THE CHURCH MILITANT
Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse.
Alex Jones talks with Infowars reporters David Knight and Jakari Jackson about the attacks in Paris and how a global summit is being held there and how now these attacks will be used to justify yet further globalization.
Coincidence? Paris Shooting, Before Paris Summit! The Real Agenda Exposed & You’re Not Gonna Like It
International whistleblower organization WikiLeaks is casting blame on the United States, United Kingdom and France for the terror attacks Friday that have killed at least 140 people.
At least 39 dead in French terror attacks this evening. France has closed borders. US, UK, France fed ISIS. Not so funny now, is it?
Many other Twitter users responded with hostility to WikiLeaks’ argument, but the organization refused to give ground. WikiLeaks, created by Julian Assange, has frequently taken a hostile attitude towards America’s anti-terrorism policy. It published Bradley Manning’s documents relating to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and played a major role in Edward Snowden’s flight to Russia with files taken from the NSA.
_____________________________________________
WikiLeaks Reveals who Funded Paris Attack
Published on Nov 16, 2015
Alex Jones discusses how WikiLeaks has been receiving hate for just telling the truth about the Paris attack and how Infowars has been telling you this for months.
(NaturalNews) It has now been confirmed that at least one of the Paris terrorists responsible for last night’s massacre had crossed into Europe as a “Syrian refugee.” He registered as a refugee on Leros island in Greece, according to Yannis Koutsomitis, who quotes Greece’s Ministry of Public Order and Citizen Protection (see Tweet, below).
“A Greek government official revealed the man, who died in the siege on the French capital, had passed through the southern European country last month,” reports Express.co.uk.
“Citizen Protection Minister Nikos Toskas, in charge of police forces in Greece, has released the following statement: ‘On the case of the Syrian passport found at the scene of the terrorist attack, we announce that the passport holder had passed from Leros on October 3 where he was identified based on EU rules.'”
Here’s the screen shot from the Express, just in case they pull the story (there will be tremendous pressure by leftists to rewrite this history and destroy any evidence that the Paris terrorists were migrant “refugees”)…
An “act of LOVE?”
When open borders advocates talk about why nations should have no borders — a patently absurd idea — they always invoke “LOVE” as the justification for eliminating borders. Even Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush claims that illegals crossing the border into the United States is an “act of love.”
Many in the alternative media have openly and repeatedly warned that so-called “refugees” in Europe were predominantly military-aged men waiting to be activated as occupying soldiers to carry out attacks against western civilization, but clueless (or treasonous) national leaders like Angela Merkel insisted that migrants should be treated with open arms and “tolerance.”
In a recent radio interview, I openly warned about the “activation” of militants in Europe just two days before the attacks on Paris. From Red List News, Episode 8, broadcast TWO DAYS before the Paris attacks:
Mike Adams: And then there’s also the question, why is it only young men that are fleeing in Europe? All the photos of the migrants are young men… men that happened to be military-aged men. And we’re told that they’re fleeing Syria, for example, because of the war there… I think there’s a very real possibility, James, that in Europe especially, this is a planned, boots-on-the-ground occupation of Europe with an activation date at some point in the future where all these young men will be activated, they will pick up rifles or weapons or whatever they can find, and they will overrun the nations of Europe with their belief system.
James White: Well it’s uncanny, Mike, because when I was on the Commonsense Show doing the news report this previous week, I mentioned the very same thing about here in the United States as well. I think that we are basically being surrounded. I mean, there’s a lot of these immigrants that are coming across who as you stated, accurately, are military aged, they’re coming across in droves, and I submit to you that they are “sleeper cell” type of…
Mike Adams: That’s the term.
James White: Like you said, and I said almost verbatim what you just stated. There’s going to come a point in time, and I don’t know when that is, but they’re all going to be activated. And now, here in America, as long as we still have firearms, they’re not going to get very far, certainly in Texas…
Mike Adams: Remember that across Europe, the act of self defense has been criminalized. In the UK, for example, you’re not allowed to fight back against a home invasion… a robber, a rapist…. you get arrested if you fight back. And so most of Europe has been completely disarmed, meaning thatthis invasion can be highly successfuland they don’t even need firearms. These young men could pick up hatchets and machetes and actually overrun Europe. Literally there’s almost no defense in European cities against this kind of invasion.
Even as many of us in the independent media have been sounding the alarm over open borders, migrants-as-terrorists and “sleeper cells” being activated in Europe, political leaders in both Europe and the United States have remained oblivious to the warnings. That naive tolerance, it now seems, has resulted in a massacre in Paris… and Paris may be just the beginning of what ISIS has planned for both Europe and the United States.
ISIS threatened to send 500,000 migrants to Europe as part of a “psychological weapon”
Open borders policies are not merely idiotic; they were embraced across Europe even in the face of direct threats by ISIS to occupy Europe with enemy forces.
In February of this year, ISIS “threatened to release the huge wave of migrants to cause chaos in Europe,” reported the Daily Mail. That paper goes on to report:
ISIS has threatened to flood Europe with half a million migrants from Libya in a ‘psychological’ attack against the West, it was claimed today.
…the militants hope to cement their control of Libya then cross the Mediterranean disguised as refugees…
Yet even in the face of a direct, specific threat to occupy Europe with ISIS forces disguised as refugees, utterly clueless political leaders at every level of government — local and national — openly welcomed ISIS terrorists as “refugees” into their countries as the ultimate act of P.C. obedience.
No political leader, it seems, wants to be characterized as “mean” in an age of hyper sensitivity to political correctness. So they issued tweets and speeches congratulating themselves for practicing “love” and “compassion” while the terrorists marched right across their borders, disguised as refugees.
Now the question becomes a simple one: Will national leaders across Europe and the United States ever come to their senses and start controlling their borders? Or will they continue to allow terrorists and violent criminals to march right into their countries in a desperate effort to appear “compassionate” even as their own countrymen are being executed by the hundreds or thousands?
Mark my words: Paris is only the beginning. ISIS has far bigger plans than anything we’ve witnessed so far. Nations that don’t control their borders will suffer horrific losses.
Syrian Refugees From The Muslim World Are Arriving In New Orleans
Published on Nov 15, 2015
it has now come to light that refugees are already coming into the New Orleans area.
Catholic Charities, which receive federal grants from U.S. Department of State/Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration, have apparently taken in two Syrian refugee families already and are expecting many more.
There are approximately 180 cities in the country that are eligible to accept the 10,000 Syrian refugees. The full list of those cities, which includes Baton Rouge, Matairie and Lafayette is in the article below from The Hayride.
The 10,000 Syrian refugees are first flown to the United States, according to the French news wire Agence France-Presse, with the State Department paying the International Organization for Migration (IOM) for the airfare.
Then, once the refugees arrive in the country, they could be dispersed across the 180 cities listed above, where they are to aided within the first 30 to 90 days in settling and finding employment in the area.
After approximately 90 days, refugees are no longer eligible for the State Department-funded support that they were receiving through migrant and refugee services. However, they are able to join support programs through the Department of Health and Human Services.
Additionally, it is unclear how much the screening process for the 10,000 Syrian refugees will cost American taxpayers.
The United States and other global powers are helping Iran to update and reconstruct a nuclear reactor that has been suspected of helping the Islamic Republic produce enough material for a potential nuclear weapon, according to regional reports and statements from the State Department.
The United States’ goal is to work with Iran to refit the reactor in such a way that it can no longer produce weapons grade material.
However, Iran maintains that the United States and other partner nations will soon provide “advanced equipment” for the reactor, which is located near the Iranian industrial city of Arak.
A spokesman for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, the Islamic Republic’s main nuclear regulator, said on Tuesday that the United States and several other nations would begin supplying Iran equipment so that it can modernize the nuclear reactor.
“Four countries of the [nuclear negotiating team] have accepted to cooperate with Iran in supplying advanced equipment for the (Arak) reactor and different other issues,” Behrouz Kamalvandi, a spokesman for the Iranian nuclear authority, said Tuesday.
Kamalvandi said that while Iran could complete the modernization on its own, “it has sought the world powers’ assistance to accelerate the job.”
The issue of Arak was a key negotiating point during nuclear talks that recently produced an agreement aimed at curbing the Islamic Republic’s nuclear ambitions.
“We have had negotiations on this issue in Vienna and recently, some consultations have been made by the Iranian foreign ministry officials in China,” Kamalvadi was quoted as saying.
The Obama administration announced that it would assist Iran is rebuilding the Arak reactor when the nuclear deal was implemented in late October.
Nuclear experts from the Department of Energy will be tasked with helping to accomplish this goal, according to Secretary Ernest Moniz.
“Under the [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action], one step that Iran must take is to redesign its Arak Heavy Water Research reactor, including removing its existing calandria and rendering it inoperable,” Moniz said in an Oct. 18 statement. “To support this effort, the Department of Energy’s nuclear experts will lead the U.S. effort to work with our P5+1 partners and Iran to modernize the Arak reactor, effectively eliminating a potential source of weapons-grade material.”
U.S. nuclear experts also will provide Iran with “technical advice” on nuclear issues, Moniz said.
“In addition to co-chairing the Arak Modernization Working Group, the Department of Energy’s technical experts will also continue to support President Obama, Secretary [John] Kerry, our P5+1 and EU partners, and the [International Atomic Energy Agency] through technical advice and expert consultations on nuclear matters,” he said.
Assistance will also be provided by the other global powers that helped secure the nuclear deal, including China, France, Germany, and Russia.
Seyed Araqchi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, praised the nuclear modernization project in comments to reporters offered after an October meeting between Iran and the global powers.
“A statement was compiled and released by Iran, China, and the U.S. yesterday in which the three countries announced their resolve to modernize Arak site in due time but what is more important to us is an official document which should be signed between Iran and the six members of the G5+1,” Araqchi was quoted as telling reporters at the time.
A State Department official directed the Washington Free Beacon to Moniz’s October statement when asked for comment about Kamalvandi’s recent remarks.
in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
This week, the Dallas City Council fast tracked and approved an aggressive and dangerous bathroom ordinance that allows men into women’s bathrooms and tramples religious freedom. In a surprise move that involved the Council approving controversial language in a closed door meeting late Monday night, without public input, the Council voted unanimously to pass the new sweeping language Tuesday morning. The language is similar to the “gender identity, “sexual orientation,” and “public accommodations” language contained in the Houston Bathroom Ordinance that was emphatically defeated by Houston voters, 61%-39%, just last week.
Make no mistake, LGBT advocates want to spread these dangerous laws to every city in Texas. The voters in Houston made a strong statement but now Dallas (and all of Texas) must send the message that we will not allow common sense, safety, and religious freedom to be destroyed by political correctness.
City of Dallas Extends Civil Rights Protection to Transgender People
Published on Nov 10, 2015
The Dallas City Council unanimously approved an amendment to its anti-discrimination ordinance on Tuesday to include protections for transgender people. Transgender people will be protected against being denied employment, housing or access to public spaces based on gender identity. The ordinance had previously included lesbian, gay and bisexual people. Just a week ago, voters in the city of Houston, Texas, rejected the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance by a wide margin, a measure that was aimed at increasing civil rights protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.
Top University Professor Exposes Mind Control Programs in Many Universities Department of Defense Operatives Draw In Students Willing to Sell Their Souls for Socialist Causes
Published on Nov 12, 2015
Professor Darrel Hamamoto breaks down how university students are being manipulated and mind controlled through university programs and what it is doing to society.
Alex Jones breaks down how past events spearheaded by the globalists, created the atmosphere that led to the Paris Attacks which have so far killed 129 people. When you open your borders to people who are diametrically opposed to your basic principals, it is a recipe for disaster. This is order out of chaos.
Keely Mullen, one of the lead organizers of the Million Student March, spoke with Neil Cavuto on Fox Business on Thursday saying that “[t]he movement, the Million Student March, is a movement for a more equitable and fair system of education,” noting that others should have to pay for college students’ schooling.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Answering a question posed by a reporter at a press briefing on November 10, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest confirmed that “the administration strongly supports the Equality Act.” The reporter had described the legislation as “a federal anti-discrimination bill against anti-LGBT discrimination known as the Equality Act.”
Earnest elaborated further:
It is now clear that the administration strongly supports the Equality Act. That bill is historic legislation that would advance the cause of equality for millions of Americans. And we certainly are pleased with the many legislators in Congress that have stepped forward to try to advance a bill that would deliver comprehensive equal rights for LGBT Americans. And we look forward to working with Congress to ensure that the legislative process produces a result that balances both the bedrock principles of civil rights, like those I’ve just described, with the religious liberty that we hold dear in this country.
Earnest also stated that “the Equality Act would have an impact on a substantial number of government policies” and that “the administration does look forward to working with Congress to try to advance this legislation consistent with the values that we have articulated about the importance of equal rights and making sure that people can’t be discriminated against because of who they love, while at the same time making sure that we can protect religious liberty at the same time.”
Setting aside the ongoing debates abut same-sex “marriage” for a moment, it is important to note that the quest for “equal rights’ for homosexuals has now escalated to include also “transgendered” individuals — the “T” in LGBT. Though the definition of “transgender” may vary, it generally means an individual who views his "gender" as being different from his sexual orientation — for instance, a biological male who identifies as a female.
Whichever one of the letters in the LGBT acronym (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender) a person chooses to identify with, however, his biological gender is an integral part of his DNA and can never be changed, with all males having an X and a Y chromosome and all females having two X chromosomes. Nothing can change this — not even so-called sex-change operations.
Therefore, Earnest’s statement that “people can’t be discriminated against because of who they love,” misses the point entirely. No one has ever presumed to discriminate against another person because of whom they love, although some people may choose to discriminate whether they want to participate in a person’s behavior that violates their religious principles. Earnest asserted that the Equality Act “balances both the bedrock principles of civil rights, like those I’ve just described, with the religious liberty that we hold dear in this country.”
Many people doubt that religious liberty will be preserved if social engineering legislation such as the Equality Act is passed, however.
The day after the legislation (“The Equality Act of 2015,”H.R. 3185 and S. 1858) was introduced in both houses of Congress on July 23, the Witherspoon Institute’s online Public Discourse published an online essay by Andrew T. Walker (the director of Policy Studies for the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention) entitled: “The Equality Act: Bad Policy that Poses Great Harms.”
In his essay, Walker wrote:
The Equality Act represents the most invasive threat to religious liberty ever proposed. Were it to pass, its sweeping effects on religious liberty, free speech, and freedom of conscience would be historic.
Aside from the enumerated protections that give rise to conflict between sexual identity and religious liberty, by elevating sexual orientation and gender identity to the level of race, the law’s effect would functionally equate those who don’t agree with it with racists and label them perpetrators of irrational bigotry.
Among the insightful points that Walker made to bolster his position were:
• “To favor the Equality Act is to oppose and actively stigmatize the moral convictions that millions of Americans adhere to with abiding sincerity and deep religious precedent.”
• “Passing anti-discrimination statutes on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity lacks both the philosophical warrant and the cultural necessity of protections based on race.”
• “Unlike race, sexual orientation and gender identity are known through conduct, which can and should be ethically evaluated.”
• “There has never been a systematic regime of laws aimed at demeaning the existence of LGBT individuals comparable to Jim Crow.”
• “Consider the cases of florists, photographers, and bakers who have had no problems serving gay customers for years, but have objected to providing their services for gay weddings. The Equality Act leaves these individuals defenseless by failing to accommodate their sincere religious beliefs and by failing to distinguish between the dignity of gay individuals and the particular conduct (such as wedding ceremonies) in which some cannot in good conscience participate.
The Equality Act of 2015 would amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin) to replace the word “sex” with “sex,” “gender identity” and “sexual orientation.” While some who object to the current proposed change still uphold the original 1964 legislation, a look back in history reveals that constitutional conservatives of that day did not accept that bill’s violation of states’ rights and increase in the power of the federal government without objections.
Among the most famous opponents of the 1964 legislation was that year’s Republican nominee for the presidency, Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.). Goldwater voted against the bill, explaining afterwards that the reason for his opposition to the bill was Title II of the legislation (which outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, or national origin in hotels, motels, restaurants, theaters, and all other public accommodations engaged in interstate commerce). The Arizonan said that, in his opinion, that section violated individual liberty and states’ rights. Most Democrats from the Southern states opposed the bill and led an unsuccessful 83-day filibuster to stop it. These included Senators Albert Gore, Sr. (D-Tenn.), father of the future Vice President, J. William Fulbright (D-Ark.), and Robert Byrd (D- W.Va,) who personally filibustered for 14 hours straight.
There are essentially two different issues at stake with this year’s Equality Act of 2015 under consideration. The first is the potential threat to religious liberty, as mentioned by Andrew Walker. The other is the historic assault on states’ rights by a federal government that strives to go beyond its constitutional bounds to regulate every aspect of life in the United States — the same reason constitutional conservatives opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Americans with common sense celebrated thesuccess of a recent Houston referendum repealing an ordinance that would, among other things, have forced private-property owners to permit an individual to use the restroom of his choice rather than the one assigned to his genetically determined sex. But those celebrants might want to put the corks back in their champagne bottles for the time being: A bill currently in Congress and endorsed by President Barack Obama could impose that same policy on the entire country.
The Equality Act, a version of which has been introduced in both houses of Congress, “would add ‘sexual orientation and gender identity’ (SOGI) to more or less every federal law that protects on the basis of race,”reported the Heritage Foundation’s Ryan Anderson. The bill vastly expands the number of establishments classified as “public accommodations” — and therefore subject to federal antidiscrimination law — to include “any establishment that provides a good, service, or program, including a store, shopping center, online retailer or service provider, salon, bank, gas station, food bank, service or care center, shelter, travel agency, or funeral parlor, or establishment that provides health care, accounting, or legal services,” plus transportation providers and any “establishment that provides exhibition, entertainment, recreation, exercise, amusement, gathering, or display.” That covers just about everything, with the possible exception of family dwellings.
As if that weren’t bad enough, the bill explicitly states that “an individual shall not be denied access to a shared facility, including a restroom, a locker room, and a dressing room, that is in accordance with the individual’s gender identity.” In other words, practically no one would be allowed to prohibit a man who claims to be a woman from using the women’s restroom or locker room (or a woman who claims to be a man from using the men’s facilities).
“So it would be a bathroom bill on a national level being forced on all 50 states,” the Family Research Council’s (FRC) Peter Sprigg told OneNewsNow.
This is not mere speculation or alarmism. Even the bill’s supporters proudly admit this to be the case.
Lambda Legal, which advocates for special privileges for individuals with deviant lifestyles, states on its Equality Act: Frequently Asked Questions page: “Under the Equality Act, companies with sex-segregated facilities including restrooms and locker rooms must provide access to gender-appropriate facilities for individuals in accordance with their gender identity.”
The bill also expressly prohibits people from claiming exemption from its provisions under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. “Thus,” FRC wrote in an Issue Brief, “the Act would force people to affirm homosexuality, same-sex marriage, and transgenderism, despite their religious objections in various situations, including the provision of public accommodations.”
The ramifications of the Equality Act, which FRC more accurately dubs the “Inequality Act,” are enormous. As Anderson put it, laws such as the Equality Act
threaten small-business owners [and, for that matter, large-business owners] with liability for alleged “discrimination” based not on objective traits, but on subjective and unverifiable identities. They expand state interference in labor markets, potentially discouraging job creation. They endanger religious liberty and freedom of speech. And they mandate employment policies that, with regard to many workplace conditions, violate common sense.
In short, SOGI laws regulate commercial decisions that are best handled by private actors, and they regulate educational decisions best handled by parents and teachers, not bureaucrats.
If the Equality Act becomes law, schools will face the unenviable task of accommodating all varieties of confused students and employees, potentially introducing children to subjects they are not mature enough to handle or to which their parents might prefer they not be exposed — not to mention giving pedophiles easier access to children of the opposite sex. Moreover, observed Anderson, “an employer would be negligent to ignore the concerns of female employees about having to share a bathroom with a biological male who identifies as female. The same is true for students. The implications for the privacy rights of adults and children are extremely serious.”
There are those such as Anderson and Sprigg who argue that there is nothing wrong with antidiscrimination laws per se. Such laws, Sprigg told OneNewsNow, should simply be restricted to protecting people with “characteristics like race which are inborn, involuntary, immutable, innocuous, and/or in the U.S. Constitution.”
Such an argument, however, yields too much ground. Once one agrees that the government has the authority to tell private citizens that they must associate with certain groups of people and acquiesce to those groups’ demands on their person, labor, and property, he has given up on the principle of private property. Henceforth, all property rights are exercised at the sufferance of those groups with political clout.
There is also the matter that federal antidiscrimination law is largely unconstitutional. The feds have the power to ban discrimination by their own agencies, and maybe, under the 14th Amendment, by state and local governments; but they have no authority to interfere with the freedom of association of private citizens, businesses, and organizations. Most of the laws that the Equality Act amends ought to be repealed, not merely maintained in their present form, and they certainly should not be expanded to cover even more people.
While dozens of bills get introduced into Congress each session only to die without attracting much attention, the Equality Act has a great deal of support among liberal lawmakers. The House bill, introduced by Representative David Cicilline (D-R.I.), has 170 cosponsors, all Democrats. The Senate bill, introduced by Senator Jeff Merkley (R-Ore.), has 39 cosponsors, all Democrats or independents, including Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who is seeking the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. In addition, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters last week that “the administration strongly supports the Equality Act.”
The only thing standing between Americans and a national “bathroom bill,” therefore, is the GOP. Since Republicans control both houses of Congress, they can effectively block the Equality Act from ever coming to a vote, let alone being passed.
Constitutionalists — and everyone else who cares about liberty and decency — must hope that Republicans prove equal to the task.
