Οκτώ (8) Δυνατές Επιλογές!..

1. Pompeo sees ‘Lord at work’ as Trump is saving the Jews from Iran

By World Israel News Staff

During a recent visit to Israel, Mike Pompeo spoke with the Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), weighing in on the U.S.’ role in the Middle East and the Trump administration’s strategy.

CBN’s Middle East Bureau Chief Chris Mitchell posited to Pompeo during an exclusive interview, “Could it be that President Trump right now has been sort of raised for such a time as this, just like Queen Esther, to help save the Jewish people from the Iranian menace?”

Mitchell’s question referenced the Biblical epoch commemorated by the Purim holiday, during which a Persian ruler and his adviser plotted to exterminate the Jewish people. Mitchell appeared to compare Purim’s hero, Queen Esther, to Trump, alluding to the present-day designs of Iran to destroy Israel.

In response, Pompeo said, “As a Christian, I certainly believe that’s possible,” lauding “the work that our administration’s done to make sure that this democracy in the Middle East, that this Jewish state, remain.”

Pompeo said he is “confident that the Lord is at work here,” issuing the comments during the same week as the Purim holiday and Trump’s announcement that the U.S. recognizes Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights.

During his Jerusalem stop, Pompeo visited the Western Wall with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The secretary of state also commented on Trump’s as-yet unreleased “deal of the century” peace plan, noting, “I’ve seen the details of the plan as it stands now. I’m sure there’ll be things moved just a bit as time goes on, but evangelicals of the world should know that this is a vision for what might ultimately lead to the resolution of this conflict.”

“I think this plan presents a vision that doesn’t sacrifice any of the core principles, frankly, of any of the faiths,” he told CBN.

2. Rafi Eitan, Israeli master spy who caught Eichman, dies at 92

By Associated Press and World Israel News Staff

Rafi Eitan, a legendary Israeli spy who led the capture of Holocaust mastermind Adolf Eichmann, has died. He was 92.

Eitan died Saturday in Tel Aviv.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Saturday evening, “My wife Sara and I, together with the people of Israel, mourn the passing of Rafi Eitan,” to whom he referred as “a personal friend of our family.”

Netanyhau continued, Rafi was among the heroes of the intelligence services of the State of Israel on countless missions on behalf of the security of Israel. He took part in the capture and bringing to justice in Israel and Jerusalem of the infamous Nazi Adolf Eichmann.”

The Israeli prime minister also lauded Eitan’s work “to return Jewish property that was taken during the Holocaust,” concluding, “His wisdom, wit and commitment to the people of Israel and our state were without peer.”

Eitan was perhaps most well-known for his role in the 1960 operation to capture Eichmann in Argentina and bring him to trial in Jerusalem, which remains one of the Mossad’s most historic missions. It brought to life the horrors of the Nazi “Final Solution” to commit genocide against the Jewish people, of which Eichmann was the architect.

Later in life Eitan entered politics and served as a Cabinet member.

Israeli President Reuven Rivlin also commented on Eitan’s passing, remarking, We have lost a brave fighter whose contribution to Israel’s security will be taught for generations to come. Rafi was a born fighter who stuck to his mission and to what he knew to be right. Our heads are bowed today in his memory, and we part from him in sorrow and thanks, and with deep appreciation for his contribution to the people and the country.”

In addition to other security officials, Mossad Director Yossi Cohen also expressed sorrow over Eitan’s passing, announcing, Eitan was a pillar of the intelligence community in general, and the Mossad in particular. We will always esteem his contribution to the security of the State of Israel from his days as a young fighter in the Palmach. His work and his actions will be etched in gold letters in the annals of the state.”

Cohen added, The great majority of his operations cannot be publicized but they contributed greatly to the security of the State of Israel. The foundations that Rafi laid in the first years of the state are a significant layer in the activities of the Mossad even today. The people of Israel owe him much. May his memory be blessed.”


According to the report, the breach was committed several months ago and it is not yet clear what information was leaked through the tapping of their phones.

MARCH 24, 2019

Iranian cleric Ahmad AlamolhodaIranian cleric Ahmad Alamolhoda. (photo credit: REUTERS/RAHEB HOMAVANDI)

“In the past few days, Iran’s cyber-attacks have resulted in hacking the mobile telephone of a candidate in Israeli elections and access to all the information,” said Alamolhoda, adding that Iran has hacked the telephones of Netanyahu’s family members.

The Saudi-based news website Independent Arabic first published the report about the hacking of Sara and Yair’s telephones early last week. However, immediately following the report, its authenticity was denied by both the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) and the prime minister.
According to the Saudi report, the breach was committed several months ago and it is not yet clear what information was leaked through the tapping of their phones.
The Saudis also connected the hack of the Netanyahu family’s phones to the alleged breach of the phone of Blue and White Party leader and former IDF chief of staff, Benny Gantz, which was first reported by Israel’s Channel 12. This report was confirmed by Israeli officials, but said that the hacking happened several years ago and only surfaced now in an effort to harm Gantz’s election campaign.
Iran’s foreign ministry denied the Channel 12 news report that its intelligence service had hacked the mobile phone of Gantz, who is considered the main challenger to Netanyahu. Elections will take place on April 9.
Information about Gantz’s phone has been leveraged by the Netanyahu campaign team repeatedly in an attempt to demonstrate that Gantz is a weak candidate who might be vulnerable to blackmail.
Gantz has confirmed that his phone was hacked, but said it carried no sensitive information. He has not blamed Iran.
“The (Israeli) regime’s officials are long used to spreading lies,” Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Bahram Qasemi said about the Gantz phone-hacking report, according to the state news agency IRNA. “They use their propaganda tools to link any event in the world to Iran.”
Qasemi said the allegations were part of an Israeli “psychological war” aimed at stoking hostility.
The two arch-enemies have long been locked in a shadow war. Israel and the United States are widely suspected of deploying the Stuxnet malware, uncovered in 2010, that sabotaged components of Iran’s nuclear program.
Iranian hackers have been behind several cyber attacks and online disinformation campaigns in recent years as Iran tries to strengthen its clout in the Middle East and beyond, Reuters reported in November.
The European Union digital security agency said in January that Iran was likely to expand its cyber espionage as its relations with Western powers worsen.
Qasemi also denied reports by Australian media in February that attempts to hack into the Australian parliament’s computer network originated from Iran.
Reuters contributed to this report.


Trump told me I’m a man of peace

MARCH 24, 2019

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas gestures during a ceremonyPalestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas gestures during a ceremony marking the 54th anniversary of Fatah’s founding, in Ramallah, December 31, 2018. (photo credit: MOHAMAD TOROKMAN/REUTERS)

Abbas, who was speaking to visiting American university students in Ramallah, said he made the proposal to US President Donald Trump during their last meeting in New York in September 2017.

It was the fourth and last meeting between Abbas and Trump, the Palestinian Authority president said.

“He [Trump] said he was in favor of the two-state solution,” Abbas said. “This is documented in protocols of the meeting. He said he would announce, within one week, his support for the two-state solution.”

Abbas also told Trump he was prepared to accept a Palestinian state on most of the pre-1967 lines with land swaps between Israel and the Palestinians, he said. According to Abbas, Trump said he too supported the idea, including the land swaps.

“I told him that if Israel is worried about its security, I propose bringing US-led NATO troops to Palestine to protect Israel’s and our security,” Abbas said of his last meeting with Trump.

Abbas claimed that Trump then turned to one of his aides and asked: “How many soldiers do we have?”

The US official – according to Abbas – said the US has 6,000 soldiers who could be part of the planned NATO force.

“Trump told his aide that this number was not enough, but the soldiers should anyway be ready,” Abbas added. “I told Trump: Mr. President, I don’t like war and I don’t believe in war. I believe that if we get our state, I would prefer to build a school than buy a tank, or build a hospital than purchase a warplane. I don’t want weapons, I just want to build my country.”

Abbas told the students that after he made these remarks, Trump looked at him and said: “How come they say you’re a terrorist? You are a man of peace.”

But two weeks after the meeting, Abbas noted, Trump announced his decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and the relocation of the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Trump’s decisions, which also included cutting US financial aid to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA), prompted the Palestinians to suspend their contacts with the US administration, Abbas said.

“The Palestinians are prepared to backtrack on their move if Trump rescinds his decision, for example, to move the embassy to Jerusalem, or announces that east Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine,” Abbas said.

The PA president lashed out at Trump’s support for recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights.

Addressing Trump, Abbas said: “Mr. President, you are not the ruler of the world; there are international laws and conventions. If you want to be the ruler of the world, you must abide by international legitimacy. It’s unacceptable for you to put your own laws and decisions. How can you allow yourself to do so? Do any of us have the right to say that Alaska is not American, but Russian? I have no right to say such a thing.

Abbas said that despite Israeli measures against the Palestinians, including deducting payments to families of prisoners and “martyrs” made by the PA government, he remains opposed to the use of violence.

“We won’t resort to violence and we won’t accept it at all,” he stressed. “We want to achieve our state and rights through peaceful means, and this means negotiations. We won’t choose any other way to achieve our rights.”

Abbas said he would work with any government elected by the Israelis.

“We believe in peace,” he said. “We believe in security for all. We have agreements with 83 countries to combat terrorism.”

The Palestinians will decide on their next move after the general election in Israel next month, he added.

“We are suffering, and we don’t know what will happen in the next few months,” Abbas said. “But they will be hard days for us.”


Democratic Socialists, National Socialists and the ties that bind.

Before Donald Trump was elected President, and certainly since, self-described “progressives” or “democratic socialists” in the Democratic Party have denigrated anybody who opposes their agenda as Nazis. But are they engaging in psychological projection? Consider the following recent events.

Comments by Rep. Ilhan Omar, Rep. Jim Clyburn and Rep. Rashida Tlaib display contempt for Jews — in Rep. Clyburn’s case, for victims of the Holocaust. Heavily Democratic legislatures in New York, Illinois and Virginia perpetuate the wanton destruction of human life by passing laws allowing abortion to the moment of birth. In Virginia, Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam said a woman can choose whether a baby who survived a botched abortion should live. False flags are cynically organized to delude the unsuspecting and promote an agenda. Behind those developments is the pervasive identity politics that defines some groups as inherently better than others.

In those four areas — anti-Semitism, genocide, false flags and identity politics — do “democratic socialists” and Nazis share more than the former want to admit.

Contempt for Jews is not limited to Nazis or “democratic socialists.” But by embracing Islam in their politics of “diversity” and “inclusion,” the “democratic socialists” tolerate Islam’s anti-Semitism. The Nazis understood the connection between Islam and anti-Semitism so well that they sought Islam as an ally in their politics of extermination.

Mohammed Amin al-Husseini, the grand mufti of Jerusalem, broadcast anti-Semitic messages from Berlin with Hitler’s blessing from 1941 until the end of World War II. Al-Husseini — a close ally of Hassan al-Banna, the Muslim Brotherhood’s founder — told Arabs in the British Mandate of Palestine to “kill the Jews wherever you find them,” thereby continuing a personal campaign that lasted nearly 25 years.

The Waffen-SS also had a special Muslim division, the Handschar, named after the German word for scimitar. Comprised of Bosnian Muslims, the Handschar division perpetrated atrocities against Jewish civilians. Notably, it was the only division in the Waffen-SS allowed to have chaplains, with one imam presiding over each battalion.

Today, Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” circulates widely in the Arab world, with no discouragement from Muslim clerics.

The House Democrats’ flaccid response to its members’ anti-Semitic remarks reflects the refusal to confront Islam’s anti-Semitism. Their resolution condemning all forms of bigotry — without mentioning Rep. Omar by name or Islamist terrorism — reveals Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the house, to be this century’s Neville Chamberlain.

Promoting the wanton destruction of human life extends beyond abortion. Last March, Oregon Gov. Kate Brown — a Democrat whom Planned Parenthood endorsed for re-election last year — signed legislation allowing mentally ill patients to be denied food and water unless that patient issued an advanced directive to the contrary before becoming debilitated. Previously, only caregivers with power of attorney could make such a decision. The bill received unanimous support from the Democrats in the Oregon legislature’s House of Representatives.

In January, Oregon’s Democrats introduced another bill expanding the state’s law governing medically assisted suicide to include any patient with an incurable disease or intolerable pain. Currently, only patients who are expected to live no more than six months because of a terminal disease qualify.

This March, Maryland’s House of Delegates — the lower chamber of that state’s legislature, the General Assembly — approved legislation allowing medically assisted suicide. The bill passed 74-66 on March 7 — with 73 of the chamber’s 99 Democrats supporting it. Within days, members of Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer Labor Party sponsored similar legislation in each house of the state legislature. Six states and the District of Columbia permit physician-assisted suicide.

Such laws follow the ultimate logic of the Nazis’ euthanasia program, Aktion T4, which Hitler personally initiated in 1939 and which doctors administered. Designed to eliminate what the Nazis called “life unworthy of life,” the program focused on the chronically ill, the elderly, the disabled, and the mentally incapacitated — whether adults or children — using mercy as one excuse for extermination.

During Aktion T4’s two years of open operation, nearly 70,000 died from starvation, dehydration, lethal injection and gassing. The Nazis built six gas chambers designed as showers to fool the victims. Though public pressure forced the Nazis to discontinue the program in 1941, it provided the basis for the murderous methods used in death camps.

The utilitarian impulse governing the use of tissue from aborted fetuses for such bizarre experiments as creating humanized mice — usage that has the Democrats’ implied consent — also governed the Nazis’ use of prisoners for their own macabre experiments in concentration camps. In one example, camp doctors infected children with tuberculosis, removed their lymph nodes to determine the disease’s progress, then executed their subjects.

The “democratic socialists” and the Nazis even share the propensity to promote their agendas by fabricating incidents. Eight decades before Jussie Smollett staged a hate crime supposedly perpetrated by Trump’s supporters, the Nazis orchestrated a scenario that plunged the world into war.

On Aug. 31, 1939, with relations between Germany and Poland rapidly deteriorating, Polish troops attacked and briefly took over a German radio station near the Polish border to broadcast this message: “Attention! This is Gliwice. The broadcasting station is in Polish hands.”

Gliwice was the Polish name for the then-German town of Gleiwitz. Gunfire could be heard during the broadcast. German police overpowered the troops and re-captured the radio station.

Only the Polish troops were not Polish troops. They were members of the SS, who not only carried out the attack but dressed concentration-camp inmates in Polish army uniforms and killed them as “proof.” One of the “troops” was an unmarried German farmer who sympathized with the Poles. The SS arrested him a day earlier and murdered him.

German radio carried news of the faux attack within hours. It seemed that Hitler’s assertions about the Poles oppressing and killing German nationals had merit. The next day, Sept. 1, Hitler declared war against Poland. World War II had begun.

The Gleiwitz “attack” belonged to a campaign of false flags orchestrated in late August 1939 by the SS and German military intelligence, the Abwehr. Attention to detail was so meticulous that the Abwehr also provided Polish military equipment and Polish military identification to the fake troops.

Nearly 80 years later, a swastika and the words, “Heil Trump” and “Fag Church” were found on the walls of St. David’s Episcopal Church in Brown County, Ind. immediately after Trump’s election. The graffiti was “among numerous incidents that have occurred in the wake of Trump’s Election Day win,” wrote the Washington Post. Yet six months later, police arrested organist George Nathaniel Stang for vandalizing his own church.

“I suppose I wanted to give local people a reason to fight for good, even if it was a false flag,” wrote Stang, who wanted to “mobilize a movement.”

That movement reflects the “democratic socialists’ ” goal of arbitrarily favoring ostensibly oppressed groups at the expense of those in power. That goal varies from the Nazis’ racial policies only in the nature of the groups. Otherwise, both narratives are fundamentally identical.

Just as the “democratic socialists” view women, African Americans, Latinos, Muslims and the sexually non-straight as needing special protection from powerful whites, Christians and capitalists, so did the Nazis view “Aryans” as needing special protection from Jews, socialists and capitalists. Just as the Nazis viewed “Aryans” as superior due to their race, so do “democratic socialists” view the marginalized as inherently superior due to their victimization.

If racism is the belief that ethnicity matters more than values, ideas and ethics, then “democratic socialists” and Nazis are identically racist. In both cases, individual rights and equality under the rule of law mean nothing.

Herbert Marcuse, a philosopher of the neo-Marxist Frankfurt School, rejected the American ideal of individual liberty under law in favor of preferences for designated groups at others’ expense. Marcuse advocated a “policy of unequal treatment” that “would protect radicalism on the Left against that on the Right,” he wrote.

Such a policy, Marcuse wrote, would demand “the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements” that oppose Leftist goals, and “may necessitate new and rigid restrictions on teachings and practices in the educational institutions.”

This was the Nazis’ practice in service of their ideology. This is the democratic socialists’ goal in service of theirs.

Tucker Carlson discussed the applied consequences of Marcuse’s approach March 11 during his Fox News show:

You sometimes hear modern progressives described as the new Puritans. That’s a slur on colonial Americans. Whatever their flaws, the Puritans cared about the fate of the human soul and the moral regeneration of their society. Those aren’t topics that interest progressives. They’re too busy pushing late-term abortion and cross-dressing on fifth graders. These are the people who write our movies and sitcoms.

The Left’s main goal, in case you haven’t noticed, is controlling what you think. In order to do that, they have to control the information you receive. Google and Facebook and Twitter are on board. They’re happy to ban unapproved thoughts without apology. They often do. So do the other cable channels, and virtually every major news outlet in this country. … They demand total conformity.

Indeed, in issuing warnings about Nazis, the “democratic socialists” and their appeasers in the Democratic Party are issuing warnings about themselves.


The jihad will, of course, continue.

The Syrian town of Baghouz, the last redoubt of the Islamic State (ISIS), was reportedly liberated on Thursday, and that means that the Islamic State’s caliphate is now definitively a thing of the past.

On June 29, 2014, the group that had up to that point called itself the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or Shams in Arabic (hence the synonymous acronyms ISIL and ISIS) announced that it was forming a new caliphate – the single unified government of all the Muslims and the only government to which Muslims rightly owe allegiance, according to Sunni Muslim thought — and would henceforth drop the second half of its name and call itself simply the Islamic State.

This claim to constitute a new caliphate became the basis of its appeal to Muslims worldwide, who traveled in unprecedented numbers to Iraq, Syria and Libya to join it: it attracted 30,000 Muslims from 100 different countries.

The reason for this was the appeal of the idea of the caliphate. The caliph is the successor of Muhammad as the military, political, and spiritual leader of the Muslims. From the time of the origins of Islam until 1924, there was always a caliphate somewhere in the world. The Umayyad, Abbasid, and Ottoman caliphates were, at their peaks, massive empires. The caliph is the only person authorized, according to Sunni theology, to wage offensive jihad, and most did.

ISIS, along with al-Qaeda and other jihad groups, considered the abolition of the Ottoman caliphate by Kemal Ataturk in 1924 to be the beginning of the troubles for the Islamic world: disunity, dominance by Western powers, inability to expand the domains of Islam in any concerted manner. All of them shared, and share, the goal of restoring the caliphate. Only the Islamic State ever managed to do so, albeit only for 57 months.

Once it declared itself the new caliphate, the Islamic State swiftly began to consolidate its control over the large expanses of Iraq and Syria that it controlled – an area larger than the United Kingdom with a population of eight million people. Blithely disregarding the world’s universal condemnation of its pretensions, it moved to assemble the accouterments of a state: currency, passports and the like. Its control of oil wells in Iraq quickly gave it a steady and sizeable source of wealth.

And contrary to the confident claims of Barack Obama and a host of non-Muslim leaders worldwide, it imposed Sharia in its domains, and strictly enforced it. It collected the jizya, the Qur’an-mandated tax on the “People of the Book,” from Christians. It severely punished women for not adhering to the Sharia dress code. Its scrupulous care to implement Sharia was part of its international appeal for Muslims, along with its pretensions to the caliphate.

That fact is also why we will see another caliphate, and it will be just as brutal and bloody as the Islamic State, because that brutality and bloodlust against non-Muslims were not eccentricities of a rogue non-Islamic group twisting and hijacking Islam’s peaceful teachings, as John Kerry and so many others insisted. In reality, the cruelty of the Islamic State – stonings, amputations, oppression of women and non-Muslims – is, as I have demonstrated many times from the Islamic texts, mandated in the Qur’an and the teachings of Muhammad.

Of course the Western intelligentsia knows that to say that Islamic violence and oppression is based on Qur’anic teaching is simply a manifestation of “Islamophobia,” and that the Qur’an is full of wisdom and peace. That’s why, when some group of Muslims founds another caliphate somewhere, and it looks very much like ISIS (and Iran and Saudi Arabia and other Sharia states, for that matter), they will be utterly bewildered. Why is this misunderstanding of Islam so widespread and persistent?

Anyway, the collapse of ISIS is due to President Trump. When Obama left office, it looked as if ISIS was here to stay, and was on the path to legitimization, a la the Palestine Liberation Organization. It was finding buyers for its low-priced oil. It had, it has just been revealed, an ambassador to Turkey. If Hillary Clinton had won the Presidency, there is no doubt that it would still be a significant force in Iraq and Syria.

The caliphate is over, but ISIS isn’t. Its dispersed jihadis are focusing on attacking civilians in the West. Unfortunately, few, if any, Islamic State jihadis will take the collapse of the caliphate as a sign that their premises were wrong; they will just go wage jihad somewhere else, which is why Western countries are suicidal to take back the ISIS jihadis who are their citizens.

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His new book is The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS


Freedom Center founder reveals progressives’ war to destroy Christian America.

Frontpagemag.com (Μπείτε + Δείτε)

In the video and transcript below, David Horowitz discusses his new book, Dark Agenda: The War to Destroy Christian America. The talk was given at the Freedom Center’s Wednesday Morning Club on March 8, 2019. Don’t miss it! 


Readers of my new book “Dark Agenda” might wonder how an agnostic Jew and ex-radical came to write about the war to destroy Christian America. Once I recognized the destructive character of the radical movement I had been part of forty years ago, I began a re-examination of everything I and my comrades had thought about the system we had set out to destroy.

In the course of this inquiry, I had a kind of epiphany. Thinking about the unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which even radicals cherished, I realized that these rights were only unalienable because they were given by a Divinity – by God. If they were granted by government, then government could take them away.

It was a simple idea to understand but not so simple to embrace. Even though I was an agnostic, I had to face the fact that without a belief in God, or respect for such a belief, these rights could not exist. Without respect for believers and their belief, without respect for the Christians who created this country, our most cherished rights would have no foundation and could not be defended.

And that was just the beginning of my second thoughts. Ninety-eight percent of the people who settled and created America were protestant Christians fleeing religious persecution. Every element of our democracy – pluralism, inclusion, diversity, equality and protection for minorities – is Christian in origin, and more specifically a direct product of the Protestant Reformation.

The Reformation was a revolt against the authority of the Catholic Church whose role until then was mediator between God and His creatures. Before the Reformation no salvation was possible outside the Church and its priesthood. The reformers advanced two fundamental doctrines: “the priesthood of all believers” and “salvation by faith.”

“Salvation by faith” was the belief that we are such flawed creatures none of us deserves salvation, which can only be granted by God’s grace. This is the idea behind the checks and balances put in place by America’s founders who understood the dangers posed not only by the popular majority but by government itself, whose agents were as prone to the sins that lead to injustice as those whom they governed.

But the truly revolutionary protestant idea was “the priesthood of all believers.” It meant that every one of God’s creatures faced their Creator directly, without a mediator, and therefore that all human beings were equal in the eyes of God, and had to be treated equally by government, which existed to serve them.

This is the idea that made America the world leader in abolishing slavery, in empowering women, and in creating a society that was inclusive and diverse. In the protestant view, no Church was raised above others, no pope or priest or minister had the authority even to define what Christianity was, and neither could the state. That was left to the individual and his or her conscience.

Because the protestants who settled and created America were fleeing persecution by religions that had  been established by the state, the American Founders made religious liberty, the first liberty and the foundation of all our other liberties.

The title of my book is Dark Agenda: The Left’s War to Destroy Christian America. In the last sixty years, the anti-religious, anti-American left has conducted a relentless assault on believers and their beliefs, suppressing religious liberty, stripping the public square of religious expression and memory, and in the process removing the underpinnings of our democratic order. What inspired me to write this book was the realization that the left’s hatred of Christianity is also its hatred for America itself.

The year 2008 marked the opening of a new $621 million Visitor’s Center adjacent to the U.S. Capitol. It was designed to serve as an informational museum about our republic. When it was opened, however, all references to God and the religious faith of the founders had been systematically edited out of its photos and historical displays. The lengths to which the designers went in their zeal to expunge religion were both extreme and petty:

  • An enlarged image of the Constitution, for example, was photo-shopped to remove the words, “In the Year of Our Lord” above the signatures of the signers.
  • The nation’s official motto was alleged to be E Pluribus Unum, when in fact it is, “In God We Trust.”
  • Even a replica of the Speaker’s rostrum in the House of Representatives omitted the gold-lettered inscription of the nation’s actual motto, because of its reference to a divinity.

It is not just visitors to the nation’s capital who have had God and religion airbrushed out of our nation’s founding. Thanks to a series of corrupt Supreme Court decisions beginning in 1962, children in the nation’s public schools are denied knowledge of the religious origins and foundations of our nation and its freedoms. Outrageously, because of the Court’s decisions this knowledge is now denied to our school children by the Constitution itself.

In 1986, a study of 60 textbooks used by 87% of public school children noted that, “the Pilgrims are described entirely without any reference to religion. Thus, the textbooks describe how at the end of their first year they ‘wanted to give thanks for all they had,’ which was the first Thanksgiving. But no mention is made of the fact it was God they were thanking…. The Pueblo Indians can pray to Mother Earth – but the Pilgrims can’t be described as praying to God. And never are Christians described as praying to Jesus.”

The study sums up its findings in these words, “There is not one story or article in all these books, in approximately 9-10 thousand pages, in which the central motivation or major content derives from Christianity or Judaism.”

If you don’t know where you come from, how do you know where you are going?

This is why the assault on religion has created a national crisis in our country, dividing us into warring camps whose fundamental views are not only in conflict, but irreconcilable.

The first Supreme Court decision banishing religion from the schools and eventually the public square occurred in 1962 and is known as Engel v. Vitale. Engel was a founding member of the New York chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, a radical organization hostile to America and its religious foundations. The ACLU suit objected to a 23-word non-denominational prayer devised by the New York Board of Regents which said, “Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen.”

For 170 years, prayers had been regular features of public schools, without a single constitutional challenge. Now Engel and his team claimed that this innocuous prayer violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment, which banned the state from establishing an official religion.

At the Supreme Court, seven unelected, appointed-for-life lawyers decided by a 6-1 vote in favor of the radicals. In his lone dissent, Justice Potter Stewart pointed out the hypocrisy of his colleagues whose sessions still began with the invocation, “God Save the United States and this Honorable Court.” The idea that a 23-word non-denominational prayer established a religion was transparently absurd, but 6 unelected justices decided it wasn’t.

The Greek scientist Archimedes famously said, “Give me a lever and a place to stand, and I will move the earth.” In the Supreme Court, a radical minority had found a lever that would circumvent the democratic process and allow them to change the world.

There were many democratic solutions available to the prayer issue. If atheists felt excluded by the non-denominational prayer, they could have petitioned the Regents, or the school board, or their elected officials to find a way to accommodate non-religious children. But as radicals they weren’t interested in the democratic process. They had found a branch of government which could change the practices of a nation overnight, make the new practices the fundamental law of the land, and do it for all fifty states at once.

How radical and anti-American were the plaintiffs who shaped America’s future through the leverage of the Supreme Court? The following year, America’s most notorious atheist, Madalyn Murray O’Hair, brought a parallel but far more influential ACLU suit to the Supreme Court claiming that school Bible readings violated the establishment clause.

Murray was the founder of Atheists of America. Life Magazine called her, “The Most Hated Woman in America.” She embraced this epithet to position herself as a victim. In fact, she was a deceitful manipulator of public opinion, who went so far as to blame Christians for the fatal heart attack her aged father suffered only hours after she had assaulted him over his morning coffee with these words: “I hope you drop dead. I’ll dump your shriveled body in the trash.”

Just prior to launching her anti-prayer campaign, Murray took her family to Europe where she tried to defect to the Soviet Union. Seeing what a troubled individual she was, the Kremlin rejected her. When she returned to the States and prepared to position her son as a victim of intolerant Christians, she asked him what he felt about the prayers at his school. He told her he didn’t mind them, to which she responded: “Don’t you understand what is going on yet?… The United States is nothing more than a fascist slave labor camp run by a handful of Jew-bankers in New York City…. The only way true freedom can be achieved is through the new socialist man…. Russia is close but not close enough or they would have let us in.”

The Russians were smart enough to see that Murray was a malicious crackpot, but not the U.S. Supreme Court, which, with one lone dissent, voted to impose her will on all Americans, and thereby suppress religious liberty, which is the foundation of all our freedoms.

The next two Supreme Court decisions engineered by the radicals were even more fraudulent. They led directly to the profound chasm in our society today. The fraudulent legal argument was common to both cases, but it was the 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade that led to the nation-breaking political divisions that confront us today.

The suit was the work of the lawyers at Planned Parenthood and the ACLU, whose support had been enlisted by a chapter of the radical Sixties organization, Students for a Democratic Society at the University of Texas. Once again, the radicals chose to by-pass the democratic-legislative process to invoke the tyranny of 9 unelected, life-appointed lawyers, who voted to make the right to kill children in the womb the fundamental law of the land.

The “legal” basis for Roe was an imaginary constitutional “right to privacy,” invented by Planned Parenthood lawyers to justify their radical agendas. Even if the Constitution contained a right to privacy – and it does not –  the decision made no sense. As Justice Rehnquist said in dissent, there is nothing private about an abortion.

Nor are restrictions on abortions attacks on a woman’s right to choose. Unless she is a victim of rape, a woman makes a series of choices before arriving at the decision to kill a child – first to have sex, then with whom to have sex, then to have unprotected sex or to not use the day after pill. All these take place before a woman reaches the point where she makes a final choice: whether to go through with the birth and find her child an adoptive mother or kill it.

Roe v. Wade represented a fundamental break from the existing fabric of American life. It was imposed overnight, in every community in the country, and without the consent of the inhabitants of those communities who – according to the Constitution – were supposed to be sovereign.

This tyrannical, fraudulent Supreme Court decision split the nation in two. Its assault on traditional communities led directly to the creation of the religious right. Until Roe, the evangelical community had been wary of political involvements, but this unconstitutional assault on its communities thrust it into politics out of sheer concern for its self-defense.

The Moral Majority, Focus on the Family and the American Family Association – all pillars of this movement – were formed directly in the wake of Roe v. Wade. When the Democratic Party embraced Roe, it led to the wholesale defection of its Catholic base and shifted the party dramatically to the left. On the right, Roe prompted Catholics and evangelical protestants to unite in a political force that first elected Ronald Reagan and then Donald Trump.

The venom of liberals towards religious people is the product of a derangement parallel to their hatred both of Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump. It is manifest in the attacks on religion by the New Atheist movement whose spokesmen have accused religion of “poisoning everything” and whose leading voice, Richard Dawkins, has written, “Religious ideas are irrational. Religious ideas are dumb and dumber; super dumb.” Dawkins’ contempt for believers is the same wackiness we see in the claims that President Trump is a “white supremacist,” a “Russian agent,” and “unfit for office.” Every creator of the scientific revolution – Pascal, Galileo, Newton, Copernicus, even Darwin – believed in a Divinity and was inspired by this belief. Dumb? Really?

Why is the left at war with religious Christians? For the same reason leftists are at war with America, the democracy Christians created on the basis of Christian ideas.

Christians believe in the uniqueness and sanctity of the individual soul; they believe in free will, and they believe in “original sin” – in the flawed nature of human beings. It is our flawed nature that makes the utopias of the left – communism, socialism, social justice – impossible to achieve, and monstrous to pursue,

Free will means that individuals are accountable for their actions, not races and genders, as the social redeemers claim. Leftists, so-called liberals, progressives, communists, social justice zealots – all are reactionary adherents of the 4th Century heresy named after its author, Pelagius, a Christian monk. The Pelagian heresy is the most destructive ideology in all of human history.

Pelagius believed that people are born good, and that the sins they commit are against their true nature. Therefore, he believed that if people would only be true to their nature, resist temptation, and be good Christians, they could create heaven on earth, and do it without a divine intervention or grace.

Progressives are the modern followers of Pelagius. They believe that people are born good and that society makes them bad (as though society was not a reflection of the people who create it). Therefore, if people will just be true to their nature, if they will choose to be politically correct – or if the state can coerce them into being politically correct – we can achieve a world of perfect equality, justice and peace. These are the same seductive lies that led to the murder of more than 100 million people in the last century. They were killed because they stood in the way of totalitarian perfection, and were therefore condemned as politically incorrect.

Pelagius’ antagonist was St. Augustine, who was in a way the godfather of modern conservatism. Augustine argued that sin is integral to human nature, that we all share in Adam’s original sin: wanting to know evil as well as good, aspiring to be god-like and create new worlds. This is why human beings corrupt movements for social change and government as surely as they corrupt society. Because it is human nature to corrupt. It is human corruption, which dooms all utopian schemes that aim to repair and redeem the world – a feat that only a Divinity could accomplish.

The battle we face today is one episode in a war as old as creation itself. It is a war that arises out of the human spirit, which is born to evil, but which is also capable of great beauty and great good. Our battle is for our lives and the lives of our children, and for this great country which is unique among the nations, and worth saving.


Analysis: Britain’s ban of Hezbollah and its implications

By Daniel Krygier, World Israel News

The United Kingdom’s recent decision to outlaw Hezbollah’s so-called political wing could potentially change the dynamic of European-Israeli relations and bring a measure of European moral clarity on terrorism, as well as putting the hurt on the terror group’s ability to raise funds.

The U.K.’s Home Secretary Sajid Javid stressed that the decision to designate all of Hezbollah as a terrorist organization was guided by the need to protect the British people. Mr. Javid also blasted Hezbollah for its role in undermining the Middle East.

“Hezbollah is continuing in its attempts to destabilize the fragile situation in the Middle East – and we are no longer able to distinguish between their already banned military wing and the political party. Because of this, I have taken the decision to proscribe the group in its entirety.”

The redefinition of Hezbollah requires parliamentary approval, which could still be torpedoed by the leftist opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn who has referred to Hezbollah and Hamas as his “friends.”

Hezbollah is designated as a terrorist organization by Canada, the U.S., Israel, the Netherlands and the Arab League. Despite a long history of terrorism since the 1980s, it was only after Hezbollah’s terrorist attack on Israeli tourists in Bulgaria in 2013 that they European Union designated Hezbollah’s military wing as a terrorist organization.

Five Israeli civilians were murdered and 32 were injured during Hezbollah’s terrorist attack at the Burgas airport in Bulgaria. However, the E.U., and its leading member state Germany, still refuse to define all of Hezbollah as an illegal terrorist entity.

As a result, Hezbollah’s so-called political wing has been allowed to parade through the streets of Europe while calling for the destruction of the State of Israel. Large Hezbollah-organized rallies have been held in major European cities like London and Berlin.

If the British parliament approves the decision to outlaw all of Hezbollah, it will likely put an end to overt Hezbollah rallies in the streets of London. More importantly, it could initiate a chain reaction that undermines Hezbollah’s financial viability. 

Hezbollah is already in financial trouble, as evidenced by its recent launch of a crowd-funding campaign, a result of financial pressures connected to U.S. sanctions against its main sponsor Iran. 

Outlawing Hezbollah in Britain will put a further crimp in its fund-raising efforts. Europe is an important source of finances for Hezbollah activities. Various European-based Muslim organizations and self-described human rights organizations serve as fronts for collecting donations that are sent to Hezbollah in Lebanon. 

According to several German intelligence reports, there are around 950 Hezbollah operatives in Germany whose work focuses on recruiting new members and raising funds.

If Germany and the E.U.’s persist in their unwillingness to follow Britain’s lead, it’s likely connected to the their commercial and diplomatic ties with Iran. Britain had until recently also supported commercial ties with Tehran.

London’s decision to outlaw the entire Hezbollah organization reveals the growing cracks in a united European front on Iran and Hezbollah. It is a serious setback for the Iran-Hezbollah-Syria axis to finance its costly expansionist policies in the Middle East. It also undermines Hezbollah’s ability to financially maintain its military might against Israel.

While much of Europe and Israel disagree on the Arab-Israeli conflict, there is a growing European-Israeli cooperation to combat terrorism. Israeli intelligence agencies have assisted their European counterparts in thwarting Islamist terrorist attacks on European soil.

Outlawing the entire Hezbollah terrorist organization is ultimately a win-win situation for the West, Israel and the Arab League.