Monday, October 20, 2014

Christian Persecution Follows US, UK and France in Kosovo, Libya, Iraq and Syria


Christian Persecution Follows US, UK and France in Kosovo, Libya, Iraq and Syria

Murad Makhmudov and Lee Jay Walker
Modern Tokyo Times
Recent interventions by America, France and the United Kingdom equates to Christian persecution and enormous instability. This reality would appear to be a constant Western policy because the same scenario keeps on happening. Of course, in terms of numbers then Muslims have been killed in vast numbers based on sectarianism and political motives. However, for minority Christian communities in Kosovo, Libya, Iraq and Syria it is clear that Western meddling is creating a nightmare for Christians.
Indeed, it is ironic that in Syria it is the mainly Muslim members of the armed forces that are protecting Christians from brutal Takfiri sectarians, Islamist terrorist groups and an array of mercenaries. Like usual, these brutal forces in Syria are being supported by America, France and the United Kingdom based on Gulf petrodollars and the intrigues of Turkey. Therefore, even when opposition terrorist and sectarian forces kidnap Christian nuns, attack churches and threaten to cleanse the Christian minority this doesn’t worry America, France and the United Kingdom. Instead, these three Western powers just prepare more spin and hide behind language. Yet all three nations know what happened in Kosovo, Libya and Iraq.
The latest massacre against Christians happened in Libya whereby seven Egyptian Christians have been executed by suspected Islamists. Of course, during the rule of Colonel Gaddafi in Libya the Christian community wasn’t singled out. However, Western and Gulf powers utilized terrorists and mercenaries in order to defeat Gaddafi in Libya therefore not surprisingly today this nation faces growing Islamist militancy.
In Kosovo after the ending of this conflict it is clear that many Orthodox Christian have been killed, churches destroyed and many Christian areas have been written off the map. Indeed, even today Orthodox Christians can’t fully travel around Kosovo because of the fear of being attacked. Also, many ancient Orthodox Christian monuments have been destroyed and now the indigenous Orthodox Christian community resides in ghettoes in Kosovo.
In Iraq it is clear that Saddam Hussein was both anti-Shia and anti-Kurd but Christians did not face persecution under his watch. Yet when Iraq was invaded then soon this would be followed by sectarianism, terrorism and anti-Christian attacks. This reality led to the majority of Christians fleeing their homeland because at no time were the various Christian communities deemed to be worthy of being protected by Western troops. Instead, just like the Orthodox Christians of Kosovo, the Christians of Iraq would soon be in disarray after being abandoned by allied forces based on the political whims of Western political elites in America and the United Kingdom.
The government of Syria is now fighting for its survival therefore the various Christian communities fear another Iraq.  At the moment, Christians can still worship freely in Syrian government controlled areas. Yet, in areas under various terrorist and Takfiri groups, it is clear that Christians are being pressured to convert to Islam, cleansed, murdered and other barbaric realities. Despite this, political elites in America, France and the United Kingdom are supporting feudal Gulf nations and the whims of Turkey. Therefore, the survival of Christianity currently depends on the government of Syria because clearly the majority of Christians will flee if Western and Gulf sectarian backed terrorists win.
In Libya the recent brutal execution of seven Egyptian Christians is following the same pattern.  Fox News in January 2014 says: “Libya’s Coptic Christians, who number about 300,000, or 5 percent of the population, were allowed to practice their faith under dictator Muammar Qaddafi. But since the strongman was ousted from power, and ultimately killed, Muslim fundamentalists have increasingly filled the power void. Last month, the national assembly voted in favor of making Koranic law, or Shariah, the basis of all legislative decisions, meaning Islam will shape all future banking, criminal and financial cases.”
Further down in the same article Fox News says: “The emerging political and legal system’s orientation, combined with the rise of militants in the oil-rich nation, has left Christians feeling like the promise of democracy in the wake of Qaddafi’s fall has been broken.”
The massacre of Egyptian Christians in Libya sums up the usual realities following on from the meddling of America, France and the United Kingdom. Can this reality in Kosovo, Iraq, Libya and Syria be a coincidence — or, does it mean that an anti-Christian agenda is at the heart of major Western powers? The East Timorese witnessed the same reality just like the Biafrans in Nigeria. Likewise, today Papuans in West Papua face Islamization and Javanization in Indonesia but Western powers care little. It would appear that Christians are expendable when it comes to geopolitical concerns and appeasing the anti-Christian and anti-Shia state of Saudi Arabia.
Orthodox Christians fear to walk openly in Kosovo despite this land being the cradle of Serbian Orthodox Christianity. Likewise, Christians fear to walk in Libya, Iraq and Syria because of the meddling of Western powers.
Recommended Reading:

Monday, October 13, 2014

Tom Parker: the Biggest Threat to Abortion in this Generation, According to Pro-Abortion Critic


Tom Parker: the Biggest Threat to Abortion in this Generation, According to Pro-Abortion Critic

By Julio Severo
Pro-abortion activist Nina Martin has labeled an Alabama judge as a man who “has figured out how to dismantle Roe v. Wade.”
In her piece in New Republic, she also said, “Tom Parker’s writings fuel the biggest threat to abortion rights in a generation.”
Yet, before nailing him to her cross, she points his “malevolent” credentials.
She says that in 2005, Justice Parker spoke to a group of homeschool students at a retreat of the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy. She proved that Witherspoon was a project of Vision Forum, a Texas-based Christian ministry.
Driven by the same motivation, she could disqualify the U.S. Constitution by proving the Christian connections of each of its framers.
She also thinks that Parker is not fit because he supported the Ten Commandments monument in the Alabama Supreme Court building.
She then quoted an “abominable” statement by him: “The very God of Holy Scriptures, the Creator, is the source of law, life, and liberty.”
What did she expect from a judge of a nation whose founders were Christian? If she wanted Parker to praise abortion, she should show him George Washington and other original Americans defending baby-killing.
Justice Tom Parker
Other Parker’s statements that annoyed her:
“It’s the judges who have legalized abortion and homosexuality ... They are shaking the very foundation of our society.”
“We have to stand for what’s right.”
“Because God, not the state, has granted parents the authority and responsibility to govern their children, parents should be able to do so unfettered by state interference.”
Parker’s words remind original Americans’ words, including Washington’s. If Nina wanted to hear what they would say today, Parker is the answer. But if Nina were to return to that time, they would surely ask her: “Are you sure that you are an American? All of us here are Christian, pro-life and pro-family.”
What is most annoying about Parker to Nina is what she calls “his relentless campaign to undermine legal abortion.” She complains, “He argues for full legal status for the unborn.”
She added an opinion of Justice Harry Blackmun: “If this suggestion of personhood is established, [Roe’s] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed.”
Parker believes that an unborn baby is entitled to life, as just original Americans did. But Nina is completely angry about Christianity and its pro-life values in America.
While the right to life of unborn babies is not recognized, more than one million of them are murdered in legal abortions in the United States every year under Roe v. Wade, a law that protects baby killing and their killers since 1973.
Again, Nina complains: “Step by step, Parker lays out his evidence: laws that give inheritance rights to unborn children, laws that ban pregnant inmates from being executed, laws that give fetuses legal guardians for the purposes of protecting their interests, laws that allow parents to sue for damages if fetuses are injured or killed as the result of negligence or some other wrongful act.”
Nina adds a comment by Parker: “Today, the only major area in which unborn children are denied legal protection is abortion and that denial is only because of the dictates of Roe.”
“What Justice Parker has done,” said Lynn Paltrow, executive director of the nonprofit National Advocates for Pregnant Women, “is explicitly lay out the roadmap for overturning Roe v. Wade.”
Parker has called on the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve the matter of full rights for the unborn babies once and for all.
Pro-abortion advocates, including Nina, are deeply worried about Parker’s writings influencing the justices in Washington.
Nina Martin has correctly identified the Alabama judge as the best chance for the U.S. pro-family movement to defeat Roe v. Wade.
It seems a too big challenge: Tom Parker facing the legal Goliath and his pro-abortion armies.
Yet, did not God use a young man called David to defeat a giant called Goliath in the past?
He is the same today.
Other articles on Justice Tom Parker:

Wednesday, October 01, 2014

Inflamed by American Prophecy, Brazilian Evangelicals Want a Woman for Brazil Presidency


Inflamed by American Prophecy, Brazilian Evangelicals Want a Woman for Brazil Presidency

By Julio Severo
The most important events for Brazil in 2014 are the World Cup — where the Brazilian team suffered its worst and most shameful defeat in such football event — and the presidential election.
Prophecy said Brazil would win the World Cup
From a rational standpoint, the election will bring another shameful defeat, because the main contenders — incumbent Dilma Rousseff and Marina Silva and Aécio Neves — are socialists. This week, these three major candidates have, joined by homosexual activists and federal prosecutors, condemned and attacked Levy Fidelix, a Catholic candidate with minimal chance to win the election. Fidelix was accused of “homophobia” after defending that homosexual relations are dirty and that a homosexual couple is never a family.
Yet, Brazilian evangelicals, stirred up by a prophecy of an American minister, have massively backed Marina Silva for president. In a tour of conferences in Brazil in 2011, Bob Hazlett prophesied:
“I heard the Lord say that even in the next two years ‘I will begin to raise up women in power in this nation and I am going to put a woman with the Spirit of God within her, who will kneel before Me, like Esther knelt before the king, because I am removing the Mordecai spirit that tries to controls the women in this nation and I am going to raise up a woman after My heart and I am going to shake this nation, but I am going to lead this nation to a season of prosperity even though other nations are in crisis. I am going to release Christ in this nation.’”
This prophecy made headlines in August in GospelPrime and GospelMais, the two main Protestant websites in Brazil, after a mysterious plane crash killed Brazilian presidential candidate Eduardo Campos, of the Brazilian Socialist Party. Marina was his vice and, with his death, she became the presidential candidate of the Brazilian Socialist Party.
In this point, Marina grabbed international headlines too, including in Reuters and Associated Press.
You can watch Hazlett’s prophecies here: http://youtu.be/3BhbUiOPTGs

According to investigative journalist Wayne Madsen, the plane crash was an operation of the Obama CIA to help Marina get the presidential candidacy.
The Obama opposition to incumbent Dilma Rousseff is explained by the fact that she is a socialist who is anti-U.S. economic interests. For example, in her administration Brazil is a member of BRICS, which wants to de-dollarize trade affairs, which would potentially be a disaster for the U.S. economy. In contrast, Marina Silva — who, according to Madsen, is a George Soros puppet —, is a socialist who is pro-U.S. economic interests.
Apparently, these socialist differences affect only economic issues, because the U.S. gave full support to a Brazil-sponsored homosexual resolution approved in the U.N. last week.
I am sure that God can see these and many other political maneuvers by anti-U.S. or pro-U.S. socialists. But many Brazilian evangelicals are backing Marina because they are blindly following Bob Hazlett’s prophecy.
I want in no way to disqualify the life and ministry of Hazlett. But, whether in his case or other cases, the Apostle Paul explains that Christians are free to prophesy in a meeting, and everyone else should evaluate whether a prophetic message is correct or not (see 1 Corinthians 14:29).
So Christians are instructed by God to evaluate prophecies made by other Christians.
The World Cup and the presidential election are the two main subjects for Brazilians in 2014, and Hazlett’s prophecies addressed both subjects. What did he prophesy about the World Cup?
He said in 2011,
“The Spirit of the Lord says: Four years from now, I will bring back the World Cup to this nation and I will anoint this nation to fill the Cup of prayer and pour out to the world, for the day when the Brazil team holds the World Cup, will be the day that I begin a revival that will cause Brazil bring revival to the world.”
Contrary to Hazlett’s optimistic prediction, there was no victory for the Brazilian team. There was no worldwide revival stemming from a Brazilian revival as a result of a Brazilian victory in the World Cup.
Besides, socialist Rousseff took advantage of the Cup euphoria to pass a law banning spanking, effectively criminalizing Christian parents who, in obedience to God’s Word, discipline their children. This was a massive defeat — not victory — to the Brazilian family. In fact, the Brazilian team had its worst defeat ever.
Hazlett’s prophecy was far away from perfection.
Why then are a multitude of Brazilian evangelicals using his another prophecy to vote for the Soros-backed socialist Marina Silva?
Hazlett’s prophecy said: “I am removing the Mordecai spirit that tries to controls the women in this nation and I am going to raise up a woman after My heart and I am going to shake this nation.”
The most important mission of Esther was to protect her people and their interests. In this mission, she was under the influence of Mordecai. Was his influence positive or negative? Positive. Mordecai was a man of God. Without him, Esther would never have defended God’s people the way she did.
If Hazlett had prophesied that God was going to remove the Karl Marx spirit that controls men and women in Brazil, including Catholics and evangelicals, I would understand. The Marxist influence is negative. This influence is an important component of the political militancy of Marina Silva, seen by Brazilian evangelicals as their “messiah” because of Hazlett’s prophecy. In an interview with Caio Fábio in 2010, Marina said that the Marxist Liberation Theology is the “living gospel.”
Caio, formerly the greatest Presbyterian minister in Brazil, was supportive of Silva in 2010 and 2014, including as an adviser. Caio, who disgraced himself in financial and sexual scandals years ago, was the strategic evangelical leader who in the 1990s connected the evangelical population with the socialist Workers’ Party, where Marina had her militancy and became an environment secretary during the Lula administration.
Marina left the Workers’ Party when the 2010 presidential candidacy of her party was given not to her, but to Dilma Rousseff.
Now the current prophecy-inflamed, Marina Silva campaign has been championed by Valnice Milhomens, a female apostle who, in 1994, hosted, with Caio Fábio, an evangelical TV show introducing socialist Lula to the evangelical population.
Caio’s intent, as reported by him later, was to connect evangelicals with Lula — a successful project, because in his first election to the Brazilian presidency Lula was supported by all the major evangelicals leaders in Brazil, equally stirred by strange prophecies and visions that his administration would bring advances to Brazil. Actually, in the first year of the Lula administration, Brazil introduced in the United Nations the first resolution classifying homosexuality as an unalienable human right. Milhomens was unable to see prophetically Caio’s intent, but she is sure that, prophetically, Marina is now God’s intent.
Hazlett’s mentions of a puppet president and strings have been interpreted as applying only to Rousseff and Lula. By the interpretation of Mordecai as a supposedly “negative” influence, deserving removal, you could also include Esther as a “puppet.” In fact, Hazlett’s prophecy treated the “Mordecai spirit” as if it were a harmful spirit to women, when this “spirit” brought wisdom and strategy to Esther.
But what about Marina Silva and Karl Marx? What about her and Caio Fábio? What about her and George Soros? Are there no strings in all of this? Is there no puppet in these relationships? Why to remove a Mordecai spirit, but not a Marx, Caio and Soros spirit?
Esther’s submission to Mordecai was a blessing, not curse.
Immediately connected with the prophetic behavior in the Christians meetings is Paul’s teaching about female behavior in these meetings:
“Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.” (1 Corinthians 14:29-34 ESV)
Paul explains that Biblical submission is protection:
“For this reason, and because the angels are watching, a woman should wear a covering on her head to show she is under authority.” (1 Corinthians 11:10 NLT)
“Because of the angels” — my understanding is that without Biblical submission, there are spiritual breaches for intrusions of demonic forces, also known as fallen angels.
With Biblical submission, God’s angels watch over the obedient.
Surely, Esther was a blessed woman, truly protected by God’s angels, because she lived according to this principle.
Now, what about Hazlett’s prophecy being used to portray Marina Silva as a Brazilian Esther, deserving the Brazil presidency — but “delivered” only from Mordecai, not from Marx, Caio and Soros? His prophecies — just as the prophecies of all other Christians — should be evaluated, as commanded by Apostle Paul.
What about Marina as Esther?
Perhaps she might win the election and become president of Brazil.
Perhaps she might eventually become an Esther too.
But first, she needs to let God remove the Marx, Caio and Soros spirits, and any other spirits, including Liberation Theology.
Yet, how do she and Hazlett expect her to be successful and a woman after God’s heart if they want to remove Mordecai — the positive influence of a man of God — from her life?
Recommended Reading:

Interview with Don Hank: Interpreting What is Happening in the U.S., Europe and Russia today


Interview with Don Hank: Interpreting What is Happening in the U.S., Europe and Russia today

By Julio Severo
As an American conservative evangelical who speaks and reads Russian and several European and Asian languages, Don Hank is uniquely able to explain the major challenges and dangers to the U.S., Europe and Russia.
In this interview, he will help international and especially Brazilian readers to understand what is happening to these cultures that have Christian traditions.
Don has a special concern for Christians being persecuted, raped and slaughtered as a result of misguided and malevolent geopolitical policies from the Western powers. He has written a number of articles in support of these persecuted Christians.
He has had a special connection to two of his Brazilian friends. When PayPal, under pressure of a campaign of a major gay group in the U.S., shut down my account, Don denounced this abuse in an article that was headlined at WND, titled “PayPal blacklists Christian writer.”
Another Brazilian helped by Don was philosopher Olavo de Carvalho. The first time any writing of Carvalho’s appeared in WND was through Don’s translation.
In fact, I got to know Don Hank through Carvalho. Both were very special and supportive in my times of persecution from homosexual activists.
The epic war involving massive homosexual and Islamic forces has hit the U.S., Europe and Russia in an extraordinary way. So, I have invited Don to speak to us about what he knows, because he is very familiar with these three cultures.
JULIO SEVERO: In view of the fact that the greatest threat to the world and specially Christians is Islam, why are the U.S. and Russia, both Christian nations, fighting each other, instead fighting Islam?
DON HANK: The answer to that goes so far outside our comfort zone and our normalcy bias barrier that many Westerners will refuse to believe it. But here it is for those who are willing to consider my interpretation:
The US is not Christian in the same sense as Russia. In the US, the Left has waged a war on Christianity that has left US Christians debilitated and unable to resist. A salient example is the way in which our people, including many Christians, have been subjugated to the politically correct doctrine that the Biblical ban on homosexual behavior is outdated and ‘homophobic.’ This politically correct doctrine is almost impossible to resist because the average American either accepts it or is afraid to resist it, and many others are disposed to insult or belittle anyone who expresses the opposite viewpoint. There is also an official trend to enact and enforce laws that punish Christians or others who oppose the concept of ‘gay marriage.’ Many churches accept this un-Biblical doctrine and some have pastors who are openly ‘gay.’ In Russia, there are no legal or social restraints against accepting or expressing the biblical and common-sense viewpoint that homosexuality is abnormal. Almost all Russian churches accept the Biblical view of homosexuality.
So in summary, both the government and the people of Russia are closer in their views to Christianity as it is taught in the Bible. Christianity in pure form is not an ideology. I define ideology essentially as that which falls outside common sense, and the Russians, thank God, still allow themselves to be guided by common sense. By the way, Putin, in a recent interview, said he does not have an ideology. He describes himself as a conservative and a pragmatist but insisted that these are not ideologies. In other words, in plain language, Russia is, ironically, a Christian country in truth while America is a Christian country in name. Or more precisely, the US is quickly becoming a non-Christian country guided by an ideology that can roughly be called Westernism, or Western liberalism. This ideology has many facets, such as a virulent form of secularism that is actually anti-Christian while pretending to be neutral; Russophobia (a kind of racism, similar to Hitler’s anti-Semitism, teaching, for example, that Russia is morally inferior to the West, a teaching that draws its support from the residual Cold War sentiments of many Americans who obtain most of their information from the mass media); the doctrine of American exceptionalism, which gives the US military the privilege to invade any country that opposes the US, and the now-meaningless concepts of ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy,’ which in real terms, mean just the opposite of what they suggest; and a New World Order concept of a world divided into several easily controllable regions, one of which would be Muslim and would be dominated by sharia law. (This regionalism would create hierarchies which the Western oligarchies that created it hope to control. They give little consideration to the unexpected consequences of such a system, which could be disastrous for them. This regionalist facet of US policy is the most dangerous by far and we are just now starting to see the threat that it poses to all Western peoples because of the Middle East situation. It is hard to believe, but, while the Western oligarchs possess formidable military capability, they are ideologically impotent to oppose Islam.
For these reasons, Russia naturally supports Christians, such as Serbs and Syrian Christians, whereas US policies could ultimately cause the death and destruction of these Christians if no counterforce can come into play. The US oligarchs (as distinct from the American people) are ideologically incapable of allying themselves with Russia against Islam. In fact, I once wrote an article entitled Washington DC, the Seat of the Caliphate, which explains why this is so.
JULIO SEVERO: Don, you said, “The US is not Christian in the same sense as Russia” and “Russia is, ironically, a Christian country in truth while America is a Christian country in name.” I agree with you that the Russian Orthodox Church, which knows how to preserve its traditions, is doing better than the U.S. mainline denominations as the Presbyterian Church, the Lutheran Church and other traditional Protestant churches. The basic mission of a traditional church is to preserve its Christian traditions. And Christianity has no tradition of supporting the killing of unborn babies and other innocents and likewise no tradition of supporting gay “marriage” and other facets of the gay agenda. Why does a high number of traditional Protestant churches in America accept these aberrations and the Orthodox Church in Russia does not? In this sense, traditional Christianity in Russia is doing better than traditional Christianity in America. But I am from the charismatic/Pentecostal variety, and in my view many Americans in this variety are doing much better, as far as I know, than Russians. For example, Russia has no David Wilkerson or Jack Deere. In fact, the most important American attending a recent pro-life event in Moscow is a member of the Assemblies of God. Let us ask other question:
William Murray has said that Saudi Arabia is the greatest financier of global Islamic terrorism. Besides, Saudi Arabia actively murders homosexuals, bans Christianity and persecutes and tortures Christians. Why doesn’t the U.S., which is the most important ally of Saudi Arabia and an active promoter of global gay rights, ever condemns them over their execution of homosexuals, but has condemned Russia over a mere law banning homosexual propaganda to minors?
DON HANK: The US is now in the hands of a small group of oligarchs who are anti-Christian. For them Russia’s law banning homosexual propaganda is not a “mere” law, it is a declaration of war on Westernism, which, though an ideology, is actually becoming a religion in the eyes of these power-hungry oligarchs, who viscerally hate anyone who opposes them… not unlike all fascists. Homosexuality is one of the pillars of this religion, one of its sacred tenets. The irony of US policies is, as you point out, Julio, that they support two mutually exclusive teachings: the homosexual agenda and Islam. For them, this is not a problem because the end justifies the means. The secret that only a few observers have articulated is that both Islam and the homosexual agenda are anti-Christian. Incredibly, then, Westernism has embraced these two teachings only for the purpose of destroying Christianity. Russia, of course, opposes both, and for that reason, Russia today is the only world power that is capable of defending Christians and Christianity.
JULIO SEVERO: Why is the U.S. so soft on Saudi Arabia, which murders homosexuals, and so hard on Russia that does not murder them?
DON HANK: Well, if the US government were really concerned about homosexuals, it would not promote Islamization as it does. Likewise, if it really were concerned about supporting Islam, it would not promote the homosexual agenda. The only explanation left for this inconsistent behavior — the default explanation — is that the US is interested primarily in destroying Christian culture, and for that reason it supports the idea of a caliphate. Saudi Arabia supports the founding of a caliphate, which is part of the New World Order concept of a world divided into regions that are easily controllable by Western oligarchs. Again, the oligarchs see Russia as lawless because it does not obey the West, and especially the US, which the oligarchs see as a law unto itself. It does not obey either God’s laws or man’s laws. It writes its own laws for its own convenience. Ironically, Russia has pointed out that it acts in accordance with international law while the US makes a mockery of international law. This is evident in a Russian televised interview with Foreign Minister Lavrov, which I have translated.
JULIO SEVERO: There is no doubt that the gay agenda and the Islamic agenda are ideologies of tyranny. How do the U.S. and Russia react domestically to these threats?
DON HANK: An expert on Russian policy, who was a retired professional analyst in the Russian government, once said in a private email to a group in which I was included, that Putin, shortly after his election, dealt with the Chechen Muslim insurgents by sending one of his generals to Chechnya with an overwhelming military force. The general told the imam of each town that they must surrender. He said if they surrendered peacefully, they would be spared. If they did not, the town would be destroyed. He kept his promise. Putin is severely criticized by the West for this policy, just as Assad is criticized for being tough on terrorists. Yet by the inaction of Western leaders, we are witnessing daily violence in the Middle East and even a growing jihadism in the West. We need to understand that inaction is more devastating in the long run than dealing harshly with murderers.
As for the homosexual agenda, Putin’s government has managed to enact and enforce laws that prohibit gay propaganda. Russia has jailed a group of women, Pussy Riot, who illegally entered and desecrated a church. The reason for Putin’s success is that, despite Western accusations that he is a tyrant, his government is much more democratic than the US government in the sense that the Russian people do not want to have pro-homosexual policies and propaganda foisted on them, and his policies respect the people’s will. In contrast, the US oligarchs in government and in NGOs, must overcome the will of the people in order to foist gay “marriage on us”. Everything is backward. The once-leftist Russia is now the most socially and economically conservative world power, while the once-conservative USA is now very radical and leftwing.
JULIO SEVERO: How did the U.S. come to have a president who is simultaneously pro-Islam and pro-sodomy?
DON HANK: In my opinion, Julio, Obama is not really as much pro-Islam or pro-sodomy as he is pro-Western liberalism, which is essentially the same as neoconservatism. He is only using Islam and the homosexual agenda to impose the West’s will on the rest of the world. And he is not acting alone. He is simply running along with the central Westernist secular ideology.
JULIO SEVERO: Ronald Reagan successfully created the Mexico City Policy, which banned, in his time, the U.S. government from funding abortion overseas. But he was unsuccessful in defeating Roe vs. Wade. Similarly, the current more conservative Russian government has successfully championed the fight against abortion in the U.N. system, but domestically it has only restricted it and banned its propaganda. What do you think about these conservative parallels?
DON HANK: I think Putin is a conservative in his heart, but like Reagan, he is a pragmatist who knows the limits of his power. Putin is already making major changes in the abortion rate and, unlike Reagan, he has both a moral reason and an economic reason for opposing abortion. The birth rate is too low to be sustainable. If any country ever bans abortion, I think it will be Russia.
JULIO SEVERO: On a larger scale, old Christian churches in Europe have been transformed in mosques. On a smaller scale, the same is happening in America. In contrast, Russia is rebuilding Christian churches and banning the construction of mosques in Moscow. Is the European and American case an example of “democracy” or suicide? Are Russians trying to stop the massive Islamic “invasion” that is transforming the European and American cultural and religious landscape?
DON HANK: Europe and America are both capitulating gradually to Islam and there is little evidence that the leaders of these regions will stop until they have been completely Islamized. The only signs of an awakening to the dangers are the rapidly growing political parties in the UK, Holland and France, which are making great strides in educating the public of the Muslim threat. The US has not had enough first-hand experience with Islam to oppose it forcefully, and of course, the Obama administration actually has Muslims in high places in government. It is widely believed that John Brennan, the head of the CIA, is a Muslim. That is a very ominous sign. So the answer to your question as to whether we are democracy or suicide, I would have to say we are headed for suicide, ironically, as a result of our obsession with democracy, though with the caveat that our “democracy” is not representative of the people’s will. A recent joint study between Northwestern and Princeton Universities showed unequivocally that the US is more of an oligarchy than a democracy.
As for Russia, while the central government has been careful to avoid confrontation with Islam, local areas and cities have, as you mentioned, taken serious measures to halt the advance of Islam, including banning mosque construction in several cities and in Moscow, refusing to issue a permit for a demonstration against ‘Islamophobia.’
JULIO SEVERO: Many people talk about Russia without understanding its language, culture and traditions. Is this your case? What do you know about Russia?
DON HANK: I hold a Master’s degree in Russian language and literature and have studied at the University of Leningrad (now Petersburg). I read Russian language articles as often as I can. It is almost impossible to understand what is really happening in Russia without looking at the Russian viewpoint. My Russophobe friends insist that almost everything that the Russians say is mere propaganda. However, it must be pointed out that Russia is no longer a monolithic government. I believe you, Julio, pointed out in a recent commentary that Moscow Times has an anti-government viewpoint. Therefore, no one can truthfully say that all news from Russia is propaganda.
There is also one very important reason why I see Russia differently from many other Americans, including conservative Christians. I have had considerable exposure to Russian literature and recognize in Putin’s words and actions the distinct influence of Russian Christian thought. Christian authors that I have read in Russian include Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy, whose Christian thoughts are expressed and illustrated in Putin’s words and deeds. Likewise, Putin has had friendly relations with Alexander Solzhenitsyn, a man whose writings reflected religious thought at a time when such was strictly forbidden by the communists (but without necessarily declaring himself to be a Christian). It is very difficult for Westerners with little or no exposure to Russian literature to correctly evaluate Vladimir Putin.
JULIO SEVERO: American ultranationalists as Cliff Kincaid believe that Putin is being influenced by an ideology called “Eurasianism,” which was set forth by the philosopher Alexander Dugin. In fact, he said that Dugin is an adviser to Putin. What is your opinion on this?
DON HANK: Julio, russophobia is now a cottage industry in America and the hacks who work in it are paid to give speeches and write books that essentially keep the cold war warm. None of the ones I know of, including Kincaid, have an extensive knowledge of Russian culture, literature or language and they do not read the Russian language press. It is impossible to be an authority on Russia without this background.
I know that many people here in the Western world have been told by anti-Russia critics that Alexander Dugin is a “mentor” of Putin. That is not true. Dugin is a very clever man who wants power for himself and has made desperate attempts to ingratiate himself with Putin. Dugin never really understood Putin. After Dugin made that crazy speech in a televised interview urging people to “kill, kill, kill” (the Ukrainians), many Russians demanded that Dugin be fired from his post as professor. Indeed, he was fired, and significantly, Putin did not object to this. Indeed, Putin has said repeatedly in interviews that the Russians and Ukrainians are brothers. He wants conciliation and he wants Russians to respect other peoples. Dugin was stupid to say what he did. Dugin later foolishly blamed Putin for not coming to his aid. Obviously, this man is an egotist who has no influence on Putin whatsoever, and I doubt he ever did.  Putin was recently interviewed by Russian media and was asked what his ideology was. Putin said he had no ideology at all and that he was a conservative and a pragmatist. This was a strong signal to the public that he was not in any way tied to Dugin and would not be swayed by his ideology.
JULIO SEVERO: Thanks, Don. If Russia followed the U.S. free speech model, Dugin would never be fired, because thousands of American professors proclaim nonsense and even murders (especially of unborn babies) and go unfired. In fact, the fad today in the U.S. is to fire only professors who speak out against abortion and homosexuality. So it is very interesting that in the Russian model, Dugin was fired. Now, another question:
A few days ago, the Kremlin hosted an international forum on large families and the future of humanity. Originally, the World Congress on Families was scheduled to hold its big pro-family event at the Kremlin. But leftist and homosexual groups successfully pressed the U.S. government to ban Christian and conservative groups from attending it. So the World Congress on Families had to comply under this massive negative pressure. What is the power today of U.S. gay and leftist groups to stop the freedom of Christian and conservative groups? Why haven’t other great U.S. conservative groups denounced it? On the contrary, gay activists in the U.S. trashed the Moscow event. The U.S. leftist group PFAW (People for the American Way), which attacked me some weeks ago, also trashed the event. In fact, American ultranationalists as Cliff Kincaid trashed it too. Even the secular Russian newspaper The Moscow Times, following the secular U.S. media, trashed the event, using basically the same words of Kincaid, saying that the Russian speakers were “corrupt” and accusing the American and the international participants of being “neo-cons.” This was the first time in my life I was accused of being a neocon. How do you interpret this strange “alliance” against the pro-family event in Moscow?
DON HANK: First of all, Julio, I want to heartily congratulate you for being able to attend that conference. I believe that God was with you in opening up the hearts of your readers to donate so generously to enable you to make this trip. It is incredible that the government of a “Christian” nation could allow itself to be pressured to ban your entering the Kremlin. What a wonderful and historically educational visit that would have been! I can’t tell you exactly why conservative groups have not complained about this absurd ban, but I do have a theory. Ever since web sites started publishing my articles about Putin and Russia, I have been receiving some emails from groups that I call “professional Russophobes,” activists who support the neocon view of Russia and are paid for speaking engagements and for writing books that denigrate Russia. This is little more than prostitution of their talents. Russophobia is racism, just like anti-Semitism. Both imply a fear and/or hatred of an ethnic group, which they consider morally, intellectually or otherwise inferior, while considering themselves superior. Jesus warned against this self-righteousness in his parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector praying in the Temple. Unfortunately, many Western Christians are also Russophobes, and this is a sign of spiritual blindness — the same kind of spiritual blindness that prevents Christians from effectively defending their faith against Islamization and the encroachment of the homosexual agenda. Only a spiritually blind person could possibly fail to see how Russia today is defending Christianity against both Islam and the homosexual agenda.
The Moscow Times is anti-Putin. The accusation of you being a neocon is beyond absurd. These people have no idea what a neocon is. Today's neocons are anti-Russian. There is a very strong anti-Putin movement in Russia and it consists mostly of what they call Westerners, who want to align themselves with the West. This dichotomy between Slavophiles and Westernizers goes back to the 1800s in Russia. The difference between these movements can best be understood by reading Turgenev's novella Nest of Noblefolk (it is available as a movie online. I highly recommend it to movie buffs who like classics). It is hard to believe, but the Westernizers are still active today and want a Russia that is closer in ideology to Europe and the US.
JULIO SEVERO: Some American pro-family leaders were very courageous and attended the Moscow conservative meeting. Now the Human Rights Campaign, the most important U.S. gay group, wants the State Department to investigate them. Is there a Gaystapo (a gay oppressive surveillance machine with state assistance) in America? Why don’t homosexual activists in Russia have the same “freedom” and apparatus to be a Gaystapo against Christians?
DON HANK: Julio, I like your word “Gaystapo” because it perfectly describes many gay activists and the state apparatus that protects them while persecuting Christians who dare to call homosexual behavior sin. I once regularly attended a church where the pastor taught the biblical view of homosexuality. There was a rebellious boy from a local seminary who occasionally attended with this pastor’s son. Once as the pastor was preaching about homosexuality, this boy jumped up from his seat and ran out the door, followed by the pastor’s son. It was a bizarre display but I suspected what was behind it.
A few weeks later, after this pastor had again preached the biblical view of homosexuality, the pastor’s home was torched and burned to the ground. Police investigators found that the fire was the result of arson, but no one was able to locate the perpetrators. Suffice to say that gay activists who portray themselves as victims are anything but victims.
JULIO SEVERO: Scott Lively, who is the greatest Christian authority today on the gay agenda, has said that possibly the Obama administration may have used the Ukrainian crisis to attack the Russian stance against the gay agenda. Before this crisis, all the U.S. media were consistently and increasingly attacking Russia over its law banning homosexual propaganda to children. In contrast, in the March cover story of Decision magazine, Franklin Graham praised the Russian government for this law and for stances more favorable to Christians. Do you believe that the Obama administration and neocons, who provoked the Ukrainian crisis, used it to draw away the attention from the Russian conservative measures?
DON HANK: Westernism, or Western liberalism, is a religion. From what I have observed, its followers are true believers, absolute fanatics who will stop at nothing to assert their goals. Julio, I therefore believe that you are right and that the Ukrainian crisis was indeed used for this purpose, but also to enforce the Wolfowitz doctrine, which demands that Russia must be contained and isolated from the former Soviet republics. This isolation is absolutely unfair in itself, but the association agreement between the Ukraine and the EU is a direct provocation of Russia. This agreement makes it illegal for Ukraine to trade bilaterally with Russia without the permission of the EU, and according to the Russians, this ban will cost Russia billions of dollars in lost trade. The EU (European Union) is a failed pseudo-state that is bringing nothing but misery to its members. Most of the northern members in Europe no longer wish to be part of the EU, but their leaders have betrayed them by denying them a referendum that would enable them to be sovereign again. I believe that the EU will eventually fall, and with it, so will the US. Both of these entities are nothing but dictatorships and have lost all legitimacy. It makes me sad to say this because I am an American. But it looks as if the America I was born in is not the America that I will die in. If it were not for my faith in God, I don’t know if I could stand the pain of seeing my country fall so far from grace. But my allegiance is to God Almighty and to Jesus Christ His Son, not to any country. Ronald Reagan once said: “I did not abandon the Democrat Party. It abandoned me.” Likewise I say that I did not abandon my country. It abandoned me.
JULIO SEVERO: Who are the neoconservatives, or neocons? Are they helpful or not to the Christian conservative movement? What is the power of neocons?
DON HANK: The term neocon describes in reality a group of powerful politicians and their enablers who simply pretend to be conservative but are left leaning promoters of a New World Order, or one world socialist government that, if it comes into being, will be a platform for the US oligarchs and their allies in banking and geopolitics to rule the world according to the doctrine of Western liberalism. Obviously, these people are not at all helpful to Christians. While they pretend to support fairness, democracy and “freedom,” one of their main goals is the destruction of Western civilization. They want to eliminate the borders around the US just as the EU has eliminated the borders around its member countries, which, as a result, are now bursting at the seams with hostile Muslims who threaten them with jihad. It is a desperate situation that, according to my European friends, will one day surely lead to civil war.
The power of the neocons in geopolitics is almost unlimited, or rather it is limited almost exclusively by Russia in the international sphere and by a few brave conservatives in the national sphere. People like you, Julio, who are not afraid to tell the truth and expose them.
https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gifThe reason they are so powerful is that their policies and their ideology pervade both major political parties in the US and also extend to NATO and the EU. Essentially, the neocons first emerged within the Republican Party but their ideas in foreign policy have extended to the Democrat Party as well. A perfect example of this is Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs. Nuland’s husband is historian Robert KaganCouncil on Foreign Relations member, and co-founder of the think-tank “Project for the New American Century” (PNAC). The CFR is a carrier of the idea that borders must be eliminated in order to pave the way for a one world government. The fact that Kagan was an advisor to both Republicans and Democrats clearly illustrates how neocons cross party lines. This is why it seems meaningless for many people to vote for a candidate of either party, since both parties accept neocon policies that invariably lead to the destruction of Christians communities.
JULIO SEVERO: How have America, Europe and Russia, with their Christian traditions, capitulated to the Islamic and homosexual ideologies?
DON HANK: The elites of Europe and America have abandoned Christianity. Christian traditions mean nothing to them. Russia is the only world power that embraces Christianity (and this is not just a political trick. It fully reflects Russian Christian thought as expressed in the 19th Century literature. The EU and the USA are failing. The economies of these two entities are no longer sustainable in the long run, since they operate on the basis of debt, not on any sound business or banking principles. They are both in their late stage of existence, a stage where the only strategy left for them is to issue currency. But issuing currency to pay debts is like adding water to the soup when new guests arrive. Once too many guests have arrived, the soup no longer is soup. It is just water with a few vegetables floating around in it. Zimbabwe and the Weimar Republic of Germany, for example, failed as a result of this policy.
To make matters worse for the US in particular, the Russians and their BRICS partners, including Brazil, are starting to de-dollarize international commercial transactions, basing them on rubles or yuan, for example. Once this strategy has advanced to a certain level, the dollar will have lost so much of its value that it will be almost worthless.
JULIO SEVERO: How could America, Europe and Russia, with their Christian traditions, work together to defeat the Islamic and homosexual ideology?
DON HANK: At some point, because of the failed policies, the US will depend on Russia and China almost completely, and at that point, the neocons will lose their power. Russians can then demand that the US and even the EU help them fight Islamization and, if they choose to do so, accept the Russian policies regarding homosexuality.
But none of this can happen without God’s intervention. We must all just wait and see….and pray.
Julio, thank you very much for this opportunity. I wish you and your readers all the best and I pray that God will continue to richly bless you all.
Article by Don Hank: