RELIGION, NATION, MARRIAGE: THE LOYALTIES OF MEN
PRAY, WORK, STUDY, PROTECT: THE DUTIES OF MEN


Saturday, October 20, 2018

Religion, Nations and Geopolitics Review: Saturday Oct 20


THE WEEKLY BRIEF

The Reckonings: The Pope and Homosexual Clergy,
The President and the Wahhabi Sauds

The relentless criticism from the left of President Trump and from the Catholic right against Pope Francis are assaults on the unity of both our country and the Church. This does not mean that both men do not have fundamental long standing problems which they must address to strengthen both Church and Country. Their deepest simmering problems surfaced in living technicolor this week.

Pope Francis must face the central cause of the sexual abuse scandal-the deep infiltration and corruption of the Catholic priesthood by homosexuals. (UPDATE DECEMBER 2018 HIS CLEAREST STATEMENT ON HOMOSEXUALS IN PRIESTHOOD)

Archbishop Vigano's "third testimony"(see below) sent on the feast of the North American Jesuit martyrs is the clearest case yet for overcoming the "silence " on this issue. That silence has crippled reform for decades. We still believe Archbishop Vigano is gravely mistaken about Pope Francis rehabilitating Cardinal McCarrick. Vigano also is directly responsible for an inadequate response to "the homosexual conservative" John Nienstedt continuing to act as a bishop and priest in good standing. At the same time there is no living priest or bishop who has so forthrightly named the beast that stalks our sanctuaries. For this, all of us, including the Pope, must be grateful for the Vigano testimonies. This last testimony refrained from asking the pope to resign and adopted a much more filial posture to the pontiff.  That did not mean he wasn't sharply critical. The Pope has asked for parrhesia . Vigano complied.

 The Archbishop is making it easier for others (including the Pope) to clamor for justice by ruling any act of sodomy by a priest must engender an automatic loss of the office and clerical state. (AOA Strategy for Reform). This betrayal of sacral fatherhood is exactly analogous to the offense of abortion against femininity and motherhood. The Church punishes the woman with excommunication. There is no trial. She is excommunicated by the act itself-latae sententiae.  A similar clarity in canon law can manifest to  corrupted modern man what depravity toward the sacral fatherhood is sodomy. Are we not amazed that there is a large body of "conservatives" and "liberals" who do not consider adult consensual acts of sodomy by priests, bishops, monks or cardinals to be a "grave delict?"   If we need a focus for the Catholic conversation about the worldwide clergy corruption, this would nicely center the conversation. A clarified interpretation of the present law or an explicit canon  would both reaffirm the sacrality of the priesthood and make clear the depravity of that twisted act. If we hear this is "scapegoating gay priests", let us remember the scapegoat is one goat who is exiled for the group. There are thousands of homosexual priests--they are not scapegoats. They are the moneychangers who overran the temple... they must be driven out.

The Eucharist is a joining of humanity in the Son's sacrificial love of the Father through the liturgical action of a male Catholic priest.  Sodomy is a sin against the fundamental male love of father for son, son for father and brothers for one another under Our Father. Properly ordered masculine love is the basis of ecclesial  apostolic order and public political life. Sodomy is incompatible with the male actions at the sacred altar which order the Church's public life to the Trinitarian love of the Father and Son.  This sin has nothing to do with the Sixth Commandment or marriage. It has everything to do with the desacralization of the Mass, the Apostolic priesthood and the unifying  love of the Son for the Father and all of humanity. It is a violation of the First and Fourth commandments before the Sixth.

The incessant criticisms of the conservative Catholic media against Pope Francis are not helping us come together to face the crisis. The many rifles aimed at the pope can be better aimed at the corrupted priests and bishops we can expose and banish from every diocese and country in the Catholic world. We need Pope Francis to call together the male bishops in public face to face assemblies to address this corruption. He is doing just that in his proposed February 2019 meeting of all the heads of bishop conferences. We need time to be sure there will be several bold bishops who will go there saying the homosexualization of the clergy is the number one problem that is destroying the protective brotherhood of fathers which Jesus instituted 2000 years ago. The ordered male group is the antidote to homosexual clericalism as well as organized male violence.  We have not made that argument with enough force. We do not have the many dossiers we need to expose the homosexual clergy including those men slated to enter the conclave of cardinals to pick the next pope.  This Pope is all about the synodal character of priestly life. We need such a Pope more than another theologian or philosopher.  The reconfigured public episcopal bodies must boldly begin the act of Apostolic cleansing which Christ did to Judas on the night before he died. He ordered His bishops to do as He had done! That mandate stands today.

Pope Francis has been tricked by many progressive bishops who have exploited his call for joy and mercy to cover their double lives of squalid exploitation and depraved forms of clericalism. May our holy prayerful Pope see them for who they are. He clearly has missed on Cardinal Wuerl. But let us be careful in condemning the Pope's every move. He is surrounded by bishops and officials placed there by Popes Benedict and John Paul II. They too dined with the serpent and added significantly to his penetration of priestly life during their pontificates. It was always thus with Sodom--the sin is so destructive of fraternity that it is hard to find a quorum of men who can clean the place after a certain degree of pollution.  Let us pray for the pope and ask every bishop and priest to speak clearly about the desacralized masculinity which must be purified in every diocese and every country including the Vatican to safeguard Christ's Spotless Bride once again. Like you, me, and Vigano, Pope Francis is not perfect and has been negligent. Is he Judas or Peter? If Judas, wash him out. If Peter, may he be called to repentance and more vigorous rule. Look at the wily Wuerl. Listen to the exuberant Francis. Who is Judas? Expose him and banish him. Who is Peter? Forgive him, even criticize him, but then follow him. We must help him because like the pontiffs before him, he is surrounded. But unlike them, he is leading us to a reckoning.

In a similar way, President Trump must now face his own long neglected Achilles heel. He too has embraced our enemies thinking them friends. The great nationalist has been stymied in his policies by three "allies".  First and most importantly, President Trump has gone down the George Bush path of trusting the Saudi Kingdom-home of the most radical terrorist religious movement on the globe today. The Cold War is over and our old ally-the Sauds- are now our enemy. It is they, not Iraq and not Iran, who killed our people on 9/11 two decades ago.  All Muslims do not look alike and all Muslims do not behead Christians, fly planes into office towers or cut up their own in foreign consulates. The rash Muhammed bin Salman is the worst of the anti Shiite Wahabbis to lead Saudi Arabia in decades. (These three links ( One  Two  Three) all have sections under Islam and the Mideast  of our previous documentation and significant stories about the rise of MbS as Saudi Crown Prince).
Even if some Sunni rich girls are driving and going to soccer games--MbS has been a warmonger, an interfamilial opportunist  and murderer from the beginning. Anyone who pays  a tiny bit of attention to religion and geopolitics in the region would never have been fooled by the 30 something murderer of Houthi Shiites in Yemen. Muhammed bib Salman is easing the domestic police but he has unleashed the murderous side of the Wahhabi  sect--the belief that Shiites are not Muslims and should be exterminated to purify the religion. Before MbS tried to bring down Qatar and the al Jazeera network, Wahhabi clerics in Saudi Arabia condemned the Wahhabis of Qatar.  MbS is not reining in Saudi Wahhabism. He is sharpening their bloodiest knives while putting a smile on his outside the tent face. MbS has alienated all of his older more competent relatives. He must have the clerics and the clerics are very interested in a leader who will do real physical harm to the armed Shiite governments in the region.  MbS  is not yet  King but he wields most of the power as Crown Prince. He has rid the higher institutional positions of older more competent royals who might have been his opposition. This includes not a few men in their fifties who once were favorites of the American CIA.  To characterize the fanatical anti Shiite campaign of Wahhabi Sauds as a century old sectarian fight between Shiites and Sunnis is to call the KKK  just another group of whites in the  century long black-white divide. Yes there is a long standing Sunni-Shia divide like there has been animosity across the color line for centuries. But the Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia (like the KKK) are special.

 The second ally who has undermined America and the Trump presidency is our look alike across the sea-Great Britain. British intelligence and most British politicians (pro- Brexit or not) do not want a US-Russian alliance. Employing eager anti Trump forces in both parties, Christopher Steele and many other English speaking white guys in media and British governmental services have been very successful in hiding in full view. The Russian hoax has as many British fingerprints as anti Trump Americans. They love the special Atlantic alliance of the white English speaking countries in "the West".  They hate the realignment of racial groups and civilizations which comes from nationalism and the respect of very different national cultures. A new post bipolar Cold War  nationalist policy of bandwagoning strong nations would reconfigure the relations of nations with a huge loss in status for white English speaking Britain. An alliance of  the strong nation men of Russia, of China, of Japan, and of Brazil makes a very different world than the globalists of the West managed by Angela Merkel, Theresa May and Hillary Clinton/Nikki Haley talk-alikes. This is an insight the English accented Fox News commentators may get last.

The Israelis too have played their great ally. They have escalated their anti Iran propaganda and  enlisted our country in a war against the strongest military force in the region which has destroyed ISIS and opposed our real terrorist enemies- the salafist Wahhabis. The Israelis have never seen the purification Wahhabis as a principal enemy.  ISIS hasn't shot at them and they haven't shot at ISIS. The Israeli have looked at the Muslim vs Muslim war as an opportunity to weaken their greatest enemy-Iran.  Because of this, America and Israel have fundamentally different views and strategies in the Mideast and Afghanistan. The Wahhabi Sunnis from the Hanbali school of Islam are still unpunished for 911. They are by far the greatest worldwide sponsors of terrorism (al Qaeda, ISIS, the Syrian civil war, Boko Haram, the Ughurs of China and Chechynans of Russia are all Sunni radicals not Iranian Shiites.) Israel has taken advantage of our Senators' general ignorance of religion and foreign policy. The huge Israeli lobby in Washington (and the considerable think tank and lobbying efforts of the Saudis) have pointed American weapons at Iran instead of where the hijackers came from. We cannot blame Israel for having their own interests. We can blame our political leaders for not differentiating Israel's enemies and foreign policy from our own. "America First" does not mean, "Whatever Israel Wants." A good nationalist favors an undivided Israeli capital in Jerusalem not an auxiliary branch in Washington DC.

The pathetic ignorance of our real national interests in the Mideast  is the problem in foreign policy that President Trump came to fix.  He said we have to find out "what the hell is going on with the Muslims. Where does this hate come from?"  Well ,we are still too religiously ignorant to understand  the story and punish our real enemies. We still don't understand Saudi Arabia: The Kingdom of Hate.
Nations are maneuvering for their interests (especially Saudi Arabia, Israel and the Brits ) while we are played for fools. What China did in economics, the Saudis, Israelis and Brits did in our foreign policy and post election paralysis.  We must empty our governing halls of the feminists and careerists who have sacrificed the nation for their own status pods in the swamp. Most of them are not evil just incredibly limited in dealing with much stronger and more serious men of other countries. Those men  are acting for their nation states against careerists who are only acting for their survival in office. So far it has been no contest. President Trump wants a nationalist foreign policy but he is surrounded by military men and Republican security experts who were marinated in the globalist interventionist world view. Journalists and senators should provide a counter narrative to help him realign our forces not blame him for the mess he did not make.

We must break with the Saudis who are our enemies. Our opposition to them is for sins more grave than their gruesome murder of a man they consider a traitor. This is not the first  time we have seen a plane load of Saudis leave a country after a gruesome murder. It happened in September of 2001.  The plane was leaving US airspace and it wasn't one Saudi traitor with an American green card who had been killed. It was 3000 American civilians at work in New York City. Their innocent blood still calls for justice!

Will Pope Francis see the lavender mob corrupting his priesthood? Will President Trump see the salafist jihadists from Mecca and Medina trying to get us into war with Iran? Both men have vicious enemies that misinterpret their every statement. That makes it difficult to help them see their real mistakes. Pope Francis has been horrifically slow to see the homosexual infiltration in every diocese and the Vatican in the Catholic clergy. President Trump picked the wrong country-Saudi Arabia- to be our ally and the worst of all leaders-- Muhammed bin Salman-- to promise his  loyalty. Let us see if the Pope and the President  can see their mistakes and make some very necessary and fundamental corrections.

                                                                   I The Pope and the Church

The Case Against the Pope by Michael Brandon Daugherty   
 We don't agree with this rendition but he makes the clearest case for the anti Francis movement.

Pope's letter to Wuerl - An indictment of both by Rod Dreher

Networks and Double Lives: Wright, Wuerl and the Pittsburgh Oratory
Good reporting by Ken Woodward in Commonweal Magazine

Vigano's Third Testament: A much stronger focus not on resignation by the Pope but repentance by all for not facing the plague of homosexuality corrupting the Catholic priesthood. In full below:

Archbishop Vigano Responds to Cardinal Ouellet: The Third Testimony
On the Memory of the North American Martyrs
By Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano
October 19, 2018

To bear witness to corruption in the hierarchy of the Catholic Church was a painful decision for me, and remains so. But I am an old man, one who knows he must soon give an accounting to the judge for his actions and omissions, one who fears Him who can cast body and soul into hell. A judge, even in his infinite mercy, will render to every person salvation or damnation according to what he has deserved. Anticipating the dreadful question from that judge — “How could you, who had knowledge of the truth, keep silent in the midst of falsehood and depravity?” — what answer could I give?

I testified fully aware that my testimony would bring alarm and dismay to many eminent persons: Churchmen, fellow bishops, colleagues with whom I had worked and prayed. I knew many would feel wounded and betrayed. I expected that some would in their turn assail me and my motives. Most painful of all, I knew that many of the innocent faithful would be confused and disconcerted by the spectacle of a bishop’s charging colleagues and superiors with malfeasance, sexual sin, and grave neglect of duty. Yet I believe that my continued silence would put many souls at risk, and would certainly damn my own.

Having reported multiple times to my superiors, and even to the pope, the aberrant behavior of Theodore McCarrick, I could have publicly denounced the truths of which I was aware earlier.
If I have some responsibility in this delay, I repent for that. This delay was due to the gravity of the decision I was going to take, and to the long travail of my conscience. I have been accused of creating confusion and division in the Church through my testimony. To those who believe such confusion and division were negligible prior to August 2018, perhaps such a claim is plausible.

Most impartial observers, however, will have been aware of a longstanding excess of both, as is inevitable when the successor of Peter is negligent in exercising his principal mission, which is to confirm the brothers in the faith and in sound moral doctrine. When he then exacerbates the crisis by contradictory or perplexing statements about these doctrines, the confusion is worsened. "Therefore I spoke" Therefore I spoke.

For it is the conspiracy of silence that has wrought and continues to wreak great harm in the Church — harm to so many innocent souls, to young priestly vocations, to the faithful at large. With regard to my decision, which I have taken in conscience before God, I willingly accept every fraternal correction, advice, recommendation, and invitation to progress in my life of faith and love for Christ, the Church and the pope. Let me restate the key points of my testimony:

  • In November 2000 the U.S. nuncio Archbishop (Gabriel) Montalvoinformed the Holy See of Cardinal McCarrick’s homosexual behavior with seminarians and priests.
  • In December 2006 the new U.S. nuncio, Archbishop Pietro Sambi, informed the Holy See of Cardinal McCarrick’s homosexual behavior with yet another priest.
  • In December of 2006 I myself wrote a memo to the Secretary of State Cardinal (Tarcisio) Bertone, and personally delivered it to the Substitute for General Affairs, Archbishop Leonardo Sandri, calling for the pope to bring extraordinary disciplinary measures against McCarrick to forestall future crimes and scandal. This memo received no response.
  • In April 2008 an open letter to Pope Benedict by Richard Sipe was relayed by the Prefect of the CDF, Cardinal (William) Levada, to the Secretary of State, Cardinal Bertone, containing further accusations of McCarrick’s sleeping with seminarians and priests. I received this a month later, and in May 2008 I myself delivered a second memo to the then Substitute for General Affairs, Archbishop Fernando Filoni, reporting the claims against McCarrick and calling for sanctions against him. This second memo also received no response.
  • In 2009 or 2010 I learned from Cardinal (Giovanni Battista) Re, prefect of the Congregation of Bishops, that Pope Benedict had ordered McCarrick to cease public ministry and begin a life of prayer and penance. The nuncio Sambi communicated the Pope’s orders to McCarrick in a voice heard down the corridor of the nunciature.
  • In November 2011 Cardinal (Marc) Ouellet, the new Prefect of Bishops, repeated to me, the new nuncio to the U.S., the Pope’s restrictions on McCarrick, and I myself communicated them to McCarrick face-to-face.
  • On June 21, 2013, toward the end of an official assembly of nuncios at the Vatican, Pope Francis spoke cryptic words to me criticizing the U.S. episcopacy.
  • On June 23, 2013, I met Pope Francis face-to-face in his apartment to ask for clarification, and the Pope asked me, “il cardinale McCarrick, com’√® (Cardinal McCarrick — what do you make of him)?”– which I can only interpret as a feigning of curiosity in order to discover whether or not I was an ally of McCarrick. I told him that McCarrick had sexually corrupted generations of priests and seminarians, and had been ordered by Pope Benedict to confine himself to a life of prayer and penance.
  • Instead, McCarrick continued to enjoy the special regard of Pope Francis and was given new responsibilities and missions by him.
  • McCarrick was part of a network of bishops promoting homosexuality who exploiting their favor with Pope Francis manipulated episcopal appointments so as to protect themselves from justice and to strengthen the homosexual network in the hierarchy and in the Church at large.
  • Pope Francis himself has either colluded in this corruption, or, knowing what he does, is gravely negligent in failing to oppose it and uproot it.
  • "I invoked God as my witness" I invoked God as my witness to the truth of my claims, and none has been shown false.
  • Cardinal Ouellet has written to rebuke me for my temerity in breaking silence and leveling such grave accusations against my brothers and superiors, but in truth his remonstrance confirms me in my decision and, even more, serves to vindicate my claims, severally and as a whole.
  • Cardinal Ouellet concedes that he spoke with me about McCarrick’s situation prior to my leaving for Washington to begin my post as nuncio.
  • Cardinal Ouellet concedes that he communicated to me in writing the conditions and restrictions imposed on McCarrick by Pope Benedict.
  • Cardinal Ouellet concedes that these restrictions forbade McCarrick to travel or to make public appearances.
  • Cardinal Ouellet concedes that the Congregation of Bishops, in writing, first through the nuncio Sambi and then once again through me, required McCarrick to lead a life of prayer and penance. What does Cardinal Ouellet dispute?
  • Cardinal Ouellet disputes the possibility that Pope Francis could have taken in important information about McCarrick on a day when he met scores of nuncios and gave each only a few moments of conversation. But this was not my testimony. My testimony is that at a second, private meeting, I informed the Pope, answering his own question about Theodore McCarrick, then Cardinal archbishop emeritus of Washington, prominent figure of the Church in the US, telling the pope that McCarrick had sexually corrupted his own seminarians and priests. No pope could forget that.
  • Cardinal Ouellet disputes the existence in his archives of letters signed by Pope Benedict or Pope Francis regarding sanctions on McCarrick. But this was not my testimony. My testimony was that he has in his archives key documents – irrespective of provenance – incriminating McCarrick and documenting the measures taken in his regard, and other proofs on the cover-up regarding his situation. And I confirm this again.
  • Cardinal Ouellet disputes the existence in the files of his predecessor, Cardinal Re, of “audience memos” imposing on McCarrick the restrictions already mentioned. But this was not my testimony. My testimony is that there are other documents: for instance, a note from Card. Re not ex-Audientia SS.mi, or signed by the Secretary of State or by the Substitute.
  • Cardinal Ouellet disputes that it is false to present the measures taken against McCarrick as “sanctions” decreed by Pope Benedict and canceled by Pope Francis. True. They were not technically “sanctions” but provisions, “conditions and restrictions.” To quibble whether they were sanctions or provisions or something else is pure legalism. From a pastoral point of view they are exactly the same thing.

In brief, Cardinal Ouellet concedes the important claims that I did and do make, and disputes claims I don’t make and never made. There is one point on which I must absolutely refute what Cardinal Ouellet wrote. The Cardinal states that the Holy See was only aware of “rumors,” which were not enough to justify disciplinary measures against McCarrick.

I affirm to the contrary that the Holy See was aware of a variety of concrete facts, and is in possession of documentary proof, and that the responsible persons nevertheless chose not to intervene or were prevented from doing so.

Compensation by the Archdiocese of Newark and the Diocese of Metuchen to the victims of McCarrick’s sexual abuse, the letters of Fr. Ramsey, of the nuncios Montalvo in 2000 and Sambi in 2006, of Dr. Sipe in 2008, my two notes to the superiors of the Secretariat of State who described in detail the concrete allegations against McCarrick; are all these just rumors? They are official correspondence, not gossip from the sacristy.

The crimes reported were very serious, including those of attempting to give sacramental absolution to accomplices in perverse acts, with subsequent sacrilegious celebration of Mass.
These documents specify the identity of the perpetrators and their protectors, and the chronological sequence of the facts. They are kept in the appropriate archives; no extraordinary investigation is needed to recover them.

"I have noted two omissions" In the public remonstrances directed at me I have noted two omissions, two dramatic silences. The first silence regards the plight of the victims. The second regards the underlying reason why there are so many victims, namely, the corrupting influence of homosexuality in the priesthood and in the hierarchy.

As to the first, it is dismaying that, amid all the scandals and indignation, so little thought should be given to those damaged by the sexual predations of those commissioned as ministers of the gospel. This is not a matter of settling scores or sulking over the vicissitudes of ecclesiastical careers. It is not a matter of politics. It is not a matter of how church historians may evaluate this or that papacy. This is about souls. Many souls have been and are even now imperiled of their eternal salvation.
As to the second silence, this very grave crisis cannot be properly addressed and resolved unless and until we call things by their true names. This is a crisis due to the scourge of homosexuality, in its agents, in its motives, in its resistance to reform. It is no exaggeration to say that homosexuality has become a plague in the clergy, and it can only be eradicated with spiritual weapons. It is an enormous hypocrisy condemn the abusre, claim to weep for the victims, and yet refuse to denounce the root cause of so much sexual abuse: homosexuality. It is hypocrisy to refuse to acknowledge that this scourge is due to a serious crisis in the spiritual life of the clergy and to fail to take the steps necessary to remedy it.

Unquestionably there exist philandering clergy, and unquestionably they too damage their own souls, the souls of those whom they corrupt, and the Church at large. But these violations of priestly celibacy are usually confined to the individuals immediately involved. Philandering clergy usually do not recruit other philanderers, nor work to promote them, nor cover-up their misdeeds — whereas the evidence for homosexual collusion, with its deep roots that are so difficult to eradicate, is overwhelming. It is well established that homosexual predators exploit clerical privilege to their advantage.

But to claim the crisis itself to be clericalism is pure sophistry. It is to pretend that a means, anw instrument, is in fact the main motive. Denouncing homosexual corruption and the moral cowardice that allows it to flourish does not meet with congratulation in our times, not even in the highest spheres of the Church. I am not surprised that in calling attention to these plagues I am charged with disloyalty to the Holy Father and with fomenting an open and scandalous rebellion. Yet rebellion would entail urging others to topple the papacy. "I am urging no such thing" I am urging no such thing.

I pray every day for Pope Francis — more than I have ever done for the other popes. I am asking, indeed earnestly begging, the Holy Father to face up to the commitments he himself made in assuming his office as successor of Peter. He took upon himself the mission of confirming his brothers and guiding all souls in following Christ, in the spiritual combat, along the way of the cross.
Let him admit his errors, repent, show his willingness to follow the mandate given to Peter and, once converted let him confirm his brothers (Lk 22:32).

"I wish to repeat my appeal" In closing, I wish to repeat my appeal to my brother bishops and priests who know that my statements are true and who can so testify, or who have access to documents that can put the matter beyond doubt. You too are faced with a choice. You can choose to withdraw from the battle, to prop up the conspiracy of silence and avert your eyes from the spreading of corruption.
You can make excuses, compromises and justification that put off the day of reckoning. You can console yourselves with the falsehood and the delusion that it will be easier to tell the truth tomorrow, and then the following day, and so on.

On the other hand, you can choose to speak. You can trust Him who told us, “the truth will set you free.” I do not say it will be easy to decide between silence and speaking. I urge you to consider which choice– on your deathbed, and then before the just Judge — you will not regret having made.

October 19, 2018
Memory of the
North American Martyrs
+ Carlo Maria Viganò
Tit. Archbishop of Ulpiana
Apostolic Nuncio

                                                              II The President


Trump At UN September 25, 2018

Full speech - excerpts here:

"Each of us here today is the emissary of a distinct culture, a rich history, and a people bound together by ties of memory, tradition, and the values that make our homelands like nowhere else on Earth.
For similar reasons, the United States will provide no support in recognition to the International Criminal Court. As far as America is concerned, the ICC has no jurisdiction, no legitimacy, and no authority. The ICC claims near-universal jurisdiction over the citizens of every country, violating all principles of justice, fairness, and due process. We will never surrender America’s sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy.

America is governed by Americans. We reject the ideology of globalism, and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism."

"We recognize the right of every nation in this room to set its own immigration policy in accordance with its national interests, just as we ask other countries to respect our own right to do the same — which we are doing. That is one reason the United States will not participate in the new Global Compact on Migration. Migration should not be governed by an international body unaccountable to our own citizens.

Ultimately, the only long-term solution to the migration crisis is to help people build more hopeful futures in their home countries. Make their countries great again."

"The whole world is richer, humanity is better, because of this beautiful constellation of nations, each very special, each very unique, and each shining brightly in its part of the world.
In each one, we see awesome promise of a people bound together by a shared past and working toward a common future.

As for Americans, we know what kind of future we want for ourselves. We know what kind of a nation America must always be.

In America, we believe in the majesty of freedom and the dignity of the individual. We believe in self-government and the rule of law. And we prize the culture that sustains our liberty -– a culture built on strong families, deep faith, and fierce independence. We celebrate our heroes, we treasure our traditions, and above all, we love our country.

Inside everyone in this great chamber today, and everyone listening all around the globe, there is the heart of a patriot that feels the same powerful love for your nation, the same intense loyalty to your homeland.

The passion that burns in the hearts of patriots and the souls of nations has inspired reform and revolution, sacrifice and selflessness, scientific breakthroughs, and magnificent works of art.
Our task is not to erase it, but to embrace it. To build with it. To draw on its ancient wisdom. And to find within it the will to make our nations greater, our regions safer, and the world better.
To unleash this incredible potential in our people, we must defend the foundations that make it all possible. Sovereign and independent nations are the only vehicle where freedom has ever survived, democracy has ever endured, or peace has ever prospered. And so we must protect our sovereignty and our cherished independence above all.

When we do, we will find new avenues for cooperation unfolding before us. We will find new passion for peacemaking rising within us. We will find new purpose, new resolve, and new spirit flourishing all around us, and making this a more beautiful world in which to live.

So together, let us choose a future of patriotism, prosperity, and pride. Let us choose peace and freedom over domination and defeat. And let us come here to this place to stand for our people and their nations, forever strong, forever sovereign, forever just, and forever thankful for the grace and the goodness and the glory of God.

Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the nations of the world."


III. AROUND THE WORLD ROUND UP

FOREIGN POLICY - NATIONAL SECURITY VS. INCIDENCES OF OUTRAGEThousands of dead Shiites vs One dead journalistWho is Jamal Khashoggi?

THE BRITISH INFLUENCE ON AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY: There are three countries that over influence American foreign policy: Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Britain. This is the best review of the out-sized role Britian plays in US policy. They look like us, they sort of talk like us, but their goals ARE NOT our goals. British interests and the anti Trump Russian hoax. Russian dossier is Britishgate.

IN YEMEN THE SAUDIS KILL SHIITES, BUT THE UAE IS ESTABLISHING A BASE OF OPERATIONS AGAINST ENEMY RADICAL SUNNIS: And they use American mercenaries as part of their forces.

IRAN WAS MAJOR FORCE IN DEFEAT OF ISISby Scott Ritter.

A DEATH IN AFGHANISTAN: Politics is protection. Abdul Raziq was seen as the most powerful man in southern Afghanistan. The top police general in Kandahar Province, he had earned a reputation as a ruthless anti-insurgent fighter and was widely praised for bringing Kandahar and the surrounding region away from Taliban rule and under Afghan government control. On Thursday, Oct 18 the Taliban struck back.

A gunman wearing an Afghan army uniform opened fire on participants meeting with the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan. Gen. Austin “Scott” Miller, the target of the attack claimed by the Taliban, escaped unharmed. But Abdul Raziq and two other top southern provincial officials were killed. At least three Americans were wounded as well.

American soldiers are dying in Afghanistan because our diplomats have not made peace with Iran, Pakistan, and the Afghan factions. Russia, China, and India would all help if we organized serious negotiations. We must negotiate with those who once were our enemies and we must recognize large regional powers so soldiers doing their duties and civilians leading their lives are not sacrificed to an  incoherent foreign policy. This incoherence is not caused by President Trump. He inherited it from diplomats and soldier diplomats who have not yet figured out how to live in the multi-polar world of the post Cold War.  Tulsi Gabbard, a Democrat Representative from Hawaii,  and Rand Paul, a Republican Senator from Kentucky,  seem to be emerging as articulate Congressional leaders seeking a serious nationalist reappraisal of foreign policy in the Mideast and South Asia.

BOLSONARO SET TO WIN OCTOBER 28 ELECTION: The globalists and international cultural liberals are aghast. The globalists at the Economist magazine are supporting the socialist candidate. That should be a lesson. The sexual revolutionaries are screaming homophobe and misogynist. The Greens say he will deforest the Amazon. He has said he will withdraw from the climate accord. Jair Bolsonaro is recovering from the knife wound inflicted weeks ago in the campaign. He is just the God adoring, nation loving, masculine leader other Latin American countries need.  May men of his kind rise to renew the great nations of  Catholic South America.

THE ATHEISTS WHO DEFINED THE MODERN ERA: Marx taught history without Providence. Freud taught psychology without the soul. Darwin taught biology without the Creator. Einstein taught the laws of Nature without the Law Giver. Some object that Einstein was not an atheist. From 1954 Albert Einstein ”the God letter” to philosopher Erik Gutkind:

"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still purely primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish," Einstein writes.

Einstein was a German-born Jew who lost his religious faith at a young age and sometimes referred to himself as an agnostic. The letter reinforces his love and shared identity with Jewish people but also calls Judaism, "like all other religions ... an incarnation of the most childish superstition."

No comments:

Post a Comment