Friday, December 30, 2016

Obama Abuses Russia, Which Does Not Repay in Kind


Obama Abuses Russia, Which Does Not Repay in Kind

By Julio Severo
As a tenant who trashes everything when evicted, U.S. President Barack Obama took several offensive actions against Israel and Russia recently, apparently seeking to hit the new White House tenant, President-elect Donald Trump, especially because for Obama, Trump would not have won the U.S. election without Russia’s assistance.
Stung by new punishments by the Obama administration — the closing of two Russian compounds and the expelling of 35 Russian diplomats from the U.S. —, Russia did not react in kind and did not expel 35 Americans diplomats. On the contrary, Russian President Vladimir Putin invited the kids of all U.S. diplomats to the Kremlin’s New Year’s and Christmas parties. In Russia, Christmas happens in January.
Rev. Franklin Graham, son of the evangelist Billy Graham and chosen to pray officially for Trump in his inaugural, said, “Has Russian President Vladimir Putin been reading his Bible? Is he turning the other cheek? I don’t know, but I find it interesting that he’s not going to retaliate against President Obama whose administration has just ordered 35 Russian diplomats to leave this country and two of their U.S. compounds to close.”
Putin’s answer was actually praiseworthy, recognized even by Trump, who said, “Great move… I always knew he was very smart!”
Trump’s move to side with Putin over Obama has been offensive to the left-wing billionaire George Soros and other socialists.
Soros, who supported Hillary Clinton’s candidacy as well as other liberal causes worldwide, says that the rise of Trump and his affinity for Putin threaten the “democratic” model championed by the European Union.
He remarked that Putin helped Trump win the U.S. election by utilizing social media to disseminate fake news stories, and he is moving against it.
He said that the Russian leader is now using the same tactic to advance European right-wing groups and undermine left-wing governments throughout the EU.
Even though Trump seems to side with Putin, there are uncertainties about how he will actually act on Russia once he takes office Jan. 20. Though he’s praised Putin as a strong leader and said it would be ideal for the U.S. and Russia to join forces against ISIS, warmongering Republicans, who did not support Trump before the election, have for years argued Obama wasn’t tough enough against Russia and the U.S. needs a president to increase pressure on Russia.
“We intend to lead the effort in the new Congress to impose stronger sanctions on Russia,” said neocon Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.
Enraging these neocon Republicans, Trump has praised Putin and chosen Rex Tillerson for secretary of state and Lt. Gen Michael Flynn for national security adviser. Both are seen as friendly to Russia.
Throughout his campaign, Trump denounced neocons and promised to fight them. Whether he will prevail or not over them will be one of his major tests.
With information from DailyMail and Associated Press.
Recommended Reading:

Tuesday, December 27, 2016

Dr. Jean Garton, a Lutheran Pro-Life Model


Dr. Jean Garton, a Lutheran Pro-Life Model

By Julio Severo
Dr. Jean Garton, who was instrumental in the formation of Lutherans For Life in 1978 and was its first president, died on December 23, 2016 at the age of 87.
Jean Garton
After the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion in the United Sates in 1973, she became a leader in advocating respect and protection for every human being.
God used her to be a world-renowned expert on pro-life issues. He provided her with opportunities to testify before the U.S. Congress and state legislatures concerning life issues. Her writings include books such as “Who Broke the Baby?” (published by Bethany House Publishers), scripts for documentary videos, and daily radio commentaries for five years, plus countless articles on numerous topics. She traveled the world speaking before royalty and government leaders as well as at small gatherings of three or four to deliver the message God had entrusted to her.
She led an energetic presentation at the Lutherans For Life National Conference this past October based on the theme “Here We Stand” and there received the Dominus Vitae award in honor of her lifelong, Gospel-motivated labors to affirm God’s gift of life.
She served as national president of Lutherans For Life for 17 years. She was a frequent and popular guest of “Focus on the Family” with Dr. James Dobson and chaired the Declaration Committee for the World Congress of Families when it was held in Prague, Geneva, and Mexico City.
Even with all of Jean’s accomplishments, at the end, what mattered most to her was the knowledge that eternity was secure not because of all she had done but by the blood of her Savior, Jesus Christ. In Him all her sins were forgiven. Through Him, she, her family and many friends, and all others who place their confidence in Him will rise from the dead when He returns. It is then she will hear her Lord say, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant.”
My first contact with Jean was two decades ago, and I received from her and Lutherans for Life many books and materials to equip ministers and other leaders in Brazil.
She and her husband of sixty-two years, the late Reverend Horace “Chic” Garton, were blessed with four children, seven grandchildren, and seven great-grandchildren.
Portuguese version of this article: Dra. Jean Garton, um modelo pró-vida luterano

Saturday, December 24, 2016

Why Judge Silas Malafaia?


Why Judge Silas Malafaia?

By Julio Severo
The name of Silas Malafaia, a famous minister who is the founder and president of Victory in Christ Assemblies of God in Brazil, has been involved days ago in an alleged scandal of “money laundering,” as if he had business with corrupt individuals with the intent of getting deliberately dirty money.
Silas Malafaia
The scandal has even been “reported” in Charisma, the biggest Pentecostal magazine in the world. Sadly, the famous American magazine sided with the view of the secular media, which is persuaded that Malafaia is involved in corruption.
Malafaia, who is so prominent in Brazil that he has already been interviewed in 2011 by the New York Times, one of the biggest U.S. newspapers, explained that there was no money laundering. Famous Brazilian journalist Reinaldo Azevedo, whom I disagree strongly on homosexual issues, wrote that what the Brazilian federal police did to Malafaia was illegal by including his name just because he received a donation from an individual involved in the federal investigation.  
Even son, many Protestants do not want give Malafaia the benefit of the doubt. Others have just labeled him guilty and convicted, because he received a voluntary donation from a source involved in corruption.
Now, does it mean that if I receive a major donation from a sorcerer or a member of the Mafia, that I have culpability in all of its crimes? Of course, not. A sorcerer and a member of the Mafia are free to come to me, hear the Gospel and give a donation, and I am free to accept or not such donation.
Jesus’s parents, Joseph and Mary, were poor and accepted a major donation from a group of sorcerers and astrologers who came because they were trying to understand God’s signs. Joseph and Mary were free to accept or not such donation. But they accepted, and the major donation was exactly what they needed to cover high expenses for an international trip to flee for Egypt and stay there for some time.
God could have sent gold directly from the sky to Joseph and Mary. But He chose to use sorcerers. Instead of letting Joseph and Mary have the sacrifice of fleeing for Egypt with a baby to escape King Herod, God could have eliminated the bloody king, who was determined to kill baby Jesus. But God did not eliminate the child-killing king.
Or, instead of sending sorcerers, He could have sent Jewish prophets and priests. But there were not anymore prophets in Israel and the priests were corrupt. They were corrupt knowing God’s Word. The sorcerers who made the donation to Jesus showed an open heart that God used. They were not Jewish. They were corrupt, but they did not know God’s Word the Jewish priests knew.
Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary, of J. D. Douglas, says: “The MAGI from the east mentioned in Matt. 2:1 (magos G3407) were high-ranking Persian priests expert in ASTROLOGY and other occult arts.”
Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, of Chad Brand, says in the entry “magi,” in reference to Matthew 2:1: “Eastern wise men, priests, and astrologers expert in interpreting dreams and other ‘magic arts.’”
To earn money at the expense of astrology and occultism is, in the Bible, sheer corruption. In the case of the magi in the Bible, they earned much money. They had gold.
It not common to see wealthy sorcerers giving a donation of gold and jewels to a poor family who worship God. But God works wonders!
Jewish theologians did not know how to recognize God sending baby Jesus. Therefore, they could not help his needful parents. God needed to bring sorcerers and astrologers from far away to supply the necessary resources. It is not by chance that He is called God of impossible. In fact, He works impossible things. What eyes have not seen and what human minds have never imagined, this is what God does.
God used those sorcerers in that determined time, and after this they were never heard of again.
Some theologians today, who follow a heresy called cessationism, would doubt dreams and revelations from Joseph and Mary, with angel visitations. And if Joseph and Mary said, “God confirmed the dreams and revelations by bringing Satanists to give us a donation of gold!” cessationist theologians would say: “It is confirmed! All of this is from the devil! Everything: your dreams, revelations and angel visitations.”
God has no partnership with the devil, but when God commands, even the devil obeys. When God instructs, even devil’s servants obey.
Only God knows how the wealthy sorcerers got their gold, but one thing is sure: sorcery and honesty do not walk hand in hand! In contrast, sorcery and corruption are always partners.
One thing is for you, as a man or woman of God, to get involved in the business of sorcerers and take a part in their morally illicit riches. Other thing is for them to give voluntarily their gold as a donation to you.
Can you then accuse Joseph and Mary of involvement with sorcery, occultism, astrology and satanism just because they received gold from sorcerers?
If no one, for 2,000 years, has ever judged Joseph and Mary for receiving a major donation of gold from astrologers and sorcerers, why judge Silas Malafaia for receiving a major donation from a man involved in corruption?
Joseph and Mary were poor and they were not corrupt. You cannot say the same thing about the sorcerers and astrologers who gave them the major donation.
Malafaia has committed big mistakes in the past: he supported the election and reelection of Lula (the Brazilian Obama), in spite of all the clear evidence that Lula was pro-abortion and pro-sodomy. But today Malafaia has been a highly important voice against the homosexualist, left-wing and pro-abortion agenda in Brazil.
No one among Brazilian Christians has been so vocal and clear, in TV and radio shows and even in the hearings at the Brazilian Congress, on the defense of life and family as he is. He has become a symbol of pro-family counter-attack. All the Brazilian Left hates him. Therefore, it is not correct to judge him and convict him hastily, moved out of envy or religious hatred.
It is not prudent also to judge a Christian couple that, as Joseph and Mary, needs to receive a donation of gold from sorcerers and astrologers to escape persecution from a pro-abortion Herod and flee for an Egypt.
No one had ever given gold to the poor couple Joseph and Mary. Satanists were the only ones God used for such assistance.
God knows if it is right or wrong to accept a donation from sorcerers, astrologers, satanists and corrupts.
Only He is the Judge.
Joseph and Mary accepted a donation from corrupts, and God did not judge them for this. Jesus and his apostles never said that Jesus’s parents were involved in satanism and astrology just for accepting gold from corrupts.
The difference between Jesus’s parents and Malafaia is that Joseph and Mary were poor, and Malafaia is wealthy.
Yet, who are we to judge him because of a donation?
Portuguese version of this article: Por que julgar Silas Malafaia?
Recommended Reading:

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

Joseph, Mary and Jesus. God did not make easy for Joseph. But He gave him dreams that saved his marriage


Joseph, Mary and Jesus. God did not make easy for Joseph. But He gave him dreams that saved his marriage

By Julio Severo
The correct way for people to be married is no sex and no pregnancy before marriage. But this did not happen in Joseph’s case — not because of his decisions or sexual impulses. He was not to blame.
His bride told him she was pregnant. And she said that God did it to her.
By the knowledge he had from the Scriptures, there was absolutely no case of God doing it to any woman in the Scriptures. If Joseph discussed it with theologians, they would assure him: “There is no Scripture support for a pregnancy by God. This goes against Scriptures!”
The sense of human righteousness would say to Joseph: “Your bride betrayed you! She could have chosen to leave you to have sex with another man, but she chose to do it while officially engaged to you! Betrayal!”
Any other man, with this sense of righteousness, would leave her and make sure that everyone learned about her infidelity and betrayal. After all, in a way or other he was also being humiliated by her “betrayal.”
Yet, Joseph’s righteousness was not grounded on human feelings. It was grounded in the Scriptures, in a righteous and merciful God.
“Her husband Joseph was an honorable man and did not want to disgrace her publicly. So he decided to break the marriage agreement with her secretly.” (Matthew 1:19 GWV)
“Joseph, chagrined but noble, determined to take care of things quietly so Mary would not be disgraced.” (Matthew 1:19 Message)
“Joseph, because he was kind and upstanding and honorable, wanted to spare Mary shame. He did not wish to cause her more embarrassment than necessary.” (Matthew 1:19 The Voice)
In Joseph’s mind, there was a sin: Mary pregnant outside marriage by other man. It was his moral right to bring embarrassment to her for what she did against him and his marriage. But he chose mercy in a situation involving sin.
In that time, women could be stoned by sex outside marriage.
What made him change his mind? Some powerful theological advice? No such advice would be available, because all theologians would agree that God was not involved in such pregnancy.
“While he was trying to figure a way out, he had a dream. God’s angel spoke in the dream: ‘Joseph, son of David, don’t hesitate to get married. Mary’s pregnancy is Spirit-conceived. God’s Holy Spirit has made her pregnant.’” (Matthew 1:20 Message)
When God’s Word and its official interpreters (theologians) seem not to have an answer for such dramatic situations, God speaks — in dreams, in visions and other powerful ways, even a voice. And God spoke to Joseph.
Joseph did not understand why only his bride was chosen to get pregnant outside marriage by the Holy Spirit. Obviously, no one else would believe it, perhaps even with the assistance of a dream.
Of course, the followers of Jesus would believe, because they had contact with the same Holy Spirit who had impregnated Mary. They had dreams, visions and supernatural gifts from the Holy Spirit. When theologians are unable to explain what God does, the Holy Spirit explains. And often He does not explain why and how, but only that it was God.
God could have sent his angel to Joseph to say: “After your marriage to Mary, I want you to live in abstinence for some months, because the Holy Spirit will impregnate her.”
Of course, Mary would also need a dream or vision to confirm such humanly ridiculous declaration. Such arrangement (a divine pregnancy after marriage) would spare Mary and Joseph public embarrassment and would greatly facilitate the maintenance of their sexual and religious reputation.
Yet, God chose not to spare her and him. Now, this was only between God and both of them. No one else would understand it. Even theologians in their time would not understand it, because there was absolutely no Scripture support for it.
God did not make easy for Joseph and Mary. If He had let them choose if they wanted or not an embarrassing pregnancy outside marriage, they would answer NO. They would ask God for a non-embarrassing way.
But the total choice was His, and their only answer should be: to accept His supernatural interventions, including angel visitations and dreams.
When they did not understand, they let God speak. And He did. And they listened.
Yet, there are no theological dreams. They are from God, not theology. Later, after the birth of Jesus, Joseph had a dream telling him to flee for Egypt. (See Matthew 2:13) He fled with Mary and boy Jesus and saved His life. But if he had consulted the Bible for literal direction and advice about fleeing for Egypt, he would never do it. Why? Because there are many Bible passages where God commands not to flee for Egypt.
So in an attempt to conciliate his personal dream with the Bible, Joseph would never flee for Egypt. Evidently, his case was prophetically in the Bible, but there is no evidence that in that time Joseph understood it.
Joseph had and accepted the dreams not to produce new doctrines, but to save first his marriage and later his son.
Dreams are not to produce new core doctrines, but to guide men and women who believe in the Bible how to save their lives, marriages, jobs and other people.
If Joseph had depended only on the literal teaching of the Scriptures, which were silent on his particular case, or on their official interpreters (theologians), he would have left Mary.
But a dream changed his life. A dream saved his marriage. A dream helped him save baby Jesus. God’s strategy is often to confront enemies. David, with God’s assistance, did it to Goliah. In contrast, God wanted Joseph to flee to a nation He had told often to Israel: Do not flee to there!
Dreams do big miracles when the individual receiving them has his mind and heart filled with God’s Word.
If he were a non-theological unbeliever, Joseph would say, “God saved my marriage from a problem He himself provoked!” He would add: “Instead of provoking problems, God should have given me houses and riches.”
If he were a theological unbeliever (a modern cessationist), he would have rejected dreams, visions and Mary and her pregnancy by the Holy Spirit. If a woman said to a cessationist that that she received an angel visitation, he would send her to a psychiatrist. Thank God, Joseph was not a cessationist!
Evidently, Joseph would have loved if God had told him: “I will give you a major government job!” After all, God is powerful and can give powerful blessings.
And if Mary were a modern woman and the angel had given her an opportunity to choose between a high-paying job and a pregnancy, she would choose the first option, and both she and Joseph would jump for joy!
Yet, there was no dance in the case of Joseph, who did not understand what was happening. He loved God’s Word. And he respected Word’s masters (the Jewish theologians). But all of them were not enough to explain the strange events in his life, especially the very strange pregnancy of his bride. To go through his hard times, he chose to give preeminence to Word’s God and His dreams.
The God who helped Joseph with a dream promised to help people in our last days with the same supernatural resources:
“And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams” (Ac 2:17 ESV)
“In the Last Days,” God says, “I will pour out my Spirit on every kind of people: Your sons will prophesy, also your daughters; Your young men will see visions, your old men dream dreams.” (Ac 2:17 Message)
With such resources, the impossible becomes possible and a prophetic God, with his prophetic plans, makes himself available to save your life and marriage.
Without dreams, it would have been impossible for Joseph to marry Mary.
His walk by faith with dreams from God is an example to everyone who love Jesus.
Recommended Reading:

Tuesday, December 20, 2016

George Soros and other liberal billionaires funding PC police crackdown of “fake news” on Facebook


George Soros and other liberal billionaires funding PC police crackdown of “fake news” on Facebook

By Julio Severo
Facebook has announced it will empower several liberal organizations, including Snopes, an organization with a clear left-wing bias, to police “fake news” and determine what news stories being shared on Facebook are real, and which should be flagged as fake.
“If the fact checking organizations identify a story as fake, it will get flagged as disputed and there will be a link to the corresponding article explaining why,” said Facebook VP Adam Mosseri.
Facebook has basically empowered a bunch of highly partisan left-wing mainstream media outlets to bury so-called “fake news” on its news feed, a move that clearly opens the door for the outright censorship of conservative content and opinion.
Billionaire Hillary donor George Soros is among a line-up of wealthy liberal figures who will fund Facebook’s fake news fact checker. 
Soros’s Open Society Foundation is listed among organizations which are backing the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN), the body tasked with flagging bogus news stories to social media users, on its website.
Soros, a staunch Democrat who tried to block George W. Bush’s campaign in 2004, has given $25million to Hillary. 
Other donors involved in the new fact checking feature include eBay founder Pierre Omidyar who has committed more than $30million to the Clintons and their “charities.” 
Google, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the National Endowment for Democracy are also funding IFCN.  
Conservative commentators criticize that the new fact checking feature will be biased towards left-wing causes and could interfere with the social media feeds of millions of voters. 
The feature, announced by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg on Thursday night, will flag any stories which have been “disputed by a 3rd party” before users attempt to share them and prohibit the promotion of any fake stories. 
The third parties include, for the U.S.: ABC News, AP, Climate Feedback, Factcheck.org, PolitiFact, Snopes and The Washington Post Fact Checker. For Brazil: Agência Lupa and Agência Pública – Truco.
For Russia, there is no representative, and it is thought that Ukraine will decide which Russian information or view is correct.
Ukrainian groups at International Fact Checking Network include: FactCheck-Ukraine and VoxUkraine. Will IFCN, with its Ukrainian groups, filter or block Russian information? Soros was instrumental in the successful Ukrainian coup and, unsuccessfully, tried destabilize the Putin administration in Russia. Soros still keeps control in Ukraine.
In news about Russia and Putin, will Soros-controlled Ukrainian views be given priority?
When Hillary Clinton was defeated on November 9, Soros regrouped with other Democrat mega-donors to discuss how they could “take back power” from Donald Trump. Their strategy seems to be to weaken conservative influence on Facebook.
Infowars, a staunchly Republican site, was among the first to condemn the added feature and question the trustworthiness of the “third party” checkers. 
“The ‘fact checkers’ that will bury ‘fake news’ on Facebook are just a bunch of mainstream news outlets. This is about silencing competition,” said Infowars’ Paul Watson.
Meanwhile the FrontPage Magazine said the move should make conservatives re-consider using Facebook at all. FrontPage said,
In essence, Facebook is giving the partisan left free space on conservative news links. It’s also allowing them to undermine a conservative link while promoting their own agenda.
It’s not quite censorship, but the partnership with left-wing partisan “checkers” helps move it to the next step of barring sites outright. For the moment, Facebook has decided that you shouldn’t just be able to share links to what you're interested in without the left getting a say.
This is yet another reason for conservatives to rethink being on Facebook.
With information from DailyMail, Infowars and WorlNetDaily.
Recommended Reading:

Tuesday, December 13, 2016

Trump Picks Exxon Mobil’s Tillerson as Secretary of State and Faces Fierce Opposition from Neocons from Left and Right


Trump Picks Exxon Mobil’s Tillerson as Secretary of State and Faces Fierce Opposition from Neocons from Left and Right

By Julio Severo
President-elect Donald Trump announced Tuesday he has picked Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson to be secretary of state, calling the oil executive with close to ties to Russia one of the most accomplished international dealmakers in the world.
Rex Tillerson
Tillerson’s business relations with Russian President Vladimir Putin are drawing opposition from Democratic and Republican neocons and will likely pose the toughest challenge for Trump. Republican Senator John McCain said, “I have concerns. It’s very well known that he has a very close relationship with Vladimir Putin,” who is “a KGB agent who is bent on restoring the Russian Empire.”
McCain was praised by the Islamic State in 2014 for helping them invade Iraq. Just as Obama, he has supported the Syrian rebels, who has been torturing, raping and slaughtering Christians. The only international leader helping Christians in Syria is Putin. McCain prefers partnership with Islamic terrorists against Russia. This is the neocon pattern.
One of the main concerns among conservative evangelicals, who were the main group supporting Trump, was: After elected, will Trump he fulfil his promise of confronting neocons, who focus on Russia, not Islamic terror, as the biggest threat?
Neocons have been for decades partnering with Islam and Islamic terror against Russia. In contrast, in his campaign Trump promised a breakthrough: partnership with Russia against Islamic terror.
Apparently, Trump is honoring his promise, because he said that Tillerson’s choice would “help reverse years of misguided foreign policies.” This is a powerful blow on neocons.
Trump called Tillerson’s career “the embodiment of the American dream.”
“His tenacity, broad experience and deep understanding of geopolitics make him an excellent choice for Secretary of State. He will promote regional stability and focus on the core national security interests of the United States,” Trump said.
Trump said that he “knows how to manage a global organization and successfully navigate the complex architecture of world affairs and diverse foreign leaders.”
Yet, the senior Democrat on foreign relations, Bob Menendez, said naming Tillerson secretary of state would be “alarming and absurd … guaranteeing Russia has a willing accomplice in the (Trump) Cabinet guiding our nation’s foreign policy.”
Neocon Republican senator Marco Rubio chimed in: “Being a ‘friend of Vladimir’ is not an attribute I am hoping for from a secretary of state.”
Trump was aware that Tillerson’s announcement would face opposition, but he chose to push through it quickly.
Actually, Tillerson has had multiple contacts with Putin as he negotiated energy deals in Russia, got awarded a medal of friendship by the Russian president, and is captured on video toasting champagne glasses with Putin. 
Rex Tillerson and Vladimir Putin
In 2011, ExxonMobil under Tillerson signed a deal with Rosneft, Russia’s largest state-owned oil company, for joint oil exploration and production. Since then, the companies have formed 10 joint ventures for projects in Russia.
In 2013, Russian President Vladimir Putin awarded Tillerson his nation’s Order of Friendship. 
But the energy deal was put on hold when the Obama administration and its European allies imposed sanctions against Russia allegedly for annexing Crimea, a region traditionally Russian for hundreds of years. Relations between Obama and Putin had in fact begun to turn sour after Russia passed a law banning homosexual propaganda for children. The law was antagonized and mocked by Obama and all the U.S. mainstream media.
ExxonMobil reportedly vowed to resume the agreement after the end of the Obama sanctions – and Tillerson has already spoken out against such sanctions and the economic hardships they impose on Russia.
Normalization of relations between the U.S. and Russia was one of the most prominent promises of Trump during his campaign.
Russian President Vladimir Putin said he was ready to meet with Trump “at any moment."
In the transcript of his interview with journalists which was released Tuesday in Moscow, Putin said, “it’s widely known that the elected president of the United States has publicly called for the normalization of the Russian-American relationship. We cannot but support this.”
Who is Tillerson? A corporate titan, he has traveled the world and represented Exxon in 60 countries. As Trump, he is also soft on the gay agenda. But he never went to war against Putin over the Russian ban against the homosexual propaganda. Obama wanted a war.
Why as a businessman is he ideal as a secretary of state? Most businessmen are interested in doing deals, making money and, if the terms are not met, walking away, not starting a war.
And here is the heart of the objection to Tillerson. He wants to end the Obama sanctions and partner with Putin’s Russia, as does Trump. But among many in the mainstream media, think tanks, websites and especially Republican and Democratic neocons, this is craven appeasement. For neocons, the Cold War is never over.
The attacks on Tillerson coincide with new attacks on Russia, based on CIA sources, alleging that not only did Moscow hack into the Democratic Party and Hillary campaign, and leak what it found to hurt Hillary Clinton, but Russia was trying to help elect Trump, and succeeded.
Mainstream newspapers, which are rightly seen as left-wing and in such capacity would defend only a socialist Russia, speak of a “darkening cloud” already over the Trump presidency and warn that a failure to investigate and discover the full truth of Russia’s hacking could only “feed suspicion among millions of Americans that the election was indeed rigged.”
Behind the effort to smear Tillerson and delegitimize Trump lies a larger motive. Trump has antagonists in both parties who are alarmed at his triumph because it imperils the foreign-policy agenda that is their raison d’etre, their reason for being.
These people do not want to lift the Obama sanctions on Russia. They do not want an end to the confrontation with Russia. They do not want to force Saudi Arabia from funding ISIS. They want to enlarge NATO to encompass Sweden, Finland, Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova.
They have in mind the permanent U.S. encirclement of Russia.
They want to provide offensive weapons to Kiev to reignite the civil war in the Donbass and enable Ukraine to move on Crimea. This would mean a war with Russia that Ukraine would lose and the U.S. and its NATO allies would be called upon to intervene in and fight.
Their goal is to bring down Putin and bring about “regime change” in Moscow.
In the campaign, Trump said he wanted to get along with Russia, to support all the forces inside Syria and Iraq fighting to wipe out ISIS and al-Qaida, and to stay out of any new Middle East wars – like the disaster in Iraq – that have cost the U.S.  “6 trillion dollars.”
This is what America voted for when it voted for Trump – to put America First and “make America great again.” But neocon agitators are already beating the drums for military confrontation.
Early in his presidency, if not before, Trump is going to have to impose his foreign policy upon his own party and, indeed, upon his own government. Or his presidency will be broken. Or he will govern for neocons or for his voters, according to his promises that got him elected.
He is having a good beginning. By nominating Rex Tillerson for secretary of state, he is directly confronting neocons.
With information from WorlNetDaily (Pat Buchanan’s article “Will Trump defy McCain & Marco?”), DailyMail and the Associated Press.
Recommended Reading:

Sunday, December 11, 2016

Radical Gay Activist Defends Brazil’s Mackenzie Presbyterian University


Radical Gay Activist Defends Brazil’s Mackenzie Presbyterian University

By Julio Severo
In 2012, Brazilian gay activist Márcio Retamero became famous by defending armed violence against Christian opponents of the gay “marriage.”
Now he is defending the Mackenzie Presbyterian University (MPU), in São Paulo, Brazil, because I said that as a Protestant institution, the Presbyterian university should honor its evangelical commitments. Retamero defends that, because MPU is connected to the Brazilian Department of Education, it should honor “secular” commitments.
This MPU is doing very well. MPU professors have been defending abortion, homosexuality and Marxism.
In a Senate hearing on August 6, 2015, MPU professor Márcia Tiburi said, “To vociferate against abortion is just a biopolitical way to control women’s lives. Abortion legalization is a fundamental part of a socially responsible democratic process.”
MPU professor Osvaldo Coggiola has several books defending Marxism, including the Cuban Revolution.
MPU professor Marcelo Moreira Neumann, author of the Brazilian study “Homophobic Bullying and School Performance,” defends automatic gender neutrality in birth registries.
Mackenzie Presbyterian University is the most prominent Calvinist or Presbyterian educational institution in Brazil.
What is fascinating is that Mackenzie, with all its Calvinist confession, and Calvinist leaders who have decision power to stop all this mess, are very fast and sharp to attack the conservative growth produced by neo-Pentecostals (charismatics) in Brazil, as reported recently by the Islamic news website Al Jazeera, where a Mackenzie professor criticized the neo-Pentecostal (charismatic) growth leading the Brazilian politics to the Right.
If the MPU owner (Presbyterian Church of Brazil) is actually evangelical, why has it allowed this to happen? Lack of vision?
Lack of vision, to those who do not believe in vision, is normal. MPU had been headed for many years by Rev. Augustus Nicodemus, who had authority in the hiring of professors opposed to Marxism and abortion, but he preferred to occupy himself with his cessationist theology, which denies that the Holy Spirit grants today gifts as vision and prophecy. Nicodemus is the greatest cessationist theologian in Brazil.
Márcio Retamero is very satisfied with the MPU’s current secularized state. But he is not happy about my comments. Days ago, I said in my Facebook:
“What kind of gospel is this? Certain Brazilian Calvinists talk crudely about Brazilian Assemblies of God minister Silas Malafaia and other charismatics. Very easily, they label everything in them ‘heresy.’ But when they talk about the Mackenzie Presbyterian University (MPU), which has Marxist, pro-abortion and homosexualist professors, those same Calvinists use respectful and pleasing terms. Is apostasy only sanctified and approved when it brings Calvin’s seal? If Malafaia and charismatics had the belligerent and quarrelsome spirit of those Brazilian Calvinists, they would say week after week that MPU is a pit of apostasy — a labeling in harmony with Bible’s reality, because no evangelical educational institution can have Marxist, pro-abortion and homosexualist professors.”
Retamero answered:
“Wait! One thing is a confessional, denomination seminary, etc. Another thing very different is a college, which even though is an autarchy or belonging to a denomination, has a secular character, is connected to the Department of Education and laws and the Constitution. In seminary is valid the faith principles of a church, usually these are not connected to the Department of Education (in the Presbyterian Church of Brazil is this way, later its students make a test of validation of the course made at the seminary). Little Severo always talking little nonsense… Some people do not learn.”
I said,
“It does not matter the standard of the Department of Education. The important thing is that having Marxist, pro-abortion and homosexualist professors, the Mackenzie Presbyterian University attempts against God’s standard, peddling itself and prostituting itself for a plate of lentils. To those who are not faithful to the Bible, this is nothing. But to those who are faithful, this is apostasy.”
Retamero answered,
“What does [Julio] recommend? That MPU severs relations with the Department of Education and goes bankrupt?! Notify this fundamentalist fanatical Taliban madman that the Bible is not — thank God — the Constitution of this nation, because in this country the State is still secular. This guy irritates in a high degree!”
A Secular State is helpful for keeping the most prominent Calvinist institution in Brazil in the orbit of Marxist, pro-abortion and homosexualist professors, according to Retamero’s view. And he defends his “secular” ideas with the typical violence of Marxists.
In a hearing at the House of Representatives in Brazil in 2012, Retamero said that he is willing to take up arms against Christians that defend natural family. You can watch him saying this in this video: http://youtu.be/dg1P7osbwSQ
Retamero, who uses the title “reverend” and proclaims that he is the minister of the Presbyterian Church of the Botafogo Beach and of the Metropolitan Community Church in Rio de Janeiro, praises the secularized state of Mackenzie Presbyterian University, but he mocks real Christians. In 2009, he published an article entitled “Open Letter to Julio Severo, a Religious Fundamentalist and Homophobic,” where, by accusing my blog of spreading hatred against homosexuals, he said “I ask federal prosecutors to keep their efforts to find him, and bring him back, even by extradition.”
Nicodemus, the most prominent Presbyterian theologian in Brazil who has criticized by name C. Peter Wagner and other charismatics, has never criticized by name Retamero, the most prominent Presbyterian gay activist in Brazil.
Recommended Reading: