Wednesday, October 25, 2017


 The Illinois Family Institute (IFI), Chicago, IL graciously hosted Aynaz Anni Cyrus and others at “The Danger of Islam” seminar on Oct. 08, 2017. Anni Cyrus of the Glazov Gang. A child bride in her home country of Iran, abused and imprisoned as a teen, she escaped to America and now advocates for women and girls, suffering under Sharia. Her mission is to bring hope and healing to women and girls who have been unfortunate enough to be exposed to the plague of Islamic ideology. She experienced, first hand, the horrors of living under Islamic theocracy in Iran. ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
Please support The Glazov Gang because we are a fan-generated show and need your help to keep going. Make a contribution or set up a monthly pledge. Thank you! Generosity: PayPal: Follow Us Here: Site: Facebook: TWITTER: YOUTUBE:


 New Data reviews are noting a shift in H7N9 as a resistant virus killing lots of people. Take note: Green Vibrance: Docs:

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Major tensions are heating up between George Soros and Hungarian leader Viktor Orban. Orban warned: “’We should never underestimate the power of the dark side’…. referencing Star Wars as he referred to the plots of those behind the migrant invasion, adding that they ‘have no solid structure but extensive networks.’”
Viktor Orban also stated:
The European Union, the European Commission must regain independence from the Soros Empire before the billionaire finishes his program for the destruction of the continent.
A couple of days ago Jihad Watch reported that Hungarian MP Istv├ín Hollik stated fears that Soros would use his organization Open Society Foundations (OSF) — the second largest political activist charity in the world — to “influence” Hungary’s 2018 general election, force out Orban, and fling open the doors to Muslim migrants. Soros, who is Hungarian-American, just transferred 18 billion dollars into the OSF. Another Hungarian MP, Andras Aradszki, referred to Soros as “Satan.”
Orban has remained refreshingly resolute about preventing the onslaught of Muslim immigration into his country. He is determined to preserve Hungary’s democracy, safety and culture, even in the face of EU threats of punishment for “failing” to take in its so-called fair share of Muslim migrants. Poland has done the same, with assurances of help from Hungary.

“‘Never underestimate the power of the dark side’: Orban goes Star Wars on EU ‘migrant invasion’”, RT News, October 23, 2017:
Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban has apparently called on Hungarians to beware of the power of the Sith in his latest speech on migration crisis in Europe. He also declared Eastern and Central Europe the last ‘migrant-free zone.’
“We should never underestimate the power of the dark side,” the prime minister said, referencing Star Wars as he referred to the plots of those behind the “migrant invasion,” adding that they “have no solid structure but extensive networks.”
The EU and some of its key member states have been “taken hostage” by a “speculative financial Empire” through an orchestrated “invasion of new immigrants,” Orban said in Budapest on Monday, adding that this mysterious “financial power” was behind the “latest great migration of peoples” that flooded Europe with “millions of migrants.”
“This plan was developed to make Europe a mixed [multicultural] continent,” the prime minister said at an event commemorating the anniversary of the 1956 anti-Soviet uprising in Hungary, adding that “only we managed to stand up against it,” apparently referring to the governments of Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, which have taken a staunch anti-migrant stance and refused to accept refugee quotas imposed by Brussels.
Orban then declared Central and Eastern Europe the continent’s last “migrant-free zone.” The Hungarian leader expressed the hope that, by acting together, Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia could potentially stop mass immigration.
He went on to say that the ultimate goal of the massive inflow of migrants into Europe consisted of depriving it of its Christian and national identity. The prime minister then stressed that Europe should remain “safe, fair, civic, Christian and free” and should regain the splendor he said it had before embracing multiculturalism.
Orban’s remarks concerning the “financial power” behind the mass immigration apparently referred to the Hungarian-born US billionaire George Soros. The Hungarian prime minister has already accused Soros of seeking to create a “new, mixed, Muslimized Europe” in July. He also repeatedly blamed the tycoon of fueling the refugee crisis in Europe, adding that “Brussels has come under George Soros’s influence.”
Orban’s words were echoed by Hungarian MP Andras Aradszki, who claimed that “Soros and his comrades want to destroy the independence and values of nation states” by bringing migrants into Europe. He slammed the billionaire by calling him “Satan” earlier this month.
Orban’s latest remarks also come as Central and Eastern European countries witness a shift to the right. In Austria, two anti-migrant parties took the first two places in the parliamentary election, and are now expected to form the ruling coalition.
Just a week later, parliamentary elections in the Czech Republic ended up in a victory of an anti-establishment movement headed by a local billionaire dubbed “the Czech Donald Trump,” who is particularly known for his severe criticism of the EU’s immigration policies.
Hungary itself is engaged in a bitter row with the EU over the refugee relocation quotas, together with Poland and Slovakia. The issue dates back to the EU decision made in 2015 to rehouse some 160,000 refugees from Greece and Italy over a period of two years, only around 27,700 of whom have been settled so far.
Budapest also faces pressure over the fence that covers one-quarter of the length of its borders and was designed to stop the inflow of migrants and asylum seekers at the peak of the refugee crisis…..
 Hungarian christian democrat mp declares that 
soros is satan incarnate
 Hungary: The Soros Plan Is Sophisticated Genocide
Hungary Prime Minister Says George Soros 
Seeks To Muslimize Europe


 'Modern Day Mao Zedong:' Chinese Govt Elevates Pres. Xi to Authoritarian Icon
 Move pivots Xi Jinping’s era toward population control

The Communist Party of China has announced the elevation of the nation’s president, Xi Jinping, to an equal status with the country’s first Communist leader, Mao Zedong – allowing Xi to use more authoritarian methods to promote his ideology of “socialism with Chinese characteristics.”
The 19h Party Congress, a gathering of the country’s top Communist Party elite held once every five years in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, unanimously moved to enshrine “Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics in a New Era” in the nation’s constitution.
The move will make Xi the most powerful Chinese leader in decades, as only Mao Zedong (the nation’s Communist founder) and Deng Xiaoping (who directed the country’s economic reforms following the death of Mao) have their names and ideologies enshrined in the Chinese constitution.

Their ideologies are compulsory learning for Chinese students from primary schools to universities.
Xi’s ideology encompasses two key principles: the Communist Party is in complete control of every aspect of life in China, from the economy to the Internet, to politics and culture, and must not be questioned. In addition, China is on a path to become a global superpower – a path it has laid out on its own terms.
“The amendment of the party constitution effectively confirms Xi Jinping’s aspiration to be the Mao Zedong of the 21st century — that means a top leader with no constraints on tenure or retirement age,” declared Willy Wo-Lap Lam, a political expert at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
“The fact that he has become the new helmsman of the ship of state, providing guiding principles for party, state and military, provides the perfect justification for him to stay number one well beyond the normal 10 years.”
Zhang Ming, a political analyst in Beijing, noted that despite his elevation in status, Xi does not enjoy broad support among the Chinese people.
“This [elevation] is a result of the party’s political system and not of the sincere support of the people’s hearts,” he said. “If he can achieve that, he would become Mao.”



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Don Boys, Ph.D.

A generation ago, it was common for hospitals, jails, schools, and other institutions to have a place on their forms for a person to state their Religion–Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish. However, there was no Baptist designation. Many will say that Baptists are like Methodists, Assembly of God, etc., just another Protestant group; but that is not true. Baptists protested the Roman Catholic excesses as did other groups, but unlike the other groups Baptists were never a part of Rome. Baptist Churches or baptistic groups were always contemporaries with the Roman Church and never broke away since they were never in that religious group.

Since this is the 500th year of the anniversary of the Reformation, many have asked why so many groups split from the church that Christ established while others want to know what was the first authentic church. It is assumed by the uneducated that the Roman Catholic Church was the “mother church” but that is not an historical fact. Well, if not the Catholics, then who?

The first church was in Jerusalem and it was a Baptist or baptistic church! If not, what were they? My critics can tell me what the Jerusalem church believed and practiced and I will adjust to their beliefs and practices.

  1. Porter wrote in 1914, “The first Baptist preacher was John the Baptist. We learn from the Scriptures that he was a Baptist and a preacher, and certainly it is impossible for a man to be a Baptist and a preacher and not be a Baptist preacher.” Can anyone argue with that statement? Since Christ was baptized by John the Baptist, did that make Christ a Baptist? Just asking.

The Encyclopedia Britannica revealed, “Baptists can be traced to 618 A.D. and it is presumed that they originated from the original source of the churches.”

In 1819, the King of Holland appointed Dr. J. Dermout and Dr. Ypeij to prepare a history of the Dutch Reformed Church and also to report on the claims of the Dutch Baptists. Following their research, they wrote: “We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly called Anabaptists, and in later times, Mennonites, were the original Waldenses…On this account, the Baptists may be considered as the only religious community which has stood since the days of the apostles, and as a Christian society which has preserved pure the doctrines of the gospel through all ages.”

The above account can be found on page 148, Volume I., of the work entitled History of the Dutch Reformed Church, by A. Ypeij, Doctor and Professor of Theology at Groningen, and I. J. Dermout, Secretary of the General Synod of the Dutch Reformed Church, and Preacher at The Hague, at Breda, 1819. Of course, they were not Baptists.

The best evidence for your position is when evidence comes from your enemy or opponent, and the Campbellites or Church of Christ people have been longtime opponents of Baptists. The following words of Alexander Campbell, founder of the Church of Christ movement, are taken from the authorized edition of the Campbell-McCalla Debate, “Clouds of witnesses attest the fact that before the reformation from Popery, and from the apostolic age, to the present time, the sentiments of Baptists and the practice of baptism have had a continued chain of advocates, and public monuments of their existence in every century can be produced” (Alexander Campbell, in debate with W. L. McCalla, held at Washington, Mason Co., Ky., Oct. 15, 1823, p. 378).

Baptists have been fervently opposed to government control or involvement in their church affairs even when it would have benefited them! In colonial Virginia, everyone was taxed to support the established religion of the Episcopal Church (Church of England); however, Baptists refused to support that error by not paying the tax.

Those Baptists were hassled, harassed, and hunted; then fined, whipped, and even imprisoned; but they prevailed. They would not pay taxes to support the local vicar of the Church of England. In fact, they were told that they could receive tax dollars to support their Baptist Churches, but the principled Baptists refused the free money! That resulted with the Anglican Church being disestablished in Virginia. Now, no tax dollars would support any church.

In our day, almost all groups are taking “free” money, even Baptists! Day cares, Christian schools, homeless shelters, etc., are being financed with tax dollars. And even Baptists have learned to live with the attached strings–later to be called, chains. The strings always begin very tenuously; but it must be remembered that what the government funds, it runs. Maybe not at first, but eventually with the government’s nickel comes a noose.

Baptist History is not without its blemishes and stains. Because of its independence, some peculiar people with peculiar teachings attached themselves to Baptist Churches and baptistic groups going back before Baptist was attached to a church name. The lack of a hierarchal organization without a “pope” required every single Baptist Church to police its own affairs. That system has worked rather well; after all, it is the biblical system.

Baptists have been the loudest voices for religious freedom and separation of church and state (although not separation of God and state) from the very beginning of this nation. Honest, informed historians credit Baptists for that reality.

  1. W. Bacon, in A History of American Christianity, wrote of the Baptists: “….that we are chiefly indebted for the final triumph, in this country, of that principle of the separation of church and state, which is one of the largest contributions of the New World to civilization….” High praise indeed and well deserved from a Congregationalist and later Presbyterian!

Baptists are also responsible for the ten amendments to the constitution not only the first one! Cathcart tells us in his Centennial Offering that “Denominationally, no community asked for this change in the Constitution but the Baptists….The Baptists asked for it through Washington; the request commended itself to his judgment and to the generous soul of Madison; and to the Baptists, beyond a doubt, belongs the glory of engrafting its best articles on the noblest Constitution ever framed for the government of mankind.”

The separation of church and state was enshrined in the Bill or Rights in the U.S. Constitution because of a Baptist preacher named John Leland. The Bill of Rights is comparable to England’s Magna Carta signed in 1215.

The Constitution was approved in 1787 at the Philadelphia Convention and was sent to the states for ratification. Virginia was by far the largest and most politically powerful colony so there would be no Constitution without Virginia. Each Virginia County elected two members to the state ratifying convention. James Madison and James Gordon, Jr. were candidates from Orange County (and there were two other candidates opposed to the Constitution) and Madison thought he was a sure winner. He was warned by his father and others that the Baptists had turned the citizens against the Constitution because it did not have a Bill of Rights. Madison headed home from New York through Philadelphia and stopped to spend a few hours with the Baptist preacher John Leland who was the major Baptist in Virginia and Orange County, home also of Madison.

The Penn State Law Review declared that religious liberty concerns of Virginia Baptists  particularly the concerns of John Leland “…played a substantial role in James Madison’s elections to the Virginia ratifying convention in March of 1788 and to the First Congress in February of 1789. Those elections, in turn, were key events in the ratification of the Constitution and in the adoption of the Bill of Rights.”

Leland was a friend of James Madison, James Monroe, and Thomas Jefferson, and because of that relationship, he was asked to preach to Congress with President Jefferson in attendance in the House of Representatives. Pastor Leland met with Madison, a candidate to Virginia’s ratifying convention, to convince him of the need for a Bill of Rights to be added to the newly approved Constitution of the United States. Madison was lukewarm to the subject.

The preacher and politician, both Virginians, later met near Orange, Virginia, in what is known today as Leland–Madison Memorial Park. During that four-hour meeting, Leland was successful in extracting a commitment from Madison for a Bill of Rights to the Constitution. During that meeting, it was understood that Leland would oppose Madison’s election if he did not commit to a Bill of Rights. Madison knew the Baptist pastor was very popular in his district and agreed to his request. (He also knew his party had been trounced in the previous election in Orange County.) Leland supported him strongly and the two pro-Constitution candidates won: Madison had 202; his fellow candidate 187 and the two opposing candidates 56 and 34!

Madison kept his word when he went to Congress in the first congressional election in 1788; and America became the most unusual nation in the world: the first nation having a written Constitution that guaranteed freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, etc.

America has a Bill of Rights because of a persistent pastor and a principled politician! This nation is short on both today.

Madison submitted twelve Constitutional amendments to the Congress about a month after Washington promised his help to the Baptists. Two amendments were rejected, but the ten original amendments were approved on September 23, 1789 after much opposition and were then submitted to the states for ratification.

The eleventh state had approved them by December 15, 1791 and America became the most unique nation on the face of the earth! We became a nation that guaranteed the people their God-given rights and limited the power of government, and we did it with a written Constitution and Bill of Rights–thanks to a Baptist preacher.

Historian of the Episcopal Church Dr. Hawks wrote in the Ecclesiastical Contributions: “The Baptists were the principal promoters of this work, and in truth aided more than any other denomination in its accomplishment.” Again, praise from a non-Baptist!

When Methodists, Presbyterians, Roman Catholics, etc., pass a Baptist church, they should doff their hats in respect and whisper a word of thanks for the freedom everyone is guaranteed because of our Baptist forefathers. Even non-Baptists agree that the Bill of Rights was a fantastic achievement in the annals of government.

The smallest Baptist church in America can swell with justified pride and appreciation of Baptist forefathers who believed in personal liberty for everyone–even the right to be wrong!

Now you know why Baptists are not Protestants and why I’m a Baptist.

Boys’ new book  Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published by Barbwire Books; to get your copy,  click here . An eBook edition is also available.

(Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives; ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis, wrote columns for USA Today for eight years; authored 16 books and hundreds of columns and articles for Internet and print media publications; defended his beliefs on hundreds of talk shows. These columns go to newspapers, magazines, television, and radio stations and may be used without change from title through the end tag. His web sites are and and . Contact Don for an interview or talk show.)

Follow Dr. Boys on Facebook at CSTNews and TheGodHaters , Twitter , and visit his blog.