ALTHOUGH THE US PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION scandal allegedly involving Russian hacking has resulted in the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats and the closure of two Russian diplomatic compounds in New York and Maryland, the bigger news story is the Middle East peace process being conducted by Russia, Turkey, and Iran without US involvement.

Just before the Christmas break, on December 20, the Russian,Turkish, and Iranian foreign ministers gathered in Moscow to discuss the situation in Syria. As a result of the meeting, the three announced their willingness to facilitate future negotiations between Damascus and Syrian opposition groups.

According to the New York Times

“Russia, Iran and Turkey met in Moscow on Tuesday to work toward a political accord to end Syria’s nearly six-year war, leaving the United States on the sidelines..”

 

“Secretary of State John Kerry was not invited. Nor was the United Nations consulted.”

 

“With pro-government forces having made critical gains on the ground, the new alignment and the absence of any Western powers at the table all but guarantee that President Bashar al-Assad will continue to rule Syria under any resulting agreement, despite President Obama’s declaration more than five years ago that Mr. Assad had lost legitimacy and had to be removed.”

 

“Andrew J. Tabler, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who studies Syria stated, “When the Turks, the Iranians and the Russians all agree on a process without the U.S. being in the room, you realize there is a problem for us.”

As a result of the meeting, the three nations issued a document referred to by the New York Times as “The Moscow Declaration”.  Among its eight articles, the “Declaration” adumbrates:

1. Iran, Russia and Turkey respect the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic as multi-ethnic, multi-religious, non-sectarian, democratic and secular state.

2. There is no military solution to the Syrian conflict. The United Nations is essential in the efforts to resolve this crisis in accordance with UNSC resolution 2254.

3. The importance of expanding ceasefire, unhindered humanitarian assistance and free movement of civilians throughout the country.

5. Iran, Russia and Turkey express their readiness to facilitate and become the guarantors of the prospective agreement, being negotiated, between the Syrian Government and the opposition. They invited all other countries with the influence on the situation on the ground to do the same.

7. The Ministers take note of the kind offer of the President of Kazakhstan to host relevant meetings in Astana.

DF

RESULTS OF THE MOSCOW DECLARATION

The Moscow Declaration was promulgated on December 20; last night at midnight (December 29-30) the Assad government and the main Syrian opposition groups agreed to a nationwide cease-fire. Turkey’s Anadolu News Agency, reports that Russia and Turkey will jointly guarantee implementation of the ceasefire agreement.

Although other cease fire agreements brokered by the UN have been unsuccessful, Turkey and Russia previously negotiated a cease fire, in the first half of December 2016, that led to the successful evacuation of civilians and rebel fighters from the city of Aleppo. One rebel commander told Reuters: “This time I have confidence in its seriousness. There is new international input” (Turkey and Iran working with Russia)

Thus, this morning,Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim told the press:

“I hope this cease-fire will turn into a sustainable peace that would prevent further bloodshed and the killing of civilians, innocents and children.”

The deal involves on one side the Syrian government armed forces, their allies and the Russian Federation. The other side includes rebel factions operating under the umbrella of the The High Negotiations Committee (HNC), which represents Syria’s opposition groups and the so-called Free Syrian Army terrorists backed by the United States intended to topple the Assad regime; they are now committed to pursuing negotiations in Astana.  According to “World Affairs Journal“

“The High Negotiations Committee (HNC), regarded by the UN as Syria’s main opposition body, confirmed the deal, which excludes jihadist groups. If the truce holds, peace talks will be held in Kazakhstan within a month.”

President Putin made it known that the agreement revolves around three major principles:

1. Ceasefire among all parties involved in the conflict
2. Measures to oversee the truce
3. An agreement to initiate peace talks

Although of major importance, Putin referred to the deal as “fragile”. According to the BBC, he also indicated that Russia would reduce its military presence in Syria, but  would “continue fighting international terrorism and supporting the Syrian government”.

Negotiations are expected to begin in January at Astana, the capital of  Kazakhstan.

bg

The Cease-Fire Includes Comprehensive Peace Talks in Kazakhstan’s Capital Astana

Russia, Iran and Turkey were instrumental in freeing Aleppo and are now poised to take the next step. During the Moscow meeting, December 19, 2016, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the President of Turkey, agreed to call the major parties involved in Syrian combat to meet in Astana, Kazakhstan to begin a peace initiative. Nursultan Nazarbayev, President of Kazakhstan, supports the process and the opportunity to host the participants. Interestingly, the UN has announced that it too will conduct negotiations involving the Syrian government and opposition groups scheduled for February 8 in Geneva, Switzerland.

Reuters notes that, at the Astana meeting,

“The Syrian government will be negotiating from a strong position after its army and their allies, including Shi’ite militias supported by Iran, along with Russian air power, routed rebels in their last major urban stronghold of Aleppo this month.”

“Moscow’s air campaign since September last year has turned the civil war in Assad’s favour, and the last rebels left Aleppo for areas that are still under rebel control to the west of the city, including the province of Idlib.”

All sides are agreed that the terrorist groups such as ISIL/ISIS, Al Nusra and Daesh must be defeated.  The defeat of the terrorists has taken primary position. Even the Turks who had previously insisted that Assad must be removed have now shifted their emphasis to the Syrian Kurds living on the Syrian-Turkish border whom they consider to be a threat to the stability of Turkey. With every day that passes, it seems more certain that Assad will remain in power to be removed only by a free democratic election that represents the will of the Syrian people, something the United States as opposed but that Russia has insisted upon all along – the United States wants Assad gone.  The last time such an election was held in 2014, Assad won 88.7% of the vote.

 

Since that time, and the fall of Aleppo, things have changed considerably.  Turkey watching Russia’s success and angered by the United States backing of the Kurds, which Ankara views as an existential threat, has continually distanced itself from NATO and the US; Turkey is now showing sure signs of a shift toward the Russian-Iranian-Syrian-Iraqi camp.

At the meeting in which Russia, Iran and Turkey agreed to “the Moscow Declaration,” the United States was not consulted, nor was the UN envoy to Syria invited.

The United States is suffering an embarrassment and must save face vis a vis the Russians somehow. The fact is, the US is playing its foreign policy cards all wrong.  As the Russian Insider reports. “So much so that Assad whom the empire had marked for the trash bin in 2011 now looks certain to survive and defeat the jihad against the Syrian Baath government….Ankara has gone from working with the US and Saudia Arabia and Qatar to topple the Syrian government to talking with Iran and Russia how to find a political solution that ends the conflict.”

Turkey is quite simply refusing to serve as a US-UN puppet any longer.  Ankara views the fight against Kurdish militants as a more important objective than the UN-US objective aimed at the removal of Assad. Thus, according to Aaron Stein of the Atlantic Council:

“This is Turkey bending to Russia….This is putting a fine point on Turkey’s policy of ‘Assad must go’ no longer being the policy.”

Consequently, the clear forecast  includes the centrality of the Kurds and Kurdistan in the peace talks.  Alluding to the Kurds (but also including ISIS/ISIL-Daesh), Turkey’s Prime Minister stated:

“We will hunt them everywhere. We will follow them wherever they flee. This is no joke. We will continue our work for the peace and safety of our nation.”

aa

Participation of Kurds in Astana Process

The Kurdish problem cannot be comprehended unless it is realized that the Kurds are represented by several political-military groups. Kurds living in Turkey comprise roughly 22% of the Turkish population. They are represented by the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK), a party that Turkey considers a terrorist organization, as does NATO, the EU and the United States. The PKK, although existing in Turkey, hopes to establish an independent state known as Kurdistan.

There are other Kurds living in Iraq and Syria.  Syrian Kurds are represented by the “Democratic Union Party” (PYD). The PYD was established in 2003 as a major opposition party to the Syrian government located in Northern Syria in an area contiguous with Turkey, thus an additional potential challenge for Turkey as well. In 2012 the PYD (in Syria) formed local militias or People’s Protection Units (YPG) to help Kurds cooperate for their own security and to assist the United States in its fight against ISIS.  The US armed the YPG through a broader group known as the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).  The SDF includes Kurdish militia in Northern Syria – Syrian Kurdish militia (YPG) are being armed with American weapons. When the SDF was founded in 2015, The Economist described it  as “essentially a subsidiary of the Kurdish YPG. Likewise CNN reports that

“The United States has denied supplying the YPG with weapons but says it provides tactical support to the Syrian Democratic Forces, the umbrella group in which the YPG is the main component.”

Thus, Turkey is weary about any affiliations between the PKK (in Turkey) and the PYD (in Syria), especially since the PYD has established armed security units (YPG) that Ankara believes are armed, dangerous, and affiliated with the PKK in Turkey.

Not only are foreign relations with Turkey involving Kurds on the Turkish border a problem for the future, the future Syrian government will have to be extra creative when handling the indigenous Kurds who have exercised a degree of autonomy during the Syrian conflict unknown previously. In 2012 Assad essentially relinquished control of Northeast Syria to the Kurds. This area is home to the bulk of the country’s oil reserves (also across the border of Iraq’s oil reserves) and some of its prime agricultural lands.  As much as Syria, Iraq and Turkey might want to see them go away, the Kurds are certainly a player in Syria’s future as well as the futures of Iraq and Turkey.

To complicate the situation, another group of Kurdish militants known as the Peshmerga exist in Northern, Iraq also close to Turkey and Syria. Since the Peshmerga aided the US in its war with Iraq, they have long been considered a US ally.

Thus, Bilal Wahab Soref Fellow at The Washington Institute notes the strong toes between the US and Iraqi Kurds:

“As reliable on-the-ground partners to the United States, the Kurdish forces in Syria, like their brethren in Iraq, have gained a reputation as fierce fighters and a bulwark against the Islamic State (also called ISIS, ISIL, or Daesh). Indeed, the Kurdish fighters have often been portrayed as foot soldiers for the United States in Syria. In that regard, not only did the People’s Protection Units (YPG) and Peshmerga defend the Kurdish population, they are also slated to be instrumental in the U.S. led coalition efforts.”

Clearly, the participation of Syrian Kurds (who have not yet been invited to participate in the Geneva negotiations) in the Astana Process is a crucial issue. Turkey remains adamantly opposed to Kurdish participation, while Russia continues to insist that the Kurds be included. Since the date of the meeting and list of participants has not yet been concluded, there is still time to include the Kurds.  It is hard to imagine a peace process in which a major party to the conflict such as the Kurds (a party with a long standing cultural tradition and historical roots in Northern Syria, Iraq, and Southern Turkey) is excluded.

Nonetheless, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu announced today that:

“The Syria’s Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) will not take part in the talks on Syrian settlement in Astana. As for its armed wing, the YPG, if they lay down arms and support the territorial integrity of Syria instead of forming a terrorist canton, they will be included in the country’s government. If they do not refuse terrorism… we will continue our struggle against them.”

Ankara simply desires a Turkey friendly region in Northern Syria. If Kurdish militants lay down their arms, as far as Turkey is concerned, they will be admitted to the negotiation table in Astana.

The other party whose presence at Astana is as yet undecided is the previously mentioned Syrian High Negotiation Committee (HNC) the umbrella group for Syrian opposition groups. What the World Journal failed to mention above is that HNC is a Saudi-backed and formulated umbrella organization.

The HNC has not been invited and it is highly unlikely, in spite of their self-proclaimed importance, that they will be invited.  The HNC was formed late in 2015; it has its headquarters in Riyadh home of Sunni radicalism, of Shariah Law and Wahhabi and Salafist ultra-extremism. The Saud monarchs rule their country with a tight fist. For centuries they have been locked in deadly combat with Shiite Iran and have been the prime supporters of jihad and terrorism in Syria.  It is hard to imagine a group supported by the Sauds involved in a peace process that will strengthen the hands of its enemies viz., Iran, Russia and Turkey. Moreover, the HNC plan for transition, drafted in 2016 and welcomed by the government of Great Britain, insist that President Assad must be removed from office within six months of any transition. This is contrary to the Syrian initiated democratic process envisioned by the Russians and the Syrian people themselves who voted overwhelmingly in Assad’s favor in 2014.

Moeover, according to Aljazeera News

“Chief opposition negotiator Riyad Hijab… said the HNC would reject any agreement struck by Russia and the US if it largely differed from the HNC’s terms.”

It is highly unlikely that a newly formed coalition of rebels headquartered in an enemy state will dictate terms to Russia, Iran and Turkey, esp. since their combined forces have been victorious thus far deep into the war.

The British, moreover, are working with leaders of the HNC to promote a liberal democracy (a type of democracy that is withering around the globe – not democracy per-se, but “liberal democracy”) in Syria to end what they call the  “tyranny of the Assad regime.”  According to the UK Government:

“The UK has and remains at the forefront of international efforts to address the Syria crisis. The UK’s membership of the UN Security Council and International Syria Support Group is used to call for adherence to the cessation of hostilities and full humanitarian access.”

The UK wants to help build a democracy in Syria, but Syrians do not want the UK; they would rather decide the future for themselves.

What makes the participation of HNC even more remote is the involvement of Turkey whom the Sauds have historically depended upon to balance power vis a vis Iran.  That scenario is now in jeopardy – a peace process brokered by Iran united to Russia and Turkey is anathema to the Sauds. Thus, it is extremely unlikely that either the HNC or the Sauds will participate or be offered a voice and certainly not a vote (if there is any vote) in Astana.

It appears that the Turks have already compromised with Russia and Syria on Assad.  Consequently, they have some wiggle room to resist Russia on the Kurdish question (see note 2 below). Turkey also faces an imbroglio with Iran. Ankara continues to insists that Hezbollah (an Iranian backed Lebanese shia militia that has supported Assad) vacate Syria. Turkey will probably get its way on this issue as well, as long as all three agree that Assad remains in power. Of the four issues: Assad,  Hezbollah,  HNC, and the Kurds, the latter seems the most difficult to resolve.

Nonetheless, the issue will be resolved by the Russians, Iranians and Turks. Under President Obama, the United States neocons are suffering a humiliating defeat, an international debacle far from their vision for a New American Century – The US is being taken out of the game and being placed on the bench by the Russians.  Putin is now calling the shots (see note 1 below).

“Russia has said the United States could join a fresh peace process once President-elect Donald Trump takes office on Jan. 20. It also wants Egypt to join, together with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iraq, Jordan and the United Nations” (Reuters, Dec 30, 2016).

Russian Secretary of State Sergey Lavrov stressed these sentiments in a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin:

“I would like to express the hope that as soon as the administration of Donald Trump takes office, they will also be able to join these efforts [to settle the Syrian crisis] so that we could jointly work in this direction”  (CNN News).

President-Elect Trump has indicated his willingness to cooperate more closely with Russia.  He will face opposition from neo-conservative and neo-liberal statesmen and from ranking officials in the Pentagon and intelligence community.  Nonetheless, he has an opportunity to work with Russia and the global community toward world peace.  But to be successful he must resign himself to the reality that the vision for a liberal new American Century must be modified.  The age of liberal global hegemony is coming to an end.  Increasingly, the nations of the world are opting for national sovereignty and a restoration of traditional family values as the Era of Peace promised at Fatima continues to dawn upon the nations.

The United States can either adjust and cooperate or continue suffering one foreign policy embarrassment after another.

______________________
NOTE

1. New Era does not foresee Russia remaining in this position, but for the moment it is increasing its global prestige until complimented and surpassed by a resurgent Europe. 
2. The YPG, and its political counterpart, the Democratic Union Party (PYD), have also forged increasingly close relations with Russia, recently symbolised by the formal opening of a PYD representative office in Moscow

DURING CHRISTMAS HOLIDAY several significant events occurred that manifest the continued demise of global liberalism as the world continues to move toward an “Era of Peace” promised by the Mother of God at Fatima.

Following the demise of the Soviet Union, Republican think tanks, such as the American Enterprise Institute, crafted the “Project for the New American Century” (PNAC) to disseminate America’s economic-political-social agenda around the globe by means of war and “nation building” as if a victory over the Soviet Union signaled the moment for American hegemony, even if it was unwanted by many third world countries in Africa and Asia and newly developing nations in Eastern Europe. Nonetheless, according to the “neo-cons” (neoconservatives) , the so-called “developing nations” should thank America for interfering in their domestic affairs. They are so backwards and lost in darkness and ignorance that they must be “forced to be free through a program of “nation building” backed by the state as championed by Jean Jacques Rousseau, one of the classical patriarchs of modern liberal democracy. Liberal democracy in the name of “freedom”  has generated a hedonistic and materialistic world view foisted upon the nations as part of American foreign policy.

Cardinal Glemp, Primate of Poland during the Solidarity Era, foresaw and lamented the spread of Western Liberalism, what he referred to as “materialism.”

“We (Poland and the Catholic Church) have withstood the onslaught of ‘atheistic materialism‘, Communism is dead. However, I am not so sure that we can withstand the onslaught of ‘hedonistic materialism‘ (coming from the West).”

Since a materialistic world view has been promoted by American foreign policy, it should be no surprise that PNAC has morphed into the American Foreign Policy Initiative (ACPI). ACPI focuses on human rights, a robust military equipped to meet global challenges and global economic outreach.  Like PNAC, ACPI is committed to a belief in American exceptionalism and the need for American intervention around the globe.  Thus, according to the ACPI Mission Statement:

“In this new era, the consequences of failure and the risks of retreat would be even greater than before. The challenges we face require 21st century strategies and tactics based on a renewed commitment to American leadership. The United States remains the world’s indispensable nation — indispensable to international peace, security, and stability, and indispensable to safe-guarding and advancing the ideals and principles we hold dear.”

Neocon heavyweights William Kristol and Robert Kagan, who were both project directors of the PNAC, co-founded ACPI in 2009. Since then, American Foreign Policy has included such aberrations as usury, abortion, artificial birth control, homosexuality, gender confusion, and excessive tolerance resulting in a sin filled anti-Christian global culture funded by American dollars disguised as “foreign aid” intended to promote, peace, prosperity and, of course, freedom.

Ironically, none of these objectives (peace, prosperity, freedom-authentic freedom) have been achieved; the nations do not co-exist in peace, prosperity has not been forthcoming in those nations that are recipients of foreign aid, and freedom has been compromised by political interference and a whole host of addictions: chemical addiction, sex addiction, media addiction, food addiction, tobacco and alcohol addiction and a culture of dependency, which enervate and enfeeble human strength and ability to resist temptations leading to an explosion of erotic and irascible behavior. Although liberals set freedom on a granite pedestal to be honored as a goddess, few people can attain freedom in a culture wherein sin, death, and violence pervasively dominate the air waves in which her torch shines.

“Jesus answered them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin (not free)” (John 8:34).

Nor can peace be attained as long as neo-con war hawks (aided by their neo-liberal allies) continue their push for an “American Century”, a period of American global hegemony accompanied by the three pillars of economic, political, and social-cultural liberalism. Peace cannot be obtained in a world without God, in a world dominated by usury that works to the benefit of a few, in a world in which military power is used to disseminate materialism and hedonism upon weaker nations as if the world were an UNREGULATED jungle in which the will of the stronger pervades to the detriment of the weaker.

GF

SO, WHAT HAPPENED OVER THE CHRISTMAS HOLIDAY THAT SPELLS THE END OF LIBERAL HEGEMONY?

1. Weapons made in the United States found in Aleppo
2. Boko Haram defeated in Nigeria
3. Russia, Turkey and Iran Brokering Peace, US Excluded
4. Israeli Expansion Opposed in UN

k

I Weapons Made in the United States Found in Aleppo

Neo-con globalists must have swallowed hard when, over the Christmas holiday, the Syrian army liberated Aleppo and were greeted not by fear and anxiety as the Western press would have its readers believe, but with thunderous applause from Syrian citizens accompanied by joyous celebration, which broke out in the streets of Aleppo, a city newly liberated from American backed terrorists euphemistically referred to in the press as “moderates”  and “freedom fighters”.  No one has been able to satisfactorily define just what in fact a “moderate terrorist” is, terrorists equipped by the United States and its allies to free Syria from its supposed despotic leader Bashar al Assad (see “Syrian Army Routes Terrorists Liberates Aleppo Can they Defeat Liberal Propaganda“)

Ironically, it is Assad who is freeing Syrians from foreign despotism; the Western backed terrorists were not armed and paid to free Syria, but to enslave it (see video below).

“It is a fact that since 2012, those so-called ‘moderate’ rebels in Syria had been absorbed into al-Qaeda groups or pledged allegiance to ISIS. For the past year, the moderates have been gone. So when the media only calls these groups freedom fighters, [while] these fighters have pledged themselves to al-Qaeda, and to ISIS, make no mistake – they are not looking to make Syria free. They are looking to enslave it, as they have so many other places” (see video).

In this regard, Ben Swann (WGCL-TV Atlanta) took mainstream media to task for its poor coverage of the Aleppo event. Swann demonstrated that the so-called ‘moderate rebels’ backed by the US are actually supporting the terrorists.

Swan reports that the CIA regularly delivered weapons to the Syrian rebels.” The Washington Post confirmed these deliveries, and also implicated the US State Department. The Post reported that the  “flow of material” marked “a major escalation of the US role in Syria’s civil war.” Swann states that through 2016, “weapons and funding from the West continued. In September of this year, 2016, the US delivered three thousand tons of weapons and ammo to fighters in Syria, including rocket launchers and anti-tank guided weapons systems.”

Anchor Ben Swann – WGCL-TV Atlanta

YHY

Aleppo Falls American Cache Located and Confiscated

https://youtu.be/hOt6ZORx2Ic

klkl

II Boko Haram was Surprisingly Defeated by the Nigerian Army Announced Christmas Eve

Since 2009, Nigeria, one of the largest Christian countries in Africa, has been facing an insurrection from Boko Haram (BH), the radical Islamic State affiliate in Nigeria.  BH was founded in 2002 by a Muslim clergyman; translated BH roughly means “western culture is a sin”. Nigeria is a country steeped in traditional family values rooted in the natural law manifest in Christianity and Islam. Southern Nigeria is predominately Christian, while the North remains predominately Muslim and a breeding ground for radical Islam. Nonetheless, BH has been a nemesis to both Christian and Muslim cultures, which have consistently lost ground to the terrorists. In 2009 the extremely radical Abubakr took over the group and violence escalated.

Since 2009, BH has killed approximately 20,000 people and driven 2.3 million into exile. The United Nations confirmed the humanitarian crisis in Nigeria, reporting that up to “14 million people [are] in need of humanitarian assistance.” In 2014 hundreds of school girls were abducted from a government secondary boarding school in Chibok, Northeast Nigeria.

Prior to the rise of BH, Muslims and Christians lived alongside each other (as in Syria, Russia, Iraq etc).  Today, they fight alongside each other as members of the Nigerian army battling BH together.

Nigerian Catholic Bishop Emanuel Badejo confirms this coexistence prior to the rise of BH:

“I’m from the West of Nigeria, where the Yoruba culture is very strong. In the Yoruba culture there are many Muslims. In my particular area we are a minority of Christians living with a majority of Muslims, but we do wonderfully well together. In my diocese—and I think this is something that hasn’t gotten into the public media enough—I have 17 schools. Seventy percent of the students in my schools are Muslim children and even some of them — not that many, but quite a number — opt to convert to Christianity and their parents don’t have a problem with that. I am telling you the truth.”

Bishop Badejo has informed the world that BH is being used by the United States to advance the liberal agenda in Nigeria. According to the bishop, Nigeria is under the liberal threat of  “ideological colonization” that is seeking to destroy the family.

“It’s so bad, he says, that the “United States has made clear it will not help Nigeria fight the Boko Haram terror group unless the country modify its laws regarding homosexuality, family planning and birth-control.”

So BH is being being used as a battering ram to martyr Nigeria in the name of liberalism. Thus, when Nigerian President, Muhammadu Buhari, made the Christmas Eve announcement that Boko Haram had been defeated, the world’s liberal elite took notice. The president announced:

 

THE ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN, IRELAND, Diarmuid Martin, and Cardinal Gerhard Muller, the Prefect for the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith (The Holy Office) have weighed in on the theological dimensions of Pope Francis’ Post Synodal Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia. The issue as reported earlier by New Era is the integral relationship between Dogmatic and Pastoral Theology.

Archbishop Martin subtly referenced the papal exhortation in a recent homily given to marriage counselors working for the Irish Catholic Bishops’ Conference. The Archbishop began his homily with these words that foreshadowed his concern about spiritual renewal manifest in compassionate but authentic pastoral theology:

“The Gospel of this afternoon’s Mass recalls once again that great figure John the Baptist.  John’s task was to announce the coming of Jesus.   He was called to reawaken a sense of expectation among a people that had grown tired and distant from God.   He was called to bring renewal to institutional expressions of religion which, at the time, had often become fossilised into mere formulae or external ritual.

The archbishop is concerned, as is the pope, about fossilized, legalistic, and judgmental Catholicism, a Catholicism that lacks vibrancy and compassion, a Catholicism out of tune with human misery, of the fact that “the harvest is plenty but laborers are few” (Matt 9:37). Before our Lord spoke these poignant words, He looked on the crowd and had COMPASSION because the vast flock was lost in sin and confusion, because they were suffering:

“And seeing the multitudes, he had compassion on them: because they were distressed, and lying like sheep that have no shepherd.

Suffering, lost and wounded souls need compassion and love, not criticism, rejection, head wagging, and cold or severe judgement. Love is the universal balm, the spiritual ointment that makes the wounded whole. God is wise, God will judge and so must we (1 Cor 2:15), but before all else, GOD IS LOVE and those who deny this do not know Him.

“And every one that loveth, is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not, knoweth not God: for God is charity.(1 John 4:7-8).

Saving souls is a labor of love; it is too easy to sit in an armchair and condemn; it takes work, great work, to get off of your but and get dirty in the work of patiently ministering to wounded humanity lost in sin like sheep without a shepherd (Matt 9:36)..

Since the Lord has appointed the present time to be an “Hour of Mercy” before His final coming as “Just Judge” the Church should be showing a merciful and compassionate face, a face most associated with its pastoral dimension.

“Speak to the world about My mercy … It is a sign for the end times. After it will come the Day of Justice. While there is still time, let them have recourse to the fountain of My mercy.  (Diary 848)

Jesus revealed to Saint Faustina that the present hour is not a time of retribution but a time of compassion, healing and mercy for all:

“I sent prophets wielding thunderbolts to My people. Today I am sending you with My mercy to the people of the whole world. I do not want to punish aching mankind, but I desire to heal it, pressing it to My Merciful Heart.”(Diary, 1588).

He further revealed to Faustina that those who have the most right to His mercy are the most grievous sinners:

“Let the greatest sinners place their trust in My mercy. They have the right before others to trust in the abyss of My mercy. … Souls that make an appeal to My mercy delight Me. To such souls I grant even more graces than they ask”  (Diary of Saint Faustina Para 1146).

 

Jesus has a

“…special compassion for the worst sinners, because they are most in need of His mercy.”

The Hour of Mercy is a time to pronounce, to pronounce the good news, not to renounce.

“For I came not to judge the world, but to save the world” (John 12:47, John 3:17).

The archbishop of Dublin apparently  had all this in mind when he opened his homily on marriage and family life. Although he did not specifically mention the doubts (dubia – perhaps complaints might be better) registered by opposing Cardinals Joachim Meisner, Raymond Burke, Carlo Caffarra and Walter Brandmüller, he did speak about “grey areas” in family life and the inability of clergy to embrace pastoral challenges with love and compassion rather than “black and white” dogmatic pronouncements.

In his homily Archbishop Martin attempted to pull diocesan marriage counselors into the mystery of romance associated with love and marriage and the uniqueness of each couple by reference to “The Jeweler’s Shop”, a literary work of Pope John Paul II:

“As a young bishop, Pope John Paul II wrote a play called “The Jeweler’s Shop”.  It was a simple play in which the principal character was a jeweller who looked out as young couples would stop by his shop window examining the wedding rings on display.”

 

“As he watched them, he began imagining who these different couples, with whom he had never spoken, actually were.  He began to see that each was different and that for each of them their love for each other, their hopes for a future together were unique.”

 

“Like the Jeweler in Pope John Paul’s play, you realise that each couple is different, that no couple is perfect, that there are many who face real challenges as they try to hold on to what remains of an initial dream which seems destined to be on the way to failure.”

From here the archbishop proceeds to Pope Francis and Amoris Laetitia:

“Pope Francis has given the Church that remarkable document his document Amoris Laetitia which is the fruit of the reflections of the world’s Bishops at two Synods as well as the contribution of married couples and experts from every corner of the world.  Pope Francis presents a wonderful kaleidoscope of the teaching of Jesus and the scriptures on the beauty and the joy of marital love.  He stresses the role of the Church to learn to teach that message in a language which will be understandable to the men and women of today.  He stresses the role of the Church in accompanying men and women on the journey of married and family life, even when the initial dreams begin to fade or indeed fail.”

What is important is understanding the men and women “of today”.  Most people today have been inculturated, misled, propagandized and cerebrally maligned without there even knowing it.  Many are lost and bewildered and do not know why. Some are well to do and affluent but lost in materialism and its attendant economic, political or moral liberalism.  Human beings must be encountered where they are at or they will not be encountered at all. This is why St. Paul, perhaps the greatest evangelist, reminds all evangelists to become “”all things to all men with the view of winning them to Christ:

“Whereas I was free as to all, I made myself the servant of all, that I might gain the more. And I became to the Jews, a Jew, that I might gain the Jews: To them that are under the law, as if I were under the law, (whereas myself was not under the law,) that I might gain them that were under the law. To them that were without the law, as if I were without the law, … that I might gain them that were without the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might gain the weak. I became all things to all men, that I might save all.”

To the sinner, I became a sinner (thou not in deed but in acceptance not of their sin, but of them).

For some Pharisaical Catholics the question might be asked: “Are you (plural) trying to win souls to Christ or to win an argument?” If you would endeavor to first befriend repugnant, heretical, schismatic sinners by loving them, withholding judgement, and refraining from didactic instruction, you might then find that the pope is correct; you might find that after laboring as accompanying-compassionate-empathetic pastors that souls become more trusting, pliable and then more teachable.

Following this line of thought, the archbishop becomes very specific:

“No marriage is lived just in clear and abstract black and white realities.  The Church has to understand the grey areas of success and failures, of joys and of disappointments.  Repeating doctrinal formulations alone is not the way to accompany people on a difficult journey. Jesus’ method was that of accompanying.  His method was to show that mercy is more effective than condemnation in changing people’s lives.”

This is the heart of Amoris Laetitia. It does not excuse sin nor does it deny dogma. Rather, it affirms dogma, is always cognizant of its co-primacy, ever ready to share it, while temporarily putting its subordinate principles on hold giving way to the ultimate dogma of LOVE from which all the others flow as do the fruits and the beatitudes. Love is the primordial and eternal motive behind all of creation and the Divine impetus for the Incarnation itself (John 3:16); it is the motive behind the life, death and resurrection of our Lord, Jesus Christ (John 15:13). Love is first; it is at the beginning and it is at the end (1 Corinthians 13: 1-13).

“But in all these things we overcome, because of him that hath loved us. For I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor might, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:37-39).

As such, a pastor must first see with his heart, putting the dogmatic intellect on ever-ready hold while forming a relationship rooted in mercy and compassion so that the truths of the faith may be planted on fertile soil at an opportune future time, a time recognized by the integral eyes of love and wisdom. “Accompaniment” is before all else pastoral. However, if the path of accompaniment never reaches out to the higher truths, if it never gently (but firmly) corrects sin, if it never gives sage direction, it is a false love, a false accompaniment.  Nonetheless, accompaniment begins with love. Like the Divine Logos who lowered Himself to become man in order to lift all men up, all His pastors must descend to the level of those whom they serve in order to then carry them upwards in the ascent towards the Holy Trinity, to “become all things to all men”, patiently enduring their insults in order to save them.”

After establishing this central idea, Archbishop Martin proceeds to examine men who, like Cardinal Burke and reporters like Raymond Arroyo, men who “do not seem to get it.”

“There are some in the Church (the archbishop says) who are unsettled by the ability of the Pope to place himself in the midst of the uncertainties of people’s lives.  Some, even senior Church figures, seem to feel that the affirmation of certainties in an abstract and undoubting way (here he is referring to the clear truths of dogmatic theology) is the only way (to evangelize or bring soul’s to Christ).”

Nonetheless, this does not mean that the archbishop wants to throw abstract dogmatic certainties out the window. The archbishop and the pope are both aware that accompaniment (pastoral theology) does not mean that the truths of the faith (dogma) are discarded as Cardinal Burke and company want to insist that they do:

“Accompanying is of course not saying that anything goes.  It is being alongside those who are troubled pointing towards – and indeed representing – Jesus who gently leads us beyond the often paralysing doubts that beset us, gently leads us beyond our own limitations and the imperfections of our love.”

Many pastors are comfortable being philosophers and theologians, of sitting in the professor’s seat and teaching college students and seminarians. This is a wonderful ministry, but most priests are called to be pastors, not professors. By the way, even the best professors develop a pastoral dimension to enhance their pedagogy, a dimension that enables them to engage their students outside the classroom, in smokers, at pubs, dinner engagements at their homes, social gatherings, back-packing and various other outings, which further enhance the teacher student bond and the impact their teaching – how much more a “pastor”?

The bottom-line:

“Faith is not about empty formulae or external ritual.  It is about authentically entering into the very life of Jesus Christ himself and witnessing to that life in our daily lives.”

Cardinal Burke and company try to excuse themselves from the above critique by emphasizing that they want to save souls and protect people from sinful actions that harm individuals and families:

“We hope that no one will choose to interpret the matter according to a “progressive/conservative” paradigm. That would be completely off the mark. We are deeply concerned about the true good of souls, the supreme law of the Church, and not about promoting any form of politics in the Church.”

Most devout Catholics would say that they are concerned about the salvation of souls. This, however, is not the question.  The question is how are they going to go about the task of salvation, how are they going to go about the task of saving souls: (1) by telling poor sinners the truth and how wrong they are or (2) by embracing them in their error with love and compassion while patiently (and with great difficulty) bearing with them while slowly leading them onward until such time that they begin to ask questions or they are ready to receive some elements of the faith?

The pastoral approach is not for cowards. No, it is for the strongest, for the prudent, those selfless who deny themselves and make reparation for the sinners they are serving (unil they mature enough to embrace the salvific way of purgation leading to illumination-union), those who are aware that modern men and women, boys and girls, have been heinously, sometimes blindly, conditioned against truth, against the Christian faith; they have been conditioned to plasticity and artificial relationships, to individualism and narcissism, everyone being out for themselves all hidden behind a veneer of niceness.  In this type of environment, it is not cheap words, but genuine love and self-giving that speak volumes.  Modern men and women mistrust melodious words; they are tired of con-games – they have heard it all before, been there – done that; what they rarely witness is authentic love in action. This is something they have not seen, somewhere they have not been. In a pagan environment it is quiet consistent acts of love that bear witness to the faith greater than any theological treatise or display of philosophical brilliance.

“But we entreat you, brethren, that you abound more: And that you use your endeavour to be quiet, and that you do your own business, and work with your own hands, as we commanded you: and that you walk honestly towards them that are without” (1 Thessalonians 4:11-12).

Empty words or too many true words are simply lip service, lip service that is associated with those who teach doctrines from their heads rather than love from their hearts – their hearts are far from God, which is another way of saying that they are far from Love, because God is Love. This type of lip service is rejected by the Lord Himself:

“This people honoureth me with their lips: but their heart is far from me. And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and commandments of men” (1 Matt 15:8-9).

In short, great as wisdom is, love is primary:

“Wisdom which is a gift, has its cause in the will, which cause is charity, but it has its essence in the intellect, whose act is to judge aright, as stated above (Aquinas, Sujuma Theologiae,  Second Part of Second Part, Q 45, Article 2).

 

“Hence the wisdom of which we are speaking presupposes charity” (Aquinas, Sujuma Theologiae,  Second Part of Second Part, Q 45, Article 1).

kjl

WHAT DOES CARDINAL MULLER THE  PREFECT FOR THE SACRED CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF FAITH HAVE TO SAY?

Given such a stinging renunciation of dogmatic theology severed from pastoral theology (a strong mind from a pure heart) or of dogmatic theology that claims to be pastoral but is not (see note below), we would expect some conformation from the highest doctrinal authority in the Church.

 According to Cardinal Gerhard Muller, Prefect for the Sacred Congregation of the Faith, the ultimate aim of knowledge about God is salvation:

“Knowledge of God” is ordered to “the ultimate end of man, for man’s salvation.”

Since the end of knowledge is salvation, salvation takes precedence over knowledge; salvation is the telos of knowledge, the end by which the means, (knowledge) is to be judged.  If knowledge is not resulting in salvation, knowledge is not doing its job. As such, at times, (speculative-dogmatic) knowledge might be reduced in the name of prudence (practical knowledge – the realm of pastoral theology), love, and compassion for the sake of salvation. For example, The First Council of Jerusalem dealing with pagans from an anti-Christian culture, reduced the role of knowledge and limited it to a few specifics:

“For it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay no further burden upon you than these necessary things: That you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which things keeping yourselves, you shall do well” (Acts 15:28-29).

Many would argue, and have argued, that contemporary society is neo-pagan, a culture just as removed from God as that of the Roman Empire; in such a case, similar rules apply.

Nonetheless, pagan culture or not, Cardinal Muller has clearly indicated that Amoris Laetitia does not permit civilly remarried divorcees to receive Holy Communion and must be interpreted in light of the magisterium:

“The magisterium of the Church still applies to those passages in Amoris Laetitia on pastoral care for remarried divorcees.

Pope Francis himself pointed out the same in his exhortation:

“Priests have the duty to accompany [the divorced and remarried] in helping them to understand their situation according to the teaching of the Church” (para 300).

Further on, he states once again:

“What we are speaking of is a process of accompaniment and discernment which “guides the faithful to an awareness of their situation before God…. This discernment can never prescind from the Gospel demands of truth and charity, as proposed by the Church” (para 300).

In May of 2016 the cardinal, talking about Amoris Laetitia, was quoted by the German paper Die Tagespost, as saying that John Paul II’s teaching contained  in  Familiaris Consortio, and Benedict XVI’s exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis, remain “unchanged.”

According to the National Catholic Register,

“Cardinal Müller argued that if Amoris Laetitia really wanted to “rescind such a deeply rooted and such a weighty discipline, then it would have clearly expressed and stated its reasons.” But he pointed out that the document has “no statement to that effect.”

 

“At no point has the Pope called the arguments of his predecessors into question,” he said. Those arguments, he added, “are not based on the subjective guilt of these brothers and sisters, but on the visible, objective way of life, which is opposite to the words of Christ.”

Since Amoris Laetitia must be interpreted in light of the constant teaching of the Church, clearly the issue at hand is a pastoral one, viz., how to uphold the teachings in the modern world, a world void of a sense of the sacred, a world in which divorce and remarriage are common place, a world in which the sons and daughters of the Church have been inculturated without their awareness of its effects. Each marriage case is unique and must be judged by its relative merits. Since the whole process is about salvation and pastoral accompaniment during an Hour of Mercy, pastors are being nudged into being more pastorally minded. This is clear to the Archbishop of Dublin, to the Prefect for the Sacred Congregation of the Faith, and to many other cardinals and bishops who stand with the pope in opposition to Cardinal Burke and the misinformed lay men who have lined up to bat for him against the pope.

“Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who make dissensions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them. For they that are such, serve not Christ our Lord, but their own belly; and by pleasing speeches and good words, seduce the hearts of the innocent. For your obedience is published in every place. I rejoice therefore in you” (Romans 16:17-19).

Men causing dissension are all misreading the document, which is clear enough to many others, and to the New Era staff. Thus, according to Cardinal Muller:

“It is a misreading” of the Pope’s exhortation to say it has been the cause of polemics.

“The Church has no power to change the Divine Law”…not even a pope or council can change that.”

 

_____________________
NOTE

Dogmatic theology does not become pastoral theology when it equates pastoral theology with telling people their sins, or by trying to save them with a simple dogmatic fix by way of simple words that might be interpreted as lip service if their is no sincere follow-up a follow-up that costs the speaker some strenuous and unadvertised effort.

“TAKE heed that you do not your justice before men, to be seen by them: otherwise you shall not have a reward of your Father who is in heaven. Therefore when thou dost an almsdeed, sound not a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be honoured by men. Amen I say to you, they have received their reward. But when thou dost alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doth. That thy alms may be in secret, and thy Father who seeth in secret will repay thee” (Matt 6:1-4).

 

GERMAN INVESTIGATORS ARE LABORING  to identify the person(s) who perpetrated the December 19 manslaughter of twelve people and the wanton injury of 48 more. The attack was purportedly carried out by a Daesh operative who used a 25 ton vehicle to maliciously mow down innocent people shopping at a Berlin Christmas market. Police announced Monday that a Pakistani national who had requested asylum in Germany was thought to be the driver of the vehicular weapon, but he was released due to insufficient evidence. The driver’s accomplice was found dead in the passengers seat. Although the suspect has not been found, Daesh claims that it was “their soldier” who carried out the operation.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who made the decision to openly greet asylum seekers, is acutely concerned about the culprit being an apprehended Pakistani seeking asylum. Earlier in July of this year another Pakistani asylum seeker, a Pakistani wielding a knife, attacked German train passengers. These incidents are part of an emerging and apparent pattern of asylum seekers attacking their generous hosts in their hosts own neighborhoods. Merkel should be concerned, very concerned; there is a pro-Traditional Europe, anti-liberal Euro-skeptic movement sweeping Europe. It is readily apparent in Slovakia, Hungary, Moldova, Poland, England, France, Italy Transdniestria, Greece, the Netherlands and Russia in which political parties rooted in Christian values are winning elections and democratically acquiring seats of power.

French voters head to the ballot boxes in the spring of 2017 during which time they are likely to elect a pro-traditional European cultural candidate (either Marine Le Pen from the National Front or the conservative Francois Fillon from the Republican Party), a candidate  opposed to open borders and favoring a rapprochement with Russia. Though Le Pen is the more anti-liberal and “traditional” of the two, regardless who prevails, France will move to amend or abrogate the Schengen Agreement, which created open borders among EU member states.

Following the French elections, Germans will head to the ballot boxes in the fall of 2017 (September-October). In addition to French election results impacting German results, today’s assault will likely add fuel to the already kindled fire that is gaining momentum as it moves across Germany in the form of a new political party that calls itself “Alternative for Germany” (AfD).  AfD is a conservative, Euro-skeptic populist party that seems to be the German counterpart of the anti-liberal front that is raging in Eastern Europe and gaining momentum in the West. In the wake of today’s heinous crime AfD leader, Frauke Petry, denounced Merkel saying that her over-zealous decision to host over a million asylum seekers in is threatening German peace and security. According to AfD spokesman, Ronald Glaser, Germany’s liberal minded leaders seem more concerned about globalism and political correctness than they do about identifying the underlying causes of social problems and doing something about them.

fgf

WHO IS ALTERNATIVE FOR GERMANY?

Originally, the AfD was founded to oppose the euro and Chancellor Merkel’s handling of the euro economic crisis. Since then AfD has adopted a pro-family, traditional values, anti-immigrant platform, a platform that has made them, according to Der Spiegel, a “dangerous party”,

“…a collection of radical-Christian ideologues, arch-conservative military veterans, buttoned-up business professors and disillusioned business owners.”

Interpreted in positive terms this means, a collection of deeply religious men and women committed to their faith and its social cultural expression, virile military veterans committed to upholding Germany’s Christian patrimony and family traditions, and who are in favor of moral values (rather than an unseen hand) regulating the market place. AfD’s leader is “dangerous” because she has brazenly committed political heresy by daring to trample on political correctness and announce what is wrong in Germany:

“…the refugee crisis, problems with the education system, the “premature sexualization of children.”

Nonetheless, AfD continues to gain popularity. The party was founded in 2013, a year in which it surprisingly won 4.7% of the vote barely missing the 5% threshold necessary to sit in the Bundestag (the Lower House of Parliament that represents the people and elects the Chancellor aka the Prime Minister). A year later AfD managed to acquire 7.1% of the vote and 7 of Germany’s 96 seats in the European Parliament.  By 2016 AfD gained MP seats in ten of Germany’s 16 state parliaments and is poised to gain seats in next fall’s federal elections.

Speaking about the 2016 state results in the Eastern state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, the BBC reported

“Anxiety about immigration dominated the Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania election on 4 September, enabling the AfD to take second place (almost 21%), behind the centre-left Social Democrats (SPD – 30.6%) but ahead of Mrs Merkel’s Christian Democrats (CDU – 19%).”

The Telegraph worded the Mecklenberg results this way:

“Almost exactly a year after Mrs Merkel opened Germany’s borders to more than 1m asylum-seekers, her party was beaten into third place in her own parliamentary constituency, according to preliminary exit polls.”

 

“The anti-migrant Alternative for Germany party (AfD) surged ahead of Mrs Merkel’s Christian Democrats (CDU) in initial projections with around 21 per cent of the vote.”

 

“Perhaps this is the beginning of the end for Chancellor Merkel,” Leif-Erik Holm, the AfD’s regional leader, said as the results became clear.”

Reporting on 2016 state elections in the capital, Berlin, Politico reported that Germany’s two leading parties, the Social Democrats and Christian Democrats, both suffered heavy losses while the AfD was catapulted into the state assembly.

According to Politico:

“Berlin’s voters have dealt the embattled chancellor another heavy blow. But what is most remarkable is the fundamental shift in the country’s party landscape and political process that this election heralds. Berlin is Germany’s political and social laboratory par excellence. It is a microcosm where the country’s major challenges play out as if under a microscope. So the stability and consensus that have long been Germany’s political trademark may soon be a thing of the past.

It seems that  Germany’s Euro-skeptic party is on the move making headway promoting a pro-Christian/Humanistic anti radical-Muslim values campaign. In May of this year, AfD adopted an anti-Islam policy that includes a section explaining why  “Islam does not belong to Germany”.

“There is no room for Muslim practices and beliefs that go against “the free, democratic social foundation, our laws and the Judaeo-Christian and humanistic bases of our culture….Moderate (Muslims who accept integration) are valued members of society”, the programme says. But it argues that multiculturalism does not work.”

Like other Euro-skeptic parties AfD advocates decentralization and opposes “Euro-federalism” as a type of centralization. If the trend toward centralization is not reversed AfD leaders have stated that they will move to “pull Germany out of the EU.”

As the result of increasing violence associated with the refugee crisis and the continued acquiescence of Germany to EU stipulations, Merkel’s political future looks compromised.

“Mrs Merkel’s national approval ratings have fallen to a five-year low of 45 per cent, and she is yet to declare whether she will lead her party into next year’s elections. For the AfD, the result is further confirmation that the party has arrived as a force to be reckoned with in German politics.”

jh

LIBERALISM COMING TO AN END IN GERMANY

The developing trend (most advanced in Berlin) but in motion throughout most of Germany is clear: The age of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) leadership based on liberal European values is being seriously challenged, perhaps coming to an end.

“The AfD’s rightward drift can be seen across Germany, but nowhere is it as clear as in the country’s eastern states. Supporters of eastern German AfD chapters are not looking for a conservative alternative on the political spectrum. They are interested in opposing and resisting the established political system.”

As indicated by the election results in Mecklenburg and especially in Berlin, it seems that in Germany, as elsewhere, liberalism is being questioned. In Germany, according to Politico:

“The political scene has traditionally been dominated by two Volksparteien, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Social Democratic Party (SPD). Each typically garnered around 40 percent of the vote and alternated in leading governments. Sunday’s poll (the Berlin result , however, saw five parties land between 21 and 14 percent, effectively leveling the playing field between the erstwhile dominant CDU and SPD on the one hand, and the Greens, the Left, and the far-right (AfD) on the other…. Two-party alliances, long sufficient to secure necessary majorities to govern, will have to make way for three-party coalitions….Now, with representation in 10 of 16 states, the AfD is here to stay.”

 

“The recent vote in the German capital was more than a state election. It was a wake-up call to the fact that German politics is undergoing a sea change that will leave its imprint on the country’s federal elections in 2017 and beyond.”

With just four years under its belt, the AfD is now the third strongest party in Germany.  As in the United States, traditional family oriented European men, men tired of the abuse they have suffered under a liberal agenda, an agenda that has robbed them of their cultural patrimony, striped them of paternal authority, and reduced them to politically correct sycophants, these men have had enough.  According to Der Spiegel, Europe’s largest and Germany’s most influential weekly:

‘”There are many conservative, upper middle-class voters — most of them older, white males — who had hoped that the AfD would provide them with a new political home reminiscent of the Helmut Kohl-era Christian Democrats. For these voters, Angela Merkel’s CDU has become too liberal, too unprincipled, too un-Catholic and too multicultural. It is a natural pool of voters for a party to the right of the CDU.”

Although opposed to the AdF, reporters at Der Spiegel are realists able to assess a situation well, even if they despise the result:

“Currently, Chancellor Angela Merkel is governing in a coalition together with the Social Democrats, Germany’s large, center-left party. That means that those who disapprove of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s handling of the refugee crisis (many people) don’t have many choices when it comes to casting a protest vote, particularly given that the Greens are reliably pro-refugee.”

Of course, this means that the AdF is the projected beneficiary. Whether or not the AdF will attain power in the fall remains to be seen; it is more of a long-shot than the National Front in France. But if Le Pen’s National Font pulls out the victory in the spring of next year and Chancellor Merkel’s CDU fails to fix the immigrant problem and address the surge in favor of protecting Germany’s cultural patrimony, AdF might be the beneficiary in more than one way in the fall.

 

THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME EVIDENCE confirming the allegation that Democratic email accounts were compromised by phishing private information such as passwords and usernames. But there is no conclusive evidence that demonstrates the Russian government is responsible. The evidence is derived from independent researchers and private cyber firms such as Crowd Street and Fire Eye.  Unfortunately, the evidence is compromised by the use of qualifiers such as “possibly”, “appears”, “indicates” etc.  The evidence is based on a series of possible suppositions.

Together, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security released a joint statement implicating the Russian government. They stated that:

“The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process.”

According to Sam Biddle:

“If the U.S. Intelligence Community is asking the American electorate to believe them, to accept as true their claim that our most important civic institution was compromised by a longtime geopolitical nemesis, we need them to show us why.”

 

“The U.S. intelligence community must make its evidence against Russia public if they want us to believe their claims. The integrity of our presidential elections is vital to the country’s survival; blind trust in the CIA is not.”

From Newera’s perspective, the Intelligence Community need not produce its evidence; the Intelligence Community along with the Executive Branch are implicated in at least three ways that, in this case will “come back to bite them”.  Recently, almost every foreign policy maneuver has backfired with unintended and disastrous consequences that were not forecasted by the American Intelligence Community. For example, the attempt to nation build in Iraq following the Gulf War led to a foreign policy debacle in which Iran and Iraq became allies much to US consternation creating a crisis in the Middle East, which is still unfolding contrary to American Foreign Projections. A similar thing happened in Egypt when a cuop to overthrow President Mubarek led to an unintended rise of the Muslim Brotherhood when Mohamed Morsi became the first democratically elected head of state in Egyptian history. This was not expected and contrary to American initiatives in Egypt, so Morsi had to go. US foreign policy is backfiring in Iran and in Syria as well.

The accusation that Russia is responsible for interfering in US elections that indirectly assisted Trump will also backfire; it will backfire because the United States is employing outworn intelligence models as explained in “The Necessity of Theopolitics“. The neo-con and neo-liberal expectations and assumptions are no longer working so well because the world is on the cusp of a momentous change as explained in many of our articles.

WHY WILL THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST RUSSIA BACKFIRE?

The allegations, even if they are true, and for sake of a strong case, let’s presume they are true, will falter for at least three reasons.

First, the CIA and American Intelligence Communities report that America’s cyber security was hacked is devastating, devastating for the executive branch, for President Obama and the Intelligence Community itself. It means that the Russians beat us and are beating us; it means that the nation is not safe under President Obama. Both Secretary of State and presidential-nominee, Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama have failed to keep America safe and secure. The Intelligence community is being out-played, out-maneuvered and out-smarted by the Russians whom we are led to believe, otherwise, are way behind us.  Not so, if the allegations are true.  If they are true, it is an explicit admission of American inferiority and the failure of the Democrats to keep America safe.  It works against the Democrats, not in their favor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHbDO7aqqwg

[p

Second, If the allegations are true and the Democrats keep raising their voices louder and louder in a crescendo of defiance, it further manifests to Americans increasingly upset with main stream propaganda, with the deceit and misinformation, it further manifests to Americans the extent to which Democrats prefer lies to truth.  They prefer that Clinton gets elected to Americans being told the truth. They are upset because the truth about Hilary could not remain hidden, that Americans actually learned the truth about her.

It is a lamentable day when Americans have to learn the truth from the Russians because their own politicians lie to them, because American politicians like Hilary Clinton prefer to cover up their nefarious deeds with deceit and falsehoods.  They are content when Americans believe the deceit, when they are fooled, but extremely upset when they see through it or when it is unexpectedly leaked. Simply stated, Hilary Clinton and her legions prefer falsehood to truth and will continue to deceive the American public as long as they can get away with it.

They are upset with the Russians, but they are more upset because they got caught and are trying to deflect their guilt by projecting it onto the Russians.  This is a classical defense-mechanism employed by people blind to their own faults. It is symptomatic of a psychological and sociological or individual and collective hubris,  a symptom of arrogance, pride and concupiscence. The proper attitude for a person convicted of sin and error is sorrow and penitence, not militant obstinacy and unjust covering of culpable blame by projecting it elsewhere. Complaint, denial, projection all conspire to reveal the extent that some politicians love a lie, are complicit in lying, and will continue to prevaricate if they attain office. The worst thing imaginable for such a person or persons is being apprehended; it is not the commission of evil deeds and wrapping them in deceit. The proof is in the response to being caught; the Clinton response is blind in its arrogance – major backfire; the old tricks are not working so well anymore.  America is waking up.

Finally, the third reason that trying to implicate the Russians will fail is the hypocrisy of it all. By this point, most people are aware that it is common US foreign policy to interfere in the elections of other countries. For the Democrats to raise a tremor about presumed Russian interference indicates the height of arrogance and their blind hypocrisy.  Why did the United States “bomb the hell” out of Syria for years.  The Obama and Clinton administration did not like the results of the Syrian elections, the fact that the Syrian people overwhelmingly preferred Assad to their meddling and re-elected him in 2014.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yetgi-8k0NQ

If the United States could not effect the outcome of an election in Syria by a major military intervention but all the Russians have to do is hack a few computers to send the Democrats to the gallows, what does that say about their allegations?

The United States did far more than engineer cyber leaks, they raised an army of terrorists backed by American military might and proceeded to obliterate a nation from the face of the earth; they did the same in Libya, in Iraq, in Grenada and elsewhere.

According to pro-American and pro-Liberal Washington Post

“The United States does have a well-documented history of interfering and sometimes interrupting the workings of democracies elsewhere. It has occupied and intervened militarily in a whole swath of countries in the Caribbean and Latin America and fomented coups against democratically elected populists.”

 

“The most infamous episodes include the ousting of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953— whose government was replaced by an authoritarian monarchy favorable to Washington — the removal and assassination of Congolese leader Patrice Lumumba in 1961, and the violent toppling of socialist Chilean President Salvador Allende, whose government was swept aside in 1973 by a military coup led by the ruthless Gen. Augusto Pinochet.”

 

“In 1954, Washington unseated Guatemala’s left-wing president, Jacobo Arbenz, who had had the temerity to challenge the vast control of the United Fruit Co., a U.S. corporation, with agrarian laws that would be fairer to Guatemalan farmers. The CIA went on to install and back a series of right-wing dictatorships that brutalized the impoverished nation for almost half a century.”

In 1970 Henry Kissinger opined:

“I don’t see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people. ”

According to the Huffington Post;

“Nixon administration documents declassified in the 1990s reveal that under Kissinger’s leadership, the U.S. security and intelligence apparatus aided General Augusto Pinochet’s 1973 military coup that toppled Allende’s government….The Pinochet government detained and tortured more than 40,000 people from 1973 to 1990 and murdered over 3,000, according to estimates from the current Chilean government.”

In Short, according to Peter Kornbluh Director of the National Security Archive,

“The United States is only getting a taste of its own medicine.” The United States is guilty of a “long pattern of …manipulation, bribery and covert operations to influence the political trajectory of countless countries around the world.”

This is hypocrisy. Hypocrites cannot lead a nation. Hypocrisy disqualifies persons from leadership because hypocrites are “blind guides.

“Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you go round about the sea and the land to make one proselyte; and when he is made, you make him the child of hell twofold more than yourselves. Woe to you blind guides”  (Matthew 23:15).

The collapse of global liberalism is imminent; everything is conspiring against it, it is breathing its last breathes that is why it is in consternation, which means that everything it attempts to advance is nefarious agenda, every lie it once told successfully, is now turned against it and crushing its head.

The Virgin Mary has confirmed this global reality.  In the most recently approved apparition in the town of Rosario, Argentina, the Blessed Virgin Mary told eighty year old Gladys Quiroga de Motta:

“The prince of evil spills today his poison with all the forces, because he sees that he is concluding his sad reign.   He has little left, his end is near.”    

The collapse of global liberalism is part of the overall collapse of the Kingdom of Pride to be replaced by a Civilization of Love during an Era of Peace.  The Venerable Mary of Agreda captured the essence of this ontological and social reality very well when she spoke of the fall of Adam and Eve, which was witnessed by Satan.  Unlike Hilary Clinton and the liberal establishment who are covering up their lies, complaining and projecting, Adam and Eve, as all of God’s children, admitted their sin and faults, manifested contrition, and asked for forgiveness.:

“But he (Satan) soon fell from his proud boasting, when he saw, contrary to his expectations, how kindly the merciful love of God dealt with the delinquents (Adam and Eve), and how He offered them a chance of doing penance by giving them hope of pardon and return of grace. Moreover he saw how they were disposing themselves toward this forgiveness by sorrow and contrition, and how the beauty of grace was restored to them. When the demons perceived the effect of contrition, all hell was again in confusion. His consternation grew, when he heard the sentence, which God pronounced against the guilty ones, in which he himself was implicated. More especially and above all was he tormented by the repetition of that threat: The Woman shall crush thy head (Gen. 3, 15), which he had already heard in heaven.”

If what neo-con and neo-liberal globalists are saying about the Russians is true, they have left America unsafe, have been defeated in cyber wars, and have compromised American security; they prefer lies to truth and are upset when the truth about them is revealed. Above all, in their arrogance, they are acting like hypocrites, whom Jesus refers to as “blind guides”, a blindness that disqualifies them from leadership. If they expect forgiveness, they must be contrite, not arrogant; tell the truth, not stifle it; ask for forgiveness, not project their error onto someone else. Since this is unlikely, liberalism will continue to implode as the Queen Mother of God stated: “The prince of evil…sees that he is concluding his sad reign. He has little left, his end is near.”