a leftist one in which a self-elected Big Brother decides what we may and may not say and do.

Why should I care what happens in Europe, you say?

The EU is using the same tactics to achieve its ends and has the same goals as our Left. That goal is a one-world leftist government.

Therefore, what happens in Europe will happen here if it has not already, so at the very least, it is a barometer. But worse, the EU is already extending its tentacles to other places. There have been proposals within the EU to widen its reach to Africa and the Middle East. Turkish membership is already being discussed.

And German Justice Minister Brigitte Zypries has already called for German control of the internet and the adoption of the German legal system throughout the world. In case you didn’t know, German courts and legislators have all but banned home schooling and have banned “hate” speech on the internet and in public. A pastor was jailed there for preaching an anti-abortion sermon. Frau Zypries has said she wants us to follow suit. Sweden seems to be perfectly  willing.

Anyone daring to say current politicians in Germany are like nazis is violating the law prohibiting the “trivializing of the holocaust.” So if you think the nazilike politicians are nazilike, better keep it to yourself. (I won’t travel to Germany and I believe a travel boycott is warranted. Maybe that is a subject for another post).

At some point, American leftists will make a bid for one-world government, something that US presidents of both parties, now including Obama, and the EU, the UN and the IMF have been quietly working toward for years, including a worldwide currency to replace the dollar.

The Obama government has said it does not want a good crisis to go to waste. Clearly, both parties, which have long been in the hands of one-world advocates (most presidents have been Council on Foreign Relations members, who are indoctrinated to believe that a one-world government is inevitable and desirable for world peace), and the goal will be the same as in the EU.

The EU started out as an economic entity too, supposedly concerned only with creating a giant market place where goods could travel freely, unfettered by trade barriers.

But from the very outset, this economic focus was only part of a bait and switch scheme. The bait is now gone and the switch is in place. The EU now is telling courts and legislatures all over Europe what they can and must do, and as you will read below, the results are a bit on the totalitarian side. This brings us to another implication for the US: beware multinational efforts like NAFTA.

Ireland was a holdout for years, having voted No in a referendum. But the EU insiders pretended to make a few changes to mollify the Irish and called for a new referendum so that the Irish could vote Yes on the supposedly“new”Lisbon Treaty concerning a EU constitution. But the Irish were duped. The “changes” were minimal to non-existent, but the actual document – though hyped by the elite — was more inaccessible to voters than the Health Care bill was to the US public.

And did you notice something?: If Ireland got to vote twice, shouldn’t the other member nations get that opportunity?

Of course. The fact that they don’t is clear evidence that this is pure snake oil.

There is nothing even remotely democratic about having nay voters vote again and again until the elites get the result they want but not allowing yea voters to do the same. Further, groups in the UK and Germany are saying it was illegal. The EU apparently illegally invested public monies from the member states in promoting the Yes vote in Ireland. And Jose Manuel Barroso, the President of the EU Commission, also went to Ireland on the tax payers’ dime, in violation of the EU’s own rules. This was supposed to be an internal affair but the unsuspecting Irish were dragged into it by a foreign power.

The only holdout today is Czech President Vaclav Klaus, one of the most brilliant men in Europe, who sees through the hype but is being pressured by the EU and member countries to sign the Lisbon treaty.

All of the above-described shenanigans reflect the way Obamacare is being rammed down our throats.

What does the EU teach us?

I think the main lesson is that the Fabian socialists are winning the world through stealth. They are, de facto, achieving their ends of world domination by “democratic” means. How did they do it? The churches went along, the Vatican went along, the “conservative” politicians went along, and now they are dragging the people along behind them. And many of the people are still under the delusion that this is all to their benefit. But a growing number smell a rat.

And note something curious:
While the EU, like American Democrats and RINOs, are using the “gay” issues like gay marriage, and immigrants of the Muslim faith to gin up sympathy for “victim” groups and thereby develop an artificial pretext for their anti-Christian schemes,
ironically, Russia, once the bastion of the Left, is not having any of this and hardly goes along with any of the EU’s schemes.

A few years back, the mayor of Moscow banned a proposed “gay” parade and made a few arrests when a few hardy souls decided to stage it anyway.

And about a year ago, the Russian Orthodox Prelate made a speech before the EU and told them that Europe lacks morality. He also complained to EU Commission President Barroso of Christian persecution in Europe.

If the mad rush to self destruction can’t be stopped from within, our traditional enemy may become an ally at some point and may become the last holdout for traditional Christianity.

And the first shall be last and the last shall be first.

Don Hank

The EU wants unlimited fines for Christian speech

By Graham Wood

I am writing today in regard to the latest example of proposed legislation, which can only be described as horrific, which will be coming forward.   Needless to say it is an EU “directive”.

What is a directive?

A directive emanating from the EU must pass into legislation in an EU member state, although there is some freedom to adapt to national culture and circumstances. Note, however, that such is the sheer scale of EU legislation, not to mention its complexity of language (bureaucratic legalese) that the vast amount is not even known about by our MPs [Members of Parliament], let alone finding time or opportunity to debate in our House of Commons. 
When you read this you will know just how far we have travelled down the road to totalitarianism, and a return to the crudities of religious (Christian) persecution associated with former times (the absolutism of the Stuart Kings and the notorious Star Chamber).  It is proposed (I quote from a small Christian newspaper):

“The provisions are simply appalling, so appalling that most people will not believe what we say until it is too late.  The aim seems to be the destruction of our Christian culture and the removal of any right for free speech on Christian matters.
Of course, it affects other religions, but somehow we doubt whether Moslems and atheists will get the same rough treatment [GW: You bet they won’t – it’s aimed at Christians – and in reality through them, an expression of hatred towards the Saviour].
Basically, if in the province of any service, that is, any public gathering or building or employment terms, you say or do something that another person claims to be offended by, then it is up to you, not the offended party (complainant), to prove that they are not offended.  Should you fail to prove this negative to the court’s satisfaction you are liable to pay compensation to which no upper limit is fixed!
All sorts of people can be affected, not just hoteliers, landlords, (almost anyone involved in a public ‘service’), and it could include publishing houses, schools,universities, preachers, doctors, lawyers, and almost any aspect of media transmission.
According to the Christian Institute: “The proposals explanatory notes make it clear that churches will be forced to consider practising homosexuals for youth worker posts, and similar roles if these become law.”

But the implications are far wider than this one example — for the proposals are so loose and vague in definition that it could be a ‘catch all’ for almost anything whereby somebody could claim to be “offended”  
This is dangerous in and of itself as you will know, but it has other severe possible repercussions, for it reverses the historic principle of the presumption of innocence until proved guilty, would be a draconian inhibition of free speech and expression, and freedom of association.
(All in theory protected under our own Constitution and Bill of Rights and later Human Rights Act with which they come into conflict)
Let me give you an example of this heinous “law” in action.

Under existing “Equality” law:
A Christian couple, owners of a small hotel in the UK, had an open discussion in their own premises, a private conversation, with a Muslim guest. The discussion ranged over Mohammed, the person of Christ etc.  The guest left the hotel and later “reported” the conversation to the police, and they in turn charged the couple with a crime (not yet known) because they defended their faith and criticised Islam).
It is extremely unlikely that the charge will be continued or the couple taken to court, but of course the damage has been done. It is the intimidating nature of these laws that will “chill” free speech in almost any context.
Why “unlimited fines,” reserved usually for serious crimes such as robbery, violence, etc? Clearly there is a harsh vindictive determination on the part of the EU and our government to crush any Christian witness in the public square.  (Acts 4 comes to mind “Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God – judge ye….”).
Two fine Christian organisations in the UK work tirelessly to defend such cases as above – The Christian Institute, and Christian Concern for the Nation. Both need our prayers and support.
It is no exaggeration to say, as CCFON states, that “This is a recipe for cultural genocide”

SIGN THE PETITION:

http://laiglesforum.com/2009/10/13/you-can-help-stop-world-dictatorship/

Afterword:

President Klaus has since caved in to enormous pressure and signed. But my readers are mostly people of faith, and there is still hope that the UK will vote out the current rascals and vote in a new more euroskeptic (anti-EU) government in the spring. Please, therefore, sign the petition to show that ordinary people aren’t buying into dictatorship without a fight.

Obama’s speech in Cairo

Obama’s speech in Cairo

Here is some of what Obama said in Cairo, praising Islam for its “tolerance”:

“Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.  We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition.  I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country.  That is the spirit we need today.  People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind and the heart and the soul.  This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it’s being challenged in many different ways.

Contrast what Obama said about Andalusia and Cordoba with this article (written several years ago) showing that non-Muslims were persecuted in Andalusia for 800 years:

Andalusia, or Al-Andalus, was the area of the Iberian Peninsula under Islamic control during the middle ages. For Bin Laden, the “tragedy” of Andalusia is the Reconquista – the liberation of the Iberian Peninsula from Muslim rule, which came to an end in 1492. But an objective analysis of the history of Al-Andalus shows us that the real “tragedy” was the yoke of Islamic persecution non-Muslims in Al-Andalus suffered under for nearly 800 years.

Muslim apologists claim that Andalusian Spain represented the “Golden Age” of enlightened Islamic tolerance and peaceful co-existance with other faiths. This is a despicable exaggeration.

Read more

Contrast what Obama said about Indonesia being tolerant with this article:

Indonesia: Gambling That Tolerance Will Trump Fear

By Calvin Sims

SEVEN years ago, in the pre-9/11 fall of 2000, I was retrieving my luggage at the airport in Jakarta when a tall Indonesian man in a flowing white robe and green scarf accidentally bumped me off my feet.

He apologized and helped me up. Then I noticed he was part of a gang of grim young men stalking the airport with wooden rods.

He said they were from the Islamic Defenders Front and were searching for Israelis to kill.

Read more

On the other hand, Obama spoke more boldly about intolerance in the Muslim community than GW Bush ever had:

“Among some Muslims, there’s a disturbing tendency to measure one’s own faith by the rejection of somebody else’s faith.  The richness of religious diversity must be upheld — whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt.”

All in all, despite the fawning to Islam and the distortion of history, this speech could have a mitigating effect on Islamic nations and could give moderate Muslims the support they need.

If only he could produce a valid birth certificate.

Republicans threw the election

Republicans threw the election

In the video linked below, hear the Democrats deny in their own words that there was a mortgage lending problem at Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. One even cussed out the Republicans who dared to suggest there might be a problem.

Why didn’t McCain mention this?

I think the obvious answer is: McCain didn’t want to offend any of his buds on the other side of the aisle, where he was busy reaching most the time instead of being a Republican.

McCain sort of wanted to maybe possibly be president under certain conditions (to be set by the Democrats).

This is why this swell idea of getting along with everyone wrecked the Republican brand just as it wrecked the financial institutions.

No Republican would defend the free market.

Now there’s no one left to defend the Republican Party. And rich people everywhere, including the rich guys who supported Obama and his socialist worldview, are losing – reportedly the founders of TomTom have lost a million so far.

Watch here.

 

“Gays” reject democracy

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,447744,00.html

 

 

More on making leftists squirm

I have found that one very effective way to deal with leftists is to ask a question they can’t answer or will inevitably answer incorrectly based on a popular misconception, and then to suggest the answer in a cryptic way that he can’t quite comprehend. That makes you the master. Like the lefty I met at the polling place. I asked him what caused the banks to crash.

He said “lack of regulation of the market.” [All lefties say that because they hate the free market].

I said “what about the CRA?” knowing that he had never heard of it.

Then when he drew a blank, I taunted him by saying: “You know [of course he didn’t], the Community Reinvestment Act.”

At this point I had defeated him psychologically because he knew I knew more than he did and my matter-of-factness suggested this was common knowledge —  which in fact, it should be and would have changed the election results had it been.

But you note that I didn’t explain what the CRA was. I didn’t want him to be able to think up some half-baked argument showing that the bank crash was still the free market’s fault. And I also wanted him to be keenly aware that the media and the Dems were keeping him in the dark

I told him it was up to him to look it up and walked away the clear winner — even in his own eyes.

But not only that, I gave him ammunition to use in a conversation with someone else that will make him look good, and on top of that, because he looked it up himself, this has the psychological effect of making him think of himself as “self-taught,” a source of pride that will stimulate him to further study in the future and may eventually moderate his leftist views.

Donald Hank

 

 

My ears are burning…

A pro-Obama, anti-Hillary Democrat blog cites “Laigle’s Forum:

“23 October – the ultra-far-right-wing blog “Laigle’s Forum” shows Berg the meaning of the saying “lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas”. [Quoting Laigle’s Forum:]

Remember that Berg claims to be a Sen. Clinton supporter. Yet these are the people supporting his suit.

“Note that Berg is a Hillary supporter and suddenly the Hillary camp is sounding like they want the Constitution restored. Can you see anything wrong with this picture of the Clinton camp complaining about injustice and lawlessness? The lady who made off with the White House silverware? The president who made a brothel of the White House and then perjured himself? The couple who rudely fired the kitchen help on trumped up charges as soon as they entered the White House, and whom Judicial Watch has been trying for years to indict for a wide assortment of suspected felonies?”

“(Is it just me, or do the tired old smears against the Clintons sound a LOT like the smears that Berg, “TexasDarlin”, and their supporters use against Sen. Obama. Hmmmmm……)”

This citation of Laigle’s is ironic for various reasons, for one thing, because a pro-Hillary blog had also cited an article by me in WorldNetDaily criticizing Obama.

About that “ultra-far-right-wing” epithet, why do Dems cite us if we are nothing but ultra-far rightwingers with whom they supposedly don’t agree with? When we criticize Obama, suddenly the Hillary camp cites us as authorities. When we criticize Hillary, the Obama supporters (in the present case) cite us as authorities but simultaneously undermine our authority with the “ultra-far-rightwing” epithet.

So, how to sort this out? first, thanks for the compliment, I think.

Second, Laigle’s does not bill itself as ultra-right, so where does this come from?

Our site has published articles from writers of different countries around the world who promote the free market and traditional values, particularly Christian traditions.

But wait: during their campaigns, both of the major Democratic candidates (Hill and Obama) have made a big issue out of being Christians themselves. So on this issue, whey don’t they qualify as ultra-far-rightwing”?

Laigle’s Forum has also tended to favor the free market, in keeping with Adam Smith’s book The Wealth of Nations. Smith is regarded as one of the first liberals.

Wouldn’t that make us liberals? Don’t they claim to be liberals?

Strong defense is another rightwing issue. Doesn’t Hillary support that, as she herself said repeatedly in her campaign?

Thus far, we are shaping up as very much like our Democrat counterparts.

The real difference is that we actually support the free market, strong defense and traditional religion, whereas the Left pretends to support them when it suits them for political purposes.

Now that Obama has mesmerized much of our youth into supporting communism, the Left is showing its true colors.

So the main difference is honesty and integrity.

If being honest makes us ultra-far-right, then I say guilty as charged, Your Honor!

BTW, they used to call people like us far right. Now they have added the “ultra.” But this tells us more about them than about us.

America is drifting to the far left, and the names the Left calls us change to match their leftward drift, not our rightward drift. We haven’t drifted.

Donald Hank

 

Spreading Islam through public and Christian schools:

 

By Berit Kjos

Our friend Tom* enrolled his seventh grade son in a local Christian school this year. But he felt a bit uneasy when he saw the new history text. And as he leafed through the pages of World History: Medieval and Early Modern Times (a standard nationwide textbook), his concern grew.

The dramatic images, evocative suggestions and interesting group assignments would probably prevent boredom, but what would his son actually learn? How accurate were the lessons? And most important: What kinds of values would they instill?

Page 4 (in the section on “Strategies”) told students to “Try to visualize the people, places, and events you read about.”[4] With all the inspiring stories and pictures, that should be easy! Group dialogue and peer consensus would help seal those biased impressions! This was not what Tom expected from a Christian school!

Read more here.

 

U.S. may soon accept Sharia Law

Incredibly, in recent days, the U.S. Treasury Department has begun embracing Shariah-Compliant Finance.  Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Robert Kimmitt has professed an interest in “studying the salient features of Islamic banking to ascertain how far it could be useful in fighting the ongoing world economic crisis.”  According to a press report out of Saudi Arabia, he has declared that “experts in the Treasury Department are currently learning the important features of Islamic banking.”

Read more here.

 

William Lobdell article:

William Lobdell says he lost his faith and is cashing in on his faithlessness to sell his book. Fair enough. Christians and Jews cash in on what they believe too.

I emailed William and told him our stories are reversed: I lost my faith in Marx after worshipping the Left for 40 years.

But before that I had lost my faith in God when I saw some of the same things he saw that caused Lobdell to doubt. My swing back to faith is partly the product of free will, and the willingness to submit and obey – not to religion but to God. That is a subtlety than I think many atheists haven’t understood.

Lobdell and I agree on one thing: religion in itself is not the way. Jesus Christ agrees with both of us on that. I think Lobdell is confusing religion with God, as I once naively did.

I am negotiating with Lobdell to submit an article to Laigle’s Forum so that we can respond.

Joran wanted to traffic in Thai women?

There is evidence that Joran van der Sloot wants, or wanted, to traffic in Thai prostitutes.

Read about it here.

 

Obama required by SCOTUS to present a birth certificate:

“At this point, Supreme Court Justice David Souter’s Clerk informed Philip J. Berg, the lawyer who brought the case against Obama, that his petition for an injunction to stay the November 4th election was denied, but the Clerk also required the defendants to respond to the Writ of Certiorari (which requires the concurrence of four Justices) by December 1. At that time, Mr. Obama must present to the Court an authentic birth certificate, after which Mr. Berg will respond.”

“If Obama fails to do that, it is sure to inspire the skepticism of the Justices, who are unaccustomed to being defied. They will have to decide what to do about a president-elect who refuses to prove his natural-born citizenship.”

Read more here.

So you want to be a communist

So you want to be a communist

 

By Donald Hank

Many conservative pundits today are trying desperately to warn their fellow Americans that Barack Obama has been linked to various far-left organizations, seems to have been reared by a convinced communist, and has ties to the far-left organization ACORN and with leftist terrorists like William Ayers.

Most of these pundits seem to be going on the assumption that, like us older Americans, people today have a basic knowledge of what communism (or socialism, the first step toward communism) actually is, at least enough to fear it.

But, in view of the enormous resurgence of the Left in America, I am not so sure the word “communism” raises so many eyebrows today.

Therefore, it is probably necessary to remind the reader what a communist state looks like from the inside.

I spent a summer in the USSR in the early 70s studying Russian under the auspices of the Council on International Educational Exchange, and a little later, about 4 months in Poland traveling on my own, and here are some things I observed: Continue reading

Europe’s Last Stand, a lecture by Geert Wilders

Geert Wilders never succeeded in scaring me before.

Perhaps you will remember how we carried news of his upcoming film long before the American press even knew about it, and when the film went public, we carried a link, and when the site went down, another link to another site?

Wilders and his film Fitna always fascinated me, but once it came out I sensed that the worst was over, that Wilders had proved a European can shake his fist in the face of the Islamic enemy and live to tell the tale. Then others would follow suit. A few have…

But that was back when America was in the hands of Americans. Geert Wilders scares me now, because we now face an enemy who will probably soon be called “President” by millions. I will never call him that.

The man who usurps power by the lies and distortions of the Left will withdraw the troops from Iraq and then Afghanistan, to the cheers of the “liberals” (sorry, I can’t write that without quotes around it. I just can’t). Things will seem tranquil at first. Then we will look around in our cities and see the women with the veils. There will be parts of cities where the men will call our women whores who venture there. Bars will have their windows smashed. Schools will stop talking about farms because that evokes images of pigs. Children’s songs like Old McDonald’s will be banned.

The words I write today will someday be banned and if discovered by someone in printed form, perhaps in a box in an attic, will sound quaint and distant, like the writings of a forgotten monk in an ancient monastery.

And this in the United States of America. Or rather in a country that goes by that name, somewhere else far from the heart. Somewhere we will be transported to by our elites. A country that should be called Ameristan, but will cynically bear the same name as when it was up here on this hill and its lights were still lit. It is a country we never loved enough, like a parent who is taken early in life before we could say “I love you” and embrace them in a way that made them understand we really meant it. It will be too late then.

Say it now, quietly and reverently:

America, I love you.

I am sorry you have to go.  But I will never let you die as long as I have a memory of the hymns sung around the piano at home, my first girl friend, my dear old dad and mom, now resting on the hillside, playing cowboys and Indians with my sisters and brothers, that little lean-to we built in the woods behind the house. My faith, that lives on inside me but that dies all around me. I will carry you with me and pass you on to others. Where two or three are gathered together, You will be with us.

Thank you, Lord, for the cherished good times and for being here with me when no one else dared to be! We will not forget your great gift of freedom to enjoy for a season and much less your gift of eternal life, in a home that knows no sorrow.

And no Change.

Donald Hank

 

Europe’s Last Stand

By Geert Wilders
FrontPageMagazine.com | 10/8/2008

Below is a speech by Geert Wilders, chairman of “Party for Freedom” in the Netherlands. The speech was sponsored by the Hudson Institute, delivered at the Four Seasons, New York, on September 25 2008 and announced the upcoming “Facing Jihad Conference” in Jerusalem. -The Editors

Dear friends,

Thank you very much for inviting me. Great to be at the Four Seasons. I come from a country that has one season only: a rainy season that starts January 1st and ends December 31st. When we have three sunny days in a row, the government declares a national emergency. So Four Seasons, that’s new to me.

It’s great to be in New York. When I see the skyscrapers and office buildings, I think of what Ayn Rand said: “The sky over New York and the will of man made visible.” Of course, without the Dutch you would have been nowhere, still figuring out how to buy this island from the Indians. But we are glad we did it for you. And, frankly, you did a far better job than we possibly could have done.

I come to America with a mission. All is not well in the Old World. There is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic. We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe. This is not only a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself; it is a threat to America and the sheer survival of the West. The danger I see looming is the scenario of America as the last man standing. The United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe. In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: who lost Europe? Patriots from around Europe risk their lives every day to prevent precisely this scenario form becoming a reality.

My short lecture consists of 4 parts: first, I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe. Then, I will say a few things about Islam. Thirdly, if you are still here, I will talk a little bit about the movie you just saw. To close I will tell you about a meeting in Jerusalem.

The Europe you know is changing. You have probably seen the landmarks: the Eiffel Tower, Trafalgar Square, Rome’s ancient buildings and maybe the canals of Amsterdam. They are still there.  And they still look very much the same as they did a hundred years ago.

But in all of these cities, sometimes a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world, a world very few visitors see – and one that does not appear in your tourist guidebook. It is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration.

Read more:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.aspx?GUID=12D0C037-ABB0-44A6-8E5B-22922484FD4D

 

 

The butterfly effect in Europe’s Islamization

Discreet influences

 

Olavo de Carvalho

Jornal do Brasil (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), May 8, 2008

 

When the Swiss painter and poet Frithjof Schuon (1907-1998) returned from the East in the forties, transfigured into the supreme master of one of the most influential Muslim esoteric organizations and announcing that he would Islamize Europe, he gave the clear impression of being completely mad. Today it behooves us to examine with humility his words and the course of his actions, whose overwhelming efficiency contrasts with the total discretion with which they were undertaken.

First of all, the creation of Schuon’s tariqah (Islamic initiation lodge) in Lausanne was hailed by the esoteric writer René Guénon (1886-1951) as the only promising result of his own efforts of four decades. This clearly shows the meaning of those efforts and, the later rupture between Guénon and Schuon notwithstanding, evinces the perfect continuity of the work of these two esoterists, whose respective disciples nowadays prefer hating one another to celebrating the common victory over a spiritually weakened Europe.

Guénon, the author of masterly analyses of the decay of the European West, had concluded in the 1920s that only three routes were open to this civilization: the fall into barbarism, the restoration of the Catholic Church, or Islamization. On uttering those words about Frithjof Schuon, he had already given up the second alternative. The fiasco of the Second Vatican Council, whose appearances the popes have in vain been trying to save, proved in the end that his diagnosis was essentially right.

The radically de-Christianized Europe is today the stage of an open strife between barbarism and Islamism. There is, apparently, no third way (“secular civilization” is a joke). The possibility of rescuing the Christian option depends entirely on the American influence or on the admirable dedication of Eastern and African priests and pastors, who, in a paradoxical turn of history, have come to try to recatechize the people by whom they were Christianized.

The action of such characters as Guénon and Schuon goes unnoticed by the media, political analysts, and “intellectuals” in general, whose eyes remain hypnotically fixed upon the garish surface of events. But without it the “occupation from within” by means of immigration would have remained innocuous for lack of the cultural conditions that disarmed the European intellectual and political elite. Guénon and Schuon contributed much to create them, subjugating the uppermost and most circumspect strata of this elite to the intellectual superiority of the East in every decisive area except the natural sciences and technology.

Guénon wrote his first articles under the pseudonym Sphynx, suggesting that his readers had no choice but to profit from his lessons intelligently or to let themselves be dominated without ever understanding them. In a single European country those lessons have been meditated with serious intent by independent thinkers, and that country is Romania. When I lived in Bucharest, I found there was not a single eminent intellectual who did not have a profound and critical understanding of Guénon’s work.

The rest of Europe vacillated between obtuse rejection and devout submission, including a significant number of secret conversions to Islam and the recreuitment of many intellectuals and leaders-among them the prospective king of England-into the scheme of state protection for Islamic expansionism. It is no coincidence that Romania is one of the rare European countries where Muslim penetration is negligible.

To give an idea of how powerful the subtle influence of Guénon and Schuon was, suffice to say that the latter interfered directly in producing the crisis between Monsignor Lefèvre and the Vatican in 1976, and the Catholic historians-whether progressive or conservative-have not taken the least cognizance of it thus far.

I know that this article of mine is addressed to few readers and that, among these, some of those who can more or less understand it will definitely hate it. But there are things that one must say just in order not to be accused, in the future, of bearing witness only too late.

 

Translated by Alessandro Cota and Bruno Mori

 

Olavo de Carvalho, 61, taught Political Philosophy at the Catholic University of Parana (Brazil) from 2001 to 2005. He now lives in the U. S. as a correspondent for Braziian newspapers. Website: www.olavodecarvalho.org.

My African religion

My African religion

by Donald Hank

A few years back, when I was still subscribed to AOL, I went to a forum that was discussing black leaders.

One poster enthusiastically stated that Malcolm X had lived in Africa and had “the religion” and he knew “the language.”  Since Malcolm X was a Black Muslim who had learned Arabic while in Africa, this poster was obviously positing that Arabic, a language spoken mostly by whites, was “the language” and Islam “the religion” of Africa, where hundreds of languages are spoken and where Christianity came centuries earlier than the latter. 

Around that time, AOL also had another forum called “My African Religion,” whose stated purpose was to introduce readers to various African religions.  No doubt the assumption was that AOL members from Africa would use the forum to describe their various African religions, such as animism and the like.

I couldn’t imagine that many adherents to strictly African religions would even own computers, let alone be able to articulate their religious views in English.

When I went into the forum, my suspicions were confirmed.  There were no messages at all, despite the fact that the link to this forum had gone up several days earlier.

So I decided it was time to post something about my African religion there, and this is what I wrote:

Read more at WorldNetDaily