Muhammad tops as the most popular baby boy name in Britain

From Muslim cradle to British grave

By Julio Severo

There is a surge in Islamic names in the U.K. in 2014, according to the Daily Mail.

Mosque in Britain

The champion is Muhammad, which is now the most popular male baby name in Britain.

Predictably, Muslims will outnumber the ethnic British people in a few decades, and U.K. will be officially Islamic.

Today, many “English” Muslims, who are not ethnic British, are joining Islamic terrorist groups in the Middle East. Usually, they were born to immigrant parents.

In the past, U.K. sent Christian missionaries to Muslim lands. Now, U.K. sends Muslims to kill Christians in Syria and Iraq. This is a foretaste of what ethnic British will experience from their fake ‘compatriots’ in the next years.

From a Christian hotbed U.K. is becoming an Islamic hotbed.

Why is this happening? The British people do not like babies and large families. When U.K. was Christian, they knew that God likes babies and large families and that the natural law fosters them.

Now Britain loves the contraceptive culture, with its bonus of death culture. But the natural law has no respect for both destructive cultures.

U.K. has no respect for their Christian heritage or the natural law.

Any culture that maintains marriage, family and babies will survive. Any culture that despises them will die away. So it just natural that the British culture is giving place to the Islamic culture.

A bigger and bigger Muslim cradle spells a bigger and bigger British grave.

Britain has lost in the cradle, and soon Muslims will give them a cultural, religious and ethnic grave.

Portuguese version of this article: Maomé se torna o nome mais popular para bebês na Inglaterra

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Rivers of Blood: A Brazilian pro-life Evangelical writes about the contraceptive culture and prophecies in Revelation

The folly of man’s planning

Christian Persecution Follows US, UK and France in Kosovo, Libya, Iraq and Syria

Are Conservatives and Socialists ‘Brothers’? George W. Bush Calls Bill Clinton His ‘Brother’

By Julio Severo

George W. Bush has described Bill Clinton as a ‘brother from another mother’ in a gushing interview about their surprising friendship, according to Daily Mail.

Clinton and Bush

He added that his own father ‘serves as a father figure’ to Clinton, who pushed the elder Bush out of office in 1992.

The Daily Mail reported that after becoming president, Clinton frequently sought Bush Sr.’s advice, just as Bush Jr. did with Clinton when he was elected America’s 43rd president.

Did these mutual advices include abortion and homosexuality? After all, before Obama, Clinton was the most prominent pro-abortion and pro-sodomy U.S. president. In contrast, Bush was generally pro-life and pro-family.

Did their friendship involve moral clashes? I have never heard about it.

In fact, I have never heard Bush openly criticizing Clinton’s pro-abortion and pro-sodomy policies. And even now that the U.S. government has been championing, through its State Department and USAID, the promotion of the homosexual agenda around the world, Bush’s voice of protest has been heard nowhere.

In 2007, in his visit to Brazil, Globo, the largest TV network in Brazil, contacted me for an interview, because, according to its journalist, I was one of the few Brazilians supportive of Bush. My support was based on pro-life and pro-family values.

I honored Bush because of these values.

Bush could honor these same values and his alleged Christian convictions by exposing and denouncing the leftist wickedness of men like Clinton and Obama. Why does he never have done it?

They are not brothers in the abortion and the sodomy issues. But, apparently, in the U.S. foreign policy there are higher interests. Clinton funded the Venezuelan Marxism in the 1990s by letting his country to buy the Venezuelan oil, thereby helping Venezuela fund Marxism in Latin America, including Foro de São Paulo. Bush never criticized Clinton for this funding. On the contrary, he did the same thing in the 2000s. So Clinton and Bush were brothers in the funding of the Venezuelan Marxism.

They were also brothers when they supported Saudi Arabia and Turkey, two foremost Muslim nations involved in international Islamic terrorism.

It seems that the message of their ‘brotherhood’ is:

It does not matter if you are conservative or socialist, support America, which has everything you need, whether conservatism or socialism. America can satisfy your ideological preference if you support her.

America can satisfy you even religiously. If you are (conservative or liberal) Christian, America has top liberal and conservative Christians to your liking. If you are Muslim, America has a Muslim as director of CIA and Muslims even in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). As you, DHS labels conservative Christians as “terrorists”!

America can satisfy you in the pro-life and pro-abortion issue. But as far as pro-life stances are concerned, America can satisfy you only in the private setting. Satisfaction about the U.S. government promoting and imposing an ideology is guaranteed only to pro-abortion and pro-sodomy activists, as the U.S. government is committed only to this cause.

Bill Clinton is socialist, and he has a pro-abortion and pro-sodomy record to confirm it.

George Bush is conservative and he has a pro-life and pro-family record to confirm it.

Yet, apparently, when the subject is U.S. supremacy, both disregard their “irreconcilable” moral and ethical differences and become “brothers.”

Another factor uniting them and making them brothers is the U.S. politics of imposing on Israel a two-state solution. This is, even though God wants only the Jews in the land of Israel, the U.S. wants Jews and Palestinian Arabs in that land. Both Democrats and Republicans are determined in this plan against Israel. Both Bush and Clinton and now Obama wanted and want to impose a Palestinian nation in the land of Israel.

For Clinton, it is easy to defend a U.S. supremacy with a government eagerly promoting the gay agenda, including by threatening developing nations with aid cut if they do not submit themselves to the U.S. homosexualist impositions.

Yet, how can be easy for Bush to be with his “brother” in this?

In fact, if the Christian conservatism of a man, American or Brazilian, matters less than nationalist interests and ambitions, just as the nation is in grave sin and threatening to turn the world into Sodom, what is the use of being a conservative?

If the Christian conservatism of a man, American or Brazilian, forms an easy alliance with socialists in a nationalist brotherhood, what is the use of being a conservative?

God-oriented conservatism makes a country strong. Socialism, which distorts and attacks God, leaves people weak.

Conservatism and patriotism is good. But when God-oriented conservatism is sacrificed on the altar of nationalism, conservatives and socialists become “brothers,” and the nationalist supremacy makes socialism a winner and pro-family and pro-life values generally big losers.

An example of the nationalist supremacy’s negative effects is the criticism from U.S. homosexual activists, feminists, leftists and rightists directed at the International Forum of the Large Family and the Future of Humanity, held in Moscow last September and attended by fine pro-family leaders from other nations, including the U.S. American leftists attacked it because it was a conservative event. U.S. homosexual activists attacked it because it opposed the gay agenda. American feminists attacked it because it was pro-life. American rightists attacked it because they think that Moscow is not entitled to hold pro-family events. All of them, even though from antagonistic ideological spectrums, were moved by nationalism.

The Moscow event was conservative. I was there. Conservative American-Jewish author Don Feder was there, attacking the culture of death and cultural Marxism. And there were other Americans, who were under threat from their homosexual, feminist, leftist and rightist ultra-nationalist compatriots.

In the past few decades America has produced Clinton, Bush and Obama. Their nationalism, marked by military interventions with a trail of suffering and death for countless Christians around the world, has been strongly accompanied — excepting Bush — by anti-family and anti-life impositions in the United Nations and around the world. The Obama administration is the most pro-Islam and anti-Christian administration in the U.S. history.

Increasingly in this terrifying nationalism, there is no place for respect for life and family. Even during the Bush administration, pro-life and pro-family values never were a top priority as sodomy and abortion have been now in the U.S. foreign policy. Even so, Bush and Clinton are ‘brothers.’ Even so, Bush have never criticized this wicked policy and sodomitic nationalism. He has never criticized the Islamic promotion by the U.S. government.

What is the use of being a pro-life and pro-family Christian conservative when the U.S. nationalism allows his values no priority or even a place of honor?

The fact the U.S. has a sodomitic top priority in its foreign policy, military interventions facilitating Islamic expansion and persecution of Christians around the world and a destructive two-state solution for Israel confirm a destructive nationalism at the service of oligarchic interests and ambitions.

If the two-state solution for Israel unites U.S. presidents in a nationalistic ‘brotherhood,’ Clinton, Bush and Obama are ‘brothers.’ And if promotion of Islam also strengthens this ‘brotherhood,’ then while Obama is the guy who is promoting Islam today, Bush was the guy who immediately after 9/11 said that Islam is a ‘religion of peace.’

After a Nazi attack in 1940, would a Clinton, Bush or Obama have said that Nazism is an ‘ideology of peace’? Why then is Islam, whose adherents love Hitler, afforded a title of peace when its ideology fosters terror and death?

Why was not Bush ashamed of misrepresenting the ideology that violently attacked his country and has been slaughtering thousands of Christians every year?

As a Christian, is he aware that one of the Ten Commandments orders us not to give false testimony? Sadly, even the Pope has broken it by saying recently that “equating Islam with violence is wrong.”

The strange nationalistic ‘brotherhood’ of Clinton, Bush and Obama does not have brought benefit for Christianity and its values. On the other hand, it has been advancing socialism, Islam, abortion and sodomy around the world in a babylonic orgy.

In his autobiography “Decision Points” (Crown), George W. Bush said that he had a spiritual conversion through Billy Graham. He said, “As I read the Bible, I was moved by the stories of Jesus’ kindness to suffering strangers, His healing of the blind and crippled, and His ultimate act of sacrificial love when He was nailed to the cross.”

About his pro-life values, he explained, “The abortion issue is difficult, sensitive, and personal. My faith and conscience led me to conclude that human life is sacred. God created man in His image and therefore every person has value in His eyes. It seemed to me that an unborn child, while dependent on its mother, is a separate and independent being worthy of protection in its own right. When I saw [my daughters] Barbara and Jenna on the sonogram for the first time, there was no doubt in my mind they were distinct and alive. The fact that they could not speak for themselves only enhanced society’s duty to defend them.”

Yet, he added, “Many decent and thoughtful people disagreed, including members of my family.”

One of these people is his wife, Laura Bush, who in her autobiography “Spoken from the Heart” (Simon and Schuster), said, “I have always believed that abortion is a private decision.”

Can the killing of an innocent child be a ‘private’ decision?

To defend life, Bush had to disappoint his wife and a multitude of pro-abortion activists.

Why not disappoint a larger number of pro-death and pro-unjust war radicals? Why not disappoint the oligarchic forces ruling in the U.S. in administration after administration?

A spiritual conversion puts you in a new family.

I would like my article to reach Bush and challenge him to commit himself more to his Christian brotherhood, with international Christians suffering on the trail of the U.S. military (mis)adventures that facilitate Islamic expansion, than to his nationalistic ‘brotherhood.’

Can Clinton and Obama become Bush’s brothers? Yes. Under Christ, they can enter the new family — which has nothing to do with the promotion of socialism, Islam, abortion, sodomy and destructive oligarchic interests and ambitions.

This new family is about knowing Christ as a Savior and Lord, living with Him and seeking and expanding His Kingdom (His Government) and His righteousness.

Portuguese version of this article: Conservadores e socialistas são ‘irmãos’? George W. Bush chama Bill Clinton de seu ‘irmão’

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Beware of False Conservatives! Neocons and Their Leftist Mistreatment of Christians

Washington, D.C.: The Seat of the Immoral World Government

Pope says equating Islam with violence is wrong

By Julio Severo

According to Reuters, Pope Francis said on Sunday that equating Islam with violence is wrong.

Pope and Turkish mufti

Francis, the leader of 1.2 billion Roman Catholics, told reporters aboard his plane returning from a visit to Turkey that it was wrong for anyone to react to terrorism by being enraged against Islam.

Francis’ predecessor, Benedict XVI, caused, according to Reuters, storms of protest throughout the Islamic world in 2006, when he made a speech that suggested Islam espouses violence.

Benedict said he had been misunderstood and apologized.

The Argentine pope has been trying to foster cooperation with ‘moderate’ Islam in order to work for peace. He said that ending poverty was crucial, because he thinks that poverty gives rise to “the recruitment of terrorists.”

In his visit to Turkey, Francis told the mufti twice that Christians and Muslims must ‘adore’ God.

While he was rebuking those who equate Islam with violence and fostering cooperation with ‘moderate’ Islam, it seems that he does not know a famous statement by Turkish president Tayyip Erdogan: “The term ‘moderate Islam’ is ugly and offensive — Islam is Islam.”

It seems also that he does not know that recently Erdogan and his government held an Islamic summit for Latin America, a mostly Catholic region now under the Islamic radar of Turkey.

With information from Reuters, AP and Jihad Watch.

Portuguese version of this article: Papa diz que igualar islamismo com violência é errado

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Rising Turkish Menace: U.S. and NATO Ally Wants Islamic Advance in Latin America

White Teen Killed by Black Cop and Black Teen Killed by White Cop and Media Preferences

By Julio Severo

Two years ago an unarmed white teen was killed by a black police officer and his death drew no media attention and no national and international protests.

Violent Ferguson protests

According to the Washington Times, Gilbert Collar, a white, unarmed 18-year-old man under the influence of drugs, was shot and killed October 6, 2012, by Officer Trevis Austin, who is black, in Mobile, Alabama. Despite public pressure for an indictment, a Mobile County grand jury refused to bring charges against Officer Austin, concluding that the officer acted in self-defense.

No national and international reaction and media coverage and activism. No protests. No United Nations intervention. Nobody burnt buildings to the ground for the white teen. And if they had done so, the media would have condemned it.

Now compare a similar shooting death on August 9. Michael Brown, a black unarmed 18-year-old man under the influence of drugs, was shot and killed by Officer Darren Wilson, who is white, in Ferguson.

A St. Louis County grand jury’s decision not to indict the officer ignited violence and looting in Ferguson and days of protests nationwide against “racial injustice.” The black population burnt buildings to the ground for the black teen, as the media watched without condemning it. The United Nations, which did not intervene for the white teen gunned down, intervened for the black teen gunned down.

There were national and international protests.

Why in America does an unarmed black teen killed by a white cop cause outrage and an unarmed white teen killed by a black cop doesn’t?

Should white populations also burn buildings to the ground to drawn media’s attention for the “racism” of black cops who kill unarmed white teens?

No, because the U.S. media has no idolatry for white people.

Years ago Erik Rush, a black Christian author, wrote a relevant book entitled “Negrophilia,” published by WND. Yet, he was too generous. The Ferguson case shows that the problem in America surpasses negrophilia. It is negrolatry and even reverse racism promoted by a negrolatric media.

If white idolatry in the past of America is condemned today, why should modern-day black idolatry be spared?

The color of the offender or of the cop is irrelevant. An offender shot by a cop should be no cause for racial idolatry or ideological opportunism.

Yet, by the will of a negrolatric and ideologically opportunistic media, an offender can be entitled to special treatment, solely because of his skin color. And a sordidly pro-abortion and pro-sodomy individual can be entitled to presidency, solely because of his skin color too.

In today’s America, does skin color matter more than character’s color?

With information of The Washington Times.

Portuguese version of this article: Adolescente branco morto por policial negro e adolescente negro morto por policial branco e as preferências da mídia americana

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Nelson Mandela: Israel Is Terrorist and Islamic Arabs Are Innocent

Rising Turkish Menace: U.S. and NATO Ally Wants Islamic Advance in Latin America

By Julio Severo

The president of Turkey has re-written history by claiming Muslim explorers, not Christopher Columbus, discovered America.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan

Recep Tayyip Erdogan, chief of America’s NATO ally, said November 15 that Islamic sailors found the New World in 1178. He said, “Muslims discovered America in 1178, not Christopher Columbus.” Turkey is the only Islamic nation in the NATO.

His theory — which is supported only by Islamic historians — came to light in a televised speech during an Istanbul summit of Muslims leaders from Latin America.

The summit was attended by 76 Islamic leaders from 40 countries. Latin America was represented by Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Suriname, Uruguay, Paraguay, Nicaragua, Panama, Colombia, Bolivia, the Dominican Republic, Guyana, Ecuador, Jamaica and Haiti.

Turkish summit for Latin America

Erdogan brought up the supposed connection in a bid to establish a long history for links between Turkey and Latin America.

The summit’s main theme was “Building Our Traditions and Our Future.”

Apparently, Turkey is aiming its Islamic expansionism at Latin America, which does not have a significant number of Muslims. In fact, with Turkey’s aid, Muslims intend an international Islamic confederation.

In a previous conference dubbed “Antichrist Confederacy,” Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Chairman of the International Union for Muslim Scholars (IUMS), announced in Turkey:

“The Caliphate in today’s age must be established through a number of several states that are governed by Shariah and supported by both, the rulers and the people in the form of a federation or confederation and not as it was in the past.”

His announcement was published throughout the Muslim world, including CNN Arabic version. IUMS represents the largest body of Muslim scholars worldwide.

Before its summit of Muslim leaders from Latin America, Turkey organized the Eurasia Islamic Council meeting, focusing on Islamic expansion in Eurasia.

Yet, Turkish expansionism has never been under the radar of the U.S. and one of the main architects of the U.S. alliance with Islamic terrorist groups, Zbigniew Brzezinski. Ben Barrack has said,

“There is clearly a fixation on the part of Brzezinski that controlling Eurasia is key to U.S. dominance. However, what he’s clearly been missing is that Turkey is the country that has been seeking Eurasian dominance while NATO countries continue to view it as an ally.”

Brzezinski’s focus of concern is only Russia. To neutralize Russia, for decades he helped Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida. And today America is a backer of the two main sources for the Islamic terror in the world: Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

So while the U.S. and its NATO are focusing on Russia as an Eurasian threat, their only Islamic ally is expanding its Islamic dominance in Eurasia.

Erdogan and Obama

Not only in Eurasia, but internationally. Turkey has also organized the Summit of Muslim African Leaders, the Meeting of the European Muslims, Meeting of the Balkan Religious Affairs Presidents and the World Islamic Scholars Peace, Moderation and Common Sense. Turkey is working very hard for an Islamic confederation.

The only Islamic ally of the U.S. in the NATO is, according to Robert E. Kaplan, reconstructing the Ottoman Empire, with the U.S. military interventions’ aid. Kaplan said,

“Each of these United States military interventions occurred in an area that had been part of the Ottoman Empire, and where a secular regime was replaced by an Islamist one.”

And during the Ottoman Empire, the land of Israel was under Islamic control for three centuries. Christians also had their lot of suffering under this Islamic empire.

One hundred year ago, Turkey committed one of the worst Islamic genocides against Christians. It was the Armenian Genocide, which has never been recognized by supposedly large Christian nations, including the U.S., Germany and Brazil, which are apparently fearful of infuriating their ally, whose Islamic expansion in the past brought blood-shedding.

Even today, Turkey is involved in blood-shedding. According to WND, “Turkey has supported jihadist groups whose fighters later morphed into ISIS fighters,” who have been slaughtering Christians in Syria and Iraq.

WND also reported, “Turkey is now perhaps the biggest al-Qaida base in the world.”

What will Turkey’s expansionist plans, especially for Latin America, bring for the next years?

I do not know. But in its summit for Latin America, Turkey promised that it is “Building Our Traditions and Our Future.”

If you include Bible prophecies, the Turkish picture gets much darker.

According to WND, theologians, both Christian and Jewish, have long interpreted the Antichristian armies of Gog of Magog as coming from the land of Turkey. Some of these theologians are: Hippolytus of Rome (170–235), Moses Ben Maimonides (aka Rambam) (1135–1204), Nicholas of Lyra (1270–1349), Martin Luther (1483–1546), John Wesley (1703–1755) and Jonathan Edwards (1703–1758).

Do their interpretations about Turkey match the record and behavior of this Islamic nation? If so, will Turkey want to have its Ottoman Empire again? And will it want to invade Israel to reestablish its ownership over the land of the Jews?

The letters of the Apostle John in the Book of Revelation were addressed to the seven churches in Asia Minor — today Turkey. Other important Christian church that disappeared under Islamic Turkey is Hagia Sophia, in Istanbul (former Constantinople). Hagia Sophia was the oldest and largest Christian cathedral (from 537 to 1453) in the world. From 1453 to 1931, Islamic Turkey used it as a mosque.

Yet, if you thought that these Christian tragedies and Turkish Islamic expansionism are old stories, think again.

After 9/11, mosques began popping up across America, and Turkey, with Saudi Arabia, is one of the Islamic nations benefiting from the Islamic terrorist attack.

The government of Turkey is building a $100 million mega mosque, the Turkish-American Culture and Civilization Center in Lanham, Maryland. Would Turkey, or even Saudi Arabia, allow the U.S. government to build a $100 million mega Christian church in their lands?

Turkey’s Islamist Prime Minister traveled to the U.S. to attend the groundbreaking ceremony for the mosque in 2013. Would Turkey allow a U.S. president to inaugurate a mega church in its nation?

Another important question is: Did Muslims discover America? There is no evidence of it today. But if America keeps its Islamic ally free to advance, it might be impossible to disprove Turkey’s claims in the future that Muslims conquered America.

Today, Turkey helps Islamic terrorist groups slaughtering Christians in the Middle East, wants to conquer America, Eurasia and Latin America and it is advancing unpunished, because it is a NATO and U.S. ally.

Apparently, Turkey will play a major Islamic role in the dark future threatening Christians, Jews, Israel, Latin America and the world. 

With information from WorldNetDaily, DailyMail, Diyanet and GospelPrime.

Portuguese version of this article: Ameaça turca se erguendo: Aliado dos EUA e da OTAN quer avanço islâmico na América Latina

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Obama Using Marxist Experience to promote Muslim Expansion

After 9/11, Mosques Popping Up Across America

Atheist Ed Brayton: Julio Severo is a Brazilian ‘wingnut’

By Julio Severo

Do homosexuality and population control have something in common? If you believe so, then you are a ‘wingnut’ — a label atheist Ed Brayton used against me, Julio Severo, because I am one of these believers.

Ed Brayton

Yet, I am not the only victim of his attacks. He has also attacked WorldNetDaily, and in a C-SPAN show, he labeled Chuck Norris a ‘moron’ because Norris said that if Obama were elected in 2012, his socialism would lead America to 1,000 years of darkness.

I agree with Norris: America can brace herself for 1,000 years of socialist darkness because of Obama and his party.

Overweight Brayton has a blog entitled “Dispatches from the Culture Wars.” He is also an advocate of evolutionism.

According to Conservapedia, Chuck Norris thinks that most obesity in America is the result of hedonism and that Christians have good reasons to believe that a hedonist lifestyle is a causal factor of atheism. This is another reason overweight Ed Brayton hates Norris.

Brayton has appeared on the Rachel Maddow Show. Maddow was the first openly lesbian anchor to host a major prime-time news program in the United States. He has also been a guest in other liberal shows.

For a lack of arguments and rationality, the only option left for leftist individuals is to resort to name-calling: ‘wingnut,’ ‘moron,’ etc. Also, dirty words are their natural language. How do I know it? The Brazilian secular and Christian Left has used this language when talking about me and my conservative views.

About the American Left, it seems that its adherents are not appreciating the column Matt Barber has given me in his conservative BarbWire.

In his blog, Brayton describes himself, “After spending several years touring the country as a stand up comedian, Ed Brayton tired of explaining his jokes… and turned to writing… for the voices in his head.”

I have always suspected that socialists have strange voices in their heads — in the Bible’s times, people called this condition ‘demonic possession.’

This time the voices told the clumsy comedian that homosexuality does not reduce birth rates and that, yes, he is an intelligent guy!

His voices have also told him that in the cultural war to spread socialist and homosexualist lies around the world, Julio Severo is another enemy deserving his attacks.

Loathing it or not, at least he is reading my BarbWire column!

Here is his article against me:

Wingnut: The Gay All About Population Control

Julio Severo is a Brazilian wingnut who is now writing for BarbWire, where he makes the incredibly absurd claim that the fight for LGBT equality is really all about reducing the population. Because, silly rabbit, causal connections are for intelligent people, none of which can be found here. Referring to a USAID conference on gay rights around the world last week, he writes:

The conference is bringing together government officials, private funders, business leaders, scholars and homosexual activists from more than 30 countries to increase coordination, cooperation and resources dedicated to promoting the homosexual agenda around the world, and to ensure full inclusion of homosexual activists in political power structures.

The conference is focusing on diplomatic and foreign assistance strategies to address homosexual issues around the world. It is also discussing the best ways to engage faith communities to support the homosexual agenda and to integrate it into development programs.

If Sodom gave the world an untrained and unsophisticated homosexual militancy, America can be proud that she has surpassed Sodom, by giving the world an aggressive, trained and sophisticated homosexual militancy.

Will the U.S. government efforts to integrate the gay agenda into development programs and political power structures succeed? I fear so. Forty years ago, NSSM 200, a highly classified U.S. government document, made it clear that the U.N., the World Bank and many other major international organizations should be used to integrate population control into development and healthcare programs. Population control was presented as “family planning,” but its objective was never family well-being. It was population reduction to meet the U.S. ambitions to seize or save natural resources from other nations for current and future American use. Because of the U.S. efforts forty years, today “family planning” is as natural as marriage itself.

Evidently, now the strategy is to make the gay agenda and its fake marriage as natural as “family planning.”

God turned Sodom into ashes. America is distinguishing herself by making Sodom global and refined. She is spreading the Sodom ashes around the world to sow a new, bigger and global Sodom.

Yes, because obviously if we start treating gay people like human beings with equal rights, everyone is going to immediately going to become gay, stop having children and destroy the species. Because The Gay, according to the Christian right, is the single most alluring thing in the history of ever. It’s so overwhelmingly tempting that we must make the lives of gay people miserable in order to keep people becoming gay. This is what these bigots actually believe.

Portuguese version of this article: Ateísta Ed Brayton: Julio Severo é um ‘doido’ brasileiro

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Washington, D.C.: The Seat of the Immoral World Government

American Left Hates Julio Severo!

People for the American Way’s Leftist Diatribe Against a Brazilian Conservative

“Homosexuality is Unnatural”: The Last Great Message of Myles Munroe on the Gay Agenda

Obama’s Immigration Amnesty: Joy for Some and Sadness for Many

By Julio Severo

Obama announced yesterday, November 20, 2014, a major amnesty benefiting millions of illegal immigrants.

Obama is not doing it for kindness. It is similar to “bolsa-família,” a populist family-fund program from the Brazilian government that provides cash to millions of Brazilians. In fact, the government of President Barack Obama thinks that this Brazilian program is very important.

Many of those benefited by Obama’s amnesty are also Brazilians, who are fleeing from the leftist hell in Brazil, but by being aided by Obama, they are also aiding to produce the leftist hell in the U.S.

The handout (family fund) of President Dima Rousseff is bad, but is the handout (amnesty) of President Barack Obama good? After all, what is this story?

Well, Brazilian evangelical and catholic conservatives who are in the U.S. are celebrating Obama’s immigration amnesty. Some of these Brazilians are my friends and I am seeing their celebration.

Yet, American evangelical and catholic conservatives are not celebrating, because they know that this massive handout is Obama’s strategy to solidify the socialist hell in the U.S. Some of these Americans are my friends and I am seeing their sadness.

In this situation, what side would you choose? Would you celebrate with Brazilian evangelical and catholic conservatives who need the immigration amnesty?

Or would you cry with American evangelical and catholic conservatives?

What side would you choose?

What I find most troubling is the Brazilian attitude. They condemn Rousseff’s family fund as a strategy to solidify her socialist power, but they are eager to get Obama’s immigration amnesty, whose strategy is solidify the socialist power in the U.S.

Immigrants granted amnesty today will be the future voters for Obama’s Democratic Party, which is similar to the ruling Workers’ Party of Rousseff in regard to anti-life and anti-family policies.

Even though most of the immigrants, including Brazilians, are against abortion and gay “marriage,” they have relatives who also need the generous immigration amnesty of the Democratic Party, regardless if this party is pro-abortion and pro-sodomy.

What is most important in this situation?

Money and prosperity. When people want them, they do not care about the means to get them.

I watched on YouTube a prank of a handsome young man in a very expensive car. He drove through several streets and offered — just by signaling with his hands, with no word — a lift to several beautiful young women who were walking on the sidewalk. Even though they were suspicious about him and objected that they did not know him, all of them accepted the ride.

Money, prosperity and comfort draw people.

Obama is offering a ride with the car that past generations of Americans worked hard to get.

Brazilian conservatives do not care about the motivations of him who is offering the ride. They want to ride and be a part of the money, prosperity and comfort.

The socialist side that has this power is going to get the support even from Brazilian conservatives. It is what is happening between them and Obama. They say that they are fleeing Rousseff’s handouts, but run for Obama’s handouts and even ask help from Obama, expecting him to deliver them from socialist Rousseff.

What do not money, prosperity and comfort do to people? They forget that they are conservative. But socialists — whether Obama or Rousseff — do not forget what they are.

Family funds, immigration amnesties and other “rides” are part of the socialist revolution sweeping Brazil and the U.S.

Conservatives should stop using clever and even illegal ways to enter the U.S.

Some years ago I was in a prayer meeting in Brazil and the Presbyterian minister asked prayer for a young couple, who was about to travel to the U.S. It was not just a trip. It was a move.

They had all the papers necessary for the trip. They had paid a very large sum to an American group to get fake papers.

They had a very successful trip. Later, they were granted amnesty. Now, they are “American.” Now, they have money, prosperity and comfort.

Did God hear their prayer?

Is God hearing Obama’s socialist “prayers”?

Portuguese version of this article: Anistia imigratória do Obama: alegria de uns e tristeza de muitos

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

America, Conservative Christians and Third World Expectations

Obama: the “Savior” of the Brazilian Right