SHEIK Ahmed el-Tayeb, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar University in Cairo and chief scholar of Sunni Islam, has been the object of friendly overtures by “Pope” Francis, including a warm meeting (above) two months ago.

The sheik recently reiterated his belief, based on the Koran, that all apostates — including converts to Christianity — should be killed. See more here, at Mahound’s Paradise.

I HIGHLY recommend this recent interview with Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad. He contends the United States government and its allies never intended to defeat the country’s terrorists, including ISIS, but has sought to manage them in the hope of toppling him.

IN THIS lull between reports of massacres and terrorist events, I would like to suggest strategies for dealing with these extremely alarming and disturbing incidents, events which are having such a profound effect on our world. Surely, there will be more.

“Conspiracy” researchers will continue to investigate each and every report, but it takes time for them to sift through it all. They commit inevitable mistakes and blunders, and sometimes seem to suggest that everything in the news is disinformation. Everything in the news is not disinformation. Deception is embedded in truth. Perhaps you reject all of their skepticism and have a rock-solid confidence in the non-existence of mass manipulation. In any event, most people do not have time or energy to apply a searing skepticism to the news and find out what is true and what is false.

In light of this, consider responding in the following way whenever a mass shooting or terrorist event occurs:

* Follow written reports (or none at all) and avoid imagery, which is more emotionally powerful and prone to manipulation. Obviously those researching the media presentation of these events must look at the imagery, but you don’t need to if you don’t want to get caught up in the details or fear falling into a universal skepticism that is confusing.

* Reject “gun control.” The solution is armed citizens, not “gun control.” School massacres can be prevented by a minority of armed teachers or administrators trained in the use of firearms.

* Reject increased security. Protest it. Refuse the police state. Reject empowerment of the profit-making security industrial complex. People are making vast sums of money off our fears and have a financial stake in inflaming them. Enhanced security and surveillance demoralize, dehumanize and create a climate of constant tension by their very existence and pose an extreme threat to our liberties.

* Reject all international military solutions to domestic terror events and all interference in the affairs of other countries. Too many good and decent soldiers and hundreds of thousands of civilians have lost their lives in the “War on Terror,” which is not in our national interest.

* Reject fear. Pray for confidence and hope.

We can defeat “terror.” With truth, patience, confidence and heroism, we can prevail.

THERE IS no precedent in American history for the number of civilian mass shootings that have occurred — 16 so far this year — under Obama. Dave Gahary reports on the issue at American Free Press. There is also no precedent for Obama’s politicization of shootings. Ironically, gun sales have soared. Read More »

SOMETHING TO explore and ponder: A “public honor-based credit system where everyone is his own central banker.”

ESCAPE from this hectic world and all its distractions. Here is one of nature’s most beautiful sounds: the song of the wood thrush, recorded in the Smoky Mountains. (See “Thrush Hollow”)

FROM The Anti-New York Times:

It is always as amusing as it is aggravating to witness the speed with which the intolerant atheists of the political Left can, when the situation calls for it, suddenly switch on a dime and profess such love and empathy for Christianity and, in this case, Islam. The latest display of this hypocrisy is evident in the sudden “rock star” status bestowed upon one Khizr Khan, father of Humayun Saqib Muazzam Khan, a Pakistani-Muslim-American soldier killed in the Iraq War, in 2004.

In this article by Maggie Haberman (cough cough) and Richard Oppel (cough cough), Papa Khan is cast as the righteous victim-hero who dares to defy the evil anti-Muslim bigot who would be King. Whether Papa Khan knows it or not, this is just a goof-ball script straight out of Hollywood. Sulzberger’s Slimes and the Demonrat Party couldn’t possibly care any less about some dead Muslim soldier or his offended parents. Papa Khan is either a pathetic fool who can’t see that he is being used, or there are some shekels coming his way in gratitude for the “historic” anti-Trump speech which he delivered during last week’s Demonrat Convention in Filthydelphia. Bravo, Papa Khan, bravo — and a shout-out to Mama Khan for her silent pictures routine.

Regular readers of The Anti-New York Times are aware of our disdain for Orange Man’s [Donald Trump’s] ignorant obsession with the fictional phenomenon that he insists we must call “radical Islamic terrorism.” However, in this particular case, we are compelled to defend Orange Man from the nasty attacks of this ignorant alien buffoon who seems to believe that his loss affords him some special moral authority that absolves him of the burden of logical thinking. Sorry Khan-Man — nobody gets a logic pass at The Anti-New York Times!

[cont.] Read More »

This man went through the torturous and discriminatory process of obtaining a photo ID.

IT was bad enough that the bigots of North Carolina, wrongly thinking that they were living in a democracy, passed a law excluding men from women’s restrooms. They also all but ordered mass lynchings by attempting to enact legislation that required photo identification for voters at the polls.

Yes, the evil, white bogeymen of North Carolina, who irrationally persist in thinking they can make their own laws, hold the hateful belief that even their black citizens are intelligent and capable enough to acquire photo identification. 

A federal appeals court last week threw out a North Carolina law requiring ID (funny, how federal judges can just do that). The judges, who just happen to represent the party that would most benefit from black voter fraud, came perilously close to saying that the people of North Carolina are haters and nothing they do or say can ever redeem them. In code language that everyone understands, that’s exactly what they said. Writing for the court, Judge Diana Motz, said the voter ID law showed “an inextricable link between race and politics in North Carolina” and targeted blacks with “surgical precision,” as if the law, which applied to whites too, was an actual bomb. (We know there isn’t an inextricable link between race and politics in, say, New York City.)

Here are the thoughts of Governor Pat McGrory, nothing but a modern-day incarnation of a slave driver:

“Photo IDs are required to purchase Sudafed, cash a check, board an airplane or enter a federal courtroom,” Mr. McCrory said. “Yet three Democratic judges are undermining the integrity of our elections while also maligning our state.”

The intention behind the law was rotten, said the federal court. It does not matter that voter ID is a common sensical check against fraud that every state should adopt no matter how white or black it is. It does not matter that government and charities can help those who are poor obtain ID. What matters is that North Carolinians are bigots.

The Washington Post found absolute proof that the law was made with devious racial hatred in mind. The smoking gun? Voter fraud does not exist. Get that? Reports of voter fraud are as common as reports of abduction by space aliens. Of course, perpetrators of voter fraud immediately call the League of Women Voters to report what they have done. “Hello? Is this the League of Women Voters? Hi, I would like to report that I have just voted on behalf of my friend, Johneesha, for 50 bucks.” People are sooner abucted by Martians than agree to spend half an hour voting for someone else for a certain amount of cash.

The Exploiter of Blacks insists the black man is capable enough to attend any university, and yet says he is not intelligent or capable enough to obtain a simple voter ID.  It’s actually racist to think blacks are capable. But that’s not surprising. The pursuit of “racial equality” is not intended to treat black Americans with dignity, but to use them as pawns in the political conquest of America by …. those who are as white as snow.

What will the evil people of North Carolina do next?

Heaven only knows.

Perhaps they will pass a law — hateful to the core — saying two plus two equals four! Read More »

A POLICE wife, in this touching post, describes her fears, anxieties and happiness.

“THE ‘DAD’ DOCUMENTARY,” produced by Karen Hogkins, is an Australian film about the pervasive injustices against fathers. It includes heartbreaking stories. There are no serious penalties for false charges against a father in custody disputes.

Secular democracy, with its totalitarian family courts, unleashes demons within families. Men, women and children are victims. Read More »

THE ideological pursuit of racial equality at all costs has once again led to chaos. It was an unusually chaotic year in the schools of St. Paul, Minnesota, where teachers were increasingly under attack by out-of-control black students and could not discipline them because of Superintendent Valeria Silva’s efforts to keep black disciplinary rates on par with those of whites.

Katherine Kersten writes at The Federalist:

Fortunately for St. Paul’s children, the city’s parents and teachers were able to hold Silva democratically accountable. But the federal government is now imposing Silva-style “racial equity” discipline policies on school districts around the country under a “disparate impact” interpretation of civil rights law. When these districts experience increased violence and disorder, citizens there will be powerless to stop the debacle.

The greatest victims will be the poor and minority children in whose names these policies are imposed, but who will now be expected to learn in a chaotic environment where learning has become impossible.

Read More »

Novus Ordo Watch reports on the “Catholic” Woodstock in Cracow, Poland.

AS Hillary Clinton prepares to become the first female presidential candidate tonight, it behooves us to ponder how history might have been different. Weep, dear reader, yes — but ponder too. If Hillary had done what she said she scorned to do — stayed home and baked cookies — things would still be bad, but maybe not quite so awful.

In 1992, during her husband’s presidential campaign, Hillary was asked why she did not suspend her career while her husband was governor of Arkansas, starting in 1978. (Things were so relatively normal back then that people actually asked these questions of ambitious, ruthless women.)

She could have said,

“I decided not to stay home and have more children and raise my family properly,” but instead she said,

“I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession.”

The wording is important. Though she denied it, her words were a definite put-down of the domestic vocation. What kind of woman believes that caring for one’s home and family can be reduced to baking cookies? Yes, many young children ardently wish that motherhood could be reduced to baking cookies — again and again, to the utter exclusion of things like meatloaf and steamed carrots — but only a woman who is callous, perhaps innately or perhaps because of her own feminist indoctrination, toward children and men, could believe such a thing possible. Only a woman who is clueless or willfully deceitful about the many demands of running a home, let alone a gubernatorial mansion, could make such a put-down. But that’s not important now; only the self-loathing woman would be offended. What is important is that Hillary could have been a great baker of cookies, instead of a psychopathic politician who bragged of killing another nation’s leader and has been connected with unethical conduct ever since she was a lawyer investigating Watergate.

Who knows how many people might have sincerely enjoyed her cookies and her teas? She could have been a brilliant and charming hostess, if she put her mind to it. She likely would have killed no one with her cookies, which, realistically, would have been baked by paid servants anyway. We might not be on the verge of World War III if she had just dedicated herself to cookies.

In so many ways, Hillary embodies the worst of feminism: its dangerous, disinhibiting, liberating belief in the moral infallibility of women and its approval of every female worldly accomplishment, no matter the private sacrifice. Bill very probably would have been a philanderer no matter what Hillary did, but, seriously, what did he have to go home to? I mean, not everyone wants to talk about work all the time. The two are a political team. They are partners in crime, I believe, but whatever your politics surely you agree these two are not a married couple in the normal sense of the term.

Feminism overdevelops the female will, turning it too often into a devouring tyrant. It encourages women to  overlook their own potential for wrong. Christians call that potential Original Sin, from which feminists believe women are exempt. Eve ate no apple in their garden, but Adam most certainly did. So many women have been “liberated” to do wrong by their feminist miseducation, including yours truly, that the casualties are countless. Feminism liberated women all right. It liberated them from the truth about themselves. It is partly because of this sense of the moral infallibility of women and her belief in the meaninglessness of their domestic lives that Hillary believes the ends justify the means. And one of those ends is the complete undoing of the sacred compact between men and women in marriage. Make no mistake about it, little mother and little, loving cookie-baker: Hillary has contempt for you no matter how much she clothes herself in pro-female sloganeering. She wants to tear you away from your husband and children and home. She has been a devout proponent of population control and the anti-human LGBTQPTAZ agenda all over the world. Like all socialists, she wants you to be loyal to the government first. Like all capitalists, she wants you to care for things more than spirit.

Hillary is a one woman, exhaustive argument against feminism. No matter what happens in November, I am absolutely certain she will go down in history, if there is any history-making ahead, as an argument against feminism. I say that with no pleasure or gloating, as I truly wish this woman would, even now at this late stage, come to her senses.

To any talented woman who believes that staying home involves nothing more than baking cookies, I urge you to spend a little time in a real home. And I recommend to you this excellent recipe for chocolate chip cookies. It is much better than most recipes. Please, for the sake of humanity, try it!

Yes, even baking cookies can be much more satisfying and fulfilling than being president of the United States. Read More »

THE writer Brandon Martinez says the brutal murder of an 86-year-old priest in Northern France, which could have presumably been prevented by the police as the attacker was already under house arrest, is further evidence of a covert war by the French government against its own people.

TRUE or False Pope: Refuting Sedevacantism and other Modern Errors is a recently released 700-page book published by Angelus Press and written by John Salza and Robert Siscoe.

Very few people are likely to read this anti-sedevacantist polemic because of its length and dullness.

But it is sure to have great symbolic value.

As the Rev. Anthony Cekada, one of the foremost apologists of sedevacantism, says in this videotaped review of the book, people who don’t want to think about sedevacantism will find affirmation in the very existence of the book and its impressive length.

Sedevacantists hold that the Vatican II claimants to the papal see, including Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and the mega-celebrity “Pope” Francis, are not true popes. This position does not entail the belief that these men were, or are, thoroughly evil or that they did not uphold some important Catholic truths. Let me repeat that point because it is so misunderstood and demonized: This position does not entail the belief that these men, and certainly not those who have faithfully followed them, are monsters. It contends that these men were, or are, not valid popes because they rejected key dogmas of the Catholic Faith. They didn’t — and don’t — have true authority.

In contrast, Catholic traditionalists such as Salza and Siscoe believe the Vatican II popes should be recognized as valid popes — and resisted. They adamantly reject the sedevacantist position.

This is an extremely important issue, not some marginal intellectual dispute.

Without settled dogma and a divinely-guaranteed authority to preserve it, Christianity is a fluctuating and unstable religion of man. Vatican II revolutionized Catholic worship and dogma. It was, and continues to be, comparable to the French Revolution in its wider cultural influence. A word to my Protestant friends, many of whom are so admirably devout and sincere in their beliefs: Your Bible wouldn’t exit without papal authority.

Here is the sedevacantist argument in brief by Fr. Cekada: Read More »

A great speech given by British MP George Galloway before the Oxford Union this spring.