Fall of anti-neocon advisers hinders Trump from pursuing his promised focus of partnership with Russia against Islamic terror; new neocon advisers urge the old, traditional focus against Russia

By Julio Severo

U.S. President Donald Trump is losing his war against neocons, whose focus is partnership with Islamists against Russia. In his campaign, Trump wanted to change the focus, with a partnership with Russia against Islamic terror. But with the fall of General Michael Flynn, formerly appointed by him as a national security adviser, and other close aides who were supporting him for such partnership, neocons are having the upper hand they had in the Obama and Bush administrations.

Fiona Hill, Trump’s new anti-Russia adviser, formerly a member of a left-wing institution

Trump administration has been plagued by leaks produced by the U.S. intelligence services accusing Trump and his aides of contacts with Russian diplomats. In the latest leaks, publicized by the U.S. media, Trump’s son-in-law met with the Russian Ambassador to the U.S. at Trump Tower.

The media has been using such anti-Russia leaks as a battering ram against Trump and his administration, with daily accusations of Trump and his aides involved with Russia.

It seems that Trump will have no freedom to rule while he tries to head for his dreamed partnership. The only choice left to him is to leave and walk away from any thought of a partnership with Russians against Islamic terror.

And Trump is beginning to walk away.

The new attitude suggests the rising influence of a new set of neocon advisers who want to keep the old, traditional stance against Russia, including Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and new national security adviser H.R. McMaster. During his first meeting with National Security Council staff, McMaster described Russia as a country that threatens the current world order.

Despite Trump’s repeated expressions of admiration for Putin, days ago he hired Fiona Hill for senior position as a national security adviser. Hill, a scholar from the left-wing Brookings Institution, has written a leading book lambasting Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The new advisers are an effort of the Trump administration to please the press and neocons in their constant barrage of accusations that the Trump administration is friendly to Russia.

While Trump initially hired pro-Russian advisers to help him in his intended partnership, the new anti-Russian advisers show a pressure to follow the tracks of Obama’s and Bush’s foreign policy.

Trump, who spoke favorably about Putin throughout the campaign, is under such pressure that his new course is to follow the old course of Obama and Bush.

Trump has been trailed by questions about his possible ties to Russia for months. He had an unusually friendly posture toward Russia, praising Putin’s leadership and, at times, appearing to echo Kremlin positions on Ukraine and other matters. He had also repeatedly said that it would be better for the U.S. and Russia to have a stronger relationship, particularly in fighting terrorism.

But Trump’s initial efforts to implement his ideas brought the neocon hell against him and his administration. And now there have been some signs of his administration taking the old, traditional approach of Obama and Bush.

U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley hit Russia hard last month over its actions in Ukraine, saying the Obama administration’s sanctions imposed after Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 will remain in place until Crimea is returned to Ukraine. Her remarks came amid speculation that Trump is changing his intentions towards Russia.

Yet, Russia was not the only nation warned by the Trump administration. On the same day Haley condemned Russia, the Trump administration condemned Israel’s settlements. According to the Jerusalem Post,

“The White House warned Israel on Thursday — in a surprising statement — to cease settlement announcements that are ‘unilateral’ and ‘undermining’ of President Donald Trump’s effort to forge Middle East peace.”

How to explain Trump’s change?

According to Dr. Scott Livey, “Obama has set up a shadow government” against the Trump administration.

He said,

At the root of the Obama strategy and propaganda is the false premise that the Russian government is an evil America-hating regime that seeks to weaken or control the United States through James Bondesqe subversion and spycraft. Back in the 1960s and 70, when the liberals were politically aligned with the Russians, the Russian-based Soviet Communist bloc WAS in fact an evil empire, and DID work to subvert America. Indeed, the Cultural Marxism dominant in our university system and mainstream media attest to their success. Today, however, the Russian Federation is socially and fiscally conservative and strongly anti-Marxist.

Today’s primary cultural influence [in Russia] is not Marxism (as it is in the Democrat Party USA) but Orthodox Christianity.

Ideologically and culturally the Russian people are the closest match to American conservatives and populists in the entire world, and it is only the constant Obama/McCain/Soros/MSM/Deep State anti-Russian propaganda that keeps the Americans from seeing it. Yet, I fault the conservatives and populists themselves in this, since the very people they’re trusting for news on such matters as Syria, Ukraine, the US election and Russia itself are the one’s they know for a fact ALWAYS lie about cultural and spiritual issues here at home.

I can’t speak to Putin’s character pro or con, but I know he’s a more faithful representative of the will of the Russian people than any of our US presidents from HW Bush through Obama, and I certainly don’t trust the people who are poisoning western minds against him. If anything, their hostility to Putin should enhance his credibility among conservatives.

Lively said that a strong US-Russia partnership on global issues could solve problems, including ISIS and al-Qaeda, and that “The world would be a far better place under such an overtly Judeo-Christian alliance than what we have now under the greedy, Godless globalists.”

Perhaps the most important point in Lively’s message is that he challenged Trump to “rehire General Flynn and put him in charge of draining the swamp in the federal bureaucracy.”

Flynn has been critical of Obama’s and Bush’s approach to focus on Russia, not the Islamic terrorism, as the global threat.

By rejecting Flynn, what does the Trump administration want? To follow Bush?

In the recent show of lesbian host Ellen Degeneres, former President George W. Bush warned Trump to “stand up to Putin” and spoke about his friendship with Michelle Obama, which surprised other people.

In his administration, Bush was unable to stand up to Saudi Arabia, even though most 9/11 terrorists were Saudis.

His focus was not to threaten Islamic terrorists. In fact, his policies actually threatened Russia and Middle East Christians.

The Bush’s invasion of Iraq paved the way for Obama and Hillary to create ISIS, which slaughtered thousands and thousands of Christians. In his pre-election campaign, Trump recognized that Obama created ISIS and he criticized Bush’s invasion of Iraq.

Like it or not, Russia is the only nation effectively fighting ISIS. And a recent WND (WorldNetDaily) report confirmed what we already knew: Russia is protecting Christians and fighting Islamic terror.

What is evident is that left-wing Americans do not want in any way U.S. conservatives to have contact and friendship with the conservative Russia.

If Trump, under the pressure from neocons and his new anti-Russia advisers, wants to follow Obama’s and Bush’s ways, which brought blood-shedding of Christians, he will be in the wrong side of history, as Obama and Bush were.

Even though Trump had no conservative history, his anti-neocon speech was fresh air in the U.S. foreign policy. His first advisers, who were overthrown by malicious leaks, would have helped him to fulfill his speech. The new advisers will fulfill the old course.

The overthrown advisers, especially Flynn, were going to bring a new and necessary vision. The new advisers are keepers of the old vision, to protect old, unnecessary and obsolete interests, which have been bloodily costly to Christians.

To live up to his speech, Trump would need to fire the neocon advisers and choose more men like Michael Flynn.

Christians, especially in the Middle East, are mortally tired of the U.S. foreign policy, which sacrifices them and does not threaten Islamic terrorism and its main sponsor, Saudi Arabia.

The U.S. and Russia are two Christian powers able to stand up to Islamic nations sponsoring terror and genocide of Christians. Their partnership should be top priority. Their disunion is an Islamic dream that is a nightmare for Christians living under Islamic threat.

By following Trump’s speech in his campaign, I hoped him to walk away from Obama and his policies. Yet, Trump is keeping Obama’s homosexual imperialism.

Russia under Putin became a shining conservative model with its Obama-hated law banning homosexual propaganda to children and adolescents.

Russia has made a global difference against the gay agenda. Obama made a global difference on behalf of this agenda, and Trump is keeping the Obama way.

Yet, Obama, who hated the Russian law, loved friendship with Saudi Arabia, which kills homosexuals.

Trump has never praised the Russian law, has kept Obama’s homosexual imperialism and sent his CIA director to reward Saudi Arabia for fighting Islamic terror, when actually Russia is fighting Islamic terror and protecting Christians.

The U.S.-Saudi partnership is not a disaster only to Russia, but to Christians in the Middle East.

A U.S. hegemony at the service of Islam and the homosexual imperialism is not healthy to the nations, especially to Christians and their natural conservatism.

Let us pray that God may raise new advisers to Trump and that he may rehire Michael Flynn.

With information from the Associated Press and DailyMail.

Portuguese version of this article: Queda de assessores anti-neocon impede Trump de seguir seu prometido foco de parceria com Rússia contra o terrorismo islâmico; novos assessores neocons instigam foco velho e tradicional contra a Rússia

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

What Is Neoconservatism (Neocon)?

Trump Continues Obama’s Homosexual Imperialism and Frustrates Christian Conservatives

Trump and Obama: What Has Changed Between Them on Homosexuality and Saudi Arabia?

CIA Rewards Saudi Arabia for Fighting Islamic Terror

Exclusive Interview with William J. Murray, Defender of Persecuted Christians

Why Throw U.S. Evangelicals into the Soros-Provoked Conflict in Ukraine?

Why Throw U.S. Evangelicals into the Soros-Provoked Conflict in Ukraine?

By Julio Severo

“Ukrainians are again facing aggression from Russia, initiated by Russian President Vladimir Putin. Christian blogger Warren Throckmorton asks whether U.S. evangelicals will step in to help,” said ChristianHeadlines.com editor Veronica Neffinger in her article “Putin is Again Bombing Ukraine: Will Evangelicals Call on Trump to Take Action?”

She added,

In a post titled “Do Evangelical Leaders Still Care about Ukraine?” Throckmorton recalls a short time ago when evangelicals spoke out about Putin’s actions toward Ukraine and called out President Obama for seemingly being unwilling to confront Putin’s aggression toward Russia’s neighbor.

However, now evangelicals seem to be remaining silent while President Trump also allows Putin to bomb Eastern Ukraine.

Trump has been accused for some time of being too friendly with Russia, although he alleges that having a diplomatic relationship with Putin is an asset for the U.S.

Even though Neffinger presents Obama as somehow indifferent to an alleged Russian aggression, Obama imposed several heavy sanctions against Russia. What did Neffinger want else? Direct U.S. military intervention?

It is a wonder that Neffinger used Throckmorton as a reliable source. According to a 2010 LifeSiteNews report, he made “waves by endorsing same-sex civil union legislation, and claiming that homosexuals can live ‘normal, natural and healthy’ lives.”

Throckmorton had no solid stance to wage the culture war against the homosexual agenda, and now does he want U.S. evangelicals involved in the Ukrainian conflict?

Throckmorton fits very well in the profile of Christian warmonger, as described by Rev. Chuck Baldwin in his insightful piece titled “Christians’ Love of the Warfare State Is Killing Other Christians.” But it is a pity that he is not a “warmonger” against the gay agenda.

Before the U.S. invasion in Iraq, we conservatives were told that the invasion was necessary to help Israel and Christians. I read (and I spread) pieces by prominent U.S. evangelicals and their views supporting the invasion. But the aftermath was destruction, especially for Christians. Iraqi Christians, who numbered over 2 million, are now less than 400,000.

I support Trump’s ban on the Islamic immigration. But if the U.S. does not want to be invaded, it should not invade other nations. Iraq was invaded and its Christian population was ravaged. During his campaign, Trump denounced Bush and his invasion of Iraq.

Why should now Trump give in to neocons and accept their wish of war against Russia in Ukraine? Ukraine, which suffered a coup orchestrated by Obama, his State Department and Soros and other neocons, is very far away from the U.S.

Ukraine is more than another Iraq. It is a showcase of neocon ambitions. While Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and George Soros were calling the Ukrainian revolution a people’s revolution, in a WND report Michael Savage said,

“The situation in Ukraine has been painted as a conflict between Vladimir Putin’s Russia, the so-called bad guys, and Ukrainian rebels, the so-called good guys who seek to oust Russia from a position of influence in Ukraine and install a new government that will be responsive to the Ukrainian people. Don’t believe a word of it. The Ukrainian nationalists are fascists. Washington’s original purpose for staging a coup in Ukraine was to move Ukraine away from Russia and bring Ukraine into the European Union. In other words, the neocons and the bought-and-paid-for ‘moderates’ in the Obama administration wanted to wrest control of Ukraine from Putin’s hands and gain economic and energy control over the country. As Dr. Stephen F. Cohen has pointed out, Western nations, with the U.S. leading the way, have been provoking Putin for decades. We’ve expanded NATO to include former Soviet states — Ukraine looks like the next target — and we’ve attacked allies of Russia, including Libya and Iraq. The U.S. — along with other Western nations — through our incursions into the politics, economics and national security of Russia and several of its allies, has effectively caused the situation that is now unfolding in Ukraine. Cohen is right.”

Savage pointed that Obama and his neocons, not conservatives, created a revolution in Ukraine to draw it away from Russia and put it, eventually, into NATO’s orbit.

Therefore, the aggression did not come from Putin, as charged by Neffinger. It came directly from neocons.

While in his campaign President Donald Trump praised Russia and his advisers were supporting pro-Russian forces in Ukraine, neocons have openly praised the Ukrainian revolution as the best democratic example against dictatorship. The Ukrainian revolution was the biggest Soros revolution, massively funded by him.

WorldNetDaily has confirmed that “Soros heavily invested in Ukraine crisis.”

“Soros has provided more than $100 million to support Ukrainian groups,” according to WorldNetDaily. The Ukrainian revolution was more than a people’s revolution. It was Soros’s revolution, and his special trophy. It is his revolutionary crown.

Yet, Soros has not funded only left-wing groups to support his Ukrainian revolution. Prominent Republicans who attacked Trump for his pro-Russian stance in their campaigns were also funded by Soros, according to Breitbart:

According to records compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, and available at OpenSecrets.org, Soros Fund Management employees donated nearly $40,000 to Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Ohio Gov. John Kasich and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

What is the stance of these supposedly conservative Republicans on Ukraine? On July 10, 2016 Paul Ryan said, “The United States stands with Ukraine… and confront Russian aggression.”

A September 8, 2016 Los Angeles Times headline said, “Paul Ryan disagrees with Trump, calls Putin an ‘adversary.’”

On Marco Rubio, a October 2, 2015 DailyMail headline said, “Rubio pledges new sanctions against ‘gangster and thug’ Putin and ‘lethal military assistance’ to Ukraine if he’s elected president.”

On John McCain and Lindsey Graham, NewsMax had this February 10, 2017 headline, “McCain, Lindsey Graham Visit Military Outpost in Ukraine.”

Reuters had this January 1, 2017 headline, “Senator McCain says U.S. ‘must stand up to Vladimir Putin.’”

The USA Today had this December 31, 2016 headline, “McCain visits frontline Ukraine troops in anti-Putin gesture.”

On John Kasich, the DailySignal had this August 12, 2015 headline, “John Kasich: The US Should Be Providing Aid to Ukraine.”

On Jeb Bush, when asked “Should the U.S. provide military assistance to defend Ukraine from Russia?” he answered: “Yes, the Russian invasion of the Ukraine threatens the balance of power in the region.” 

All those Republicans support the neocon war Soros created in Ukraine. All of them want war against Putin. All of them were funded by Soros, whose left-wing organizations were expelled from Russia by Putin.

All of them criticized Trump for his non-involvement, at least in his campaign, in the crisis Soros created in Ukraine.

In her piece inciting U.S. evangelicals to get involved in the Ukrainian crisis, Veronica Neffinger talks about “Putin bombing Ukraine” and about “confronting Putin’s aggression.”

Yet, Putin did not create the crisis. He is only answering Soros’s aggression. A May 27, 2014 Infowars headline said, “Soros Admits Responsibility for Coup and Mass Murder in Ukraine.”

On the Neffinger article, Rev. Scott Lively said in answer to a Julio Severo’ question, “I think the Ukraine mess is the predictable result of Obama’s determination to restart the Cold War due to Russia’s hostility to the LGBT agenda, by staging the coup to force regime change in pro-Russia Ukraine. The civil war still raging will need to be resolved by Trump and Putin, probably by splitting the country.”    

Readers of the Neffinger article said,

Betty Gray: “Obama and Soros overthrew the elected leader of the Ukraine to put in their man. I say the Ukraine is next to Putin, it is his business; especially for the regions who want to leave.”

John Xanthopoulos (Professor at University of Montana Western): “Utter nonsense! Russia is not bombing Ukraine! Can the Evangelicals find something productive to do and mind their own business!”

Deanna Miling Swarvar (Ferris State University): “We should no way get ourselves involved in another conflict especially with Russia. Its time we tend to our own issues and let other countries take care of their own problems.”

In a 2014 piece in the American Thinker, my Jewish friend Don Feder, who is an American author, said,

Putin is a power player who cares more about Russia’s national interests, and Russian minorities in his near abroad, than in that mythical force known as world opinion. Would that America had a president who cared more about our interests than in promoting globalism and the left’s social agenda.

The Crimea’s population is 60% ethnic Russian. For most of the past 800 years, the Ukraine has been Russian.

An independent Ukraine disappeared in the 12th century. It reappeared briefly after the Bolshevik Revolution, only to be crushed by the Red Army and not emerge again until the fall of the Soviet Union. All of this fuss about the “territorial integrity” of a state born yesterday.

The Russian-backed government in Kiev came to power democratically, but was ousted by the [Soros coup]. We’re told that the interim government is pro-Western and pro-EU.

When Reagan was president, the expression pro-Western meant something. It meant pro-representative government, pro-human rights and pro-Western (Judeo-Christian) values.

Today, it means a willingness to accept same-sex “marriage,” abortion on demand, an anti-religion ethos – the agenda of the EU’s cultural commissars — and the economic dictates of the Brussels bureaucracy.

Putin doesn’t want to see the EU — and, possibly, NATO — on his doorstep. Do you blame him? If someone overthrew a democratically elected, pro-American government in Ottawa and replaced it with an interim regime hostile to our interests, that contained neo-Nazi elements and which immediately moved against English-speaking Canadians, it would irritate us too…

But don’t I care about a possible Russian annexation of the Crimea and Eastern Ukraine (with its Russian-oriented, Orthodox population), conservatives who are still fighting the Cold War ask me? Not really.

Obama and neocons initiated the Ukrainian crisis through Democratic and Republican puppets funded by Soros to provoke Russia and Putin.

And now does Neffinger want evangelicals to confront Russia and Putin by using as reference Warren Throckmorton, a Christian psychologist confused about sodomy, an evangelical who does not fight the gay agenda, but wants to incite evangelicals in neocon wars?

As pointed by Chuck Baldwin, neocon wars loved by U.S. evangelicals kill Christians in other nations.

Then Neffinger cited Paul Kengor, who said, “The ‘Putin-likes-me’ attitude of Trump is a fatal conceit… It is also the polar opposite of Ronald Reagan’s statements and attitude toward the Russians.”

A fiery anticommunist activist would never want to talk with red leaders. He would repay hatred with hatred, as Hitler did. But Reagan really sat with them. In fact, he took Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet leader, to his ranch, to feel his family life and his warm reception.

Reagan worked to quench the Soviet hatred with Christian conservative consideration.

Margaret Thatcher said, “Reagan won the Cold War without firing a shot.” His shot was his ranch!

Reagan took Gorbachev to his ranch because he wanted to cultivate friendship, not hatred. The Soviet Union knew how to cultivate hatred. Reagan knew how to cultivate friendship.

There is no Soviet Union today, and no Reagan. But there is so a heavy hostile neocon climate that if Trump continues trying to cultivate friendship with Putin or take him to his ranch, Soros-funded Republicans and Throckmorton-incited evangelicals will charge Trump of cowardly appeasement.

Yet, today’s reality is not what Kengor seems to have tried to portray: U.S. Christian capitalism vs. Soviet atheistic communism. The conflict today is the U.S. and especially its evangelicals giving in to neocons and their wars.

In Russia today, there is no atheistic communism controlling its society, according to William Murray in an interview to Julio Severo. Putin is only defending his own country and Russian-speaking Orthodox Christians in Eastern Ukraine. He is only reacting to a coup by Soros and neocons.

The conflict is neocons vs. Putin or Putin vs. neocons. Which side will Trump choose? Which side will U.S. evangelicals choose?

Ukraine and its crisis are not a problem for the U.S. and its disastrous foreign policy, which caused the crisis.

Now, the least the U.S. can do is to let Putin try to clean the mess Obama, neocons and Soros did in Ukraine against Russia.

Evangelicals should not get involved in neocon wars. But they can pray that God’s will may prevail over Soros and neocons. 

They can also encourage Trump to fulfill his campaign discourse, which was essentially against neocons. Only with God’s help Trump can resist neocons.

And with God’s help, evangelicals should expose neocons and other evangelicals who help them.

Portuguese version of this article: Por que atirar os evangélicos dos EUA no conflito provocado por Soros na Ucrânia?

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

What Is Neoconservatism (Neocon)?

Pro-Family Warmongers, Pro-Sodomy Neocons and Pro-Sodomy Non-Neocons: What Is Worse for Christians?

Christians’ Love of the Warfare State Is Killing Other Christians

Left-Wing Billionaire George Soros and His Plan of Global Chaos

Ronald Reagan: A Christian Example against Communism

Exclusive Interview with William J. Murray, Defender of Persecuted Christians, on Russia

Left-Wing Billionaire George Soros and His Plan of Global Chaos

By Julio Severo

Major media outlets in the U.S. have ignored the leak of thousands of emails from Open Society Foundation (OSF) by the activist hacker group DCLeaks. OSF, which was founded by the left-wing billionaire George Soros, has funneled billions of dollars over the past two decades to left-wing organizations in the U.S. and throughout the world.

According to the documents, Soros has given more than $30 million to groups working for Hillary Clinton’s election in November, making him her largest single donor. So it is likely the case that the media’s support for Clinton has played some role in the mainstream media’s bid to bury the story.

Of course, another reason for the cover-up is that the mostly pro-abortion and pro-sodomy media is fond of the most pro-abortion and pro-sodomy candidate in this U.S. election, as they have been fond of the equally pro-abortion and pro-sodomy incumbent President Barack Hussein Obama.

DCLeaks exposes the megalomaniacal nature of Soros’s socialist philanthropic project. No corner of the globe is unaffected by his efforts — from Ukraine to Brazil. No policy area is left untouched — from the gay agenda to anti-Israel politics.

On the surface, the vast number of groups and people he supports seem unrelated. After all, what does climate change have to do with Islamic immigration to Europe and America? What does Ukraine have to do with U.S. national interests?

DCLeaks documents show how Soros-backed projects foster his globalist ambitions in the name of democracy, human rights, economic, racial and sexual justice and other lofty terms. In other words, Soros’s projects and organizations work to subvert nations, from America and Europe to Israel and Russia. His most shining example of subversion is Ukraine.

“Soros has provided more than $100 million to support Ukrainian groups,” according to WorldNetDaily, which also said that “Soros heavily invested in the Ukraine crisis.” The Ukrainian revolution was more than a people’s revolution. It was Soros’s revolution, and his special trophy. It is his revolutionary crown.

Because Russia was his main opposition in Ukraine, Soros has targeted mainly Putin. In his article titled “Putin is a bigger threat to Europe’s existence than ISIS,” Soros said, “The leaders of the US and the EU are making a grievous error in thinking that president Vladimir Putin’s Russia is a potential ally in the fight against Islamic State. The evidence contradicts them. Putin’s aim is to foster the EU’s disintegration.”

But, according to DCLeaks, who is working to disintegrate Europe, America, Israel and even Russia is not Russia, which has become merely his favorite scapegoat. It is Soros himself.

Soros’s actions have been strong on behalf of Muslim immigration. From the U.S. to Europe and Israel, Soros is behind a worldwide push to use immigration to undermine Europe, America and Israel. The leaked emails show that his left-wing groups have interfered in European elections to elect politicians who support open border policies for Muslim immigrants from the Arab world and to support financially journalists who report sympathetically on these immigrants and their Islamic religion.

Soros’s groups are on the ground enabling illegal immigrants to enter the U.S. and Europe. They have sought to influence U.S. Supreme Court rulings on illegal immigration from Mexico. They have worked with Muslim and other groups to demonize Americans and Europeans who oppose open borders.

They have also worked to demonize Israel and Russia.

Parallel to these efforts are Soros-supported groups’ push not only for gay “marriage” but for unisex public bathrooms.

They support not only an alleged right of women to serve in combat units, but also efforts to force soldiers to live in unisex barracks. In other words, they support efforts to destroy people’s sexual privacy and identity.

As far as Israel is concerned, Soros-backed groups work to delegitimize every aspect of Israeli society as racist and illegitimate. Soros uses Palestinians to claim that Israel is a racist state and funds moderate leftist groups, radical leftist groups, Israeli Arab groups and Palestinian groups.

Even though Soros is an American from Jewish extraction, his plans and actions are clearly against Israel. He is an anti-Zionist Jew.

In many ways, Donald Trump’s campaign is a direct response not to Hillary Clinton, but to Soros himself. Does Soros support Islamic immigration? Trump opposes it. Does Soros support the Ukrainian revolution? Trump supports Russia. Does Soros support the Palestinian cause against Israel? Trump supports Israel. Does Soros hate Putin? Trump wants friendship with Putin. Does Soros see Russia, not ISIS, as the biggest threat? Trump sees ISIS, not Russia, as the biggest threat.

Trump’s support for Russia has led some prominent individuals, including a former CIA director, to say that Trump is a “Russian agent.” In contrast, no one ever accuses Clinton of being a Soros agent or an Islamic agent.

By supporting a ban on Muslim immigration, backing Israel and Russia and supporting Britain’s exit from the EU, Trump acts as a direct foil to Soros’s multi-billion dollar efforts. It is a war between billionaire Trump and billionaire Soros.

DCLeaks exposed the immensity of the Soros-funded Left’s campaign in Europe, America and Israel, including Soros plans to “counter Russian foreign policy and subvert traditional Russian values.” The “direct democracy” movements that he supports are nothing less than calls for mob rule. As F. William Engdahl said: “George Soros, the hedge fund speculator turned self-proclaimed philanthropist, and his tax-exempt foundations are an integral part of that pre-emptive war machine.”

So it is no wonder that Soros-backed groups were kicked from Russia in 2015, because Russian officials understood that these groups wanted to destabilize Russia.

For their own survival, the U.S., Europe and Israel should also expel these groups.

If Trump wins the U.S. presidential election, ISIS, not Russia, will be treated as the biggest threat to America’s and Europe’s existence. In this case, Russia will be America’s partner against ISIS. And if Trump fully understand Soros’s and Clinton’s obsession to promote abortion and sodomy, he is going to fight to promote life and family values.

Yet, if Clinton wins, Russia, not ISIS, will be treated as the biggest threat to America’s and Europe’s existence. In this case, ISIS will be America’s partner against Russia. This is not just imagination. Both Putin and Trump have denounced that ISIS was created by Clinton and Obama, whose Soros-backed sanctions against Russia over Ukraine are helping ruin Russian economy. And Soros’s expertise is to profit from troubled economies.

Christians also have been targeted by Soros’ plots. The Center for Constitutional Rights, a Soros-funded Marxist group, filed a lawsuit against Rev. Scott Lively for “crime against humanity.” His crime? He expressed the traditional Christian view on the homosexual perversions in the Ugandan Parliament. He has also been an international advocate for the Russian law banning homosexual propaganda to children and adolescents. This law is hated by Soros, Clinton and Obama. Lively says that Obama used the Ukrainian issue as an excuse to impose sanctions against Russia, when his real motivation was the Russian anti-sodomy law.

If Soros is so successful in the U.S. presidential election as he was in his leftist chaos and revolution in Ukraine, Hillary Clinton will be the next president of the United States, and Soros and his Marxist machine will have more power against Christians like Lively.

Yet, as far as it depends on DCLeaks, a group of Russian hackers exposing Soros and his global revolutionary chaos, American voters should not give Soros-backed Clinton the opportunity to turn the U.S. into a Soros-controlled Ukraine.

With information from the Jerusalem Post and other international agencies.

Portuguese version of this article: Bilionário esquerdista George Soros e seu plano de caos mundial

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Beware of the Revolution Man: Socialist Billionaire George Soros Spent $33 Million to Turn Ferguson Protest into National Revolution

Top Anti-Russia Journalist Presents a Dossier Suggesting Trump May Be a Russian Agent

Former CIA director endorses Hillary Clinton, supports Muslims in CIA and characterizes Trump as Putin’s agent

A Trap for Trump

Is Trump a KGB Agent?

Russia Suspected in Cyber Attack on Campaign of Pro-Sodomy Hillary Clinton

Siding with the “religion of peace”: Obama, Bush, Brzezinski…

Putin Loves Hillary!

Trump and the Pope: a Right-Wing Populist (Today) Clashing with a Left-Wing Populist

Pro-Family Cannibalism?

By Julio Severo

C-Fam has been doing a nice work of exposing pro-abortion and pro-sodomy activities, groups and individuals around the world. But now, its director Austin Ruse did a recent un-nice work of exposing one of our people — namely, Dr. Scott Lively —, accusing him as a “boogeyman” used by homosexualist groups. In his article “Anatomy of a Mythical Boogeyman,” Ruse employed indeed a mischievous ruse to justify a moral cannibalization of Lively and his reputation.

Scott Lively

Ruse said:

Gay activists are not really afraid of Scott Lively. They know he’s had little to no effect overseas. He is their invention, a vehicle to keep their base riled up and the direct mail checks flowing.

Based on rumors, Ruse also belittled Lively:

He has bummed around the pro-family movement for many years but has never really been accepted by the mainstream groups. I am told he does not work well with others. One major pro-family figure told me that Lively is just as happy attacking other pro-family people as he is going after the LGBTs.

A Catholic attacking an evangelical. Something new?

So if gay activists choose a valid victim (Catholic Ruse) to trash, we are supposed to defend him. But if they choose an invalid victim (evangelical Lively), are we supposed to trash him too?

Last year, Matt Barber (who is not an unknown leader in the pro-family movement) wrote an article published on WorldNetDaily (which also is not unknown in the pro-family movement) defending Lively:

“As did Christ, Scott Lively speaks absolute truth, in absolute love, with absolutely no fear of personal destruction or even death. He loves everyone, whether friend or foe, Christian or pagan, straight or gay. For example, Scott and his family took into their home and nursed, both physically and spiritually, the late Sonny Weaver, a former homosexual who died, as so many have, from AIDS – a natural consequence of unnatural behavior. Sonny became homosexual after being raped at 7 years old by a gay man in a local YMCA. He became a former homosexual after accepting Jesus as Lord of his life.”

Ruse’s boogeyman piece received an intelligent answer from a fellow Catholic named “bonaventure,” who said:

Dear Austin

You do realize that the homofascist organizations like HRC, GLAAD, etc., refer to you no differently than they refer to Scott Lively?

Maybe Lively is “marginal” (i.e., has a small, unconventional, protestant/fundamentalist ministry, etc). And maybe he doesn’t get along too well with the more mainstream pro-life ministries (many of which opposed various state level Personhood amendments). So what? So what if he doesn’t share your humor, or doesn’t appreciate listening to Timothy Dolan’s “jokes” on different pro-life organizations’ board meetings?

You should have shown Scott Lively under a better light in your article, rather than scoff at him — which is no better than elevating him to be the chief boogeyman. Because, on the other side of the culture war, you are as much a boogeyman as Scott Lively is. In fact, you may even have your own “crimes against humanity” federal lawsuit badge of honor soon…

Seriously and without sarcasm: rather than presenting Scott Lively under the negative light as you did in your article (correct me if I am reading too much into it), you should have rather contacted him somehow, and joined him on a common front with whatever force and influence you actually HAVE.

Another reader, Nicola M. Costello, commented:

Why gratuitously trash Scott Lively, a leader on our side of the issue Mr. Ruse?

Homosexualist group GLAAD has a malicious bio sketch of Ruse, basically describing him as a version 2 of Scott Lively. Should now we treat Ruse as boogeyman 2?

Homosexual blog JoeMyGod, in a post titled “Austin Ruse To Scott Lively: You Can’t Sit With Us,” said about the Ruse-Lively imbroglio: “Delicious, delicious, delicious.”

In their ruses against Lively and in their “Crimes Against Humanity” lawsuit against him, homosexualist groups want a cannibalization of Lively and much more. Now will they use Ruse’s boogeyman piece as an evidence that pro-family groups are destructive and self-destructive?

In his answer titled “Taking ‘Friendly’ Fire,” Lively said:

“Marxist strategist Saul Alinsky taught his followers to 1) pick a target to be the symbol of their opposition, 2) freeze the target in place through unceasing propaganda, and 3) publicly destroy the target to set an example to those who oppose them. I’ve somehow become that target: the sacrificial scapegoat of the LGBT movement. And, short of a miracle of God, I will be publicly destroyed, if not through the ‘Crimes Against Humanity’ lawsuit then by some other means. If we have learned nothing else about the agitators of the modern LGBT movement, we know they are as relentless and implacable as their ancient counterparts in Sodom, who would not desist from their siege of Lot’s home even though they were struck blind by God.”

Above all, Catholics and evangelicals know, in their Bibles, that Jesus said that a house divided against itself cannot survive. He said:

“Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and a divided household falls.” (Luke 11:17 ESV)

What about a pro-family kingdom cannibalizing itself? Can it survive?

Portuguese version of this article: Canibalismo pró-família?

Source: Last Days Watchman

Articles by or on Scott Lively:

Obama Orchestrated Ukraine Coup to Re-Start Cold War and Prevent Russia from Leading Global Revolt Against LGBT Agenda

Russia vs. the LGBT Globalists

Beware of the Revolution Man: Socialist Billionaire George Soros Spent $33 Million to Turn Ferguson Protest into National Revolution

Gay Magazine Praises Jeb Bush

Land of Billy Graham legalizes homosexual “marriage” and six judges resign rather than be forced to officiate such perversion

Churches warned: “Tidal wave of gay theology” looming

Homosexual “Marriage” and the Last Days

An Open Letter To President Vladimir Putin

If Gay Foreigners Can Sue U.S. Pastor Over Sermons, Who Is Safe?

Good News from Russia: Russians Made Homosexual Agenda Roll Back

A Warning To The Church In America

Christian minister accused of “Crime against Humanity”