Monday, August 25, 2014

Churches warned: “Tidal wave of gay theology” looming


Churches warned: “Tidal wave of gay theology” looming

Evangelist sued for Bible preaching sees lesbian worship singer as harbinger

Bob Unruh
An evangelical Christian worship singer who has been urging churches to change their doctrine on homosexual behavior since announcing she is a lesbian is at the forefront of a coming tidal wave of “infiltration” of the church by promoters of the “gay” agenda, contends evangelical attorney, evangelist and activist Scott Lively.
Vicky Beeching
Lively, president of Abiding Truth Ministries, said that with insiders on the offensive such as Vicky Beeching, a British-born artist who has become popular among evangelicals in the U.S., he expects “attacks on Christians in America like we’ve never seen before.”
He explained that after the Stonewall riots in 1969, homosexual activists banded together to oppose every American institution that did not fully accept and promote homosexual behavior.
The first victory was over the American Psychiatric Association, and within 40 years, every other group had been conquered, he said. The Boy Scouts were the latest to fall, just a year ago.
Now, the only organization left is the church, he said.
“All of their battle-hardened activists and enormous resources are all directed at the church,” he said.
The problem is that church leaders haven’t been preparing for such a fight, Lively said, and don’t really know what the movement is about.
Beeching revealed she is a lesbian in an interview last week with the Independent newspaper of London.
“What Jesus taught was a radical message of welcome and inclusion and love. I feel certain God loves me just the way I am, and I have a huge sense of calling to communicate that to young people,” she said.
Lively, however, said Beeching represents “the drawing back of the tide before a tsunami” and an indicator of “how bad this is going to get.”
He’s published a brochure for pastors that explains what the Bible says about homosexuality.
“Not a single biblical passage portrays homosexuality positively,” the brochure says. “Jesus unequivocally condemned ALL sexual sin including homosexuality by affirming the ‘one flesh’ paradigm of Genesis.”
It contends a “dangerous modern heresy called ‘gay theology’ is infiltrating the Christian church at an alarming pace.”
“Many believers, fearful of being called ‘haters,’ are trivializing the threat by calling homosexuality ‘just another sin,’” it says.
“But from Genesis to Revelation, the Bible teaches that homosexuality is NOT ‘just another sin.’ It is a symbol of extreme rebellion against God and harbinger of His wrath.”
Listed are multiple biblical condemnations of homosexual behavior.
He said his goal is to put the brochure into the hands of every pastor and Christian leader in America and around the world so they have a biblical explanation for why homosexual behavior is sinful.
Lively noted one of the founders of the “gay” agenda, Herbert Marcuse, expressed a desire to see the “disintegration of the … monogamic and patriarchal family.”
“One last barrier to ‘gay’ cultural hegemony remains: the Christian church,” Lively said.
Lively is not unfamiliar with attacks on Christians. He’s being sued by activists in Uganda who accused him under the Alien Tort Statute of inciting the persecution of homosexuals.
The case is significant because a ruling against him would mean that an international agenda based on anti-biblical standards could trump the U.S. Constitution’s freedom of speech and religion.
U.S. District Judge Michael Posner has let the case brought against Lively by an African group called Sexual Minorities Uganda, or SMUG, proceed.
SMUG calls Lively’s speech against homosexual behavior a “crime against humanity” in violation of “international law.” The plaintiffs allege the Alien Tort Statute in the United States allows them to make the charge in a U.S. court.
But Lively’s attorney, Horatio Mihet of Liberty Counsel, says his client’s preaching is protected by the Constitution.
“We believe SMUG’s claims are firmly foreclosed, not only by the First Amendment right to free speech, but also by the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Kiobel, which eliminated Alien Tort Statute claims for events that allegedly occurred in foreign nations,” he said.
Yet, Posner took nearly 80 pages to say that he thought SMUG’s allegations were substantive and needed to be adjudicated.
Recommended Reading:
US wants to combat anti-homosexuality movement worldwide

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

The Perfect Revival?


The Perfect Revival?

By Julio Severo
Brazil has experienced an explosive growth of Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal (neo-charismatic) churches. Large crowds of poor people have been attending these churches looking for answers for their physical, material and spiritual needs.
The Brazilian Catholic Church, plagued by the Liberation Theology, has been worried about this growth. And even mainline Brazilian Protestant churches, similarly plagued by Protestant versions of the Liberation Theology, have been worried.
International onlookers see such growth as a phenomenon or even evidence of “revival.” Yet, Brazilian Calvinist critics question that if it were genuine, Brazil would not have now a socialist government. But what if Brazil depended just on the Catholic Church and its Liberation Theology? It would be already a Catholic Cuba. What if Brazil depended just on mainline Protestant churches and their Protestant versions of the Liberation Theology? It would be already a Protestant Cuba.
The Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal growth in Brazil is far from perfection. But virulent critics from mainline Protestant churches, which are very small in Brazil in comparison to large Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal churches, have used the imperfections to point that the “revival” in Brazil is counterfeit, misleading, and even demonic. Calvinist critics have consistently condemned the Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal growth in Brazil.
They ignore that revival does not equal perfection. They ignore the grave imperfections of the perfectly charismatic church of 1 Corinthians.
They point that the result of a perfect revival is change and transformation in Christians and their behavior. This change affects everyone: lawyers, farmers, and even politicians. If there is a large numbers of Christians in a government, it is expected that it will conform to the Christian values and justice by the testimony and presence of Christians.
They point that the perfect revival was the Great Awakening in America and the preaching of men like Jonathan Edwards.
Let us use their standard to analyze a “perfect revival.” First, came the Great Awakening, by Jonathan Edwards and others. Next, the birth of the United States by men simultaneously Protestant and Mason. This is, most of the Founding Founders were Protestant at the same time affected by the Great Awakening and Masonry!
If America is today plagued by Mason symbols and taints, the example was set by these Mason Protestants who lived under the influence of the strong spiritual culture left by the Great Awakening.
The largest Presbyterian denomination in Brazil, founded by U.S. Mason Presbyterian missionaries in the midst-1800s and cradle of the first Protestant version of the Liberation Theology in the 1950s, has a difficult time to discipline its countless Mason ministers and other leaders, who nevertheless have been busy criticizing the many “heresies” of the Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal growth.
So by their logic, if the Great Awakening was a perfect revival, it follows that Masonry plaguing Protestant politicians is ok, because if it is not ok, it follows that the Great Awakening was an imperfect revival. And Calvinist critics in Brazil have just one answer to imperfect revivals: systematic criticism.
Never mind that what God’s Word says also applies to Masonry among Protestant ministers, politicians and other leaders:
“Stop forming inappropriate relationships with unbelievers. Can right and wrong be partners? Can light have anything in common with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14 GWV)
The Great Awakening was the greatest blessing for the birth of America. But Masonry was not a blessing, and it will be, with its schemes of New World Order, her fall.
The Great Awakening was not a perfect revival. Only God is perfect. The Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal growth in Brazil is not perfect. Only God is perfect.
If Brazil is today more socialist, Pentecostals and neo-Pentecostals are not to blame. In the 1990s, Rev. Caio Fábio, the greatest Presbyterian leader in the Brazilian history, led the Brazilian Church to support the Workers’ Party (Partido dos Trabalhadores), which is the ruling socialist party in Brazil, and today Rev. Fábio is a fallen man, because of his sexual and financial scandals. More information about his huge influence in the Brazilian Church can be found in my free e-book “Theology of Liberation Versus Theology of Prosperity” here: http://bit.ly/15AJmMC
The Workers’ Party and other socialist parties are determined to impose abortion and homosexuality in Brazil. The only hindrance to their project, by their own admission, is the daring testimony of neo-Pentecostal televangelists, who are under a heavy barrage of “theological” criticism from Calvinist critics comfortably in a religious environment plagued by Masonry and the Theology of Integral Mission, which is the Protestant version of the Liberation Theology.
Their inspiration is often John MacArthur, a Calvinist theologian who believes the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit have ceased. Calvinist churches increasingly embracing homosexuality, abortion and stances against Israel and MacArthur and his Brazilian followers worried about what the Holy Spirit can or cannot do today. Why do not he and other Calvinist critics use their judgmental “gift” toward PCUSA and many other cessationist, liberal Protestant churches?
Why do not they use their judgmental “gift” toward the Theology of Integral Mission and Masonry?
If they did it, many Calvinist critics in Brazil would begin to busy themselves with these colossal problems in their own midst, and understandably they would be left no time to attack Pentecostals and charismatics and much less to require their growth to conform to Calvinist expectations of the Great Awakening.
If they want to criticize “imperfect” revivals, what about Masonry among Founding Fathers who were affected by the Great Awakening? Why do they refuse to see Masonry as intricate witchcraft? If they want perfection in others, why is their midst plagued by the Theology of Integral Mission? Why does this liberal and leftist theology affect predominantly Calvinists in Brazil? Why do they have never criticized their former theological celebrity, Rev. Caio Fábio, for his instrumental role promoting the Theology of Integral Mission and evangelical involvement with the Workers’ Party?
Is there a perfect revival? Of course, not. But if Pentecostals and neo-Pentecostals do not criticize the Great Awakening, why do Calvinist critics consistently criticize the Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal growth in Brazil?
As for me, I say: there is no reason to reject the Great Awakening and the Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal growth in Brazil because of their imperfections. Mature Christians will appreciate both events and will know how to reject their imperfections without tossing away what God did and is doing.            
Portuguese version of this article: O reavivamento perfeito?
Recommended Reading:

Monday, August 18, 2014

The U.N. Year of Solidarity With the Palestinian Cause


The U.N. Year of Solidarity With the Palestinian Cause

By Julio Severo
By a United Nations resolution, 2014 is the “Year of Solidarity with the Palestinian People,” an occasion that has been used by the U.N. to organize special activities along with governments and non-governmental organizations to promote the Palestinian cause.
The resolution was passed on the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People in 2013, a very busy year for the U.N., which adopted a total of 21 resolutions singling out Israel for criticism. In contrast, the rest of the world combined received just 4 of such condemnatory resolutions in 2013. It makes one wonder why Israel has received a very preferential treatment by the U.N.
Strangely, Saudi Arabia, a neighbor of Israel where democracy and respect for basic human rights are unheard-of, has received no U.N. resolution condemning its tyranny and violence against women and minorities, especially Christians.
Both Israel and Saudi Arabia are close U.S. allies, but only one them — Israel — has been under permanent U.N. and U.S. pressure to compromise its sovereignty over Muslim and anti-Semitic demands.
If the issue were just territorial — “Palestinians need a territory and nation” —, the nations forcing Israel to compromise its sovereignty are fully capable of giving Palestinians a territory. The U.S., Brazil and other nations have very large territories and, because they have chosen a stance requiring a minor state — Israel — to relinquish its small land to Palestinian demands, they have the moral obligation to give the example and relinquish a part of their large lands to such Muslim demands.
Israel, which is too small to give lands, is under a cruel pressure by large-land countries in the U.N. Since its creation in 2006, the United Nations Human Rights Council has condemned Israel in 45 resolutions, more than the rest of the world combined.
Islamic terrorism — Palestinian, Saudi, Iranian, Turkish, etc. — has been a permanent threat to the whole world. Yet, the U.N. resolutions do not have addressed it. The small Jewish nation, which is the only democracy in the Middle East, is treated as if it were the greatest terrorist threat in the world. It is the perfect scapegoat for the massive Muslim terror.
In fact, the Palestinian cause has been aptly used to hit hard the scapegoat.
If anti-Semitism were not present in the U.N., Saudi Arabia would receive much more than 21 yearly resolutions condemning its gross systematic human rights abuses. Other Islamic nations neighboring the Jewish country, habitually facilitating Islamic terror against Israel and other nations, would similarly deserve U.N. condemnations. And if you include the whole Islamic universe with many other nations with similar feelings and actions of hatred and terror against Israel and other nations, no one would wonder if the U.N. had countless resolutions against the massive threat posed by the Islamic ideology. The wonder is: no single U.N. peep about this gigantic threat.
The target is the scapegoat. Israel is to blame. The radical Islamic universe is innocent, even when they, and other anti-Semitic groups, use the Palestinian cause to promote their anti-Semitic hatred.
In the Bible you see David and Goliath, and the ancient Israel’s wars for its survival. In God’s perspective, David is innocent and Goliath is the threat.
In the modern Israel’s wars for its survival, the mounting U.N. negative resolutions against Israel leave no doubt that, in the U.N. perspective, David is the threat and the massive Islamic Goliath is innocent.
The U.N. “Solidarity” Year with the Palestinian cause is solidarity with the modern Goliath and a clear sign that David will suffer more negative U.N. resolutions.
Long ago, when there was no Palestinian “cause,” there was massive, international anti-Jewish hatred, and the infamous Catholic Inquisition is just one of its evidences. Six, five and four hundred years ago, Jews were the “oppressors,” and many Jewish families were slaughtered. In Nazi Germany, again the Jews were the “oppressors.”
With the Palestinian cause, what has changed? After the Palestinian cause, what will change?
In Nazi Germany, there was no solidarity with the Jew victims. Just with the Nazi cause.
Solidarity with the Palestinian cause has moved Western nations, even Christian churches, to opposition to the modern David. For many Western churches, now Israel is an “oppressor.”
By the many U.N. resolutions against Israel, there is a “solidarity” of Islamic and leftist nations against Israel. And definitely there is a U.N. solidarity with these nations.
Only the God of Israel can deliver Israel from the army of Goliaths (from the U.N., the U.S., Brazil and many other nations) that have raised up in these last days.
Israel has always been hated in the spiritual world because it brought Jesus, His Gospel and His Word to the world. Even though the Jews are unable to recognize it, this is the main cause for the incredible hatred against them and the world’s “natural” solidarity with their enemies.
With or without the Inquisition, Israel will be always the “oppressor.” With or without Nazi Germany, Israel will be always the “oppressor.” With or without the Palestinian cause, Israel will be always the “oppressor.”
In this context, the U.N. solidarity with the Palestinian cause is just “natural.”
Now, who can show solidarity to the historically oppressed Jews and their Promised Land?
Only the true, invisible and prophetic Church of Jesus Christ can do it and, by doing it prayerfully, many Jews may be led to know the Messiah and His salvation.
Portuguese version of this article: O Ano da Solidariedade da ONU à Causa Palestina
Recommended Reading:

Monday, August 11, 2014

People for the American Way’s Leftist Diatribe Against a Brazilian Conservative


People for the American Way’s Leftist Diatribe Against a Brazilian Conservative

By Julio Severo
The American Way should be to expose and destroy tyrannies, especially socialism. But do not tell that to the People for the American Way (PFAW), which, according to WorldNetDaily, is “an atheist socialist organization which, through publications like its ‘Right Wing Watch,’ dedicates itself to the destruction of conservatives in general.”
Former leftist U.S. President Bill Clinton in People for the American Way
The latest attack from “Right Wing Watch” was against me, Julio Severo, in a piece entitled “BarbWire Pundit Defends Brazil’s Past Violent Dictatorship, Fears Looming ‘Gay Agenda.’” My BarbWire article, “U.S. Betrays Military Men Who Protected Brazil from Communist Threat,” just exposes that the Obama administration is betraying military men who protected Brazil from violent and bloody communist revolutions and rules. It also stresses that in this time in Brazil there was freedom to proclaim the Gospel, and that Billy Graham, Rex Humbard and Pat Robertson reached millions with their Christian message.
According to its website, “Right Wing Watch” has a special mission to attack conservatives opposed to the gay agenda, abortion and Muslim ideology.
“Right Wing Watch” has denounced C. Peter Wagner, founder of the New Apostolic Reformation, for his influence on the conservative candidacy of Rick Perry for the U.S. presidency in 2010. Wagner is best known for leading the conservative resistance to the efforts by Liberation Theology adherents to hijack the Lausanne Congress on World Evangelization in 1974. The hijack was successful only years later through the Theology of Integral Mission, which is the Protestant version of the Liberation Theology.
“Right Wing Watch” has also denounced WorldNetDaily for its exposé of John Brennan, the director of CIA who converted to Islam and allegedly was recruited in Saudi Arabia. Islam is undeniably violent. Saudi Arabia is one of the most violent tyrannies in the world. But the real enemy, for PFAW, is WorldNetDaily.
PFAW has also attacked Joseph Farah, the owner of WorldNetDaily, for saying that “Obama Is ‘At War With God.’”
In another piece, “Right Wing Watch” says: “Franklin Graham Blasts ‘Anti-Christ’ Obama Administration, ‘Ungodly’ World Vision For Accepting Gays.” Graham is the son of the most famous American evangelist, Billy Graham. He is also the president of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.
There are many other PFAW attacks on Graham, including: “Franklin Graham Endorses Vladimir Putin’s Anti-Gay Crackdown.”
Of course, Graham did not endorse any crackdown. He just supported the Russian law that protects children from homosexual propaganda. Does PFAW endorse forcing Russian children to be exposed to the immoral and nasty gay propaganda? Does PFAW endorse pedophilia?
The excellent stance of Graham was the cover story in Decision magazine, a famous evangelical publication of BGEA, entitled: “Putin’s Olympic Controversy.”
The Russian law protecting children was not praised only by Graham. The World Congress of Families, which is the largest pro-family and pro-life organization in the world, praised it too. Its spokesman, Don Feder, defended it in his article: “Sochi and The Left’s Human Rights Hypocrisy.” But again, “Right Wing Watch” attacked Feder in its malevolent article “World Congress Of Families Spokesman: Putin Will Save America From ‘Heady Elixir Of Sexual Rights.’”
So, according to PFAW, homosexual activists need unrestricted access to children. And if you try to protect them, you are the problem. You are violent.
According to PFAW, children should be exposed to messages about Islam as a “religion of peace.” And if you try to protect them, you are the problem. You are violent.
Norman Lear, founder of PFAW
People for the American Way (PFAW), founded by Norman Lear, has partnered with leftist and pro-abortion organizations and receives grants from many groups, including the Ford Foundation. In 2013, the Ford Foundation, which has been a population control investor for many years in Brazil, gave $300,000 to PFAW.
According to Conservapedia, “98 percent of the PFAW’s political contributions went to Democratic Party candidates.” This is, PFAW is solidly committed to Obama’s pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality party.
This definitely is not the American way. Population control; advocacy of abortion, Islam and homosexuality; efforts to withdraw protection of children from the homosexual propaganda: this is not the American way.
The American way, as lived by George Washington and other real Americans, was virtue and respect to God. But PFAW wants to pervert it into depravity and disrespect to God. By the way, Washington did not accept homosexuality and he would never have accepted the Islamic ideology. And absolutely he would have supported every effort to protect children from homosexual propaganda and to chastise homosexual propagandists.
If PFAW dislikes conservative Christians, it should not spare George Washington and his original American way.
The PFAW’s leftist diatribes against Franklin Graham, C. Peter Wagner, Don Feder, the World Congress of Families and me just put me in a worthy company. I am sure that Washington would have been pleased to join us.
I am also sure that Josef Stalin and the tyrannical Saudi kings (who have no tolerance for Christians and free speech) would have been pleased to join the so-called “People for the American Way” — better labeled “People for the Anti-Christian Way.”
Recommended Reading:

Saturday, August 09, 2014

Under U.S. and UN Pressure, Uganda Laws on Homosexuality Set Aside for Now


Under U.S. and UN Pressure, Uganda Laws on Homosexuality Set Aside for Now

Austin Ruse
NEW YORK, August 8 (C-Fam) The constitutional court of Uganda has ruled the laws against certain predatory homosexual activity is unconstitutional, ending however briefly the international conflict the laws have aroused in the United States and other industrialized nations.
The law was struck down on procedural grounds, the court determining the law was enacted without the requisite number of lawmakers present when it was passed. The constitutional court is not the highest court in Uganda and the Attorney General is already talking about appealing the decision to Uganda’s Supreme Court. The Uganda Parliament could also reenact the law with the required number of Parliamentarians present.
The law called for lengthy prison sentences for, among other things, deliberately infecting another person with the AIDs virus and the rape of an underage person. Commentators in the west have spread the false rumor that gays were being imprisoned simply for “being gay.”
International pressure against Uganda for the law has been intense. Donor countries, including the United States, had recently frozen $120 million in aid to cash-strapped Uganda in protest of the law, this even though Uganda is one of the poorest countries in the world and is also one of the United States’ key military allies in the region against Islamic terrorists in Sudan, South Somalia, and the Central African Republic.
Many are critical that the Obama administration has made LGBT one of America’s foremost foreign policy agenda items, even though the world seems to be melting down in Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Israel and elsewhere. The Administration, charged with dithering in all these crisis areas, reiterated the LGBT policy this week as African leaders met in Washington DC for the largest such gathering in history.
Critics point out that at a time when Christians around the world are being hunted, tortured and murdered, the Obama administration seems not to care, indeed barely mentions the issue. This is particularly vexing to Christians since they comprise 77% of the adult population of the US while gays comprise only 1.6%, according to new numbers released by the Center for Disease Control. That would be 187,000,000 Christians whose fellow religionists are being killed by terrorists, while gays number only 3.8 million, half as many as Methodists, one of the smallest denominations in the US.
The president of Uganda has said that one of the reasons he signed the law was because of the intense pressure brought by the rich countries against Uganda. No less than Foreign Policy Magazine covered this issue a few months ago, citing not just President Obama but pundits on leftist television channels like Rachel Madow on MSNBC. The President of Uganda and others saw this as a new form of colonialism, in this case sexual colonialism; the rich west trying to impose a new morality that Ugandans find offensive. Uganda has a long history of resisting gay initiatives. In fact, the Catholic Church around the world celebrates a feast day for Charles Lwanga and his companions, young African men who resisted the homosexual overtures of the King and were martyred for their resistance.
The Ugandans have also insisted the law has been deliberately misinterpreted by western commentators who often say the law makes it illegal simply for “being gay.” In fact, all provisions of the law have to do with actions and not “being.” Based on this plea, Sweden recently returned as a donor to Uganda.
Recommended Reading:
Christian minister accused of “Crime against Humanity”

Friday, August 08, 2014

Religious Freedom Advocate: Saudi royal family will not allow Obama to defeat Sunni ISIL militants


Religious Freedom Advocate: Saudi royal family will not allow Obama to defeat Sunni ISIL militants

Leading spokesman for religious freedom says President Obama will make no serious effort to defeat ISIL terrorists because they are Sunni. William J. Murray, the chairman of the Religious Freedom Coalition released a statement in which he quoted both the Wall Street Journal and Washington Times as admitting the royal family of Sunni Saudi Arabia would not permit any genuine attempt to stop a Sunni onslaught of terror in the Middle East because it is Sunni based.
Murray says the United States has been the “puppet” military of the Saudi royal family, attacking and isolating Shia nations such as Syria. In his view the Shia majority state of Syria, which protects religious minorities, is a target of the United States only because the Saudi royals are giving the orders, not the American people.
In 2012 the United States was training “moderate” fighters of the ISIL (ISIS) in Jordan, the same fighters that are killing and enslaving Christians in Iraq today. That training occurred because of the “urging” of Saudi Arabia and their desire to overthrow the secular leaning government of Syria which provides equal rights to Christians and other non-Islamic minorities.
In his powerful statement released in video form with graphics, Murrays says the only way to stop the tide of Islamic terror in the Middle East and the world is to shut down the funding state of that terror, Saudi Arabia:
“There is only one real solution to the problems of the Middle East. Instead of being the proxy warriors for the Saudi royals, the West needs to take control of Saudi Arabia and declare the oil fields the property of the citizens of that nation. Members of the Saudi royal family should have their ill-gotten wealth stripped from them worldwide and face the International Criminal Court for their crimes.”
Murray then explains the positive effect shutting down the terror funding center of the world would have:
“Once the Saudi center of Islamic evil in the world is gone, Western nations will be free to deal with Islamic terror elsewhere. This will also eliminate the distribution of Saudi textbooks filled with racial and religious hatred and preaching death to democracy in Islamic schools and mosques throughout the West. That alone will bring the recruiting of terrorists to a virtual halt. It is time to act against the real threat to Western civilization – the Saudi royal family.
The same day that William Murray released this statement Congressman Frank Wolf sent a letter to President Obama saying “your conscience will haunt” for what America is allowing to happen to Christians in Iraq. In the letter he said:
“Your administration is aware of what is going on, yet you are doing nothing.  Just what is the point of having an ‘Atrocities Prevention Board” if it takes no action to prevent or stop atrocities?  When was the last time this board has met?  Has the board even been convened to address the genocide taking place in Iraq?” Wolf wrote.
“It is now clear to the nation and the world that your words were hollow; your ‘presidential directive’ apparently was nothing more than a token gesture.  You will come to sincerely regret your failure to take action to stop the genocide in Iraq.  Your conscience will haunt you long after you leave office.  Mr. President, say something; do something,” Wolf concluded.
Recommended Reading:

Thursday, August 07, 2014

Confirmed: U.S. Chief Facilitator of Christian Persecution


Confirmed: U.S. Chief Facilitator of Christian Persecution

Raymond Ibrahim
Prominent indicators confirm that the U.S. is the chief facilitator of the persecution of Christians around the world today.
Senator John McCain and Syrian “rebels”
According to the recently released 2014 World Watch List, which ranks the 50 nations where Christians are most persecuted, Syria is the third worst nation in the world in which to be Christian, Iraq is fourth, Afghanistan fifth, and Libya 13th. All four countries receive the strongest designation, “extreme persecution” (other designations are “severe,” “moderate,” and “sparse” persecution).
Aside from being so closely and harshly ranked, these four nations have something else in common: heavy U.S. involvement. Three—Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya—were “liberated” thanks to U.S. forces, while in the fourth, Syria, the U.S. is actively sponsoring “freedom fighters” against the regime, many of whom would be better labeled “terrorists.”
The Syrian situation alone indicts U.S. foreign policy. According to Reuters:
Open Doors, a non-denominational group supporting persecuted Christians worldwide, said on Wednesday it had documented 2,123 “martyr” killings, compared with 1,201 in 2012. There were 1,213 such deaths in Syria alone last year, it said. “This is a very minimal count based on what has been reported in the media and we can confirm,” said Frans Veerman, head of research for Open Doors. Estimates by other Christian groups put the annual figure as high as 8,000.
While most Americans are shielded from the true nature of the war by the U.S. media’s reluctance to report on it, Arabic media, websites, and activists daily report and document atrocity after atrocity—beheadings and bombed churches, Christians slaughtered for refusing to convert to Islam, and countless abducted for ransom or rape—at the hands of those whom the U.S. supports.
It’s enough to point out that “the largest massacre of Christians in Syria,” to quote a top religious leader, was left wholly unreported by any major U.S. news network.
At any rate, the statistics speak for themselves: Syria, which used to be religiously tolerant, is now, in the context of the United States’ trying to bring “democracy” to it, the third worst country in the world in terms of “extreme persecution” of Christians.
The Blaze reports that Dr. David Curry, president of Open Doors,
charged that the Obama administration has essentially declined to make the protection of religious minorities a priority . . . “There are many instances where the vacuum of leadership and spokesmanship has created a real problem,” said the human rights leader. “I would say that every significant data point on this year’s ‘2014 Watch List’ is worse—and I think a factor in it is a lack of leadership from Western governments including . . . the U.S. in terms of religious freedom.”
But it’s worse than that. Far from taking any action or providing leadership—or simply ceasing to support the terrorists responsible—the Obama administration recently tried to go to war with Syria on behalf of the “freedom fighters,” amazingly, in the name of “human rights” (Apparently the unsubstantiated rumor that Assad massacred people is enough for the U.S. to go to war, but the ongoing and well-documented massacres of Christians and other civilians at the hands of the opposition is not enough for the U.S. to stop supporting them.)
What’s worse, even the most misinformed mainstream-media-watching American today knows that the so-called “Arab Spring,” which was hailed to justify U.S. support for “rebels” of all stripes—in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood (which months ago destroyed some 80 churches); in Libya, al-Qaeda, which has turned Benghazi into a terror zone; and now the “freedom fighters” in Syria—is not what it was touted to be.
In other words, at this point, whenever the U.S. intervenes in an Islamic nation, Islamists come to power. This is well demonstrated by the other three nations to which the U.S. brought “democracy” and where Christian minorities suffer “extreme persecution”:
Afghanistan: The supposedly “moderate” Karzai government installed by the U.S. upholds many of the draconian laws enforced by the Taliban—including the apostasy law, fiercely persecuting those who seek to convert to Christianity—and, in 2011, under U.S. auspices, it destroyed Afghanistan’s last Christian church.
Iraq: After the U.S. toppled Saddam Hussein, Christian minorities were savagely attacked and slaughtered, and dozens of their churches were bombed (see here for graphic images). Christians have been terrorized into near-extinction, with well over half of them fleeing Iraq.
Libya: Ever since U.S.-backed, al-Qaeda-linked terrorists overthrew Qaddafi, Christians—including Americans—have indeed suffered extreme persecution. Churches have been bombed; Christians have been tortured and killed (including for refusing to convert); and nuns have been threatened.
Surely a common theme emerges here: Where the U.S. works to oust secular autocrats, the quality of life for Christians and other minorities takes a major nosedive. Under Saddam, Qaddafi, and Assad, Christians and their churches were largely protected.
Moreover, while George W. Bush was responsible for Afghanistan and Iraq, the argument can be made that, back then (2001 and 2003), this pattern of Islamic radicalization that erupts once autocrats are gone was less well known than it is today. There weren’t many precedents.
Conversely, the Obama administration has had both Afghanistan and Iraq to learn from—and yet still it supports Islamists and jihadis. But by now, what happens once they assume power—religious persecution, terror, oppression—is no longer a secret.
Incidentally, those who care little for the fate of Christians or other minorities in the Islamic world would do well to remember a simple truism: Wherever anti-Christian elements come to power, anti-American forces come to power. The two are synonymous.
Put differently, Muslim persecution of Christians is the litmus test of how radical an Islamic society has become. In all those Muslim nations that the U.S. has interfered in—Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt (till the Egyptians revolted, to the chastisement of the U.S.), and now Syria—the increase of religious intolerance is a reflection of the empowerment of forces hostile to Western civilization.
I am often asked, “How can we help persecuted Christians?” At this point, one must respond: “How about starting with getting the U.S. government to stop being the chief facilitator of Christian persecution?” Altruism aside, it would be in the interests of all who value freedom, religious or otherwise—and especially their descendants.
Recommended Reading: