Wednesday, February 22, 2017


 Bombshell: Major Ad Agency Suspends Infowars Over Support For Trump
 Discriminatory move based on 
"political content" of website
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Major advertising agency AdRoll has suspended its syndication of Infowars product ads across millions of websites and platforms due to our support for Donald Trump.

A letter sent to Infowars explaining the decision cites the “political content” of our website as the reason for the suspension.
The letter also implies that the suspension is related to the “fake news” witch hunt that has been spearheaded by the mainstream media, citing “potentially sensitive information” that is not accurate.

The company has violated its agreement with Infowars and this represents a direct, politically motivated attack on our funding with a potential revenue loss of around $3 million dollars a year.
The letter also mentions the The Network Advertising Initiative, an industry regulator set up to protect user privacy. The letter does not provide a single example of where Infowars has harmed user privacy.
“When all these big corporations get together and create blacklists of who they want to ban, it’s clearly racketeering,” said Alex Jones in response to the suspension.
AdRoll will undoubtedly claim that it can suspend agreements with whoever it likes, but the clear discriminatory nature of the decision is based on false and defamatory “fake news” lists that have already been debunked.
These McCarthyite blacklists are being used by the establishment media to push for censorship of their competition by strangling our funding.
Infowars will immediately be exploring all legal avenues to fight back against this defamatory and discriminatory attack on our organization.
Read the letter in full below.
I apologize for the lack of communication here prior to pausing campaigns. Infowars has been flagged by the AdRoll Policy team and, as a result, campaigns suspended. In an effort to protect the privacy of our site visitors, our partner ad networks as well as the National Advertising Initiative (NAI) have strict policies that prohibit retargeting user segments based off of potentially sensitive information.
All content on your website should be relevant, accurate, informative, and up to date. Any claims should be easily verifiable. We are not able to promote websites that intentionally misrepresent their business or use any tactic to falsely enhance reputation or misrepresent actual offerings. Furthermore, all political content should focus on the merits of the candidate, and political messaging should not target special interests or groups, or imply affiliations.
This is in line with the policies of both AdRoll and our partner ad networks policies. Given the nature of retargeting, and that we are targeting customers with ads that have directly visited your website we must ensure that we are always abiding by these policies and upholding such standards to ensure the confidentiality of our customers. Our policy center explicitly states these policies and a link can be found here.
Since your account was flagged, we are no longer able to run campaigns for your site and have now gone ahead and suspended the campaigns. I am sorry not to have better news for you today but hope that you can understand. Please consider this review final.
Let me know if you have any questions.
 BREAKING NEWS: Infowars Is Being Censored!
 Published on Feb 21, 2017
The information war is intensifying! Infowars reporter Millie Weaver covers recent attempts by the MSM to shutdown Infowars and the Pro-Trump movement. Help support Infowars by spreading the link to the live show, by getting the free app, buying products from our store, and sharing our reports with your family and friends!
 Globalists Cut Off Infowars Supply Line
 Published on Feb 22, 2017
In a typical asymmetrical warfare tactic, globalists factions have leveraged their connections to deliver a massive blow to

Undoubtedly, Infowars is one of the primary driving factors behind the biggest upset to the New World Order in decades, and today, Infowars has been banned from one of the largest advertising platforms in the world for its support of Donald J. Trump. This is an unprecedented attack on the liberty movement and free speech and we need your support.
The Takeover Of The Internet Is Here: 
A Desperate Warning
 Published on Feb 21, 2017
Alex Jones gives a dire warning to the viewers as Google attempts to destroy Infowars by cutting off our funding by having their partner company ban Infowars from showing ads using AdRoll.
AdRoll Bans Conservatives As Fake News 
 Published on Feb 21, 2017
AdRoll has banned Infowars from their platform, cutting what was projected to be $5,000,000 in ad revenue down to $0.
Radio Show Host Banned From Advertising On Internet
 Published on Feb 21, 2017
Google is attempting to destroy Infowars by cutting off our funding and ability to show ads to the public.

InfoWars Gets Banned! 

 Published on Feb 21, 2017

Infowars has been banned from one of the largest advertising platforms in the world for its support of Donald J. Trump in an unprecedented attack on the liberty movement and free speech.

We will also be launching The Defense of Liberty 13 Hour Special Broadcast February 22, 11 AM CST and going all the way to midnight. Join The Resistance!

Why Google Wants To Censor The Internet - Revealed

You Can't Ban Liberty! This Is America!




republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
This is so very refreshing and welcome after eight years of Obama’s contempt for Israel. The UN is a tool of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which has fueled its vicious anti-Israel bias. It is positively exhilarating to see the U.S. standing for sanity and justice.
In the teeth of this, the establishment media is still pushing the discredited claim that President Trump is anti-Semitic.

“Nikki Haley Denounces UN’s ‘Outrageously Biased’ Resolutions Against Israel,” by Sam Dorman, Washington Free Beacon, February 21, 2017:
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley ripped into the international body’s “anti-Israel bias” last week, specifically denouncing the U.N. Security Council for criticizing the Jewish state while ignoring security threats in the Middle East.
“It is the U.N.’s anti-Israel bias that is long overdue for change,” Haley said Thursday after her first Security Council meeting, which she described as “a bit strange.” The meeting focused on Israel, Haley said, rather than on issues like Iran funding terrorists and how to defeat the Islamic State.
Haley reaffirmed the United States’ support for the Jewish state and said Washington would not “turn a blind eye” to the U.N.’s “anti-Israel bias.”
“I’m here to emphasize the United States is determined to stand up to the U.N.’s anti-Israel bias,” Haley said before singling out Security Council resolutions focused on Israel as “outrageously biased.”
“The double standards are breathtaking,” Haley said. She then described how the Security Council blocked a statement condemning a terrorist attack in Israel during which terrorists shot and stabbed innocent people….

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Far-right French presidential candidate Marine Le Pen cancelled a meeting with Lebanon’s Grand Mufti after refusing to wear a headscarf.
Brava to Marine Le Pen! She is the model of a modern leader who respects human rights and equality for all, unlike her leftist faux-feminist political counterparts of Sweden’s “first feminist government,” who donned headscarves in Iran, and Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne, who sat with a headscarf in the back corner of a mosque while the men prayed. Le Pen refused to bow in shame to a misogynistic culture in which men subjugate women as inferiors.
The regular use of the term “far-right” to describe sensible politicians such as Le Pen and citizens who refuse to be subjugated by Islamic supremacists is intended to malign them and discredit their fine work.
Ms Le Pen said that in a meeting in Egypt with the Grand Imam of al-Azhar – considered by some Muslims to be the highest authority in Sunni Islamic thought – she had not been forced to cover her head.
“Marine Le Pen walks out of meeting with Lebanon’s Grand Mufti after refusing to wear headscarf,” by May Bulman, Independent, February 21, 2017:
Far-right French presidential candidate Marine Le Pen cancelled a meeting with Lebanon’s Grand Mufti after refusing to wear a headscarf.
“You can pass on my respects to the Grand Mufti, but I will not cover myself up,” she told reporters.
The front National leader was told by Lebanese officials that she would have to wear a veil for her audience with Grand Sunni Muslim Mufti, Sheikh Abdel-Latif Derian.
Video footage shows Ms Le Pen at the entrance to his office shaking her head.
Ms Le Pen said that in a meeting in Egypt with the Grand Imam of al-Azhar – considered by some Muslims to be the highest authority in Sunni Islamic thought – and she had not been forced to cover her head.
“He did not have this demand,” said Ms Le Pen. “But it’s not a problem, you can pass on to the Grand Mufti my considerations, but I am not putting the veil on.”
Once told that customs were different in Lebanon, Ms Le Pen walked out of the building and left in her car.
Her aides had reportedly been informed before her visit that she would be required to wear a headscarf.
The anti-immigration politician made a three-day visit to Lebanon this week to meet officials in an effort to bolster her presidential credentials two months before the first round of voting in the French presidential election.
Polls suggest Ms Le Pen is likely to get the highest proportion of votes in the first round of voting in April, but then lose to a more mainstream candidate in the second round in May…..


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“Too much traffic, too little parking, the city planning commission decided by a 9-0 vote against the mosque in September 2015. But in December, the mosque sued the city and the Obama Justice Department joined in, claiming the real reason the mosque was denied was because the city was caving to anti-Muslim bigotry in the community. Now, a settlement deal is headed to the Sterling Heights City Council on Tuesday evening. If the council votes to sign the deal, it could be very costly for the city.”
Attorney General Sessions should put a stop to this. The Obama DoJ used its might to crush local opposition to mosques, even when the objections were based on legitimate concerns regarding zoning and other matters. And of course all discussion of Muslim Brotherhood ties and the jihad threat was ruled “Islamophobic.” Sessions needs to stop the persecution of the people in Sterling Heights and elsewhere who don’t want to see a mega-mosque transform their communities.

“Mega-mosque being forced on Christian refugee community,” by Leo Hohmann, WND, February 21, 2017:
A city of 130,000 people in southeastern Michigan is under the gun of Islamic pressure following its denial of a mega-mosque in a residential neighborhood populated largely by Christian refugees who fled Islamic persecution in Iraq.
Sterling Heights already has two mosques, but a third, the American Islamic Community Center, applied for a permit and was rejected after it was determined its proposed use was incompatible with the residential area. Too much traffic, too little parking, the city planning commission decided by a 9-0 vote against the mosque in September 2015.
But in December, the mosque sued the city and the Obama Justice Department joined in, claiming the real reason the mosque was denied was because the city was caving to anti-Muslim bigotry in the community. Now, a settlement deal is headed to the Sterling Heights City Council on Tuesday evening. If the council votes to sign the deal, it could be very costly for the city.
Local residents fear it’s a bad deal, something similar to the Obama DOJ-orchestrated deal forced upon nearby Pittsfield Township, Michigan, last year. That town had to pay out $1.7 million to local Muslims to whom it had denied a permit for an Islamic school, and township employees were ordered to undergo sensitivity training to assure they never again discriminate against Muslims.
Sessions to the rescue?
Attorney General Jeff Sessions could cancel any similar deal from taking effect in Sterling Heights, but only if he is aware of it and acts quickly.
“If the city council is found to be cooperating with the Obama DOJ staff who are expediting this consent order to stick it to the Sessions/Trump team, then this city will go nuts,” said Dick Manaserri, spokesman for Secure Michigan, a group formed to educate the public on Shariah law and how it differs from American law.
In last November’s presidential election, Donald Trump carried Sterling Heights, normally a Democratic Party stronghold, by 56 to 44 percent over Hillary Clinton. He also carried Macomb County, home to Sterling Heights and also a Democratic-oriented county.
But Trump’s new AG, Sessions, is apparently not yet fully in control of the Justice Department, which includes many holdovers from the Obama administration.
“Why else would Jeff Sessions not dismiss the Obama DOJ lawsuit against Sterling Heights?” Manaserri asks. “We have been told by legal experts that he has the power to simply dismiss the lawsuit. A consent order typically implies wrongdoing with the application of penalties.”
When the planning commission denied the mosque permit in September 2015, hundreds of Sterling Heights residents gathered outside City Hall to celebrate. That celebration was caught on video, and critics cited it as evidence the city was somehow biased against Muslims.
Tom Mitchell is a resident of Sterling Heights whose family has been there since 1965. He’s seen the city’s transformation over the past couple of decades under the control of what he calls “progressives.” He avoids the world “Democrat” because the city’s elections are technically nonpartisan.
“I feel that with the left taking over, they are destroying this community. I don’t want to become another Dearborn or a Hamtramck. And our elected officials are enabling this takeover,” he said.
Hamtramck, just a few miles south of Sterling Heights, became the nation’s first city with a Muslim-majority city council in 2016, and a large portion of Dearborn resembles a Middle Eastern country with signs in Arabic and women walking the streets with their faces veiled.
He said it’s not a matter of discrimination. Churches have been denied building projects in the past because their sites were too close to residential housing. They didn’t get the federal government to sue the city; they simply picked another site.
“I truly believe this one man, Mr. Sessions, has the power to throw out any consent decree that was engineered by Obama’s Department of Justice. That is our hope,” Mitchell said. “In fact, I know of hundreds of us who are praying for that opportunity to get it in Jeff Sessions’ hands, before Tuesday night, because once it’s signed, how do you overturn that? Signing it is tantamount to a consent that we’re a bunch of bigots here in Sterling Heights.”…

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
You can see McMaster say this beginning at the four-minute mark:
“We are engaged today, as General George C. Marshall’s generation was engaged, against enemies who pose a great threat to all civilized peoples. As our World War II generation defeated Nazi Fascism and Japanese imperialism, and as later generations defeated Communist totalitarianism, we will defeat today’s enemies, including terrorist organizations like Daesh, who cynically use a perverted interpretation of religion to incite hatred and justify horrific cruelty against innocents.” — Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, speech to Virginia Military Institute, Center for Leadership and Excellence, November 21, 2016
In this video also, from May 2016, McMaster says this same thing. At 14:43, McMaster refers to “groups like ISIL, who use this irreligious ideology, this perverted interpretation of religion to justify violence. They depend on ignorance, and the ability to recruit vulnerable segments of populations to foment hatred, and then use that hatred to justify violence against innocents.”
This could be Barack Obama or John Kerry speaking.
As I explained here, this was during the Obama regime, when that was the official policy of the U.S. government, but President Trump has repeatedly criticized his predecessor (and his 2016 election opponent) for not being willing to call the problem of jihad terror by its right name. Since he has become President, he has repeatedly reiterated his determination to eradicate “radical Islamic terrorism.” If McMaster genuinely holds the view that the Islamic State is not Islamic, then he is a disastrous pick as National Security Adviser, and will continue the willful ignorance of the Obama administration, hamstringing efforts to understand, and counter effectively, the motives and goals of the enemy. 


 Jihadists returning to Europe from Syria to carry out attacks, says former Danish ambassador
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
With the Islamic State’s stronghold over areas in Syria and Iraq quickly slipping, ISIS is now boasting that Muslims born in the United States will become an army of conquest and are “getting ready for the battle in their homeland”.
According to an article in the Spectator by BBC world affairs correspondent Paul Wood, “A document is circulating among Isis members through text messages and Twitter. Titled ‘The caliphate will not perish,’ it is a series of morale-boosting declarations by Isis leaders, living and dead.”
The document makes it clear that when ISIS loses its territory, which could happen in just weeks or months, a “virtual caliphate” will replace the physical one, with a new generation of jihadis inspired to continue the fight.

In the document, a member of the Isis Shura Council “boasts that Muslims born in the US will become an army of conquest,” according to Wood.
“They are getting ready for the battle in their homeland. Today the caliphate is in Iraq and Syria. Tomorrow, it will be in the White House,” asserts the ISIS council member.
Wood also spoke to Rolf Holmboe, a former Danish ambassador to Syria, who told him that nine out of ten Danish ISIS fighters (ethnic Danes and immigrants) have made it back into Denmark and that some “were being instructed to smuggle themselves back for operations”.
“There could obviously be an upsurge in terror attacks in Europe and in the western world as revenge for the fall of the caliphate,” Holmboe told Wood.
This clearly exonerates Donald Trump and his supporters who are concerned about jihadists using the refugee red carpet to smuggle themselves into the west to carry out deadly attacks.
As we reported back in 2015, an ISIS manifesto bragged about how the terror organization brags has exploited the refugee program to send jihadist sleeper cells to Europe since 2012
“No doubt, some of these refugees were undercover fighters of Al Qa’idah and the Islamic State,” the ISIS manifesto stated. “They were quick to take the opportunity of entering into the different countries of Europe (most probably as early as 2012).”
“All this was happening under the nose of the European intelligence services whose job during this time (2012) was only to prevent European Muslims from entering Syria. (This shows how quick the Islamic groups were in planning ahead. Years before Europe even knew where its Muslim citizens were going – experienced Islamic fighters had already found safety in Europe.)”
The document also revealed how Muslims were being radicalized inside Islamic ghettos that the left still refuses to acknowledge even exist despite ongoing riots and violent unrest in cities like Stockholm, Malmo and Paris.


 Soros-Linked Group: Racist to Say "Illegal Immigrant" or "Islamic Extremist"
 Italian organization pushes media to hide ethnicity 
of migrants who commit crimes
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
An Italian-based lobbying organization tied to George Soros is calling on journalists to eliminate all language that could portray migrants in a negative light, including phrases like “illegal immigrant” and “Islamic extremist.”
The list of terms to be banned for use by journalists was released by Association Carta di Roma, an Italian-based immigration lobbying organization that “seeks to be a stable reference point for those who work on daily basis with media and minorities issues.”
Founded in December 2011, Association Carta di Roma uses “research and monitoring activities,” along with “training activities for media operators,” to promote “respect and guarantee of the rights of asylum seekers, refugees, migrants or minorities in general.”

The organization has requested terms such as “clandestine” (clandestine migrants), “zingari” (gypsies), “nomadi” (nomads), and “extracomunitari” (those coming from outside the European Union) not be used by journalists.
While those terms broadly encompass a large number of people, even precise ethnic terms such as “Albanian,” “Maghrebi” and “Chinese” should not be used in news reports because “today, they are no longer neutral.”
Association Carta di Roma also demanded journalists not report on the ethnic origin of those who commit crimes, stating “journalists are encouraged to ensure the anonymity of asylum-seekers, refugees, victims of trafficking and migrants involved in news events – including those involving crime – where reference to their identity could cause them harm.”
The phrase “Islamic extremists” should be replaced by the term “extremists” in order to avoid causing unwarranted prejudice against Muslims, according to the organization.
Journalists should take cultural diversity into account in their reporting in order to ‘promote mutual understanding between national, social, cultural and religious groups in the local area, therefore enhancing social cohesion,” according to the report.
George Soros, through his Open Society Foundation, is a major financial supporter of Association Carta di Roma; the Open Society Foundation logo features prominently on the Carta di Roma website, as does the logo for the Untied Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.


 Exclusive: Russian Bank Docs Show How Putin Laundered Money to Hillary & Podesta
 Now we know why Clinton & Co. were so desperate 
to frame Trump with ties to Putin
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Today Infowars investigative journalist Jerome Corsi met with former vice-head of Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee, Curt Weldon, to discuss his committees’ deep research into the Clinton technology transfers to Russia in exchange for Clinton Foundation donations.  Weldon validated much that is presented in the following article, which is part one of a series of investigative articles coming out over the upcoming week based on intel by Weldon and other sources:
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congress may want to examine concrete evidence showing Russian President Vladimir Putin paying Hillary Clinton and John Podesta for a long time before the mainstream media goes even more overboard trying to fabricate a tie between Putin and President Donald Trump.
The money trail hunt begins with a document Infowars has obtained from the Russian Central Bank “Registry of Significant Control,” known generally as the “RSC Registry.”
This document traces the ownership of Metcombank, a relatively small Russian-domiciled bank located in the Russian Ural Mountains, to ownership by Viktor Vekselberg, a Russian billionaire with close ties to Putin.
As we shall see this document provides evidence of the circuitous path the Russian government has been using since Hillary Clinton was secretary of state to make large financial payments to John Podesta and to the Clinton Foundation.

Be sure to keep referring to this document to cross-check as you continue reading the article below.
As the RSC Registry makes clear, Vekselberg has been paying Clinton and Podesta through a complicated money laundering scheme involving Metcombank in Russia, with payments tracing back to the Renova Group, a Russian-based energy and investment international conglomerate also owned by Vekselberg.
A March 1, 2013 article from Russian media in which Vekselberg confirmed the questionable bank deposits.
The funds rediverted to Clinton and Podesta through the Renova Group and Metcombank originate in large part from Rusnano — a state-owned investment fund owned by the Russian government. Conveniently, Vekselberg is a board member for Renova.
A NYT article from April 23, 2015 revealing how Clinton made military transfers 
to Russia.

The entire scheme involves a Netherlands-listed private company that plays prominently into the international money laundering the Russian government has been conducting through offshore entities in the Cayman Islands, as documented by the Panama Papers.Money laundering schemes created by professional criminals are typically complicated.  To begin understanding the RSC registry on Metcombank, note that the bottom box on the chart (second page) makes clear that Vekselberg effectively owns 100 percent of Metcombank.
First, the simple part.

Metcombank appears to be the bank Vekselberg has used to make transfers to the Clinton Foundation, with the money flowing first through the Moscow branch of Metcombank, and from there into Deutsche Bank and Trust Company Americas in New York City, finally ending up in a private bank account in the Bank of America that is operated by the Clinton Foundation.
How Putin paid Podesta is more complicated.
John Podesta, the campaign chairman of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during her 2016 presidential run. Podesta has deep ties to Russia despite blaming President Trump of the same.
The complication begins when we examine the RSC Registry and realize that Vekselberg owns Metcombank through a series of intermediary companies, starting with the Renova Group, a Russian corporate conglomerate with interests in oil, energy, and telecommunication that lists Vekselberg as chairman of the board.
The Renova Group owns and operates Renova Assets Ltd., a private investment company headquartered in the Bahamas for which Bloomberg lists no key executives, board members, or members of the executive committee.
Conveniently, Vekselberg also has ties to Rusnano, the Russian State Investment Fund, via his ownership and management of the Renova Group in Russia.
In 2011, Vekselberg directed Rusnano to make a $35 million investment into Joule Unlimited, a small Massachusetts-based energy company, owned by Joule Global Holdings, N.V., in the Netherlands, with Joule Global Stichting, the ultimate controlling entity.
The Rusnano investment into Joule Unlimited was made when then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spearheaded the transfer of U.S. advanced technology to Russia, some with military uses, as part of her “reset” strategy with the country.

As previously reported, in the summer of 2011, while he was advising then-Secretary Clinton on State Department policy, John Podesta joined the board of three Joule entities: Joule Unlimited, a small Massachusetts-based energy company; its holding company, Joule Global Holdings, N.V., which was based in the Netherlands; and Joule Global Stichting, which appears to be the ultimate controlling entity.
Podesta, it turns out, has been paid an undisclosed amount, starting in 2011, for serving on the executive board of Joule Unlimited that he neglected to report to regulatory authorities in the U.S., as well consulting fees from the Wyss Foundation, a group controlled by Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss, an investor in Joule Energy.
In an Aug. 2016 report entitled “From Russia with Money,” the Government Accountability Institute noted that Podesta consulted for a foundation run by one of the investors in Joule Energy, Hansjörg Wyss, who in turn was a major Clinton Foundation donor.
Podesta was evidently paid $87,000 by the Wyss Foundation in 2013, according to federal tax records.
The GAI report also documented the Wyss Charitable Foundation has given between $1 million to $5 million to the Clinton Foundation.
Joule Global Stichting was established in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, on March 14, 2011.
John Podesta joined the Joule Global Stichting’s executive board on June 25, 2011. The Joule Global Stichting is a foundation, but it’s not strictly a foundation in the charitable sense.
A foundation of this type, a Dutch stichting, is a popular means for reducing one’s tax burden, as noted on the website of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca, which is at the heart of the Panama Papers investigation into offshore banking and money-laundering operations as archived and released by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.
The Government Accountability Institute concluded that although Podesta is listed on the corporate records, he failed to disclose his membership on the board of Joule Global Stichting in his federal financial disclosure forms when he joined the Obama White House as a senior advisor.
To complete the circle, Vekselberg, the Renova Group, the Skolkovo Foundation, and Hansjörg Wyss all have ties to the Clinton Foundation, either as substantial donors or as participants in the Clinton Global Initiative.
Joule Global Stichting and Joule Global Holdings, N.V., also figure prominently as a client of Mossack Fonseca.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“Freedom of expression does not signify a right to lying,” asserted French Minister for Families, Children, and Women’s Rights Laurence Rossignol. A new law in France imposes a punishment of a maximum of two years in prison and a fine of $30,000 for “spreading or transmitting allegations or indications liable to intentionally mislead, with the purpose of deterring [from abortion], on the characteristics or medical consequences of a voluntary interruption” of pregnancy. In other words, if a person asserts, on a pro-life website, that abortion could lead to certain adverse medical situations for the pregnant woman, and the government considers that “mis-explaining the need for a new law in France,” that person could be criminally prosecuted.
“Voluntary interruption” of pregnancy is, of course, euphemistic language for abortion, and speaking out against what one considers the taking of innocent human life — unborn babies — through abortion is considered criminal in France.
Clear language has been a frequent victim in the abortion argument since even before the infamous Roe v. Wade decision of 1973. Whenever referring to an unborn child in the womb, the pro-abortionists start speaking Latin, instead of English, calling the child a “fetus” — which means “young one.” And, whereas we used to refer to a miscarriage as “losing the baby,” the pro-abortionists call it “losing a pregnancy.” Then, there is the euphemistic “reproductive rights.” Finally, those who favor abortion on demand prefer the term “pro-choice,” without saying what they are “pro-choice” about. When reporting on the dispute, American leftist journalists use the language of those who favor abortion on demand, giving the “pro” term to those who are for legalized abortion, and the “anti” word to those who want to defend the unborn child, calling them “anti-abortion.”
The bill in the National Assembly in France was designed to stop the “electronic” or “online” dissemination of any information that has the intent of dissuading women from seeking an abortion to end their pregnancy. But the wording is so broadly written that any person, or any group, that speaks out publicly against the grisly practice, calling attention to the dangers or risks of having an abortion, can become subject to criminal prosecution.
In France, where abortion has long been legal as a purely elective (for any reason) procedure and totally funded by tax money as a “fundamental right,” the socialist government was moved to action after it became known that Google searches made for abortion providers also took women to pro-life websites, set up to discourage abortion. The pro-life sites explained that there are risks associated with abortion, and suggested places where a pregnant woman could go if she wished to seek help in keeping the baby. The pro-life groups assert that abortion can have negative side effects and cause health problems or psychological consequences. (On a personal note, this writer met a woman years ago who said that she had an abortion when she was 17 years old, and had nightmares for about 10 years after that. That would appear to confirm the pro-life websites. The woman eventually became a Christian and a pro-life activist).
In contrast, the government’s Ministry of Health created a pro-abortion website that provided information on access to abortion. The Ministry of Health contends that the pro-life sites perpetuate “misconceptions” about the procedure. On the pro-abortion government site, there is a page on what the Ministry of Health calls “misinformation about voluntary interruption of pregnancy,” a page in which the government argues that pro-life sites are not really information sites, but are rather just pretending they are. (This sounds a bit like the claim that “fake news” allegedly helped Donald Trump win the U.S. presidential election last November.) Instead, on the government sites, women are urged to go to Planned Parenthood or other pro-abortion sites that provide abortion clinic addresses.
In 2001, the government banned “moral and psychological pressure searching to hinder abortion.” This law was created to stop the activities of pro-life activists in which they spoke to women planning to obtain an abortion, or held demonstrations near abortion providers in clinics or public hospitals. An elderly and nearly blind pro-lifer was fined for the crime of giving knitted baby boots to a woman in the stairway of the building where Planned Parenthood had its offices in Paris.
Regarding the latest law, Rossignol said, “anti-abortion activists will remain free to express their hostility to abortion, provided they are honest about who they are, what they do, and what they want.” If a pro-life site does not do that, said Rossignol, then it is guilty of “manipulating minds.”
And who will decide whether or not pro-life material is “misleading,” or involved in “manipulating minds”? A pro-abortion government bureaucrat, of course. Presently, government-published “information” on abortion uses what pro-lifers contend is misleading information. For example, the socialist Hollande government refers to a surgical abortion in very odd language — calling it an “aspiration of the egg.” Rossignol even argued in the National Assembly that “abortion is not the removing of a life.”
Clearly, the law is intended to chill the freedom of speech of the pro-life movement in France. On the other hand, there is no provision in the law to punish pro-abortionists for disseminating “misleading” information.
There is opposition to the new law. Jean-Marie Le Mene, president of the Fondation Jérôme-Lejeune, stated, “That which dissuades from abortion is not false information, but correct information.” The Republican (center-right) party called the law an infringement on freedom of expression, and voted in opposition. Additionally, they have vowed to ask the Constitutional Council to set the law aside as being contrary to the French Constitution’s protections of free speech.
Unfortunately, what has happened historically in France is all too familiar to those in America who have seen our own Republicans in action. Past laws against abortion have been opposed by the Republican Party of France when they are in the minority. Once back in the majority, however, they have made no moves to roll back these laws, which increasingly advance the cause of those who favor abortion.
No doubt pro-abortionists in the United States have taken note of these anti-free-speech and pro-abortion actions in France by that country’s socialist government. If the American Left had the votes, would they enact a similar law here?


  Trump just fired one of his senior security officials, Craig Deare, after he made “gross” comments about Ivanka Trump’s good looks at the Wilson Center, a Washington think tank.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 "Whoever disrespects the Holy Prophet Muhammad is worthy of death, and
 even if disrespects indirectly he is still worthy of death. Even if 
someone asks for forgiveness it is not acceptable.”
Large numbers of people who believe this are entering the U.S., and obviously many are already here. What could possibly go wrong?

“US Mosque hosts celebration in honor of Pakistani killer,” by Ehsan Rehan, Rabwah Times, February 14, 2017:
A U.S. Mosque on Sunday celebrated the death anniversary of a Pakistani man who shot and killed a sitting Governor for criticizing the country’s Blasphemy Laws.
Mumtaz Qadri, who was the Governor’s bodyguard, assassinated liberal Pakistani politician and Governor of Punjab province Salman Taseer in 2011 for speaking out against Pakistan’s controversial Blasphemy laws and expressing solidarity with a Christian woman who had been accused of blasphemy. After Qadri was charged with murder by an anti-terrorism court and hanged in 2016, more than 100,000 people came out to attend his funeral.
The Gulzar E Madina Mosque in Pikesville, Maryland hosted an “Urs” in honor of the infamous killer on February 12th. Urs is a traditional commemoration usually given to Saints and Holy personages. The Mosque also advertised the event in the February 9th edition of Urdu Times, America’s most widely distributed Urdu language newspaper.
The Urs or commemoration was attended by dozens of people including young children and teenagers. Event speakers included Pakistan-based Islamic singer Muhammad Ali Soharwardi, NewJersey-based Islamic scholar Syed Saad Ali and Baltimore-based Islamic cleric Ijaz Hussain among others.
Pakistan-based Ali Soharwardi has been on a U.S tour for the past few weeks and performed at several events in New York and New Jersey before making his way to Maryland.
Speaking at the event, an unidentified speaker said:
“Whoever disrespects the Holy Prophet Muhammad is worthy of death, and even if disrespects indirectly he is still worthy of death. Even if someone asks for forgiveness it is not acceptable”
Speaking at the event New Jersey-based Islamic scholar Syed Saad Ali asked the attendees why they did not take any action after the arrest of Qadri, Ali said:
“Warrior Mumtaz Qadri kissed the noose in love for Prophet Muhammad When Qadri was in jail for 5 years what did we do? what effort did we make (for his release), Why did we not go where he was being held? Qadri did everything for us, and for the love of Islam and we could not even stand by himPeople say Islam teaches peace…..I say Islam teaches us Ghairat (Honor) Who will now stand up?
Referring to another Blasphemy Killer, Tanveer Ahmad, Ali said:
“Our warrior Tanveer who is sitting in a jail in Scotland, I don’t know if someone knows or not, when that Mirzai (Ahmadi) spoke his “sacrilegious rubbish” he went there and stabbed him 27 times and the police arrested him and right now he is in a jail in Scotland. So if we just take a step forward, angels will automatically come for our help. But what Mumtaz Qadri has done is something amazing, he has surpassed all these warriors”
In march 2016, British-Pakistani man Tanveer Ahmad killed fellow British-Pakistani Asad Shah in Scotland for “disrespecting Islam”. Shah was a member of the minority Ahmadiyya Islamic sect, the Ahmadis are considered heretics by mainstream Muslims.
Baltimore-based Islamic cleric Ijaz Hussain praised the religious freedom in the U.S. and said:
“We have some freedoms here (in the U.S.) which we do not even have in other Muslim countries, this is the beauty of this country. There are some countries where we can’t even praise the prophet, we can’t celebrate the Day of Imam Hussain, this country has freedom of religion and this is the beauty of this country.”
Hussain further said:
” Mumtaz Qadri was not a terrorist and whoever says “We are with you O Prophet” cannot be a terrorist.”
He went on to condemn American Muslim organizations for not taking action against Blasphemers, Hussain said
“When the blasphemous film was released in the U.S, everyone was sleeping including CAIR, ISNA, ICNA and others, and now when the ban has come into effect, they all have risen up, because they are not letting Muslims come into this (so called) heaven”
The speakers also collected donations which they claimed would be used to help Syrian refugees get to the U.S.

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Enlarged February 22, 2017 (first published February 9, 2005)
David Cloud, Way of Life Literature, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061
 Beth Moore is one of the most popular female Christian speakers and authors. Her Bible-study books have sold millions of copies. Her Living Proof Live conferences, hosted by LifeWay (Southern Baptist), draw thousands of attendees. She hosts her own radio program (Living Proof with Beth Moore) and appears regularly on the television program LIFE Today.
Christian Reader magazine called her “America’s Bible Teacher.”
Beth Moore’s Ecumenism
Moore’s meetings are attended by people from “every denomination,” because she “doesn’t get caught up in divisive doctrinal issues” and “steers clear of topics that could widen existing rifts between different streams in the body of Christ” (
Charisma, June 2003).

This is the unscriptural “keep it positive” ecumenical philosophy that is so helpful in furthering end time apostasy and building the apostate one-world “church.” Paul exhorted Timothy not to allow any doctrine other than sound Bible doctrine, but Mrs. Moore knows better than to be so
intolerant and narrow-minded (1 Tim. 1:3).

Moore’s worship leader, Travis Cottrell, “has a uniquely fresh approach to worship that brings the church together,” an approach “that permeates every denominational wall” (LifeWay Christian Resources web site).

In a conference in Houston, Texas, Moore claimed that God showed her a picture vision in which Christ was looking down on Houston and seeing all of the different churches. (She says, “God speaks to me often by putting a picture in my head.”)

Moore had women come up to the platform and sit in little groups to represent a hodgepodge of churches and doctrine. She says: “We are a very interdenominational group. ... I can’t tell you how much I love that diversity.” The groups she highlighted were United Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, Charismatic, and Roman Catholic.

Moore claimed that God showed her that the Roman Catholic Church is part of the “church” as He sees it and that it should be included in ecumenical unity.


Moore is the blind leading the blind. She ignores the Bible’s solemn warning about the multiplication of false teachers and the explosion of end-time apostasy. She ignores the fact that within the denominational diversity she “loves” is found a bewildering variety of heresies, such as baptismal regeneration, infant baptism, sacramentalism, Mariolatry, veneration of relics, popery, antinomianism, universalism, contemplative mysticism, theological modernism,
The Shack’s female goddessism, to name a few.

We are living in the midst of rampant end time apostasy as prophesied in the Scriptures (2 Timothy 3-4). It is not time to “permeate” denominational walls; it is time to raise up walls of biblical separation as a godly protection from error and worldliness.

Romans 16:17 and Jude 3 and similar commandments are commonly ignored by popular evangelical speakers, but they will not be ignored at the judgment seat of Christ.

“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Timothy 4:3-4).

“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them” (Rom. 16:17).

“Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3).
Beth Moore and Contemplative Prayer
Beth Moore is also on the contemplative prayer bandwagon. She joined Richard Foster, Dallas Willard, and other contemplatives on the
Be Still DVD, which was published in April 2008 by Fox Home Entertainment. Shortly after it was released she issued a retraction of sorts, but she soon retracted her retraction. In a statement published on May 26, 2008, Moore’s Living Proof Ministries said: “We believe that once you view the Be Still video you will agree that there is no problem with its expression of Truth” (Beth Moore statement, Lighthouse Trails website.)

To the contrary, the very fact that it features Richard Foster and Dallas Willard are serious problems!

Lighthouse Trails issued the following discerning warning:
“In the DVD, there are countless enticements, references and comments that clearly show its affinity with contemplative spirituality. For instance, Richard Foster says that anyone can practice contemplative prayer and become a ‘portable sanctuary’ for God. This panentheistic view of God is very typical for contemplatives. ... The underlying theme of the Be Still DVD is that we cannot truly know God or be intimate with Him without contemplative prayer and the state of silence that it produces. While the DVD is vague and lacking in actual instruction on word or phrase repetition (which lies at the heart of contemplative prayer), it is really quite misleading. What they don’t tell you in the DVD is that this state of stillness or silence is, for the most part, achieved through some method such as mantra-like meditation. THE PURPOSE OF THE DVD, IN ESSENCE, IS NOT TO INSTRUCT YOU IN CONTEMPLATIVE PRAYER BUT RATHER TO MAKE YOU AND YOUR FAMILY HUNGRY FOR IT. The DVD even promises that practicing the silence will heal your family problems. ... THIS PROJECT IS AN INFOMERCIAL FOR CONTEMPLATIVE PRACTICE, and because of the huge advertising campaign that Fox Home Entertainment has launched, contemplative prayer could be potentially introduced into millions of homes around the world.

“[On the DVD Moore says], ‘... if we are not still before Him [God], we will never truly know to the depths of the marrow of our bones that He is God. There’s got to be a stillness.’ ... [But is] it not true that as believers we come to Him by grace, boldly to His throne, and we call Him our friend? No stillness, no mantra, no breath prayer, no rituals. Our personal relationship with Him is based on His faithfulness and His love and His offer that we have access to Him through the blood of Jesus Christ, and not on the basis of entering an altered state of consciousness or state of bliss or ecstasy as some call it” (“Beth Moore Gives Thumbs Up to Be Still DVD,”
Lighthouse Trails report.
In her book
When Godly People Do Ungodly Things (2002), Moore recommends contemplative Roman Catholics Brother Lawrence and Brennan Manning.

Of Manning, she says that his contribution to our generation “may be a gift without parallel” (p. 72) and calls
Ragamuffin Gospel “one of the most remarkable books” (p. 290). She does not warn her readers that Manning never gives a clear testimony of salvation or a clear presentation of the gospel in his writings, that he attends the Catholic Mass regularly, that he believes it is wrong for churches to require that homosexuals repent before they can be members, that he promotes the use of mantras to create a thoughtless state of silent meditation, that he spent six months in isolation in a cave and spends eight days each year in silent retreat under the direction of a Dominican nun, that he promotes the dangerous practice of visualization, that he quotes very approvingly from New Agers such as Beatrice Bruteau (who says, “We have realized ourselves as the Self that says only I AM ... unlimited, absolute I AM”) and Matthew Fox (who says all religions lead to the same God), and that he believes in universal salvation, that everyone including Hitler will go to heaven. (For documentation see “A Biographical Catalog of Contemplative Mystics” in our book Contemplative Mysticism: A Powerful Ecumenical Bond.)

If Moore truly wants to disassociate herself from the contemplative movement, that would be a simple matter. Let her issue a statement renouncing Richard Foster and Brennan Manning and their Roman Catholic contemplative friends and unscriptural practices. But don’t hold your breath, dear readers.