Central African Republic: Muslims open fire at Catholic church, detonate grenades, 24 killed, 170 injured

You won’t hear much about this, because the Catholic Church has committed itself to Islamopandering, such that it is largely silent about the Muslim persecution of Christians that has taken place in Africa as well as in the Middle East.

Jean-Clément Jeanbart, the Melkite Greek Catholic Archbishop of Aleppo, gave an interview to a French reporter in which he was highly critical of the mainstream media and even of his fellow bishops for ignoring the Muslim persecution of Middle Eastern Christians. “The European media,” he charged, “have not ceased to suppress the daily news of those who are suffering in Syria and they have even justified what is happening in our country by using information without taking the trouble to verify it.” And as for his brother bishops in France, “the conference of French bishops should have trusted us, it would have been better informed. Why are your bishops silent on a threat that is yours today as well? Because the bishops are like you, raised in political correctness. But Jesus was never politically correct, he was politically just!”

Archbishop Jeanbart was not the first to say this. “Why, we ask the western world, why not raise one’s voice over so much ferocity and injustice?” asked Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, the head of the Italian Bishops Conference (CEI). Syriac Catholic Patriarch Ignatius Ephrem Joseph III Younan himself has in the past appealed to the West “not to forget the Christians in the Middle East.” The former Melkite Greek Catholic Patriarch Gregory III has also said: “I do not understand why the world does not raise its voice against such acts of brutality.”

But Gregory III should have understood, since he was a major part of the problem. After all, he himself said: “No one defends Islam like Arab Christians.” It is to defend Islam that Western clerics do not raise their voice against such acts of brutality. It is to pursue a fruitless and chimerical “dialogue” that bishops in the U.S. and Europe keep silent about Muslim persecution of Christians, and enforce that silence upon others. Robert McManus, Roman Catholic Bishop of Worcester, Massachusetts, said it on February 8, 2013 as he was suppressing a planned talk at a Catholic conference on that persecution: “Talk about extreme, militant Islamists and the atrocities that they have perpetrated globally might undercut the positive achievements that we Catholics have attained in our inter-religious dialogue with devout Muslims.”

Remember that Mohamed Atta, about the plane he had hijacked on September 11, 2001, told passengers over the intercom: “Stay quiet and you’ll be OK.” The Catholic Church appears to have adopted that statement as its policy regarding Muslim persecution of Christians.

“Leave them; they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matthew 15:14)

“Another Catholic priest killed in Central African Republic,” by Fredrick Nzwili, RNS, May 5, 2018:

Militants killed a Roman Catholic priest this week in Bangui, the violence-wracked capital of the Central African Republic where Catholic and other faith leaders had made headway recently mediating between factions.

Former members of the mainly Muslim militant group Seleka are accused of killing Father Albert Toungoumale-Baba on Tuesday (May 1) at the Notre Dame of Fatima Church. Of the hundreds of worshippers gathered at the church, at least 24 were killed and 170 injured by militants who sprayed bullets into the crowd and detonated grenades.

Toungoumale-Baba is the second Catholic priest to be killed in about a month in the CAR….

 

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/05/central-african-republic-muslims-open-fire-on-at-catholic-church-detonate-grenades-24-killed-170-injured

Did y’all know that Karl Marx was a racist?

 

Editor’s note: This commentary contains language, although used in historical context, that may offend some readers.

May Day celebrations were held all across the fruited plain, with leftist radicals and unionists worshipping the ideals of communism.

Communism is an ideology calling for government control over our lives. It was created by Karl Marx, who—along with his collaborator, Friedrich Engels—wrote a pamphlet called “Manifesto of the Communist Party.”

In 1867, Marx wrote the first volume of “Das Kapital.” The second and third volumes were published posthumously, edited by Engels.

Few people who call themselves Marxists have ever even bothered to read “Das Kapital.” If one did read it, he would see that people who call themselves Marxists have little in common with Marx.

For those who see Marx as their hero, there are a few historical tidbits they might find interesting. Nathaniel Weyl, himself a former communist, dug them up for his 1979 book, “Karl Marx: Racist.”

For example, Marx didn’t think much of Mexicans. When the United States annexed California after the Mexican War, Marx sarcastically asked, “Is it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did not know what to do with it?”

Engels shared Marx’s contempt for Mexicans, explaining: “In America we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own development that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United States.”

Marx had a racial vision that might be interesting to his modern-day black supporters. In a letter to Engels, in reference to his socialist political competitor Ferdinand Lassalle, Marx wrote:

It is now completely clear to me that he, as is proved by his cranial formation and his hair, descends from the Negroes who had joined Moses’ exodus from Egypt, assuming that his mother or grandmother on the paternal side had not interbred with a n—–. Now this union of Judaism and Germanism with a basic Negro substance must produce a peculiar product.

Engels shared Marx’s racial philosophy. In 1887, Paul Lafargue, who was Marx’s son-in-law, was a candidate for a council seat in a Paris district that contained a zoo. Engels claimed that Lafargue had “one-eighth or one-twelfth n—– blood.”

In a letter to Lafargue’s wife, Engels wrote, “Being in his quality as a n—–, a degree nearer to the rest of the animal kingdom than the rest of us, he is undoubtedly the most appropriate representative of that district.”

Marx was also an anti-Semite, as seen in his essay titled “On the Jewish Question,” which was published in 1844. Marx asked:

What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. … Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. Money degrades all the gods of man—and turns them into commodities. … The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange. … The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general.

Despite the fact that in the 20th century alone communism was responsible for more than 100 million murders, much of the support for communism and socialism is among intellectuals.

The reason they do not condemn the barbarism of communism is understandable. Richard Pipes explains:

Intellectuals, by the very nature of their professions, grant enormous attention to words and ideas. And they are attracted by socialist ideas. They find that the ideas of communism are praiseworthy and attractive; that, to them, is more important than the practice of communism. Now, Nazi ideals, on the other hand, were pure barbarism; nothing could be said in favor of them.

That means leftists around the world will continue to celebrate the ideas of communism.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/05/10/ugly-racism-karl-marx/

 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/karl-marx-the-racist_2217122.html

It’s been nearly 100 years since Karl Marx’s ideas triggered the world’s first communist revolution in Russia on March 8, 1917.

Every so often, there seems to be a renewed interest in Marx’s ideas here in the West. In a recent example, protesters could be seen displaying communist hammer-and-sickle flags at demonstrations and marches opposing newly-elected President Donald Trump’s victory and inauguration.

But some of Marx’s viewpoints may not have been all that progressive or in keeping with modern values on tolerance. In some of his writings, the architect of communism has expressed overtly racist ideologies, even going so far as using the “n-word” and slandering the Jewish faith.

Yes, you read that correctly: The founder of communism, whose ideas swept across the world many decades after his death, had ideas that many ideologues with views left of center nowadays would find reprehensible.

One might argue that Marx’s ideals are merely an outdated product of the mid-19th century.

For example, in a July 1862 letter to Engels, in reference to his socialist political competitor, Ferdinand Lassalle, Marx wrote, “It is now completely clear to me that he, as is proved by his cranial formation and his hair, descends from the Negroes from Egypt, assuming that his mother or grandmother had not interbred with a n*****. Now this union of Judaism and Germanism with a basic Negro substance must produce a peculiar product. The obtrusiveness of the fellow is also n*****-like,” according to the book “Race and Racism in Modern Philosophy.”

Regarding Mexicans, during the Mexican-American War, he wrote: “Without violence, nothing is ever accomplished in history.” But then he asks, “Is it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did not know what to do with it?”

And Engels, the co-author of the famed (or infamous) “Manifesto of the Communist Party,” added: “In America, we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own development that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United States.”

Marx—whose grandparents were Jewish, but whose parents converted to Christianity—wasn’t a fan of his ancestral religion either, writing in his essay “On the Jewish Question”:

“What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money . … Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist,” Marx wrote in the book—which critics have later described as virulently anti-Semitic.

And in what sounds like a 19th-century version of a screed penned by a Holocaust-denying, white supremacist on a web forum, Marx continues:

 

“Money degrades all the gods of man—and turns them into commodities. … The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange. … The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general.”

And even further, he explains: “In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Judaism,” which, according to some critics, suggests he’s arguing that man can only be free when Jews “no longer exist,” according to The Philosophers’ Magazine.

In 1856, Marx took it a step further when he penned an article, “The Russian Loan” for the New York Daily Tribune.

Marx opined: “Thus we find every tyrant backed by a Jew, as is every pope by a Jesuit. In truth, the cravings of oppressors would be hopeless, and the practicability of war out of the question, if there were not an army of Jesuits to smother thought and a handful of Jews to ransack pockets.

“The real work is done by the Jews, and can only be done by them, as they monopolize the machinery of the loanmongering mysteries by concentrating their energies upon the barter trade in securities,” he added.

Many would argue that Marx’s 19th-century views on race are outdated. Maybe the same could be said about his collectivist grandstanding.

Communism is estimated to have killed at least 100 million people, yet its crimes have not been fully compiled and its ideology still persists. Epoch Times seeks to expose the history and beliefs of this movement, which has been a source of tyranny and destruction since it emerged.

See entire article series here.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

 

 

Babysitter who forced boy, 13, to perform sex acts on her is spared jail

A babysitter who forced a 13-year-old boy to perform sex acts on her has been spared jail. Mary-Ellen Mooney, who was 18 at the time, rubbed the boy’s thigh and kissed him, then took his hand and put it down her pants. She had the boy touch her on three separate occasions and sent him Facebook messages in which she called him ‘babe’ and said she had ‘a real soft spot’ for him.

The babysitter, now 19, was arrested and charged with two offences after the 13-year-old told a friend what had happened. She initially denied the charges before admitting her guilt. She was today handed a suspended jail sentence at Amersham Crown Court for the 10-11 January offences and given a night-time curfew.

MORE: Taxi driver confronts Uber driver for ‘stealing jobs’, ensures nobody wants to get in his car ever again

MORE: Police hunt owner of drone ‘that caused death of police horse’

The court heard that Mooney sent the victim sexually explicit messages, one of which told him to ‘take control and show your dominant side.’ ‘It isn’t about size, it’s the way you use it,’ she told him. ‘There’s no point having a big dick if you don’t know how to use it.’ Sophie Murray, defending, said Mooney had a difficult upbringing and was the carer for her mother, an alcoholic, from an early age. Judge Karen Holt said she was ‘just about persuaded I don’t need to send you to prison today.’ Mooney, from Milton Keynes, also made the subject of a five-year Sexual Harm Prevention Order and has been placed on the Sex Offenders’ Register for 10 years.

 

Read more: http://metro.co.uk/2015/11/10/babysitter-who-forced-boy-13-to-perform-sex-acts-on-her-is-spared-jail-5491913/?ito=twitter?ito=cbshare

Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/