OBAMA’S PARTNERS IN PEACE: We Will Turn Israel ‘to Dust’

/0 Comments/in , /by

A banner at an Iranian military parade Wednesday threatened to “turn Tel Aviv and Haifa to Dust,” The Jerusalem Post reported Wednesday.

Iran held military parades across the country to commemorate the start of the 1980 war with Iraq. At the Tehran parade, which was shown on state television, a banner on a military truck read, “If the leaders of the Zionist regime make a mistake then the Islamic Republic will turn Tel Aviv and Haifa to dust.”

Iran displayed its latest military equipment at the parades, including the recently acquired Russian S-300 air defense systems. The Iranian navy displayed over 500 vehicles, including submarines and helicopters, at the parade in the port city of Bandar Abbas.

The test launch of an Iranian ballistic missile received global attention in March because the missile had the phrase “Israel must be wiped from the face of the earth” inscribed on it in Hebrew.

Ahmad Karimpour, a senior adviser to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps’ elite Quds Force, boasted in May that “If the Supreme Leader’s orders [are] to be executed, with the abilities and the equipment at our disposal, we will raze the Zionist regime in less than eight minutes.” (Read more from “OBAMA’S PARTNERS IN PEACE: We Will Turn Israel ‘to Dust'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

A Mysterious Polio-Like Illness That Paralyzes People May Be Surging This Year

/0 Comments/in , /by

Through July, 32 new cases of AFM [acute flaccid myelitis] have been confirmed across the United States this year by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a sharp rise compared with last year, when just seven cases had been confirmed by that month. The numbers have risen steadily since April. In past years, most cases have occurred between August and December, with a peak in October.

Among the many unanswered questions about the condition are what causes it, how best to treat it and how long the paralysis lasts. Although most cases occur in children, AFM occasionally affects adults.

The CDC official who leads the surveillance efforts said that confirmed numbers for August will not be available until the end of this month, but the number of reports she is receiving from doctors around the country continues to rise.

“CDC is looking at these trends very carefully,” Manisha Patel said. “We have sent out several health alerts to states to let them know we are seeing an increase in reporting and to encourage them to communicate with doctors to report these cases in a timely fashion.” (Read more from “A Mysterious Polio-Like Illness That Paralyzes People May Be Surging This Year” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Joe Miller: Alaskans Deserve Debates From U.S. Senate Candidates

/0 Comments/in , , /by

September 21, 2016 —  U.S. Senate candidate Joe Miller stated on Wednesday he is eager to debate Senator Lisa Murkowski, and the other contenders for the seat she currently occupies,  about the issues vital to the future of Alaska and the country.

“Alaskans are not satisfied with the current direction of our state and nation,” said Miller. “They deserve the opportunity to see the candidates for U.S. senate make their case, and regarding Senator Murkowski, justify her votes, in televised events available to the public at large.”

Murkowski is the most liberal “Republican” up for re-election, having voted with President Obama 72 percent of the time during the last session of Congress.

Multiple local news affiliates are seeking to host televised debates. To date, as far as the Miller campaign has been able to determine, Senator Murkowski has failed to commit to most, if not all, of those debates.

“As has been the case in years past, Alaskans deserve debates in a format that allows for the free exchange of ideas, where candidates will be given the opportunity to directly question each other and offer rebuttals, so the event is not merely a series of unchallenged soundbites,” said Miller

Joe Miller is a limited government Constitutionalist who believes government exists to protect our liberties, not to take them away. He supports free people, free markets, federalism, the Constitutional right to life, the 2nd Amendment, religious liberty, American sovereignty, and a strong national defense.

Seven Deadly Reasons Why the Left Loves Islam

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Imagine that some splinter Christian sect existed that preached a sneering contempt for women, sex slavery, hatred for Jews, death to non-believers (and homosexuals), child-marriage, religious conquest, segregation and gross religious discrimination, and the legitimacy of lying whenever it suited the church’s purposes. Imagine that it had been practicing all these evils since shortly after its founding, and had left mountains of corpses on three continents — complete with burned libraries, looted cities and ruined civilizations.

Do you think that secular leftists would spend their time and energy making excuses for such a church? Would they fight like wildcats to admit millions of its followers into Western lands? Or would they boycott any country where it predominated as they did racist South Africa? Would they subject its American followers to ruthless surveillance and government harassment, as the Clinton administration did the Branch Davidians? Would they send the FBI to fill its ranks with helpful informers, as the government did to the white-nationalist Christian Identity “churches”?

The question answers itself.

People whose minds work in linear fashion draw from all this the conclusion that leftists concerned with equality, social justice, and personal freedom would strongly oppose orthodox Islam and rethink their attitude toward Islamic immigration if only they knew the facts. Clearly these well-meaning people just haven’t been informed about the teachings of orthodox Islam and the track record of its faithful followers. So it’s our job to share those facts.

So far so good. We have the duty to do just that. Marshal those Quranic suras, those authoritative haditha, and cite abundant examples of atrocities which those canonical texts have directly inspired. Recount the recent sermons of highly placed widely respected Muslim religious authorities who approve recent attacks of terrorism or gross religious violence.

But don’t get your hopes up.

Far too many leftists have built insuperable barriers to that information, and nothing — literally nothing — you say or do could convince them. While knowledge may be power, the human will is stronger. We are richly capable of denying the facts in front of our faces if they go against where our guts want to lead us.

That raises another, more interesting question: Why would leftists who are outraged, say, that the Catholic church won’t ordain women or that Southern Baptists won’t celebrate same-sex weddings, give a pass to a faith that endorses child polygamy and executes homosexuals? What’s in it for them?

As the author of a book on the Seven Deadly Sins, let me step in here and tell you. I’ll taxonomize the motives of pro-Muslim progressives according to each of those classic human motives. Perhaps not every progressive who’s in denial about Islam is in the grip of Deadly Sins. But I’ll wager that most of them are driven by one or more of the following:

Lust

Plenty of progressive men first adopted their views as a mating strategy. And indeed, spouting feminist rhetoric probably did help them in the bedroom. But this easy intimacy filled their lives with a series of thin-skinned, self-righteous women with an unsleeping vigilance for the slightest trace of “patriarchy.” Perhaps, on a deep, subconscious level, such men can’t help admiring bearded foreigners with harems who don’t have to pay this price for pleasure.

Gluttony

This might seem too trivial to make much of a difference, but you’d be shocked at how many progressives form their immigration policies around the crucial issue of access to ethnic restaurants. It’s not just food, of course. People who hunger to see themselves and be seen as sophisticated and cosmopolitan also want access to hookah-pipe cafes, funky foreign clothes and “exotic” neighborhoods where they can dip into alien cultures — but of course, would never live. Other progressives hunger for approval, and look for a cost-free way to gain it, by siding with supposedly “oppressed” groups like Palestinians, or radical Muslims forced out of countries by secular governments.

Wrath

Too many progressives nurse a deep, insatiable hatred for the Christian and Western past, and also for those of us in the present who are loyal to such things as church, nation or Western civilization. These people don’t so much think as feel that if a roadside Pentecostalist church in Oregon is allowed to abstain from gay weddings without swift and certain punishment, within five years the Spanish Inquisition will be burning witches on Wall Street. Or something. As I said, they don’t sweat the details.

Greed

For the past 30 years, no one has been kept off a TV network or failed to get tenure because he was too friendly to exotic, foreign cultures, or too hostile to Western ones. Even Fox News won’t air the most candid critics of Islam. Those critics have to resort to online TV shows (some of which are excellent, by the way, like The Glazov Gang).

Sloth

It’s so much easier to follow the narrative that makes you comfortable, pumped out by elites whom you have decided to trust, than to ferret out facts that are only likely to ruin your day. And anyway, what can you do? What will happen will happen, and trying to push back against overpowering forces of history is exhausting. What’s the point?

Vainglory

Nothing is lower prestige in our culture today than being a narrow-minded bigot — which is how everyone who matters sees people who criticize other cultures. It suggests that you haven’t traveled to foreign countries, attended elite academies, or mixed with the best kind of people. You might as well just put on a Trump hat, drive a red pickup truck to a NASCAR rally, and stand there listening to Nash-Trash while drinking Budweiser (non-ironically). Please.

Envy

If there’s one worldview that’s predicated on frustrating natural human drives and diverting them into strange, unnatural byways, it’s progressivism. You’re expected to prosper while loathing capitalism, raise boys to play with dolls and girls to play with guns, and compete for social status while battling for equality. Muslims don’t have to fake any of that. Their faith is nothing if not candid: It’s about joining the winning team, with God on its side, which will gladly use force and fraud to make sure it comes out on top — in this life and the next one. Its ethics could have been crafted by bands of Vikings or a cabal of adolescent boys. What fun we would have, some progressives may imagine, if they could only swallow Islam. Most can’t. But they can take vicarious pleasure in seeing it in action, and in watching the Christians squirm. Delicious. (For more from the author of “Seven Deadly Reasons Why the Left Loves Islam” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Americans Support Restrictions on Refugees but Obama Says Screw It Anyway

/0 Comments/in , /by

In his final address to the United Nations as president of the United States, President Obama said “we have to open our hearts” in welcoming refugees all around the world, and that “we have to follow through, even when the politics are hard.” Further, Obama said that “we have to have the empathy to see ourselves” in the plight of refugees, and that in welcoming refugees, “our world will be more secure.”

Oh, really?

Obama’s address at the U.N. comes on the heels of a slew of terrorist attacks in Minnesota, New York, and New Jersey this past weekend. Ahmad Rahami, the terrorist responsible for the bombings in New York and New Jersey, was originally from Afghanistan. Dahir Adan, who stabbed nine people at a Minnesota mall on Saturday, was a Somali immigrant and a suspected ISIS recruit. Both terrorists came to the United States as children.

Despite questions about the vetting process for refugees, the Obama administration is seeking to increase the America’s cap of refugees next year to 110,000, from 85,000 this year. As Conservative Review recently reported, the administration has already surpassed its target number for Syrian refugees this year by about 3,000, for a total of 13,000 refugees from Syria. More than 98 percent of these Syrian refugees are Sunni Muslim, while just 0.4 percent of them are Christian.

A new Rasmussen poll conducted after the weekend terrorist attacks shows that almost half of likely American voters do not want to let in any more refugees to the United States and 62 percent “believe that increasing the number of Middle Eastern and African refugees next year poses an increased national security risk to the United States.” Further,

Voters were similarly opposed and concerned about the national security threat of bringing Syrian refugees here this year, but Obama did it anyway, citing humanitarian concerns and the pressures these immigrants were putting on our European allies. The administration even sped the vetting process for these refugees in order to hit the president’s goal of bringing at least 10,000 here in 2016.

If President Obama is so intent on welcoming poorly-vetted refugees from ISIS-controlled regions into the United States, perhaps he should consider welcoming a few into his new home next year when he leaves office. (For more from the author of “Americans Support Restrictions on Refugees but Obama Says Screw It Anyway” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

N.Y. Times Shafts Top Christian Author

/0 Comments/in , /by

Jonathan Cahn, the two-time New York Times best-selling author, knows what it’s like fighting the odds as a Christian to make the vaunted list – despite having the sales to warrant it.

He made it twice with his first two books, 2012’s “The Harbinger,” which remained on the New York Times’ fiction bestsellers list for more than 100 weeks, and 2014’s “The Mystery of the Shemitah,” which made the list for more than 12 weeks. But the messianic rabbi’s readers won’t be seeing his latest release on the Sept. 26 list.

It’s not for lack of sales for “The Book of Mysteries,” which came out Sept. 8.

Apparently, the book is too mysterious to classify for the guardians of the New York Times list.

Or maybe they’ve just had enough of Cahn’s domination of their charts every other year. (Read more from “N.Y. Times Shafts Top Christian Author” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

What’s at Stake in the Next Supreme Court Term

/0 Comments/in , /by

The next Supreme Court term is beginning Oct. 3—and there’s plenty of contentious issues on the docket for the eight justices to rule on.

“The cases this term may be hard-pressed to match the excitement and media flurry that accompanied highly anticipated rulings in recent years, such as cases involving same-sex marriage, immigration, abortion, and President [Barack] Obama’s signature health care law,” The Heritage Foundation’s Elizabeth Slattery, a legal fellow, and Tiffany Bates, a legal research associate, wrote.

“But the upcoming term has the potential to become an important year for property rights, the separation of powers, and copyright law.”

At an event at The Heritage Foundation on Tuesday, Paul Clement, a former solicitor general of the United States, said, “It is a very interesting time at the court.”

“That doesn’t automatically translate into interesting cases,” he added.

The 2016-17 Supreme Court term begins on Oct. 3. Justices agree to hear about 1 percent, or roughly 70 cases, out of approximately 7,000 petitions for review they receive each year, according to Heritage research. Already the court has agreed to hear arguments for 31 cases and oral arguments are set for 19 cases in October and November.

“It’s certainly right that the court seems to be reluctant to add cases to their docket that they think in advance may well divide them four to four,” Clement said.

Here are three key cases the Supreme Court will hear in its next term.

1. Murr v. Wisconsin

This case is about four siblings who own two adjacent waterfront properties. Their parents built a cabin on the first lot after obtaining the parcels separately in the 1960s. The siblings, decades later, looked into developing or selling the second lot and found that zoning regulations prevented them from doing so and that the state considered both lots to be one property.

“As it turns out under state law not only can they not sell the one parcel, but they are not even allowed now to develop the other parcel, which it seems to me about the most extreme regulatory scheme you can devise,” Carter Phillips, a former assistant to the solicitor general, said at the Heritage event.

Clement and and Phillips have each argued more than 80 before the Supreme Court.

Phillips said this case seems “unbelievably unfair” and that sometimes the government goes too far in its “regulatory scheme.”

The case has not been scheduled for oral argument.

2. Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Pauley

Supreme Court cases sometimes come from the “most unlikely government programs,” Clement said, describing another case, this one involving church and state. The case involves Trinity Lutheran Church and a Missouri scrap tire program.

“When you buy new tires in the state of Missouri … you pay a small tax and that goes into a fund. What that fund helps do is take used tires and instead of having them fill up landfills where they create all sorts of problems, those get sort of shredded and treated and then they get used to make playgrounds for children safer,” Clement said.

In Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Pauley, one of the likely highlights for the term, Trinity Lutheran Church in Missouri applied for a state-funded grant to install a rubber playground surface for the church’s daycare and preschool. The state denied its application on the basis that it was a religious institution.

Oral argument for the case have not been scheduled, but Clement said this is a “very important case.”

“This is perhaps the best example of a case that the court is taking a really long time to schedule for oral argument,” Clement said. “This case was granted in the same sitting where a number of cases were granted last year and scheduled and argued and decided already.”

Clement predicted there could be a closely divided court on this case.

“It does seem like the most logical inference is this is a case where the court is going to take its time scheduling this in the hopes that they might have nine justices to decide the case,” he said.

3. National Labor Relations Board v. SW General, Inc.

Another case this term concerns the president’s power to fill vacancies in government roles. Under the Constitution, the Senate must provide “advice and consent” before the president can appoint officers.

However, the president can nominate “acting” officers to high-level federal offices before the Senate has acted, although federal law limits the length of time such officers can serve and who can be appointed.

The case National Labor Relations Board v. SW General, Inc. challenges “the service of the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon, who was responsible for prosecuting unfair labor practices,” according to Heritage’s research.

Heritage’s Slattery and Bates wrote:

President Obama appointed Solomon as Acting General Counsel in 2010 and also nominated him for the permanent post in 2011. This issue came up in the course of an unfair labor practice charge against SW General, Inc., a company that provides emergency medical services to hospitals; the company asserted that Solomon was serving in violation of the [Federal Vacancies Reform Act].

The case is scheduled for oral argument on Nov. 7. According to Slattery and Bates, “the outcome of this case could have broad and long-reaching effects for the separation of powers and on federal agencies’ actions if their high-level officials were appointed in violation of” the Federal Vacancies Reform Act.

Additional cases that could come up for review by the Supreme Court, according to Heritage research, could be about the Washington Redskins’ trademark, another Obamacare challenge, and the issue of schools’ bathroom policies for transgender students. (For more from the author of “What’s at Stake in the Next Supreme Court Term” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Amid Fetal Tissue Investigation, Republicans Seek Legal Action Against StemExpress

/0 Comments/in , /by

Republicans on a special House panel are recommending that StemExpress and its CEO be held in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over accounting records. The company came under scrutiny after last year’s undercover videos of Planned Parenthood, the nation’s top abortion provider.

Republicans on the panel, which is investigating the market for tissue from aborted babies, see the accounting records as crucial for the investigation.

“To date, the panel has never received a single accounting record from StemExpress,” Republicans on the Select Investigative Panel said in a new staff report. “No names of key personnel have been provided by [StemExpress CEO] Ms. Dyer so that the panel might conduct interviews, and the cost estimates have been ambiguous and inadequate.”

StemExpress is a for-profit biotechnology company that procures tissue from abortion clinics such as Planned Parenthood. StemExpress then transfers that tissue to medical researchers.

Rep. Marsha Blackburn, chairman of the Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives, will hold a procedural vote on Wednesday to hold the biotechnology company in contempt of Congress. Blackburn, a Republican from Tennessee, is aiming to force StemExpress and its CEO Catherine Dyer to comply with congressional subpoenas by using the force of the U.S. Justice Department in order to make the company release its full accounting records.

Before the Justice Department would take action against StemExpress, several more steps would need to occur after Wednesday’s vote. The House Energy and Commerce Committee will also need to hold a procedural vote before it can advance to the full U.S. House of Representatives. It is unclear when Republicans would schedule those votes with the House planning to recess at the end of September or earlier.

The Daily Signal reached out to StemExpress, which claimed it has already complied with congressional records requests.

“StemExpress offered to testify before the select panel, but this offer was ignored,” a spokesman for the company said. “Several House and Senate committees have reviewed our accounting records and closed their investigations. We have provided hundreds of documents to the select panel, including accounting records, both voluntarily and in response to subpoenas. All Americans should be concerned that a congressional panel can use the threat of contempt proceedings to support a narrative that flies in the face of the facts.”

Republicans claim that StemExpress has failed to provide investigators complete copies of accounting records in an attempt to slow walk or stonewall their efforts.

Instead, as they outlined in their latest staff report, StemExpress has provided investigators summary documents of the company’s financial records that “fell far short of actual accounting documents.” Throughout the investigation, StemExpress has maintained that releasing documents with personal information could put individuals at risk.

Questions about whether middleman companies such as StemExpress profit off the sale of fetal tissue were raised in a series of undercover videos produced by the pro-life group Center for Medical Progress. The videos featured employees at StemExpress and Planned Parenthood discussing the sale of fetal tissue. Both companies have denied illegal activity, and Planned Parenthood has since stopped taking reimbursements for fetal tissue donations.

Accounting documents, Republicans say, are needed to determine whether StemExpress profited from the sale of fetal tissue, which the 1993 National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act prohibits. However, it is legal to provide and accept payment to cover reasonable costs for “transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or storage of human fetal tissue.”

The panel’s ranking member Rep. Jan Schakowsky, a Democrat from Illinois, blasted Blackburn and the select panel for attempting to hold StemExpress in criminal contempt of Congress.

“Chair Blackburn has manufactured a controversy over information that she does not need,” Schakowsky said in a press release. “Her threat to punish a small biotechnology company and its owner is particularly outrageous given the company’s compliance with her unilateral subpoena demands. The McCarthyesque threat that StemExpress ‘name names’ of all employees or face congressional contempt is disgraceful.”

Republicans sent StemExpress multiple document requests—including subpoenas—since the panel was established on Oct. 7, 2015. On Sept. 8, 2016, Blackburn “provided one last offer to Stem Express and Ms. Dyer to comply with the subpoenas.”

“Having exhausted its efforts to obtain compliance from the subpoena recipients,” the majority’s staff report reads, “Chairman Blackburn recommends that StemExpress, LLC, and Catherine Spears Dyer be held in contempt for their willful failure to fully comply with the panel’s subpoenas issued to them.” (For more from the author of “Amid Fetal Tissue Investigation, Republicans Seek Legal Action Against StemExpress” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Inspired Attacks Show Strength of Islamic State, Experts Say

/0 Comments/in , /by

After the terrorist attacks this weekend, President Barack Obama acknowledged a link between the central Islamic State and lone bad actors, even as the administration has frequently drawn a distinction in the past.

National security experts believe terror attacks “inspired” by the radical groups are just as dangerous—potentially more so—than if ISIS draws up the plan of attack.

The independent bad actors are clearly “executing the will of the organization,” said Bill Roggio, the editor of The Long War Journal.

“ISIS says, if you can’t come down here and fight with us, fight at home, it might even be better,” Roggio, also a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “ISIS and al-Qaeda are a greater movement where in many cases these people pledge their allegiance to the groups.”

Roggio noted the attacks in New York and New Jersey are certainly similar to past terror attacks.

“The attack patterns follow the past patterns; a bomb in a populated area, similar to Boston. The execution was sloppy. but the planning and coordination were good,” Roggio said.

Over the weekend, a pipe bomb exploded at the location where a charity race for Marines and sailors was set to take place later in New Jersey. No one was harmed because the area was empty at the time of the explosion. Also, a pressure cooker filled with shrapnel—similar to what was used in the 2013 Boston Marathon attack—exploded in the Chelsea area of Manhattan, where 29 people were injured.

Additionally, in St. Cloud, Minnesota, a man stabbed eight people at a shopping center, talking about Allah and Islam. All of the victims survived. The attacker was shot and killed by an off-duty police officer before he could harm anyone else. The Islamic State claimed credit for the attack.

But there is no evidence that any of the attacks were linked to a foreign terror organization or cell.

Obama addressed the weekend’s terror attacks on Monday in New York ahead of the United Nations General Assembly meeting, asserting the Islamic State is losing. Obama said:

We will continue to lead the global coalition in the fight to destroy ISIL, which is instigating a lot of people over the internet to carry out attacks. We are going to continue to go after them. We’re going to take out their leaders. We’re going to take out their infrastructure. They are continuing to lose ground in Iraq and in Syria … As we take away more of their territory, it exposes ISIL as the failed cause that it is, and it helps to undermine their ideology, which over time will make it harder for them to recruit and inspire people to violence.

In July, CNN host Jake Tapper challenged Secretary of State John Kerry’s insistence that the Islamic State is “on the run,” pointing out several terrorist attacks that were inspired by the Sunni militant group.

Kerry responded, “It depends on where you mean ISIS,” drawing a distinction between an inspired attack and one plotted and carried out by the central organization.

“If people are inspired, they’re inspired, but ISIL which is based in Syria is under huge pressure and that is just a fact … If you’re saying that one person standing up one day and killing people is a reflection of ISIS moving in Iraq and Syria, I think you’re dead wrong.”

In two high-profile cases this summer, an ISIS-inspired attacker killed 49 in Orlando and another ISIS-inspired attacker murdered 84 in Nice, France, during a Bastille Day celebration.

Inspired attacks are actually worse, argued James Carafano, vice president for the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute at The Heritage Foundation.

“It is way worse when an organization doesn’t have to invest its assets and infrastructure, and can simply outsource terror for free,” Carafano told The Daily Signal. “The notion that ISIS didn’t draw up the attack plans so we are somehow better off is utterly stupid. For ISIS this is free lunch.”

The Islamic State is still able to energize people to join its fight, which demonstrates that the United States and the West haven’t sufficiently weakened the group to the point that it is perceived as weak, Carafano said.

“The inspired attacks show that ISIS is able to take the fight to the enemy and hurt the enemy when people are acting on its behalf,” Carafano said.

In some respects, if anyone is winning, it would be the Islamic State by virtue of still being in existence after two years of fighting with the United States and other powerful Western countries, said Jim Hanson, executive vice president at the Center for Security Policy, a national security think tank.

“Whether it is al-Qaeda or ISIS, this is a civil jihad movement that doesn’t have to have a hierarchy like a Fortune 500 corporation, it’s the ideology that links them,” Hanson said in a phone interview with The Daily Signal.

“The ideology links them enough to say online, ‘If you believe as we do in Sharia law and that Islam should dominate, you are one of us,’” Hanson, a former Army Special Forces sergeant, added. (For more from the author of “Inspired Attacks Show Strength of Islamic State, Experts Say” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Retired Navy Chaplain Says Military Is Now Hostile to Christianity

/0 Comments/in , /by

Newly retired Navy chaplain Wes Modder said in a recent interview that the military has become openly hostile to Christianity.

In an interview with OneNewsNow, Modder, who the Navy tried to fire in 2015 for failing to act properly “in [a] diverse and pluralistic environment,” said that Christians need to understand if they remain in uniform, they will be attacked by military officials hostile to their beliefs.

The problem is even worse for Christians just now joining the military.

“If you’re a Christian and you come into the military today, it’s going to be difficult for you,” Modder added.

Modder was serving at the Nuclear Power Training Command in Charleston, South Carolina, with regard from his superiors, but that all changed in 2014. A gay lieutenant junior grade officer poked and prodded Modder during private counseling sessions to answer questions about homosexuality and same-sex marriage the officer knew would land him in hot water.

At the time, Modder had no idea the officer was gay.

“I came to find out later that he was a gay activist, and I was targeted,” Modder told OneNewsNow. “And, of course, the chaplain I was working with at this Navy Nuclear Power Training Command in Charleston — she was a very liberal United Methodist command chaplain. She decided to escalate it, brought charges that I was intolerant [and] not able to function in a diverse pluralistic environment.”

The officer then carefully noted the answers provided and used them to build a case against Modder, who previously had earned high praise from his commander officer Capt. Jon R. Fahs, namely that as a chaplain he was “the best of the best.”

Five months later, Fahs turned on Modder and said he discriminated against his students, creating an open controversy about religious freedom in the military.

With a complaint in hand from Equal Opportunity representatives, the Navy removed Modder from his duties.

The Navy attempted to fire the chaplain, but the investigation found that the case was remarkably weak, leading to the removal of the “Detachment for Cause” action against him. First Liberty, a legal defense group focused on religious liberty, provided representation for Modder, allowing him to retire after 20 years of service on September 6 with an honorable discharge and medal of accommodation. (For more from the author of “Retired Navy Chaplain Says Military Is Now Hostile to Christianity” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.