COULD OUR LORD HAVE BEEN WRONG, NOT POSSIBLE!!!

Pope Francis Hopes Jesus Was Wrong…

 Kennedy Hall January 16, 2024 0 Comments

Editor’s note: with the latest scandal against the Faith from the Roman Pontiff himself, we recall how Scalfari reported that the Pope did not believe in the dogma of hell, and the Vatican’s failure to condemn this heresy in a political newspeak non-answer. This latest scandal seems to confirm, in some way, that the Pope does not believe in hell. Here we recommend our readers to our contributing editor, Kennedy Hall, in which he compares the words of Pope Francis to the words of Jesus Christ. TSF

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Kennedy Hall

Kennedy Hall

Kennedy Hall is a contributing editor for OnePeterFive. He is the author Terror of Demons: Reclaiming Traditional Catholic Masculinity and Lockdown with the Devil, a novel published by Our Lady of Victory Press. He is a writer at Catholic Family NewsLifeSiteNews and is the host of the Conservative talk-radio show, The Kennedy Report. He is married with four children and lives in Ontario, Canada.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on COULD OUR LORD HAVE BEEN WRONG, NOT POSSIBLE!!!

I THANK GOD FOR THE GIFT OF CORPUS CHRISTI NATIVE NELLIE GRAY WHO GAVE AMERICA THE ANNUAL MARCH FOR LIFE IN WASHINGTON

March for Life 2024
by Judie BrownShareTweetForwardRead online and share:
https://all.org/judie-brown-commentary/march-for-life-2024By Judie BrownWhen the first March for Life was held on January 22, 1974, nobody could have imagined that five decades later thousands of people would still come from every corner of the nation to mourn the deaths of millions of preborn babies.If someone had suggested this, I do not believe that any of us who were around then would have believed it! But here we are. Many people erroneously believe that our work is done because the Dobbs ruling sent the decision to each state regarding abortion, but we know that the fight is a long way from being won. Babies are still dying every day in abortion facilities and in women’s homes, via the abortion pill regimen. We cannot stop giving voice to the babies. And we cannot stop fighting until abortion is unthinkable in every state in our nation.Now, with the passage of each year—as the bodies pile up and many of our leaders have died—we continue to remember, to affirm life, and to defend the innocent. According to statistics, more than 64 million preborn children have died from surgical abortion alone! We will never know the number of babies who have died due to chemical or IVF abortion, though it is safe to say that at the very least 100 million children have died.The most inspiring words I ever heard were at my first March for Life in 1976. They were spoken by March for Life president Nellie Gray, who explained succinctly why we as pro-life Americans could never compromise for any reason. Then, in 1994, when Nellie appeared on EWTN, she made a statement that summarizes why we march. She told Mother Angelica:When we found legislation making exceptions first for the life of the mother, rather than putting in there equal care for both the mother and the preborn child, they (pro-life leaders and others) were actually saying that someone had the authority to kill an innocent child. Then you know what happened, once they made that one exception for the life of the mother, abortionists came along and put an exception for rape and incest and deformed children. And once those principles were violated, then unfortunately it was extremely difficult to make the abortionists understand that killing an innocent human being is not within the scope of either the moral or the secular law.Nellie’s point was simple, and it was as clear then as it is today. The addition of exceptions to so-called pro-life legislation defeated us and our desire to focus on the humanity of the preborn child. Politics has not been fair to truth or to preborn children. Her words and principles throughout the years have guided us, as they have so many others who know that when pro-life people go to Washington to march for life, we are saying no to every single abortion for any reason whatsoever.The March for Life is a pilgrimage that brings pro-life people together to reflect on why we defend the babies and why we must never stop until each and every one of them is protected by the culture and in every state law. It is a sacrificial way of expressing with our presence and with our prayers the goal we share to end the ghastly crime of abortion.Going forward, may we never lose our zeal for truth as we continue to strive, with the help of God, to end the mass murder of our preborn brothers and sisters.________________________________________________Learn how to teach these truths to your children and encourage their teachers to do likewise. American Life League’s Culture of Life Studies Program offers the way.Make sure to have Celebrate Life Magazine in your home. It also makes a wonderful gift for your doctor and your educator, not to mention your pastor.Start rooting out the evil in your neighborhood by learning how to stop Planned Parenthood.Please pray for America.
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on I THANK GOD FOR THE GIFT OF CORPUS CHRISTI NATIVE NELLIE GRAY WHO GAVE AMERICA THE ANNUAL MARCH FOR LIFE IN WASHINGTON

Progress most often takes place at the boundary between the two conditions: the expected norm, and the unpredictable, which no one wants.  A mixture of the two allows for the unexpected, yet desirable advance to occur.

A Quick Note

On Nikki Haley, Donald Trump, 

and Chaos

Chaos Is Not The Pejorative She Suggests

By Pem Schaeffer

pemster4062@yahoo.com

January 4, 2024

Nikki Haley, sensing she is enjoying a modest “surge” in polling for the Republican candidacy for President, has settled on a bumper sticker tagline claiming “Chaos follows Donald Trump wherever he goes; really, it does.”  Her conviction in doing so is that chaos is a pejorative, and is disqualifying.

I would argue the opposite.  A tenet of Chaos Theory is that progress, or positive change, can only happen at the boundary between order and chaos.  Order, by its very definition, favors the status quo, the norm, the expected.  It resists progress, or more precisely, positive change.  Chaos, on the other hand, is random in nature, unpredictable, and impossible to control.

So it is that progress most often takes place at the boundary between the two conditions: the expected norm, and the unpredictable, which no one wants.  A mixture of the two allows for the unexpected, yet desirable advance to occur.

So much as she may regret saying so, the “chaos” that follows Trump is what differentiates him from the carbon copy bureaucrats, swamp critters, and establishment figurines in bloated government.

For an example of this form of “chaos,” take a look back into how Trump took hold of the refurbishment of the Wollman Ice Rink in Central Park and turned the “same old, same old” establishment on its ear while saving significant dollars and completing the job ahead of schedule.  

Some might say that the migration of those tired of living under the reign of “Divine” Monarchs to the shores of America was an act of chaos targeting the established order.  Similarly, the Declaration of Independence they approved was a deliberate act challenging the established order….one could say it’s where chaos met at the boundary with order.  The Boston Tea Party could be looked at in the same light.

And if the Revolutionary War was not chaos rising organically against the established order, what was it?  

So there is ample history to assert that the American Experiment, this great quest for government of the people, by the people, and for the people, to guarantee the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, is the embodiment of chaos clashing with established order, and achieving momentous progress in so doing.  And creating a model for societal organization and governance that has no equal elsewhere in the world.

In light of this, I would say that Nikki Haley might want to rethink her chaos bumper sticker attack unless she is signaling that deep down inside, she believes America needs Donald Trump to bring his unique brand of ordered chaos back to the Federal Government apparatus so that figuratively, it “starts making ice again.”  

And we can all start “skating” anew to great American tunes.  With Old Glory waving above us all.

If you do not take an interest 
in the affairs of your government, 
then you are doomed to live under 
the rule of fools.
Plato
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Progress most often takes place at the boundary between the two conditions: the expected norm, and the unpredictable, which no one wants.  A mixture of the two allows for the unexpected, yet desirable advance to occur.

WHO IS GETTING RICH FROM AMERICA’S SUPPORT OF THE WAR IN THE UKRAINE

FOLLOW THE MONEY

By: Bill Schoettler

December 30, 2023

This phrase has become famous…because it is true and valid. If you are wondering why something happens in the world, follow the money. That is, find out who profits from the “thing”, and who (which individual or group of people) benefits financially from the outcome. That’s the way you find out the whys about the world. This is especially true about politics and the bedfellows of politicians. Why was any particular law passed…what are the special provisions buried within that law? Look for the people, organizations, and countries that benefit from the passage of that law and you can begin to unravel the why of the law.

How does this work? Well, consider the current big money pit for the United States. The war in Ukraine. There would appear to be absolutely no benefit, economically, philosophically, or any other way of participating in this war, participating by sending lots and lots and lots of money to Ukraine, that the United States of America benefits.

Okay, we are causing trouble to Russia. But Russia is practically a third-world country with a poor economy and poor people. Ukraine had the potential to be reasonably rich, producing grain for most of Europe. We, the USA, don’t need the Ukraine crops. Ukraine is run by a dictator, Zelensky, who has virtually banned religion, stifled dissent, quashed human rights, and 10 years ago would have been condemned by the US as a disfavored nation.  So, who is getting rich from the war?

We know that when Biden was VP his son was financially involved with Ukraine. So involved, in fact, that some in the Ukraine government began investigating how Hunter Biden, a lad with virtually no academic credentials [other than being the son of the Vice President of the United States], was being paid large sums of money. Biden, then the VP, called the Ukraine government and promised to cut off aid to that country if the investigation wasn’t quashed.  What’s even more astounding is that Joe Biden bragged about using his office to interfere with the functioning of a foreign government. It is of little interest, however, that Joe Biden, whose entire adult life was spent as a politician, somehow acquired 3 residences and takes expensive vacations.  Follow the money.

While we’re on the subject of war, ask who it is in the USA that benefits from war. The soldiers? Professional military personnel love to practice their trade. Also, in wartime promotions are more rapid. But we’re not involved in a shooting war other than by helping to supply and pay for others to do the shooting. So the military contractors who make the guns and bullets are happy to make money.  We don’t want to forget the middlemen, those who do the brokering of arms and equipment.

Who benefits if the war continues? All of the above. But what if a new President were to step in and decide, for whatever reason, to stop the war…or at least withdraw US support for Ukraine? The moneyed interests who are profiting would be upset. 

Who has talked about stopping the US support for Ukraine? None other than the current front-running (so the polls tell us) candidate who might win the next election. If we follow the money here, we might discover that many people and organizations that might otherwise be considered either Republicans or classically considered conservative would benefit if Biden were to continue as President and Trump would lose. 

Trump had 4 years to demonstrate his program as President. During that entire time, he was vilified, attacked, prosecuted, betrayed, and subverted by members of the opposition as well as by members of his own party. Then he lost an election. Since losing, Trump has traveled the countryside giving speeches and talking about how he would operate a new Presidency if he were to be elected in 2024. His promises plus his record plus the fact that he is really pissed …all combine to scare the shit out of the Democrats and even many Republicans.

Am I stating this too forcefully? I doubt the language will be foreign to most, but I want to make a point here. Trump becoming the next President of the United States will upset many people, companies, politicians, and members of the government who are not elected but count their paychecks as symbols of their support for the current administration. If you follow the money here, you will be depressed if you are a Trump supporter because the deck is stacked against him. Follow the money. 

What to do? Depends on how much you value your freedom to seek employment based on your talent and ability, how you view the insanity of the so-called climate crisis, whether you believe electric cars are the salvation of civilization, what your pronouns are, and a host of other idiotic nonsense that currently infuses our society. It also depends on what kind of country you seek.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on WHO IS GETTING RICH FROM AMERICA’S SUPPORT OF THE WAR IN THE UKRAINE

BRACE YOURSELF FOR THE UNTHINKABLE AND THE UNIMAGINABLE IN OUR IMMEDIATE FUTURE


A Culture in Collapse

American civilization has been turned upside down,

and we have a rendezvous soon with the once

unthinkable and unimaginable.

By: Victor Davis Hanson

January 8, 2024

In the last six months, we have borne witness to many iconic moments evidencing the collapse of American culture.

The signs are everywhere and cover the gamut of politics, the economy, education, social life, popular culture, foreign policy, and the military. These symptoms of decay share common themes.

Our descent is self-induced; it is not a symptom of a foreign attack or subterfuge. Our erosion is not the result of poverty and want but of leisure and excess. We are not suffering from existential crises of famine, plague, or the collapse of our grid and fuel sources. Prior, far poorer, and war-torn generations now seem far better off than what we are becoming.

What is happening to us is not due to an adherence to a too strict conservative tradition but is almost exclusively the wage of the progressive project.

In short, we are seeing fissures that America has not experienced in our cultural history since the Civil War. The radical Left apparently feels such chaos, anarchy, and nihilism are necessary to topple past norms and customs and thereby adhere to a socialist, equity agenda that no one in normal times would stomach.

Some of the decay is existential and fundamental; some anecdotal and illustrative. But either way, while decline came about gradually over decades, its sudden and abrupt chaos during the three years of Biden’s presidency has shocked Americans.

Financial Implosion

As long as interest rates were de facto zero, both parties ran up gargantuan debt. Now the national debt has hit $34 trillion. But two odd things have also happened under the Biden administration that are beginning to undermine the very existence of the U.S. financial system:

1) Interest rates have soared from de facto zero and are on a trajectory to 5.5%—meaning that the interest on the debt, in theory, in the not too distant future will require 20 percent of the annual budget, squeezing out both entitlements and defense.

2) Yet the upcoming rendezvous with economic Armageddon has not slowed a Biden administration intent on borrowing nearly $2 trillion in the current fiscal year.

The public is baffled: is the Left playing chicken with us? Is the strategy to “gorge the beast,” thereby demanding even higher federal taxes, which, combined with many state taxes, now exceed 50 percent of one’s income?

Is the goal massive “redistribution” by ensuring “equity” by gouging the middle class and rich? Or is the left’s goal more nihilistic: to force a remedy for insolvency by ensuring high inflation, renouncing government debt, or government appropriation of private capital?

Military Crises

Americans have lost deterrence abroad.

Confusion reigns among the public over why the Biden administration fled from Afghanistan, leaving behind billions of dollars of munitions and equipment in the hands of Taliban terrorists. Why did it allow a Chinese spy balloon to traverse the continental U.S. with impunity?

And why did Biden signal to Russia when preparing an invasion of Ukraine that our reaction would depend on the magnitude of Putin’s offensive? Why has military recruitment cratered, shorting the Pentagon of thousands of soldiers?

Why do Iranian proxies attack almost daily U.S. installations abroad and ships in the Red Sea, apparently without fear of reprisal? Why did Hamas slaughter Israelis on October 7? What explains our indifference or ennui?

Is the answer a deliberate effort to curb supposed American “arrogance” by once more leading from behind? Are we rebooting the Obama Administration’s bankrupt idea of empowering an Iranian crescent from Teheran to Damascus to Beirut to Gaza to ensure “creative tension” between Israel and the moderate Arabs and Persian-led theocratic Shiites?

Why do our officer classes rotate in and out of lucrative military consultantships, lobbying billets, and board membership on corporate defense contractors—as if their innate talents rather than their lifelong contacts with current serving procurement officers earned their exorbitant fees?

Why did our retired four stars with disdain violate the uniform code of military justice by serially and publicly trashing the commander-in-chief? Why has the Pentagon revolutionized the entire system of recruitment, promotions, and tenure in the armed forces by predicating them in large part on race, gender, and sexual orientation rather than merit or battlefield efficacy? Did we learn anything from the old Soviet commissariat system? Would we prefer to lose a war by promoting equity than win one by ensuring liberty?

Why did the top brass go after supposedly “insurrectionist” white males (who died at twice their demographics during combat in Iraq and Afghanistan) in the military, only to discover from their own internal investigations that no such cabal of “domestic terrorists” existed, and only to drive out thousands more of the maligned by stupidly requiring COVID vaccinations from those with naturally acquired immunity?

In sum, the U.S. will either undergo a post-Vietnam-like revolution in the military or, in late Roman imperial fashion, our armed forces will be unable to defend the interests or indeed, the very safety, of the U.S.

Race

Why, when so-called non-white ethnicities and races were achieving parity with or exceeding the majority population in per capita income and when racial intermarriage was commonplace, did we blow up the values of the civil rights movement and revert to precivilizational tribalism? Who were the sophists who convinced us that racially segregated dorms, safe spaces, and graduations, or using race as an arbiter of admissions and hiring, was not racist?

When did we lump together an entire cadre of diverse ancestries, ethnicities, religions, politics, classes, and values and dub them all “white,” and then smear them collectively in stereotypical fashion? When did we calibrate race as the chief determinative factor in our identities? Have we become premodern tribal people—feuding clans right out of the Norse sagas, ghosts of the Balkans nursing ancient grievances and hatreds? Since when in history has a nation’s “diversity” ever been preferable to its “unity”?

The Sexes

Did anyone in, say, 2004 believe that in just twenty years, the Left would try to mainstream the previously rare medical malady of gender dysphoria into a transgendered civil rights issue by insisting on three rather than two sexes?

Would anyone have believed that leftists, gays, and feminists would have done their best to destroy a half-century of female athletic achievement by allowing biological males to compete in women’s sports and thereby erase the record performances of three generations of women?

Would anyone have believed that a feminist and accomplished swimmer like Riley Gaines would be cornered, swarmed, threatened, and barricaded in at a university for the crime of daring to state the obvious: that transgendered women are still, in terms of their musculoskeletal physiques and frames, males, and thereby have no business competing in women’s sports?

Would anyone have believed that a gay senate aide would have engaged in passive, unprotected sex in a public and hallowed Senate chamber, filmed in graphic detail his act of sodomy, had it circulated among friends and social media, and then, when outrage followed, claimed victimhood by accusing those offended of being homophobic toward him and his active homosexual partner?

Lawlessness

We are witnessing the steady erasure of jurisprudence, both civil and criminal. Does the law as we knew it a mere decade ago still exist? Massive looting with impunity is now largely exempt from justice in our major blue-state cities. In Compton, a van slams into a Mexican bakery as waiting crowds swarm, loot, and destroy the business. And for what? Some free pies and cakes? Or the nihilist delight in ruining the livelihood of a hardworking family business?

Such smash-and-grabs rob stores of billions of dollars in revenue each year. Can we even comprehend that employees and security guards are now ordered to stand down, as if the apprehension of such thieves might in some way seem illiberal or racist?

Does anyone even care that pro-Hamas protestors—many in America as guests on green cards and student visas—shouted support for the October 7 massacre of Jews, screamed for the destruction of Israel and the Jews in it, shut down the Manhattan and Golden Gate Bridges, defiled the Lincoln Memorial and White House gates, and disrupted Christmas celebrations in our major cities with complete exemption? Is storming the California legislature, and disrupting it in session, now a felony in the manner of those convicted after January 6, or do we have two sets of laws, dependent on ideology, race, and party affiliation?

In one of the most chilling videos in memory, Las Vegas Clark County District Court Judge Mary Kay Holthus was recently violently attacked by an unshackled career felon defendant (with three prior violent felony convictions and facing additional new felony counts). The assailant, Deobra Redden, leaped over the justice’s bench with ease and began beating her and pulling her hair before two bailiffs, with great difficulty, managed to restrain him. Why was Redden out on parole given his violent record, and why was he not shackled given his toxic past? His self-admitted effort to kill the judge, his ability nearly to pull it off, and the record of past leniency accorded him are a commentary on a sick society.

But then again, in our major cities, George-Soros-subsidized prosecutors have all but destroyed civil society. They have been systematically releasing felons with violent criminal records on the same day they are arrested, freeing convicted felons early from prisons and jails, and sabotaging the law by arbitrary enforcement on the grounds that it is inherently either unfair or racist.

The post-civilization civil bookend to that precivilizational subterfuge was a systematic legal effort, for the first time in American history, to remove in an election year the leading primary and general election candidate Donald Trump from various state ballots. The Soviet-like charge was that he was guilty of “insurrection,” a crime with which he has never been charged, much less convicted. Meanwhile, three state prosecutors and one special federal counsel—all leftists and some previously bragging in their own election campaigns of their intention to destroy Trump—have charged candidate Trump with an array of felonies. The vast majority of Americans agree Trump would never have been so charged had he just not sought to seek reelection—or had been a liberal Democrat.

Education

In ancient times, the President of the Harvard Corporation was a signature scholar and intellectual, befitting Harvard’s self-regard as the world’s most preeminent university. No longer.

Now-resigned president Claudine Gay’s meteoric career was based on a flimsy record of a mere 11 articles—the majority of them plagiarized. Her entire career was fueled by the tired pretext that the privileged Gay was somehow deserving of special deference given her race and gender.

Confronted with such corruption, the Harvard Corporation, its legal team, and 700 faculty sought to downplay Gay’s intellectual theft. Indeed, they smeared her critics as racist—only then to deal with her new billet as a professor of Political Science with a long record of plagiarism that was exempt from the sort of punishments dealt out to students and faculty for less egregious defenses.

How did Ivy League degrees so quickly become mostly certifications of ideological and woke orthodoxy? Or is it worse than that? Does a Stanford history major or Yale literature graduate know anything, respectively, about the Civil War or Shakespeare’s plays? Do they even know that we, the public, know that they don’t know?

Was Elizabeth Warren really Harvard’s first law professor of color? Was Claudine Gay truly an impressive and respected scholar of political science? Are the governing members of the Harvard Corporation the nation’s best and brightest?

How in less than five years did our elite universities destroy meritocracy, abolish SAT requirements, require DEI oaths and pledges, and mirror the worst commissariat institutions of the old Warsaw Pact nations and Soviet Union? How and why these elite universities blew themselves up in a mere decade will baffle historians for decades to come.

The End of Sovereignty

The Biden administration has shattered federal immigration law, as some 10 million illegal entries will have crossed unlawfully and with impunity in the first Biden term—all by intent. The southern border is not merely porous; it no longer even exists.

Did the Left want new constituents? New entitlement recipients to grow government and raise taxes on the clingers and deplorables?

Did it want a larger DEI base to replace the steady exodus of non-whites from left-wing agendas? Does it shun sovereignty, preferring a global village without arbitrary borders? Do these utopians in Malibu and Martha’s Vineyard similarly feel their own yards and grounds need no walls, no barriers, and no boundaries to deny the underprivileged their rights to enjoy what the predatory classes possess?

In this new America of ours, Joe Biden is hale and savvy, while Hunter did nothing wrong. Our heroes are Dylan Mulvaney, Gen. Rachel Levine, and the two Sams, Bankman-Fried and Brinton.

In today’s America, Karin Jean-Pierre is truthful, while Alejandro Mayorkas is honest. An innocent and saintly George Floyd was randomly murdered; his death is proof of systemic police racism. And defunding the police brought calm and quiet, in the way our border is secure and the homeless are mere victims.

Dr. Jill is an impressive academic. Oprah and LeBron are the downtrodden and victimized. Gen. Mark Milley is a brave maverick, and so is Adam Schiff. The flight from Afghanistan marked a brilliantly organized retreat.

The Chinese balloon really did not take too many pictures of sensitive areas. January 6 was an armed insurrection, preplanned by fiery conspirators and revolutionaries. Ashli Babbitt deserved to be blasted in the neck for entering a broken window. 

Kamala Harris is a wordsmith. Russian collusion really happened. So did Russian laptop disinformation. Christopher Steele’s dossier was mostly true, in the fashion of Claudine Gay’s dissertation and Barack Obama’s memoir. And 51 former intelligence authorities bravely came forward to offer their expertise in certifying that Hunter’s laptop was cooked up in Moscow.

With all this, what do we think the Iranians, Putin’s Russians, the communist Chinese, the Houthis, Hezbollah, and Hamas now think of the United States?

That we are the nation that won World War II or fled from Afghanistan? Did the eight million who broke our laws and simply walked across our border respect us, fear us, admire us, or come here to manipulate and use us? Did Hamas appreciate the hundreds of millions of dollars we gave them, in the same way Iran was friendlier after we lifted the sanctions?

In sum, American civilization has been turned upside down, and we have a rendezvous soon with the once unthinkable and unimaginable.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

2024 — the Year of our Reckoning

2024—the Year of our Reckoning

By: Victor Davis Hanson

American Greatness

December 25, 2023

We should remember the now-modern proverb of Nixon-era economic advisor Herb Stein to the effect that what cannot go on (without destroying the nation), simply will not go on.

In some sense, the country for recent years has been cruising on the fumes from prior and likely better wiser generations and institutions. In 2024, the tab for our current apathy, toxic politics, and incompetence will come due.

So next year we will likely see the climax to several current dangerous ideas, events, and forces, which finally will either overwhelm us or be addressed and remedied. We live in a Neronian age but can recover if we first understand how we got here and the nature of the suicide we are committing.

In 2023, it became clear, to even the most loyal supporters of the Biden administration, that the U.S. has simply lost or indeed forfeited American deterrence abroad. Our enemies do not fear us; our friends do not trust us; and neutrals do not care either way.

After the 2021 Kabul debacle, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, the 2023 brazen Chinese spy balloon’s uncontested trajectory over the United States, the recent Hamas invasion of Israel, the serial Iranian-fueled terrorist attacks on U.S. installations in the Middle East, and the terrorist Houthis’ veritable absorption of the Red Sea, many of America’s opportunistic enemies drew conclusions and adopted strategies that would have been previously unthinkable.

Either adversaries will be so emboldened to start regional wars—an impotent Iran now brags it will block the entire Mediterranean—or the United States will be shocked into action and have to deter Iran, the Houthis, and Islamic terrorism, while dealing with an opportunistic China eager to annex Taiwan, and Russia determined to finish off Ukraine.

Those challenges will force the military to staunch its recruitment hemorrhaging, rectify low morale, and rearm. Such rebooting in turn will require discarding the woke agenda, stopping the DEI proselytizing and virtue signaling, and returning to a meritocracy focused on military preparedness and battlefield efficacy.

Since January 2021, the Biden administration has flagrantly and unapologetically dismantled federal immigration law. It destroyed the border as we once knew it. It has already greenlighted more than 8 million illegal entrants—with another quarter-million entering each month.

No one in government has offered any projected costs to states and federal agencies of offering health, food, housing, legal, and education subsidies to millions—who broke the law by entering the U.S. and continue to violate it while residing here unlawfully. Is that the sign of a promising American citizen—that the first thing he does upon entering America is to break his host’s law?

Incredibly, no one has even explained to Americans why millions of illegal aliens are exempt from the vaccine mandates, background checks, and adherence to the law that is demanded of U.S. citizens and legal immigrants. We will soon demand “real” IDs of American citizen airline travelers, while we fly illegal aliens all over the states without any identification.

Those who blew up the border can’t honestly even explain to the American people why they did so. Was it to ensure future (or even present) political constituents? Cheap labor? To ensure higher taxes to pay for more government services and to “spread the wealth?” Obeyance to the diversity/equity/inclusion lobbies? To make up for fleeing blue-state population?

The United States has now exceeded, both in real numbers and in percentages, all past numbers of non-native-born American residents—at a time when civic education, the idea of the melting pot, and adherence to assimilation have never been more under assault.

In 2024, either the border will close, or the United States will suffer radical political realignments, sheer chaos in our major cities, protests from Americans furious over the complete flaunting of federal law by their own elected officials, and a likely impeachment of Joe Biden for deliberately forsaking his oath to “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States.”

The October 7 Hamas invasion of Israel and premodern massacring of nearly 1,200 Jews—and the virulent anti-Semitism that swept our elite campuses and big cities even before the October 27 Israeli Defense Forces’ retaliatory invasion of Gaza—was a wakeup call about the racialized hatred and anti-Semitism now endemic on the Left.

Campus protestors dropped the prior protestations that they were not anti-Semitic in their hatred of Israel. Instead, they now call out Jews by name. They disrupt their homes and businesses, regardless of their views on Zionism. Pro-Hamas protestors feel free to harass Jews, and with impunity and arrogance chant genocidal chants promising the destruction of Israel and its Jewish population.

The main campus culprits for these sudden unabashed hatreds are tripartite. First, wealthy, mostly white leftist students—increasingly as ignorant of history as they are arrogant in their zealotry—feel it pays psychological and careerist dividends on campus to mouth orthodoxies of hating Israel and de facto siding with the Hamas killers.

Most have no idea of the Hamas charter, where flows the Jordan River, or what the British Mandate for Palestine or the Balfour Declaration were. Few of the loudest could ever even find Jordan, Israel, the West Bank, or Gaza on a map. No matter: being heard and seen on campus hating Israel is considered a necessary fad like 1970s bellbottoms or pet rocks.

Second, huge numbers of full-tuition-paying Middle Eastern visiting students and green-card holders, along with Gulf-fueled and endowed faculty, assume that they are exempt from any legal consequences. So they often deface the federal monuments of their hosts, shut down traffic, swarm Jews on campus and in the street, break the law, and battle with police—with absolute impunity.

Third, just as startling is the undisguised hatred emanating from radical diversity/equity/inclusion students and faculty. As the declared oppressed, they too feel exempt from any charge that they are mouthing racist and anti-Semitic venom, as they conflate Israel with the now maligned stereotyped “white” people.

The apogee of such extremism was evident in the congressional testimony of three ethically challenged Ivy League presidents. They reminded the nation that no campus president would unequivocally condemn, much less punish, any anti-Semites on campus, who openly called for the destruction of Israel and its Jewish population. And they lied about “free speech” constraints on their punishment of mainstreaming anti-Semitic and genocidal threats—given they routinely expel, censure, and variously punish all sorts of “hate speech,” but only if it is directed against their own DEI constituencies.

All this is not tenable.

Our top universities are facing a perfect storm. Declining pools of students, crushing student loan debt, spiraling tuition and room and board costs, administrative bloat, defecting donors, and the public’s distrust of such people being entrusted with their children’s higher education, will all soon lead to a general reexamination of the very need of these universities in the first place, at least as they are presently constituted.

Their racialist admissions, hiring, retention, and promotion protocols are destroying meritocracy. Their mediocre curricula, grade inflation, and campus polarization have convinced the public that they are no longer deserving of the many taxpayer indulgences that shield campuses from market realities—such as massive federal research grants and subsidies, tax-free billions of dollars in private donations, tax-free endowment income in the tens of billions of dollars, and taxpayer-subsidized $2 trillion in student loans.

So insulated are these atolls of privilege that they cannot recognize growing public anger over the damage they are doing to the country. Iconic Harvard University cannot even fire its DEI president Claudine Gay, despite serial instances in her own past of plagiarism (which prompted Harvard’s sycophantic board to defend her by embracing a new euphemism— “duplicative language” as if to signify the tiny clerical lapse of stealing the ideas and prose of others).

In 2024, radical changes in university administration and values will begin to be made, or higher education will face a reckoning from the public and a newly elected government.

Currently, Colorado has tentatively removed Donald Trump from its 2024 ballot on the specious grounds that he is an “insurrectionist.” Thus, the state insists that he is subject to the 14th Amendment, Section 3 clause of 1868, that calls for the disbarment from future government employment or service those former federal officials and employees who had joined the Confederacy.

Aside from the misapplication of the spirit and letter of that post-Civil War legislation, those responsible for erasing Trump know that he has never been charged with, much less convicted of “insurrection”. And he never will be.

They understand that half the country knows the January 6 “riot” was the work of unarmed, overzealous, and buffoonish protestors, who broke the law by entering the Capitol, but otherwise had no master insurrectionary plan. And the majority surrounding the Capitol did in fact obey the president’s call to protest “peacefully and patriotically.”

The left privately understand that their latest weaponization of government follows their “Russian collusion hoax,” their “laptop disinformation” farce, their two politicized impeachments, their performance-art Mar-a-Lago documents raid, and thus are all part of a systematic degradation of our campaigns, elections, and political customs, tradition, and discourse.

A jaded public knows too well that such punitive measures never applied to the 2016 Hillary Clinton crimes of destroying subpoenaed emails and devices, or the FBI’s illegal alteration of FISA documents or its contracting out social media to suppress news stories, or its hiring of a foreign national Christopher Steele, who compiled a fake “dossier” to destroy the candidacy of Donald Trump.

A majority of Americans further know that had Donald Trump not chosen to run for office in 2024, state and federal prosecutors such as the publicity-seeking and partisan Alvin Bragg, Letitia James, Jack Smith, and Fani Willis would never have indicted him.

All privately know that the entire Biden family, including the President, could just as easily be indicted on state and local felonies, but the Biden consortium finds itself exempt both for its leftist ideology and its current control of the Department of Justice.

What then do the campaign and election of 2024 foreordain?

We will be in entirely new and completely dangerous territory. The likely Republican nominee who currently leads incumbent president Joe Biden will be for most of 2024 the constant target of a coordinated state and local Soviet-like effort to destroy his candidacy before the voters can even vote for or against him in the November election.

The United States’ 2023 annual budget deficit is about $1.7 trillion. The nation is burdened by a $34 trillion national debt—even though the federal government since 2021 has raised all sorts of new income and excise taxes.

The era of printing money, zero interest rates, “modern monetary theory,”and spending wildly is drawing to a close. The mounting interest on the national debt is now crowding out optional but soon essential annual federal spending. At some point soon, one generation of Americans is going to have to exercise spending restraint or accept a continuing decline in its living standards.

In sum, in 2024, we will either see the destruction of presidential electoral politics as we have known them or a complete repudiation of lawfare. The current new normal that the party in power indicts the leading candidate of the opposition is not sustainable or compatible with the idea of America.

Either the military will have to deter dramatically our growing number of opportunistic enemies, or it will descend into something like the French army between the world wars—plagued by ideology, ossified brass, corruption, mediocrity, misplaced investments, and bankrupt strategies.

If there are no radical changes in higher education, our Ivy League and self-identified elite campuses will go the way of Bud-Light, Disney, and Target—once premier brands now reduced to red ink and laughing-stock caricatures.

The United States is cracking under 8 million illegal entries; it cannot sustain another year and 2 million more illegal entrants—or a total of 55-60 million foreign-born residents, with no idea of how many are U.S. citizens, illegal aliens, or green card holders–or how many are employable, or free of criminal records or in need of massive federal and state subsidies.

In 2024, the U.S. will begin to see that to meet its spiraling debt, it will either keep inflating its currency, or slash spending, or raise even further taxes to the degree that even the lower middle class will have to pay 50 percent of its income in state and federal taxes, or renounce its debt, and thus go full-Third World.

Will we meet these challenges or ensure the ongoing decline?

If what we saw after October 7, or the wild and out-of-control reign of weaponized local and state prosecutors, or what we watch nightly on television at the border, or the paralyses we witness abroad of our military, or the breezy way in which our officials promise groups here and abroad billions of dollars in easy money, continues into 2024, then the country as we knew it will become unrecognizable.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on 2024 — the Year of our Reckoning

SHAME ON YOU IF YOU INTENTIONALLY SUPPORT HAMAS

The Shame of Hamas

By: Victor Davis Hanson

December 12, 2023

Almost daily, western news agencies quote “15,000 civilian deaths” caused by the Israel Defense Forces. They once at least used to qualify “according to Hamas authorities.”

Now they don’t even do that much, but employ “Palestinian authorities,”as a euphemism for Hamas liars.

How does Hamas know the roughly exact number of “civilian” causalities, but not the number of Hamas warriors dead? Do surveillance photos reveal vast new civilian cemeteries that could accommodate such a vast count? Or is Hamas burying its terrorist deaths separately?

Did Hamas gain credibility by falsely reporting an Israeli bombing hit on a hospital that killed “500 civilians”? By falsely bragging that there were no tunnel complexes under the hospital. By falsely reporting hostages were killed by Israeli air strikes rather than being passed off to terrorist splinter groups who dispatched them?

Hamas claims simultaneously that:

1) it did not break the ceasefire; 

2) but it boasted about and claimed credit for two terrorist brothers from Jerusalem who murdered four Israelis and injured six during the ceasefire by simply driving down a street, jumping out, and shooting civilians before they were gunned down by off-duty soldiers; 

3) it bragged it had launched more rockets into Israeli civilian centers; and 

4) during the ceasefire Hamas leaders have promised to renew the war and shortly to top the October 7 murdering spree.

Are we thus to assume this is a legitimate entity with which any nation would wish to conduct any sort of negotiations?

What did Kamala Harris, a Middle East expert, mean when she warned Israel, “Too many innocent Palestinians have been killed. Frankly, the scale of civilian suffering and the images and videos coming from Gaza are devastating.” Did she remark on the “devastating” mutilations and decapitations of October 7? What does she think the U.S. military did in Mosul or Fallujah to root out ISIS and Saddamite terrorists other than use “devastating” methods?

One can see how cynically the beleaguered Biden triangulating administration once again outsources an unenviable task for the DEI Kamala Harris, on the expectation that her incompetence will further embarrass her, and thus win public opinion to whatever position is the exact opposite of her advocacy. As she weighs in to empathize with the pro-Hamas crowd, her nonsense only further discredits them.

What does Antony Blinken mean when he reportedly said to the Israeli government, “I don’t think you have the credit for that” in response to Israeli promises to spend necessary months to destroy Hamas? Did he mean, “If you put us in an embarrassing situation with our Arab-Muslim constituencies, we will cut off arms to you”?

But did Congress not pass a massive aid bill for Israel? And did not Blinken’s Party once impeach Donald Trump for delaying military aid to Ukraine to leverage the Ukrainian government to audit its corrupt government agencies that were buying influence into the Biden family, which in exchange had offered protection money by firing nosy prosecutors?

So, is Blinken predicating the sending of congressionally approved vital help to Israel based on what he feels are domestic political considerations in an election year—such as, further Israeli attacks alienate Arab-Muslim voters, who promise in turn not to vote for Biden, so Blinken warns Israel they have limited “credit”?

Here is the bottom line. The Middle East will blow up if Hamas is not destroyed—even as Europeans, moderate Arabs, and the U.S. population all desire its end. But to see Hamas gone will be a media circus that will spark protests throughout the world and likely violence. Everyone knows that if police broke up such violent riots, deported law-breaking resident aliens, and charged citizens for their illegality, the violence would stop.

And everyone knows if Hamas is dismantled, Hezbollah will do nothing. Iran will do nothing, and the Arab nations will do nothing—other than be relieved.

So, everybody knows the cure for the Hamas evil and its supporters, and no one wishes to apply the short-term medicine.

How the Biden administration figured that Hamas’s survival is in the interest of the United States, or that allowing thousands to come from the terrorist nations of the Middle East into the U.S. is wise immigration policy, or sending embargoed money to Iran is necessary, make no sense other than either Biden’s team is utterly incompetent or feel Israel’s enemies are more important to us alive and active than Israel being stuck in perpetual danger.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on SHAME ON YOU IF YOU INTENTIONALLY SUPPORT HAMAS

IN CASE YOU DID NOT NOTICE, I HATE TO INFORM YOU THAT THERE ARE UNHINGED PEOPLE AMONG US

e Unhinged Among Us

By: Victor Davis Hanson

American Greatness

November 30, 2023

October 7 should have been an open-and-shut case of moral condemnation.

During peace and holiday, invading Hamas gunmen murdered, tortured, mass raped, decapitated, and mutilated some 1,200 Israelis. The vast majority were unarmed women, children, infants, and the elderly.

The cowardly murderers proudly filmed their atrocities and then fled back to Gaza—to cheers from the Gaza street.

Before Israel even retaliated, the mass murder of Jews earned praise from the Middle East, the international hard left, and especially the faculty and students of elite Western campuses.

When the Israeli Defense Forces struck back, the killers dispersed to the safety of their multibillion-dollar subterranean cities. The cowardly elite architects of the mass murder fled to Arab sanctuaries in Lebanon and Qatar.

From its headquarters burrowed below hospitals, mosques, and schools, Hamas bartered hostages for a reprieve from the IDF and the release of its own convicted terrorists in Israeli jails.

Hamas shot any of its own supporters who refused to shield Hamas gunmen.

It continued launching rockets at Israeli civilian centers. It serially lied about its casualties, expropriating intended relief food and fuel for its underground tunnel city of killers.

Abroad, Hamas supporters also emulated the methods of the pro-Nazi demonstrators in Western cities of the 1930s. Unlike their pro-Israel critics, the pro-Hamas demonstrators in the U.S. and Europe turned violent.

They took over and defaced private and public property. They chanted genocidal anti-Semitic slogans calling for erasure of the nation of Israel.

They interrupted shoppers, blocked highways, attacked businesses, and swarmed bridges. They assaulted the police.

The majority wore masks to hide their identities in the fashion of anti-semitic Klansmen.

Why did the doctrinaire left, the youth of the Democratic Party, and the campuses outdo each other in their anti-semitic venom toward Israel?

For the first time in their lives, many of the ignorant protestors suddenly professed concern about refugees, colonialism, disproportionality, innocent civilians, and the rules of war.

But none could explain why the Palestinians who fled Israel in 1947-48 still self-identify as victimized “refugees” when 900,000 Jews ethnically cleansed from Middle-East Arab cities about the same time do not.

The 200,000 Greek Cypriots driven out from northern Cyprus by Turkey apparently do not warrant “refugee’’ status either.

Few protestors knew that Jews have lived in present-day Israel for over three millennia. The longest colonialist presence there was Muslim Turks who brutally ran the Holy Land for 300 years until they lost World War I and were expelled.

How exactly did the eighth-century A.D. Al-Aqsa Mosque happen to be built within King Herod’s earlier Second Temple enclosure?

The Pro-Hamas crowd has little appreciation that colonizing Arab Muslims has one of history’s longest records of “settling” other countries far from their historic birthland.

They “settled” and “colonized” the Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine Middle East, Berber North Africa, and southern Spain. Millions of Middle Easterners migrated to—“settled?”— supposedly infidel European cities, where they often self-segregate and do not assimilate fully with their magnanimous hosts.

As far as “disproportionality,” it is the goal of every power at war, Hamas included.

What protestors are furious about is that Israel is more effective at being disproportionate in retaliation than Hamas and its Iranian supporters were in their preemptive mass murdering.

Targeting innocent civilians? Hamas is among the current greatest offenders in the world.

It rockets Israeli cities without warning. It mass murders Jews in their beds during peace. It exposes Gazans to mortal danger by impressing them as human shields. Hamas shoots those who refuse.

The “rules of war” are violated by Hamas daily. Such protocols require combatants to wear uniforms not to blend in with civilians, not to use them as shields, not to murder noncombatants, not to rape them, not to mutilate them, and not to execute civilians without trial.

Why then would millions ally themselves with this odious reincarnation of the SS?

Are they ignorant of the history of the Middle East?

Are they arrogant since few challenge their hate and threats?

Are they opportunists who feel mouthing anti-Western shibboleths gains them career traction in leftist-run media, academia, and popular culture?

Are they bullies who count on the Western silent majority remaining quiet as they disrupt lives, trash Western tolerant culture, and commit violence?

Like Hamas that they support, do they despise Jews? Why else do they express an existential hatred toward Israelis that they never display to any other group?

Those now on the street utter not a peep about the Sudanese Arab mass killers in Darfur, Chinese oppressors of the Muslim Uighurs, Russians targeting civilians in Ukraine, or ISIS, Syrian, and Yemeni murderers of fellow Muslims.

Yet all of these terrorist killers are guilty of the very charges the protestors falsely attribute to Israel. But they are all not Jewish—and that explains the pass given them by our anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas street.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on IN CASE YOU DID NOT NOTICE, I HATE TO INFORM YOU THAT THERE ARE UNHINGED PEOPLE AMONG US

WHAT WERE THE HAMAS MONSTERS THINKING?

What Were the Hamas 

Monsters Thinking?

Victor Davis Hanson
American Greatness

November 27, 2023

We know the multifaceted strategy of the monstrous Hamas operation of October 7.

In precivilizational fashion, it wished to kill and mutilate the most vulnerable of all Israeli civilians and thus to shock the world that it was capable of—and proud about— anything, from decapitation to necrophilia. Such animalistic savagery, in the reckoning of Western therapeutic society, was supposed to be seen as forced upon Hamas murderers by the “occupation.”

The killers felt they would shock the Israelis into concessions given their eagerness to commit the unspeakable. They took captives for tripartite reasons: to barter children and the elderly for their kindred terrorist murderers in Israeli jails; to use captives to force the Israelis to grant cease-fires and pauses in their retaliation; and to bank them as shields to protect Hamas kingpins from retaliation.

Hamas invaded during a holiday in the early hours, in a time of peace, and on the iconic 50th-anniversary of the Yom Kippur surprise Arab attack. They aimed to prove that  Israeli soil was for the first time porous and 2,000 killers could enter sacred Israeli ground with impunity and kill in one day more Jewish civilians than on any day since the Holocaust.

The terrorists shot thousands of rockets into Israel to overwhelm the Iron Dome and terrify the entire civilian population.

All these tactics were aimed at long-term strategic goals: 

ü stop the Abraham Accords; 

ü obey the directives of Hamas’s Iranian terrorist masters as payment for their arms; discredit the radical Palestine Authority and Arab moderate nations as anemic in their opposition to the supposedly shared hated Zionist entity; 

ü and prompt an Israeli response that by necessity would involve collateral damage to human shields, and schools, mosques, and hospitals atop subterranean Hamas headquarters.

Yet if we know their despicable methods, aims, and strategies, why did they think the civilized world would support their barbarity or at least excuse it?

One, Hamas assumed anti-Semitism was prevalent throughout the West and was canonical in the Middle East. Palestinian authorities count on the fact that being an enemy of the Jews of Israel wins them empathy of the world and creates their own unique rules of passive-aggressive victimhood.

So Palestinians demand to be the only “refugees” in the world—not Greek Cypriots, Eastern European Germans, Prussians, Kurds, Armenians, and certainly not a million Jews cleansed from the Arab Middle East.

Israelis are to be “settlers,” not millions of Middle Easterners who surge and settle into the West, form resistance communities, sneer at integration and assimilation, and use Western liberality to protect and project their own illiberality.

Second, Hamas relies on useful Western idiots. It understands its terrorists repel the majority of Americans. But it figures Western and globalist institutions—academia, the media, popular culture—in their wealth, ignorance, and self-importance, alleviate guilt and find resonance by mouthing the shibboleths of the “underdog.”

In particular, Hamas understands that the Palestinian cause has fused with the leftwing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion industry. Thus Hamas becomes the Middle-East counterpart to BLM, aggrieved minorities, and, more preposterously, the trans/gay/feminist movement. Meanwhile, Israelis are recalibrated as the demonized Western “colonialist” white supremacists.

Third, the Islamic expatriate populations of Europe and the U.S. have soared. In the strange logic of the Middle Easterner in the West—on a green card, or a student visa, or either as an illegal alien or a first-generation immigrant—he will envision the magnanimity of Americans and Europeans who offered him refuge from the violence, hatred, tyranny, racism, sexism, terrorism, and violence of his homeland all too often as weakness to be manipulated, not as generosity to be appreciated much less reciprocated.

Middle Eastern expatriates brag of their growing numbers and the political clout that Islam accrues in liberal democracies, without a clue of their hypocrisy of supporting illiberal tyrannies whose violence drove them out to the West in the first place.

So, we watch Middle Easterners in the U.S. trying to ruin iconic events such as crashing “Black Friday” shopping, disrupting the New York Thanksgiving parade, or tearing down American flags on Veterans’ Day.

Only in America would the Iranian terrorist theocracy’s ex-ambassador to the UN, Mohammad Jafar Mahallati, be accorded a professorship at Oberlin or a former top diplomat for the Iranian regime Seyed Hossein Mousavian land a coveted billet at Princeton.

From such perches, these expatriates are free to promote pro-Hamas, Iranian, anti-Semitic—and anti-American—agendas. They consider their hosts not so much tolerant as stupid, in the sense that any American expatriate in Iran who whispered criticism of the theocratic regime would either be hanged or used as a barter hostage. Why would those whose careers were devoted to demonizing and harming the United States from their coveted billets in Iran even wish to move to the Great Satan, while keeping warm relations with their theocratic kingpins in Tehran?

Four, behind all these considerations, is the reality of terrorism and the fear it instills in the West, given the 21st century history of Middle Easterners slaughtering thousands of Americans and Europeans. In crude terms, Hamas and its terrorist affiliates signal us, “damn Israel or be prepared for another 9/11.”

Five, Hamas is a death cult, an updated terrorist version of the more organized SS—with the qualifier that it broadcasts rather than hides its savagery.

Radical Palestinians brag that they love death more than Israel loves life. So they count on Israel giving up three convicted terrorists for one elderly or young captive, on targeting civilians with rockets while Israelis drop leaflets warning of their bombing attacks, on coercing human shields that they assume Israel will avoid, on sanctioning raping, mutilating, and beheading in a way Israel would never conceive of reciprocating in kind, and on and on.

So will all these tactical and strategic methods work? For all the UN, media, and globalist support for Hamas, still perhaps not.

October 7 was a declaration by Hamas that all barbarity imaginable was now fair game. Yet its sheer evil has unleashed the IDF that perhaps not even Joe Biden, hostages, and “world opinion” can permanently stop.

For all the boasts about loving death, it was Hamas who cowardly murdered the unarmed, scampered back to the safety of their tunnels, and used their own kindred Gazans to shield them from death—delivered to them by supposed nerds who love life too much.

Europeans also have had it with unlimited immigration from the Middle East. Restrictionist politicians throughout Europe are ascending as never before, in Greece, Ireland, Italy, Germany, Holland, Spain, and Sweden.

They all reflect growing public anger that Europeans are hated by the very people who seek them out and wish to destroy their Enlightenment institutions by manipulating and discrediting them.  The thousands who hit the streets to cheer on October 7 and damn their hosts only confirm a growing global consensus—in the West, Latin America, Asia, and even throughout the Middle East—that admitting migrants from Palestine or Gaza, or their supporters, is a veritable death wish.

Pro-Hamas protestors calling Joe Biden “Genocide Joe” and boasting about the Arab or Muslim vote in Michigan is incoherent. Not only do harassing Thanksgiving shoppers and parades, disrupting iconic American holidays and events, swarming highways and bridges, and preying on Jews alienate Americans. But also taking credit for ensuring Biden’s defeat will only distance the Democratic establishment, such as it is, from its embarrassing, loud, but ultimately relatively impotent Islamic constituency.

Shouting for mass death “From the River to the Sea” does not endear the pro-Hamas crowd to half of their fellow Democrats, much less unabashedly strutting their anti-Semitism. The current overt support for Hamas, in other words, has revealed to the nation the bankruptcy of the entire pro-Hamas/DEI base of the Democratic Party and will do much to ensure a conservative president in 2024.

And that president will likely deport anyone on a green card or student visa promoting Hamas terrorism, or violating U.S. law while ensuring a travel ban from terrorist supporting regimes in the Middle East. Such measures will win overwhelming public support, despite media and academic outrage.

Strategically, Iran, Hamas, and the Palestinians may seem to have flummoxed Israel into endless concessions by metering out hostages for serial pauses. But again, no Israeli government can retain power by allowing the mass murdering Hamas to survive and so it will not.

Despite all the blood-curdling rhetoric of Hezbollah and Iran, neither will attack Israel or U.S. assets in force, given no American president could afford not to retaliate disproportionately. And “disproportionately” would mean rendering Iran’s military and Hezbollah to something akin to the current status of Hamas.

So for now, Hamas and its American-residing apologists are full of themselves and feel they are leveraging and manipulating the West. But such haughtiness may be a delusion. Hamas in the Middle East and its enablers in Europe and America have done more to harm the Palestinian cause and the idea of Middle Eastern immigration to the West than at any time since 9/11.

It is hard to anger Westerners but continue the death chants, the violent demonstrations, the creepy anti-Semitism, and the proud support for the Hamas bloodwork of October 7, and they will be surprised at the growing anger of otherwise postmodern Europeans and distracted Americans.

Just as Israel realizes that there is no living with Hamas killers, so the West is learning that it can no longer sustain universities that despise the culture that nourishes it or Middle Eastern immigrants, visiting students, and residents that use the gift of freedom and tolerance to promote their abhorrent anti-Semitism, violence, intolerance—and, yes, hatred of their generous hosts.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on WHAT WERE THE HAMAS MONSTERS THINKING?

FRANCIS DID NOT HAVE GRAVE CAUSE TO DEPOSE BISHOP STRICKLAND, ERGO

The Pope Cannot Depose Bishops Without Grave Cause

 Antonio Francés, PhD November 28, 2023 0 Comments

Editor’s note: in light of the recent news that the Holy Father, after deposing Bishop Strickland, now allegedly intends to move against Cardinal Burke (again), we present this study in conjunction with Fr. Murray’s recent analysis of the Strickland case. 

Father Charles Murray has excellently analyzed the canonical side of Bp. Strickland’s removal. He has demonstrated that the guarantee of due process has been violated. Canon 196 and other related canons were masterfully explained. I myself published a different article that I wrote before having read Father Murray’s analysis. I saw the issue from a different angle. But I find that now it is expedient to combine the two perspectives.

Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

The first point that I think must be highlighted is that canon 196, concerned with “privation from office,” is within a chapter of the Code referred to “Provision of ecclesiastical offices” in general. In addition to canon 196, one can read in the same chapter canons 192 and 193 concerning “removal” from office. According to canon 193, “A person cannot be removed from an office conferred for an indefinite period of time except for grave causes and according to the manner of proceeding defined by law.” When applying these canons to a bishop of a particular Church one must have in mind the particularities of the office.

A bishop of a particular church, according to the very Code of Canon Law, “by divine institution succeed to the place of the Apostles through the Holy Spirit who has been given to them” (canon 375 n. 1). Moreover, bishops receive the function of sanctifying, teaching and governing “through episcopal consecration itself” (Canon 375, n. 2). This means that, although according to current canon (human) law, the bishops of the Latin Church are appointed by the pope, their authority derives from divine institution and is received directly from God, not from the pope.

This fact is clear in the Gospel and in the documents of the Second Vatican Council, as we will briefly examine. But an important point that Father Murray has pointed out but not explored in depth is that “this new Code could be understood as a great effort to translate […] the conciliar ecclesiology into canonical language” (John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Sacrae Disciplinae Leges). This obviously means that the Code must be understood and explained in the light of the documents of the Second Vatican Council.

Moreover, the Code must reflect “the distant patrimony of law contained in the books of the Old and New Testament from which is derived, as from its first source, the whole juridical-legislative tradition of the Church” (ibid.):

Christ the Lord, indeed, did not in the least wish to destroy the very rich heritage of the Law and of the Prophets which was gradually formed from the history and experience of the People of God in the Old Testament, but He brought it to completion (cf. Mt. 5:17), in such wise that in a new and higher way it became part of the heritage of the New Testament. Therefore, although St. Paul, in expounding the Paschal Mystery, teaches that justification is not obtained by the works of the Law, but by means of faith (cf. Rom. 3:28; Gal. 2:16), he does not thereby exclude the binding force of the Decalogue (cf. Rom. 13:28; Gal. 5:13-25; 6:2), nor does he deny the importance of discipline in the Church of God (cf. 1 Cor. chapters 5, 6).

Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

For this reason,

besides containing the fundamental elements of the hierarchical and organic structure of the Church as willed by her divine Founder, or as based upon apostolic, or in any case most ancient, tradition, and besides the fundamental principles which govern the exercise of the threefold office entrusted to the Church itself, the Code must also lay down certain rules and norms of behavior.

Thus, we must examine what Revelation tells us concerning the authority of the bishops, and what the Second Vatican Council has taught us concerning the content of Revelation on this very point, in order to judge the removal of a bishop.

The Gospel teaches us that Christ gave to all the Apostles the right to judge: “whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 18:18). Simon received this power first and above all, but as Scripture shows, the other Apostles received it as well. Moreover, when the dispute at Antioch took place, in the Council of Jerusalem, Peter and James spoke almost as equals because, although Peter has power over the whole Church, James was then the bishop in Jerusalem (see Acts 15:6-21). Again, in Corinth the jurisdiction of Peter and Paul seems to have overlapped, perhaps because Corinth was a Roman colony (1 Cor. 1:12).

The Apostolic Canons contain a similar teaching: the local bishop has his own authority distinct from that of the Metropolitan, although in important matters he needs the approval of the Metropolitan.

Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

According to both Scripture and Tradition, then, and according to the Second Vatican Council, the bishop has a native jurisdiction that cannot be taken away by the Pope, except in a case where the bishop has committed a grave crime and must be punished by the universal visible head of the Church, as Father Murray indicates. The difference with other ecclesiastical offices is that by the very nature of the bishop’s office he cannot be removed unjustly because he is free to use his native jurisdictional power to oppose an arbitrary and openly tyrannical act of the pope. No other ecclesiastical office enjoys this native power of divine institution besides the pope. In that way it would be better to see the pope as a special case of what is true of all bishops than to see the pope as radically other than they, and thus, to empty bishops of their Christ-conferred apostolic authority, which the canons of the Church acknowledge and must respect by natural and divine law.

The Second Vatican Council sheds further light over this issue in its Apostolic Constitution Lumen Gentium:

Bishops, as vicars and ambassadors of Christ, govern the particular churches entrusted to them by their counsel, exhortations, example, and even by their authority and sacred power, which indeed they use only for the edification of their flock in truth and holiness, remembering that he who is greater should become as the lesser and he who is the chief become as the servant. This power, which they personally exercise in Christ’s name, is proper, ordinary and immediate, although its exercise is ultimately regulated by the supreme authority of the Church, and can be circumscribed by certain limits, for the advantage of the Church or of the faithful. In virtue of this power, bishops have the sacred right and the duty before the Lord to make laws for their subjects, to pass judgment on them and to moderate everything pertaining to the ordering of worship and the apostolate.

The pastoral office or the habitual and daily care of their sheep is entrusted to them completely; nor are they to be regarded as vicars of the Roman Pontiffs, for they exercise an authority that is proper to them, and are quite correctly called “prelates,” heads of the people whom they govern. Their power, therefore, is not destroyed by the supreme and universal power, but on the contrary it is affirmed, strengthened and vindicated by it, since the Holy Spirit unfailingly preserves the form of government established by Christ the Lord in His Church (27).

This long citation is necessary in order to make it clear that, whatever else may be the case, the Code of Canon Law may not be interpreted in a way that changes the divine constitution of the Church. A fortiori, the pope, even if in some sense he is above canon law as the one who promulgates it, has no right to act against the principles of natural and divine law that the Code embodies and particularizes. When he acts against the provisions set forth in the Code, he demonstrates his unwillingness to be bound by the deeper and immutable law that canon law exists to serve. He demonstrates, in short, contempt for rights and duties, which is the definition of an unjust ruler or, in the ancient title, a tyrant.

For all these reasons, the universal power of jurisdiction possessed by the pope cannot annul and destroy the native power of the local bishop, as would be the case if the pope could whimsically remove any bishop without due process, stated grave cause, and the opportunity for defense, as Francis has now done with many successors of the Apostles. It is tragic that these men have not exercised their God-given rights and duties by resisting the false and injurious exercise of the primacy of Peter.

Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

The time has come when bishops have to withstand the current arbitrary use of power by the Roman See, because this resistance is required by the need to preserve divine Revelation, as the case of Bp. Strickland has made exceedingly clear. This means that no bishop should comply with a “dismissal” that is not the result of a canonical procedure in which a grave crime committed by the bishop himself (not any of his inferiors) has been fully proved. And “grave crime” is not a concept that Francis can manipulate ad libitum: it must be connected with the fundamental tenets of the revealed divine Laws (of the Old and New Testaments) and/or with the keeping of divine Revelation and the office of sanctification.

Jesus Christ Himself is calling the faithful bishops to be brave and to withstand this most subtle attack against the divine constitution of the Church. What is at stake here is not just the “guarantee of due process.” This attack is directed against the structure that He Himself established. It is an attack that is perhaps fulfilling the ancient prophecy by Leo XIII:

Most cunning enemies have filled with bitterness and drenched with gall the Church, the Spouse of the Lamb without spot, and have lifted impious hands against all that is most sacred in it. Even in the holy place where the See of Blessed Peter and the chair of truth was set up to enlighten the world, they have raised the abominable throne of their impiety…[1]

Photo credit.

Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

[1] The New Raccolta, or Collection of Prayers and Good Works to which the Sovereign Pontiffs Have Attached Holy Indulgences, from the 3rd Italian edition (Philadelphia: Peter F. Cunningham & Son, 1903), 365.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Antonio Francés, PhD

Antonio Francés, PhD

Antonio Francés is an academic from the Americas.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on FRANCIS DID NOT HAVE GRAVE CAUSE TO DEPOSE BISHOP STRICKLAND, ERGO