You Can Never Awaken a Man Who Is Pretending to be Asleep by Bill Warner

Posted on September 15, 2012 by ccpastormike

September 15, 2012

The White House and media response to the events in the US embassies in Egypt and Libya can be characterized by the fact they speak like they have never seen Sharia mob justice before in their lives. Or, at least, you would think that from the knowledge and wisdom they display in their analysis.

For the last 11 years since 9/11, we have watched the same events unroll in the Islamic world and the same response come from our so-called leaders in the government, media, schools and the pulpits. The establishment view: Those Muslims are extremists, not real Muslims. We should be careful not to offend the religion of peace. When Muslims are offended by movies, Koran burnings and Mohammed cartoons, it is our fault.

The clue phone is ringing, pick it up. Here are the clues:

The murder of intellectuals and artists who criticize Mohammed is Sunna. Sunna is the perfect example of Mohammed’s life. When Mohammed captured Mecca, he first prayed, then he destroyed all religious art and then he issued death warrants for the artists and intellectuals who had opposed him. There are only two new facts in the Koran, a derivative work. The first new fact is that Mohammed is the prophet of Allah, and the second new truth is that if you don’t believe he is prophet of Allah, you can be killed.

Violence is what brings Islam success. In Mohammed’s life, he preached the religion of Islam for 13 years and garnered 150 new followers. When he went to Medina and became a politician and a warlord, when he died every Arab was a Muslim. Jihad violence was what made Islam successful. If Mohammed practice jihad, Muslims must use the technique of jihad.

Hello establishment experts, the black flag is not an Al Qaeda flag. The black flag with the Shahada, “There is no god, but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet” and the swords goes back to the Golden Age of Islam in Baghdad in the 9th century. (The establishment professors never tell you about this jihad aspect of the Islamic Golden Age.) This jihad flag is ancient.

Current news is that Ambassador Stevens was raped before he was killed. If so, then this is pure jihad doctrine. The rules for rape of captured Kafirs (unbelievers) are Sunna. At the conquest of the Jews in Khaybar, the Hadith are explicit that captured Kafirs can be raped.

The mob is a manifestation of the Sharia and the umma (the Islamic community). Notice that when a fatwa is issued, such as the famous fatwa by Khomeini against Salmon Rushdie for his artistic work The Satanic Verses, the fatwa is not to be fulfilled by the Islamic police. No, the murder is to be carried by any member of the umma. This is vigilante justice, Sharia justice, mob justice. Pay attention to how often Muslims riot to make political gain.

The shortest hadith is: war is deceit. So here come all of the “good” Muslims to explain how the murder and riots are not real Islam. And they are so upset about what Arabs are doing at the US embassies. But, they still can tell us that Islam is the religion of peace, without a single trace of irony.

The idea that we should not blaspheme Islam, Mohammed or Allah is pure Sharia and the position of the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation). It seems that none of the establishment experts have the foggiest idea of what Sharia blasphemy entails. Not believing that Mohammed is the prophet of Allah, that a woman is a second class citizen, that jihad is part of Islam is all blasphemy. Critical thought is blasphemy. The Golden Rule is blasphemy. Any well-founded religion can survive blasphemy, except Islam, and that is the reason it is forbidden. But the worst part of this travesty is the refrain from Obama and Hillary that we should subvert our freedom of speech to the demands of the Sharia. The Sharia is Allah’s law and our Constitution is a document of ignorance to be removed from the world. So say the imams and Obama and Hillary.

And now for the last tired response from the apologists: those violent people are an extremist fringe. NO! The mobs are main-line Islam.

You can awaken a man who is asleep, but you will never awaken a man who is pretending to be asleep. That is the reason that we find our experts in the government, media, education and the pulpits to be such dhimmis. They have refused to learn a single thing about Islamic doctrine and history since 9/11. But, cheer up! When the dhimmis write about the beauty of Islam and how the Kafirs are wrong, read the comments. You will find that the common man knows far, far more about Islam than the experts. The higher you go, the less they know.

________________________________

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam

DEFEATING THE ISLAMO-PROGRESSIVE AXIS

Posted on August 25, 2012 by ccpastormike

By Matt Barber

There’s evidently a fine line between a “hate crime” and a BLT.

The Reuters headline screamed: “Bacon found at NY Muslim celebration probed as possible hate crime.” I was expecting the subtitle: “Cops bring lettuce & tomato, dispose of evidence,” but to no avail. (Pork, of course, is verboten in Islamic culture. Don’t knock it, I say.)

Condemnation was swift and judgment final: “It’s anti-Islamic sentiment – a sign they don’t want us to feel welcome,” charged Cyrus McGoldrick, spokesman for the New York chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR.

Indeed, at the very least such a stupid, “Islamophobic” prank was, um, tasteless.

Except that it wasn’t.

A caller to a local newspaper took credit for the crime: “This is-I was reading the article about the horrible incident of bacon and Muslims in the park and I wanted to let you know that is not my intention. I had put the bacon there. It was going bad in my trunk and I put it out for the scavengers like the opossums and the raccoons and sea gulls, and I did not intend for that to cause anybody any problems.”

So, apparently, knee-jerk liberals and mainstream media have egg on their face once again. (Add toast and you get a Denny’s Grand Slam.)

Let’s put aside for a moment that we live in a hyper-sensitive, politically correct culture wherein hurting someone’s feelings is, quite literally, a federal offense. I’m more interested in the blaring double standard.

Bacon at a Muslim picnic? “Hate crime.” A crucifix with the image of Christ submerged in urine? “Art.”

I know, there was that time a group of tea-partiers stormed the mosque in Lansing, Mich, threw Oscar Mayer ham slices on the children, mocked the women for their hijabs and screamed: “Mohammed slept with a nightlight!” but …

No, actually, it was a group of homosexual activists who stormed a Christian church in Lansing, Mich, threw condoms at people, committed gross displays of public perversion in front of children and screamed, “Jesus was gay!”

“Hate crime, right?” Not a chance. Not even a ticket. In fact, law enforcement knew about the “protest” in advance and refused to send police. They sent a reporter instead.

You get the point.

Indeed, secular-”progressive” hostility toward Christianity is at an all-time high. But it’s not just “gay” activists and other “progressive” extremists. It’s systemic. It’s Democrat-tested and Obama-approved.

The Family Research Council, or FRC – no stranger to violent “hate crimes” that somehow aren’t “hate crimes” – has released a study cataloging a vast sampling of the left’s anti-Christian attacks. (The study can be found at ReligiousHostility.org. I highly recommend you review it before stepping into the voting booth this November.)

Yet the same “progressives” who find “homophobia” under every bed, and “Islamophobia” around each corner, have never imagined the cancerous “Christaphobia” that courses throughout their very own veins. Their narrow little minds won’t allow it. The poor sap with hateful halitosis is usually the last to know.

Still, what’s most remarkable is that secular-”progressives” and Islamists – such as the aforementioned CAIR and President Obama’s “Muslim Brotherhood” pals – have forged a bizarre and notably incongruous sociopolitical partnership.

Consider, for instance, that central to Muslim teaching is the mandate that homosexuals, when discovered, are to be summarily executed. Yet, homosexual activists and other liberals are usually the first to cry “Islamophobia” if anyone points out the bloody precepts central to mainstream Islamic dogma.

And how about women? Well, according to Islamic law – again, mainstream, not fringe – women are treated as chattel and can be beaten with impunity for any reason or no reason at all.

Yet liberal feminists – “tolerant” to a fault when it serves their agenda – will trip over themselves to ignore such “cultural diversity.”

The only explanation, as far as I can tell, is best illustrated by the maxim: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

But, who is this common enemy?

Well, it too is signified by an alliance. This alliance, however, is most simpatico. It consists of Christians and Jews worldwide. It too is built around a shared cause.

But unlike that of the Islamo-”progressive” axis, this cause intends freedom, not tyranny – representative democracy, not control. Most importantly, this Judeo-Christian cause is built upon the rock of truth given us by the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The God of the living, not the dead. The great “I Am.”

I’m currently reading the two-part work, “Democracy in America,” written by Alexis De Tocqueville in 1835. The French statesman and historian immersed himself in American society and was left stunned by the indissoluble synthesis of Christianity and American culture.

He observed at the time that in America, “Christianity is the companion of liberty in all its conflicts – the cradle of its infancy, and the divine source of its claims.”

“There is no country in the world where the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America, and there can be no greater proof of its utility and of its conformity to human nature than that its influence is powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth.”

“The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds,” wrote De Tocqueville, “that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other.”

Impossible so it must have seemed. Regrettably, however, De Tocqueville could never have foreseen today’s Islamo-”progressive” machine. It relentlessly endeavors to stifle Christianity’s profound influence on America.

Indeed, that influence will surly continue to fade lest Christians – both individually and corporately – again shine bright as the morning sun.

The historical record is indisputable. For almost two-and-a-half centuries, biblical Christianity has been America’s moral compass. It was Christians who, as wrote De Tocqueville, made America “the most enlightened and free nation of the earth.”

We’ve lost that moral compass and, today, wander aimlessly in the wilderness as a result. It’s up to Christian America to again find the way.

We must.

For if we don’t lead, who then will the world follow?

The Silence of the Pulpits by Bill Warner

Posted on August 17, 2012 by ccpastormike

If you are even slightly awake about the world news today, it is no surprise that Christians are being killed, raped and brutalized throughout the Islamic world. However, there is a place where you can go and escape the dreadful and relentless details of Christian annihilation by Islam. You can just go to church. For example, this week in Nigeria Christians were killed. Nothing out of the ordinary, indeed in the world of Christian persecution, this is routine.

And so the response to the murder of Christians is found in nearly every church is …wait for it…, complete silence—not a mention or reference to it or the brutality against Christians that happens almost every day in the Islamic world. This is not a passive silence, because if you try to change it, you will fail. The silence is an active, working conspiracy that goes throughout nearly all of Christendom.

Take a simple example: prayer for the persecuted. From a Christian perspective, this falls under the heading of obvious. Try taking the idea of prayer for the routinely murdered Christians in Nigeria or Egypt to ministers, boards and any part of the structure of the church and see how far you will get. You will get rejection with a myriad of lame and evasive excuses, since they fear to recognize the suffering of Christians around the world. If you acknowledge the suffering, you might ask the question: why are these Christians suffering? Ah, there is the rub. The suffering is caused by Muslim jihadists who are following the Islamic doctrine of jihad against the Christian as found in Koran, Sira and Hadith. Islam is the cause of suffering of Christians, as well as Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and atheists.

STOP!!! We cannot say those things! Facts are the new hate speech, so we cannot speak about the jihad against Christians. Therefore, we get no prayers for the persecuted, because it would lead to talk about why the murder of Christians keeps happening. And that truth would lead to being called an Islamophobe, so we are not going there. Result: silence.

It is ironic that the Wall Street Journal, a FINANCIAL newspaper, has run an article about the silence in the pulpit concerning the suffering of Christians. We live in a time of moral inversion when Christian leaders are chastised for their moral bankruptcy by money men. It is supposed to be the other way around.

Actually, there are few religious leaders left in America. Instead we have chief-executive-officers who manage a 501 c 3 institution that has meetings on Sunday. In too many cases, Christianity has devolved into an hour’s meeting that is supposed to make you feel good for a week.

This 501 c 3 corporate mentality is another one of the roots of the denial of the Christian suffering. If you are willing to see the doctrinal roots of the ongoing murder of Christians by Muslims, then you might have to speak about it from the pulpit and that could be seen as political speech. In spite of the fact that there has never been a 501 c 3 revoked because of political speech by a minister, the imagined loss silences ministers. Hmmm, if a minister is worried about the IRS revoking his 501 c 3 then who is the minster serving? Caesar or Christ?

Now you may not be a Christian, and so it might seem that there is nothing here for you. But in reality we all have pulpits. Are we using the suffering of Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, women, gays, and intellectuals caused by Islam as a topic of conversation with those around us? Who is comfortable with bringing up anything negative about Islam? To tell those facts about Islam is a social crime and you will be accused of being a hater/Islamophobe. So most of us remain silent about the evils of political Islam, and we are just like the ministers—silent in our own pulpits. Christians and non-Christians share the fear of being insulted as bigots and Islamophobes.

It turns out that all of those who oppose any social evil will be hated. Think about it. It takes a massive amount of power to put into place any societal doctrine, such as multiculturalism and political correctness. The government, universities, many churches, synagogues and the media have become enforcers of multiculturalism and political correctness. They are very powerful and believe that their dogma rules all peoples.

They are also full-throated apologists for Islam. Now it turns out that their actual knowledge about the doctrine and history of political Islam is close to zero and Muslim-brotherhood-approved, but that is no problem. The Establishment just says that those who find fault with Islam are bigots and they hate us.

The silence of the pulpits is the greatest aider and abettor of Islam in the US. No one serves and advances Islam better than the silent ministers. They have abandoned their duty of courage in the face of persecution, but the rest of the flock still looks for moral leadership from them. Islam triumphs when Christian leaders do not condemn the murderous evil of political Islam.

Even worse than the silent ministers are those who go to “interfaith dialogs” and smile while the Muslims assert religious and political dominance over them. The nice, oh so nice, Christians and Jews show up to tie, while the Muslims are there to win, and they do.

Christians need to follow the example of Jesus and willingly suffer the condemnation by the Establishment and fight against the political Islam that murders Christians. Said another way, Christians should demonstrate courage and sacrifice to support their cruelly murdered brothers and sisters.

We cannot defeat political Islam until we get Christian boots on the ground. Do the math. The pulpits must become a source of courage and knowledge and stand up for Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and all others who suffer under Islam’s persecution today and for the last 1400 years.

It isn’t just about religion; it is about the survival of our civilization.

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink: http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/the-silence-of-the-pulpits/
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com

The Grasp of Socialist International (SI) by William F. Jasper

Posted on August 8, 2012 by ccpastormike

Forcing Change, Volume 4, Issue 11

Editor’s Note: For years I have wanted to write an expose on the Socialist International, an umbrella organization that pulls together socialist, proto-communist, and various other Marxist-based political parties. Although most people in North America have never heard of the SI, it’s one of the largest political associations on the planet, and is a key driver in promoting global governance within the international community.

My first real taste of the Socialist International was in the late 1990s when Canada’s third largest political party – the New Democratic Party – openly promoted a world tax and world government in the House of Commons. Soon thereafter, the idea of a world tax came up for vote and it passed, officially making Canada the first nation to establish such a tax in law. Essentially, when the world adopts such a measure, Canada will be the first to step up as a global payer (see Forcing Change, Volume 1, Issue 8).

In the context of understanding the NDP world-tax agenda, I discovered that the party was a full member of the Socialist International. In fact, it was and is, the only Canadian member of the SI. For readers in my country, this may seem shocking – but it also explains the foreign policy and domestic welfare agenda of the NDP. From that point on, I have studied and monitored the SI and its role as a global governance trendsetter.

Therefore, when I came across this article by William F. Jasper, I jumped at the chance to share it with you. For this article does a remarkable job in bridging the Communist/Socialist platform of the SI with major developments taking place today. Read it, then re-read it. For in doing so, you will have a grasp of how the global political chess game is played. Furthermore, I have attached the complete list of member parties in the Socialist International at the back of this edition of Forcing Change. This list alone speaks volumes.

World government and world socialism. Those are the explicit goals of the Socialist International (SI), one of the planet’s most influential organizations, but one that is virtually unknown to the vast majority of Americans, since it is rarely mentioned in the major U.S. media.

For the last two weeks of December 2009 and throughout all of January 2010, the headline story at the top of the home page of the Socialist International’s website boasted of the organization’s prominent influence and clout at the recently concluded United Nations Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen, Denmark.

However, the brief article, entitled “SI at COP15 in Copenhagen: reaffirming social democratic priorities,” does not begin to do justice to the Socialist International’s central role, not only in pushing the current alarmism over global warming, but also in building a global militant environmental lobby from 1970 to the present. [Editor’s Note: SI has been influential in the setting the agenda for the latest UN climate change talks in Mexico].

The SI was most notably represented in Copenhagen by its president, George Papandreou, who is also the current Prime Minister of Greece. “At this time, we are observing the birth of global governance,” Papandreou said while addressing the UN summit on December 18, 2009. “We must, however, agree to an obligation and be committed to carrying this out,” he stressed.

We know now, of course, that the Copenhagen palaver failed to produce a binding agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol or produce the structures the SI is hoping to establish within the United Nations to transform it into a genuine global government. That failure, however, is viewed by the SI as a temporary setback, which will be remedied at future annual climate confabs, such as the UN’s 2010 follow-up to Copenhagen in Mexico.

At its 1962 Congress in Oslo, Norway, the Socialist International plainly declared:

“The ultimate objective of the parties of the Socialist International is nothing less than world government…. Membership of the United Nations must be made universal.”

The SI has never wavered from that goal, though it has softened its rhetoric, adopting the mushier, less threatening term “global governance” to replace its earlier appeals to “world government.”

This is important to keep in mind, since current and former Prime Ministers and Presidents who are members of the SI comprise a large and influential contingent of world leaders who figure prominently at global and regional summits. Currently, the Socialist International boasts 170 political parties and organizations worldwide, including many that are currently in power running national governments.

Prominent SI member parties include:
• Britain’s Labour Party (Gordon Brown, Prime Minister),
• Australia’s Labour Party (Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister),
• South Africa’s African National Congress (Jacob Zuma, President),
• Spain’s Socialist Workers’ Party (Jose Zapatero, President),
• Nicaragua’s Sandinista Liberation Front (Daniel Ortega, President),
• Namibia’s South West Africa People’s Organization (Hifikepunye Lucas Pohamba, President),
• Chile’s Socialist Party (Michelle Bachelet, President), and
• Egypt’s National Democratic Party (Hosni Mubarak, President).

These and other SI member parties and their leaders have been fairly open in their calls for “global governance” to address what they claim are “global crises” that cannot be addressed (they say) in the current system of sovereign nation states. As The New American has reported, Prime Ministers Gordon Brown and Kevin Rudd have been especially outspoken, with hysterical pronouncements on the supposed need for UN governance to stave off supposed catastrophic global warming.

In a speech in November 2009, Prime Minister Rudd denounced global-warming skeptics— including respected scientists and politicians — as evil “climate-change deniers,” who are “dangerous” and are “holding the world to ransom.”

As Chancellor of the Exchequer under Prime Minister Tony Blair, and then as Prime Minister, Gordon Brown has pushed for transforming the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and the Bretton Woods institutions (the IMF and World Bank) into a full-blown United Nations Economic Council, to complement the UN Security Council. Brown is a member of the Fabian Society, the British socialist organization that served as the model for, and incubator of, the SI. Indeed, the SI world headquarters in London and the Fabian Society’s London office are but two hands on the same body.

On January 16, 2010, Brown delivered his “Causes to Fight For” speech to the Fabian Society New Year Conference. He has addressed the group many times. Although the Fabians are usually presented as “moderate” and “democratic” socialists, the Fabian Society has been a key ally of the communists from Lenin’s time to the present, including providing special assistance in covering up Josef Stalin’s unspeakable crimes.

The Socialist International Congresses, as well as the SI’s various committees and commissions, have issued a stream of reports and statements over the years reiterating its 1962 call for world government/global governance. “Governance in a Global Society – The Social Democratic Approach,” issued by the XXII Congress of the Socialist International in São Paulo, Brazil, in 2003 is a prime example. The declaration of SI’s 2006 Council Meeting in Santiago, Chile, which met under the banner of “Governance, energy, and climate change, new horizons for peace,” is another.

The Santiago meeting also provided the occasion for setting up the Socialist International Commission for a Sustainable World Society (SICSWS), which is now joined at the hip with the United Nations. SI’s Richard Lagos, the former president of Chile, co-chairs the CSWS with Goran Persson, the former Prime Minister of Sweden.

Lagos has also been appointed by Ban ki-Moon to serve simultaneously as Special Envoy of the United Nations Secretary-General on Climate Change.

“Global governance is no longer a concept but an urgent necessity,” declared the SI-CSWS at Santiago. It states further:

“Politics needs to be global to guarantee peace and stability; to safeguard the environment; to generate development and social cohesion; to ensure robust economies that can withstand speculative pressures and create fairness and opportunities for all.

“No other issue illustrates better the borderless and truly global nature of the challenges facing today’s world and the need to put forward common answers than global warming and climate change.”

Green, Pink, and Red

Ever since its inception in 1951, the Socialist International has made cosmetic efforts to distance itself from communist socialists. It continues to do so, sprinkling its calls for socialism and global governance with assurances of support for “democratic” principles. However, its democratic bona fides and its supposed opposition to totalitarian socialism are as threadbare today as they ever have been.

“During the Cold War, the SI aligned itself with communist terrorist Yasir Arafat and the PLO, the Soviet Union’s premier terror master. It was also comfortable maintaining close fraternal relations with the communist dictatorships of the Warsaw Pact, Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Cuba’s Fidel Castro and Nicaragua’s Sandinista regimes became SI favorites.

When Gunther Guillaume, companion and closest aide to West German Chancellor Willy Brandt, was exposed as a communist agent of the Soviet KGB/East German Stasi, Brandt was forced to resign as Chancellor. The Guillaume-KGB connection helped explain the incredible political positions Brandt had been taking vis-à-vis Moscow and the communist world. But Brandt’s KGB revelations didn’t phase the SI leadership, who allowed him to continue in office as the longest-serving president of the SI.

Not much has changed there; “reformed” communists and communist parties are welcomed with open arms and hold top posts in the SI. The aforementioned SI Commission for a Sustainable World Society is a case in point. Its members include Aleksander Kwasniewski, the former President of Poland, who was a die-hard Communist Party member until it became expedient to switch to the “reform” label. Likewise for CSWS member Sergei Mironov, who was an apparatchik in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and remains a stalwart supporter of Russia’s top KGB man, Prime Minister – Vladimir Putin.

Another SI poster boy is Sergei Stanishev, Prime Minister of Bulgaria and chairman of the Bulgarian Socialist Party (formerly called the Bulgarian Communist Party). Still another is Ayaz Mütallibov, the former communist dictator of Soviet Azerbaijan. And, of course, we should mention, once again, Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega, since his communist Sandinista regime has some special SI connections.

Perhaps one of the most important former members of the CSWS is Carol Browner, former Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency during the Clinton administration, and currently Director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy in the Obama administration. For some reason, no “mainstream” journalist has thought it important to question Browner or President Obama about Browner’s membership in and activities with this SI commission.

One of the most important SI-Sandinista ties comes in the person of former Sandinista junta member Miguel D’Escoto, who now sits as President of the United Nations General Assembly. As we reported online in June 2009 (“UN’s Marxist Plan for Global Government”), D’Escoto’s UN Commission of Experts on Reforms of the International Monetary and Financial System was chaired by Joseph Stiglitz, who is also simultaneously chairman of the SI’s Commission on Global Financial Issues.

Stiglitz’s 2003 book The Roaring Nineties was described by Bloomberg News as “a cornerstone of President Barack Obama’s blueprint to reshape the U.S. economy.”

Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, “mentored several members of Obama’s economic team, including budget director Peter Orszag, 40, and Jason Furman, 38, deputy director of the National Economic Council,” according to Bloomberg.

In his autobiographic Dreams From My Father, Barack Obama writes of the “socialist conferences I sometimes attended at Cooper Union” while a student at Columbia University in New York City. He has never explained what impact those conferences had on him, nor was he ever asked to do so during his interviews with the major media.

Joseph Stiglitz, the socialist economist and SI commission chairman, is now a professor at Obama’s alma mater, Columbia, and a mentor to the advisors who are devising Obama’s plans for socializing virtually all sectors of the American economy. And former Socialist International commissioner Carol Browner is leading the administration’s efforts to foist a regulatory control scheme on the American people that is more ambitious, intrusive, and potentially totalitarian than anything ever imagined by earlier socialist leaders such as Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, or Mao Zedong: a global plan to control and regulate all energy production and consumption and all carbon dioxide emissions.

“Every breath you take, every move you make, I’ll be watching you.”

Those are lyrics to the 1983 hit by the British rock band The Police. If the Socialist International, the UN, and the Obama administration have their way, that may be the new theme song of the Global Green Police.

From Davos to Porto Allegre

The Socialist International serves as one of the most indispensable bridges by which the globalist elites transport their programs for world government to both the global business/financial leaders and the socialist/communist leaders of the world.

This important bridging function was on display during the last week of January 2010, as global leaders flocked to two competing – and, supposedly, opposing – world summits: the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, and the World Social Forum (WSF) in Porto Allegre, Brazil.

The Davos palaver is by far the more glamorous of the two events, usually featuring a roster of the super-rich (with names like Rockefeller, Rothschild, Gates, Buffet, Soros, and Branson), the politically connected (with names like Kissinger, Clinton, Greenspan, Bernanke, Summers, Sarkozy, and Blair), and the just-famous (with names like Pitt, Jolie, Bono, and Gere). Some 2,500-3,000 moguls and magnates, Presidents and potentates, network and confabulate in the planet’s most splendiferous four-day soiree.

The annual WEF event, it would seem, represents the ultimate gathering of the lords of capitalism. Meanwhile, the countering WSF in Porto Allegre is a radical congeries of some 30,000-50,000 socialists, communists, anarchists, syndicalists, Marxists, Leninists, Trotskyists, Maoists, feminists, union activists, and environmentalists.

Decrying capitalist greed, corporate power, and globalization, the WSF leaders call for building a new global system based on “social and environmental justice.” Their heroes are Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, Bolivia’s Evo Morales, Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega, and Brazil’s Lula da Silva.

Associated Press reporter Alan Clendenning reported on President Lula da Silva’s celebrity style at this year’s WSF. Wrote Clendenning:

“Former radical union leader Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva – known almost everywhere as Lula – was greeted like a rock star by activists in a sports stadium chanting ‘Lula, Lula, the warrior of the Brazilian people!’

“He got more cheers after promising to scold world leaders and bankers at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and to tell them the free market policies they have espoused for decades were to blame for the worldwide financial crunch.”

Lula, a longtime activist leader of the communist Workers Party of Brazil, is not only a founder of the WSF, but also the key founder (with Fidel Castro) of the even more radical São Paulo Forum, which includes among its member organizations most of the official communist parties of Latin America, as well as notorious terrorist organizations. Among the São Paulo Forum members on the U.S. State Department’s list of terrorist groups are the Colombian FARC (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias Colombiana) and ELN (Ejercito de Liberacion Nacional), the Peruvian MRTA (Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement), and the Chilean MIR (the Movement of the Revolutionary Left).

It must seem odd to some observers then, that President Lula, the radical socialist, is honored at both the WEF and the WSF. This year he was the first head of state to receive the World Economic Forum’s new “Global Statesmanship Award.”

Alas, due to high blood pressure and his doctor’s orders, he was forced to send a substitute to pick up his award and deliver his “scolding” speech to the Davos assembly. Like his communist comrades in Beijing, Lula is the frequent recipient of accolades from the leading lights of the business and financial worlds, for his supposedly pro-capitalist policies.

However, like the wily Chinese, Lula is merely following the program of patient gradualism advocated by the Fabian Socialists – and Lenin himself, who, in his New Economic Policy (NEP) gladly embraced partnerships with Western corporations with the aim of using capitalism to build communism to the point where it is strong enough to smash capitalism.

While Lula is not a formal member of the SI, he is a close ally. He hosted the SI’s 2003 Congress in Brazil, and was praised there by SI President George Papandreou. And SI leaders Papandreou, Zapatero, Zuma, Brown, and Rudd – to name a few – were at Davos to promote the Fabian globalist-socialist agenda.

Likewise, German Chancellor Angela Merkel is not a formal SI member, but at this year’s Davos gathering, she was avidly pushing the socialist program of her British SI comrade, Gordon Brown. Calling for a global financial shake-up, she proposed the forging of a new charter that “may even lead to a UN Economic Council, just as the Security Council was created after World War II.”

Safeguarding the environment and reducing the poverty gap, Merkel told the WEF, are principles that “need to be enshrined in the form of a global economic order charter” that “could lead to the establishment of a UN economic council.

“Davos Man,” aka “Global Citizen”

While the WEF and WSF appear, at least on the surface, to be opposing each other on the issue of economic globalization, in reality they are both pushing for globalism, i.e., the development of the UN into an all-powerful world government.

The “Davos man,” says David Rothkopf, in Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They Are Making, represents “the rise of a global power elite, a superclass” for the new “global era.” The Davos man represents, says Rothkopf, “the global citizen, the leader for whom borders [are] increasingly irrelevant.”

Rothkopf, who is himself a Davos man (president of a high-powered consulting firm, Garten Rothkopf; a former managing director of Kissinger Associates; and a veteran member of the Council on Foreign Relations) and regular WEF attendee, writes:

“These global elites have crystallized a tension between the almost 400-year-old idea of the nation-state as the defining unit of global governance, and the emerging reality of a world in which nations are not only diminishing in influence but also are being transcended both by transnational needs beyond their reach and transnational power centers advancing internationalist or supranationalist agendas.

“Internationalist vs. nationalist. Globalist vs. regionalist. A battle not over a redistribution of wealth but over the redistribution of sovereignty and power.”

Rothkopf is not exactly being honest in that last sentence above; the battle is indeed about redistribution of wealth – and sovereignty and power. But it is not about redistributing the wealth of the Davos globalists; it is about redistributing the wealth of the world’s productive middle classes in the developed nations to the political classes of the developing nations chosen by the globalists.

And the vehicles used to redistribute the wealth are the UN and its agencies, along with various national and regional “aid” agencies, as well as those NGOs favored with the imprimatur of the globalist power elite. FC

Forcing Change is a Canadian-based organization built on the research work of FC’s Chief Editor, Carl Teichrib.

http://www.forcingchange.org/

What If Chick-Fil-A Were Owned By A Muslim Man?

Posted on August 4, 2012 by ccpastormike

What if the president of Chick-Fil-A were a Muslim instead of a practicing Christian? What if instead of Dan Cathy his name was Dan Shahar or Adil Bashir? I think I know the answer to the question of my hypothetical but for the sake of having to write more than a paragraph let’s dive deeper into this double standard in which the media, the left, and the gay community excuse and outright ignore the legit hatred and documented violence against homosexuals whereas peaceful expressions of disagreeing views from Christians are treated on the same level. You would think Mr. Cathy held a public stoning of a homosexual or tortured a same-sex married couple; but of course we’re not in Iran or Saudi Arabia.

I would venture to guess had Mr. Cathy been a Muslim none of this would have been an issue. As is the case, the left hates Christians, Jews, but sympathizes heavily with Muslims and Arabs. They even go as far as to make excuses for some of the most vile acts of terrorism not only against the West but against other Muslims and Arabs. When you have some liberals saying “Well in a way they aren’t really terrorists because they’re just reacting to American occupation on what they consider holy ground”

And let me guess, the excuse for a Muslim opposing homosexuality is one of religious belief but Christians applying that exact same concept of belief is hate and intolerance? Gotcha my dude.

It’s funny because everything the left and the media accuses Christians of being: anti-women, homophobic, angry, violent, bigoted, anti-gay, those accusations have actually been proven as fact when you talk about the Muslim world in general. Name me one nation whose population is predominantly Christian that has as one of its laws the denial of women to drive cars. Name me one majority Christian or Jewish nation that restricts women from owning property when their husbands die. Name me one majority Christian or Jewish nation that not only jails homosexuals but tortures them, not to mention stones women in public if they commit adultery. In Saudi Arabia I believe a woman was sentenced to death for criticizing Islam.

What if the majority of voters who supported Prop 8 were practicing Muslims? Do you think angry homosexuals and supporters of gay marriage would be outside of mosques waiting for folks to come out of they can harass them? Do you think those same protesters would disrupt fellowship and prayer at a mosque like they disrupted services at several churches in California?

You see the left has a very clear target in which to express their own hatred. Let me be clear, to borrow a phrase from our president, the left and the media hates Jesus Christ. I’ll say it again, the left, homosexuals, their little echo chamber, the media, hate Jesus Christ. You cannot get any down to the bare truth than that. You see it’s different when a Muslim opposes same-sex lifestyles because they’re Muslims, but for Christians it’s hate and bigotry.

No matter the historical evidence in just the past few years alone, of violence and torture against homosexuals and women, the target is always the same: “Christians”

“You gotta get the Christians, because they stand in the way of what we want to do.” You see this man name Jesus who lived but 33 years and was the son of God, this man who was perfect in all his ways and was to bear the sin and inequity of the human race so that we might have everlasting life, they don’t much like him. Jesus represents everything the world finds detestable and “narrow minded”. And if you find leadership, clarity, compassion, strength, morality, perfection, wisdom, love, peace, righteousness, justice, truth, salvation, protection, reason, understanding, boldness, and unity detestable then you might be of the world, and you too hate Jesus Christ.

The bible says Jesus was in the world, and the world was made through him but the world knew him not. Jesus himself said the world will hate you because they hated me first, but those who stand firm to the end will be saved. We know in this hour the world will increasingly stand against Christians because we know from what our Lord told us; they stood against him first.

This is beyond a political statement when you talk about going to Chick-Fil-A as a sign of support for. This is about how we as Christians must prepare for the coming persecution. Chick-Fil-A and traditional marriage propositions are just the tip of the iceberg.

Let me give you a little insight on the world we live in today: A religion expressed as the centerpiece of the most destructive, antiquated, violent, and vile acts known to man is promoted by American media and the Muslim world as a religion of “peace”, yet a religion that promotes love, salvation, compassion, service to the lesser among us, and tells it’s followers to turn the other cheek and to love your enemy, and pray for those who have wronged you, that religion is promoted as hateful, violent, and backward.

You know I take great peace in knowing that it was Jesus Christ and not Muhammad who died on the cross for the sin of mankind. I take great peace in knowing that Jesus, not Muhammad is the one true Messiah and the hope of the world. It sounds controversial and might rub people the wrong way but truth’ll do that to ya sometimes.

Posted by tomjeffersonsghost (Diary)

Thursday, August 2nd at 12:58PM EDT

http://www.redstate.com/tomjeffersonsghost/2012/08/02/what-if-chick-fil-a-were-owned-by-a-muslim-man/