To listen to a related presentation Click Here
“And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the Judgment.” Hebrews 9:27
It Is Appointed for Men to Die and Face Judgement
To some the doctrine of Eternal Judgment is a great comfort. To others it is a terrifying concept. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the Living God.
Man Knows Not His Time
The world was informed that the longest ruling dictator in Africa, Marxist terrorist, Robert Mugabe died in a hospital in Singapore. How various people reacted to this news speaks volumes.
DA Leader Praises Murderous Dictator
DA leader, Mmusi Maimane, sent his condolences to the family of “former President Mugabe. May his soul rest in peace.” Mmusi Maimane claims to be a Christian and a democrat, yet he calls the brutal dictator “President” and assumes that “his soul [will] rest in peace!” DA leader, Mmusi Maimane also described Mugabe as “a liberator!” One wonders where Maimane has been since 1980? Has he not noticed the tragic destruction of neighbouring Zimbabwe under the despotic tyranny of ZANU and Mugabe?
Promised Paradise but Delivered Perdition
The eulogies from leaders praising Robert Mugabe are in sharp contrast to the celebrations in Zimbabwe over the demise of the Marxist dictator, who promised them a paradise and delivered perdition.
“While they promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by whom a person is overcome, by him also he is brought into bondage.”
2 Peter 2:19
Fake Leaders and Fake News
The Fake Leaders and Fake News reports: “guerrilla leader”, “hero”, “liberated his people from colonialism”, “instituted land reform”! Audacious, outrageous, deception and dishonesty are pervasive. The lamestream media has again disgraced itself as the purveyors of fake news and Marxist propaganda.
“A Perfect Human Being”
EFF leader, Julius Malema called Mugabe a “Hero”, “Liberator” and “a perfect human being”! “president” Emmerson Mnangagwa praised Mugabe as an “icon of liberation.” “It is with the utmost sadness that I announce the passing on of Zimbabwe’s founding father and former president Comrade Robert Mugabe.” So said the new dictator who seized power from his previous leader in a 2017 coup.
Incredibly Mnangagwa described the deceased dictator as a “National hero!”, “Comrade Mugabe was an icon of liberation, a pan-Africanist who dedicated his life to the emancipation and empowerment of his people. His contribution to the history of our nation and continent will never be forgotten. May his soul rest in eternal peace!” Calling Mugabe “a great teacher and mentor.” And “a remarkable statesman of our century!” Mnangagwa instituted an official mourning period.
Facts Can Ruin a Good Story
Riddled with so many lies and hypocrisies, this is worthy of study to refute every phrase. Marxists do not believe that man has a soul, nor do they believe in “eternal peace!” Mugabe’s actual contribution was tyranny, brutality, cruelty, massacres, starvation, corruption, hyperinflation and the systematic destruction of a once safe, stable, productive country that used to be self-sufficient, even exporting food, to a disastrous basket state, beggar nation dependant on foreign aid and charity to even survive. More than half of all Zimbabweans have voted with their feet, a vote of no confidence in Mugabe’s ZANU ruled failed state, by fleeing endemic corruption and brutality in Zimbabwe to neighbouring countries.
Self-Serving and Selfish
Mugabe was not dedicated to “emancipating and empowering” the people of Zimbabwe! Mugabe was one of the most corrupt, self-serving and selfish leaders in history. Living in opulent decadence, feasting on giraffe meat while his destitute people starved. Mugabe enslaved and disempowered the people of Zimbabwe.
Rhodesia Was Not a Colony
Yet, ANC president, Cyril Ramaphosa’s, described the despot as “a champion of Africa’s cause against colonialism who inspired our own struggle against apartheid!” Well, Mugabe never fought against colonialism because Rhodesia was not a colony. Rhodesia was a self-governing country from 1923, Independent from 1965 and a Republic from 1970. Rhodesia was self-funded from the beginning, providing its own security. Rhodesia never needed British funding, nor British troops. Rhodesia never needed any foreign aid.
Mugabe Never Liberated Anybody
Mugabe waged a brutal terrorist war against black civilians, white farmers, Christian missionaries and Red Cross ambulance workers. Mugabe never liberated anybody. Mugabe was a Marxist terrorist, dictator and corrupt blood diamond criminal.
Inspiration for the ANC
His communist corruption certainly inspired the ANC “struggle” for state capture gangster-state looting of our country though. Mugabe’s tactic of distracting attention from his government’s failures and atrocities, by make scapegoats of the small minority of whites and promising free land, also inspired the disastrous ANC policy of EWC (Expropriation Without Compensation).
Insulting the Intelligence of their Readers and Viewers
Western media have also insulted the intelligence of their readers, or viewers, with misleading reports like this Associated Press (AP) article: “Former Zimbabwean leader, Robert Mugabe, an ex-guerrilla chief who took power when the African country shook off white minority rule and presided for decades white economic turmoil and human rights violations eroded its early promise has died in Singapore.” AP writers, Farai Mutsaka and Cristopher Torchia claimed: “Mugabe enjoyed strong support from Zimbabwe’s people…!”
Truth Does Not Fear Investigation
How can any journalist be so ill-informed, or dishonest, as to lie so blatantly! No, Mugabe did not enjoy popular support. Millions of Zimbabweans celebrated his fall from power. As another point of fact: Mugabe was never a guerrilla. Mugabe had the popular ZANLA guerrilla leader, Josiah Tongogara, murdered, 26 December 1979, so that he could lead ZANU. Mugabe was a politician, never a soldier, not even a guerrilla/insurgent.
A Travesty of Justice
Nor did Mugabe “take power”, it was handed to him by British governor, Lord Soames (son-in-law of Winston Churchill), after a very flawed “election” where all agreed that, in terms of the Lancaster House Agreement, Mugabe’s ZANU should have been disqualified for its systematic “intimidation” (terrorism) of the voters and flagrant violations of the accord and electoral code of conduct. As Ian Smith declared: “We were never defeated by our enemies, we were betrayed by our friends.”
Reality vs. Rhetoric
Most importantly, Mugabe was not an innocent victim of “economic turmoil and human rights violations”! Mugabe was the prime human agent responsible for the socialist policies which destroyed the robust economy inherited from Rhodesia. Mugabe initiated the communist revolution that violated human rights, including the Gukurahundi massacres of tens-of-thousands of civilians in Matabeleland, the chaotic farm invasions, the blood diamond wars in the Congo and Zimbabwe’s own blood diamond scandals in the Marange diamond fields, South East of Zimbabwe, since 2008.
“Destructive forces are at work in the city, threats and lies never leave is streets.”
Learning from the Mistakes of Others
At “independence”, Mugabe declared to Newsweek: “We are not going to make the same mistakes the rest of Black Africa has made. We are going to learn from their mistakes.” It is hard to think of anything he learned… except how to lie, steal, cheat and murder. What mistakes, or crimes, did Mugabe fail to implement?
Mugabe’s True Legacy of Corruption, Brutality, Starvation and Disease
Starvation, disease, corruption and brutality were the hallmarks of Mugabe’s Marxist ZANU in Zimbabwe. Hospitals ran out of medicine. Shops ran out of food. Fuel stations ran out of petrol. Banks ran out of money. Water failed to flow though the pipes. Electricity power failures became the norm. Tuberculosis, HIV, Cholera and Malaria spread like wildfire. Zimbabwe’s cholera epidemic reached 10 X (1,000%) the African average, according to the World Health Organisation (WHO). Zimbabwean life expectancy plummeted under Mugabe, from over 60 years in 1980, to 37 years for men and 34 years for women by 2006, the lowest in the world.
Ignoring Disastrous Track Record
Yet, despite his disastrous track record, Mugabe was elected president of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), Chairman of the African Union (AU and UN “Goodwill Ambassador” for the World Health Organisation (WHO)! The intense suffering of the people of Zimbabwe apparently did not matter to the AU, UN, SADC, or CNN and the BBC for that matter.
Truth is Stranger than Fiction
It all sounds like a bizarre Monty Python comic satire. The lunatics are running the asylum. If this was part of a scripted plot in a fiction film or book, it would be dismissed as: “Unbelievable!”
Why was Mugabe in a Hospital in Singapore?
The fact that Mugabe died in a hospital in Singapore is most revealing. Mugabe and his destructive socialist policies had so destroyed the once advanced and excellent hospitals built up by Rhodesia that he had to fly to previous British colony Singapore where free enterprise provides better health care than any socialist state. Why did Mugabe not go to a Zimbabwean hospital? Or, a communist state? Or, at least an African hospital? Why Singapore, far away in Asia? What an indictment on the catastrophic communist failure of Mugabe and ZANU!
The Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation
Yet, as they once praised Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Fidel Castro, the BBC gushed with ridiculous praise for Mugabe: “broadening access to health care and education for the black majority!” Are there no genuine investigative journalists left at the BBC? As anyone who has actually lived in Zimbabwe could testify: Mugabe’s thug’s looted hospitals, closed hospitals, burned schools, beat up teachers, kidnapped and brutalised students and closed schools. The health care and education standards were vastly better for black people in Rhodesia. Zimbabwe became a failed state under Mugabe lowering life expectancy to almost half that of Rhodesia and taking a country with the lowest unemployment in Africa (under 4%) to the highest, 95% unemployment! That was even after half the population had fled the country!
“You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.”
“Hate evil, love good, establish justice in the gate…”
Blasphemous Bolshevik False Prophet
Mugabe blasphemously boasted that he had beaten Jesus Christ, by rising from the dead more times than Christ, who had only risen from the dead once! Jesus is the Resurrection and the Life.
“When Justice is done, it brings joy to the righteous but terror to evildoers.”
It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the Living God.
Witnessing to Mugabe
I have been asked: “Have you shared the Gospel with Mugabe?” Yes, we have. I have written to him and one of our Board Members, Bishop Bwanali Phiri, met with and prayed with Robert Mugabe and presented him with the gift of a Bible.
How Are We as Believers to Respond to Death?
The Bible mandates capital punishment for murder, rape and kidnapping. Believers are to pray the imprecatory Psalms of justice against the wicked. God will ensure justice in eternity.
“For I, the Lord, love justice. I hate robbery.”
The Choices Before Us
We are in the middle of a world war of worldviews. A battle for the mind. A battle for the heart.
A battle for the future. The choice before us is clear:
The lies of the world, or the truth of the Word of God?
Indoctrination or education?
Communism or Christianity?
The broad road to destruction, or the narrow way to life?
Heaven or hell?
The grace of God, or the wrath of God?
Is Jesus Christ your Saviour and Lord?
If not, He will be your Judge.
“It is appointed unto men once to die and after that to face Judgement…”
Dr. Peter Hammond
P.O. Box 74 Newlands 7725
Cape Town South Africa
Zimbabwe Celebrates as Mugabe Falls
Mugabe’s Blood Diamonds
Mugabe Tsunami in Zimbabwe
The National Suicide of Zimbabwe
As a Missionary, who for 38 years has concentrated on serving persecuted Christians in Restricted Access Areas, I have travelled in 42 countries and worked in 38 countries across 4 continents. This included throughout Eastern Europe, behind the Iron Curtain, during the Cold War.
When I first visited Yugoslavia and heard people in Croatia speaking about their need for independence, I was highly skeptical that it could succeed. Yugoslavia consisted of six republics, five nations, four languages, three major religions, two alphabets, but only one political party – the Communist Party.
In 1990, the first multiparty elections were held in Croatia. On 25 June 1991, Croatia declared independence, which came into effect 8 October 1991. By 15 January 1992, Croatia was recognised as an independent country by the European Economic Community. The aggression by Yugoslavia was effectively ended August 1995, with a decisive victory by Croatia. Since then, 5 August has been observed as a Victory and Homeland Thanksgiving Day.
In Slovenia, a group of intellectuals articulated the case for Slovene independence in 1987, in the magazine Nova Revija. The Committee for the Defense of Human Rights was formed. Demands for democratisation and independence for Slovenia forced the communist government to enact a number of democratic reforms. In September 1989, constitutional amendments were passed to introduce parliamentary democracy to Slovenia. On 7 March 1990 the Slovenian assembly changed the official name of the state to the Republic of Slovenia. April 1990, the first democratic elections in Slovenia took place. On 23 December 1990, more than 88% of the electorate voted in a referendum for a sovereign and independent Slovenia. Slovenia declared independence 25 June 1991. The Yugoslav People’s Army invaded on 27 June 1991, which led to the 10-Day War. The result was the Brijuni Agreement and the withdrawal of the Yugoslav army from Slovenia. December 1991, a new constitution was adopted, followed by laws on denationalisation and privatisation of state enterprises in 1992. The members of the European Union recognised Slovenia as an independent state on 15 January 1992.
When I first travelled to Bratislava, in Czechoslovakia, talk of the Slovakians seceding from Czechoslovakia seemed unrealistic and impossible. The Christians were adamant that Slovakia must become an independent country. Indeed, following the collapse of communist rule in Czechoslovakia in 1989 and withdrawal of the Soviet Red Army, the Slovak Socialist Republic was renamed the Slovak Republic and on 17 July 1992, Slovakia declared itself a sovereign state, meaning that its laws took precedence over those of the federal government. Throughout the autumn of 1992, negotiations with the Czech Federal government resulted in the vote, 31 December 1992, to dissolve Czechoslovakia. The Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic went their separate ways after 1 January 1993. As the overthrow of communist rule in Czechoslovakia had been called The Velvet Revolution, the peaceful separation of Czech and Slovakia was called The Velvet Divorce.
The Baltic States
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia are three Baltic states which were occupied over the centuries by Sweden, Poland and Russia.
The Republic of Latvia was established 18 November 1918, when it seceded from the Soviet Union. In 1940, Latvia was invaded by the Soviet Union. Later Latvia was liberated by German forces during Operation Barbarossa in 1941. In 1944, the Soviet Red Army again invaded Latvia and forced it back into the Soviet Union. Starting in 1987, the Singing Revolution called for Baltic emancipation from communism and Soviet occupation. On 4 May 1990, the Declaration on the Restoration of Independence of the Republic of Latvia was issued and on 21 August 1991, Latvia declared its independence. Latvia has been declared the capital of Culture in Europe and its capital, Riga, has hosted the Choir Olympics, which my daughter, as part of the Cape Town Youth Choir, participated in. Over 140 choirs from around the world gathered in Riga for this event.
Estonia was also occupied over the centuries by Polish, Swedish and Russian forces and declared independence, 24 February 1918. On 6 August 1940, Estonia was invaded and occupied by the Soviet Red Army and incorporated into the Soviet Union. Estonians continued to resist the Soviet occupation for years after the Second World War. The Forest Brothers’ Resistance movement opposed the Soviet policy of collectivisation and forced removals of Estonians to make way for Russian immigration. In 1987, the Singing Revolution began and by 1988, the Popular Front of Estonia became the standard-bearer for Estonian independence. The Estonian National Independence Party was the first non-communist party in the Soviet Union. It demanded full restoration of independence. On 16 November 1988, the Estonian Supreme Soviet issued a sovereignty declaration asserting the primacy of Estonian laws over Soviet Union laws. On 23 August 1989, about 2 million Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians participated in a mass demonstration forming the Baltic Way human chain across the three republics demanding restoration of independence. In 1990, the Congress of Estonia was formed as a representative body of Estonian citizens. In March 1991, a Referendum was held, where 77% of voters supported independence. A Moscow coup attempt was exposed and resisted and Estonia declared its restoration of independence 20 August 1990, which is now observed as a national holiday in Estonia. The last units of the Red Army left Estonia in 1994. In 1992, Estonia launched economic reforms for privatisation and free market economy. In 2004, Estonia joined the European Union and NATO.
Lithuania seceded from the Soviet Union on 16 February 1918, to form the Republic of Lithuania. In 1940, Lithuania was invaded and occupied by the Soviet Red Army. On 11 March 1990, a year before the formal disillusion of the Soviet Union, Lithuania became the first Baltic state to declare itself independent. On 11 March 1990, the Supreme Council announced the restoration of Lithuania’s independence. On 28 March 1990, the USSR imposed an economic blockade on Lithuania. The blockade lasted 74 days, but Lithuania stood firm. When the Soviet Union attempted a coup in Lithuania, storming the Seimas Palace, Lithuanians vigorously defended their Council and inspired other Soviet republics to secede from the Union. Shortly after 11 February 1991, the parliament of Iceland voted to confirm that Iceland’s 1922 recognition of Lithuanian independence was still in effect as it had never formally recognised the Soviet Union’s occupation of Lithuania. Iceland stated that full diplomatic relations should be re-established as soon as possible. On 25 October 1992, the citizens of Lithuania voted in a referendum to adopt their new constitution. On 31 August 1993, the last units of the Soviet Red Army left Lithuanian territory. Since 2004, Lithuania has been a member of NATO and of the European Union.
Under Fire in Sudan
Since 1995, I have been involved in the campaign for South Sudan’s independence. From 1995 to 2002, I conducted 27 missions to Sudan, delivering over half a million Bibles and books in 24 languages throughout Southern Sudan and the Nuba Mountains. During this time, I conducted over 1,200 meetings in Sudan and over 1,000 meetings, radio and TV programmes internationally, to campaign for South Sudan’s independence. This involved writing the book Faith Under Fire in Sudan, the third edition being three times the size of the original 1996 edition. I brought in filmmakers, such as Pat Matriciana of Jeremiah Films, to produce Sudan the Hidden Holocaust and Terrorism and Persecution and also assisted Samaritans Purse with their first films on Sudan and helped establish them in the hospital pioneered by Dr. Fraser in Lui.
Independence is Essential for Future Peace and Freedom
Initially, even the leaders of the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) were skeptical that the map could ever be redrawn, as the African Union had resisted any changes to the borders delineated in the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885. I argued strenuously with Colonel John Garang, the leader of the SPLA and Commander Silva Kiir, the second in Command of the SPLA, that only independence for South Sudan could secure their future and freedom. Anything else would mean the continuation of oppression by the Arab North, as they would be a minority in their own country. Although Blacks are a majority in South Sudan, they were a minority in the whole country in Sudan. Missionaries had pleaded with Great Britain in 1955 not to include the Black Christians and animists of the South into an Arab ruled Sudan. Suggestions were made to incorporate Equatoria into Kenya or Uganda, but to no avail.
Islamisation and Arabisation
From the very first day of independence, 1 January 1956, the Arab North sought to Arabise and Islamise the South with brutal oppression, great devastation and loss of life. I showed from Sudan’s history and from the teachings of Islam, why the only way to be free of Shari'a law and Arab oppression was to fight for full independence and sovereignty of South Sudan and the Nuba Mountains.
South Sudan is Now an Independent Country
Although they were highly skeptical that it was at all possible, today South Sudan is an independent country and Silva Kiir has been its first president since 9 July 2011.
The Nuba Mountains of Sudan
Today we continue to campaign for freedom and independence for the Nuba Mountains, which is an island of Christianity in a sea of Islam. The courageous Nuban Christians continue to resist the Arabisation and Islamisation policies of the Khartoum government in South Kordofan. Redrawing of the map is absolutely essential to recognise ethnolinguistic, demographic realities and to avoid further loss of life and future conflict.
Resist Centralisation – Support De-Centralisation
We must not continue to follow in the footsteps of failure. Centralisation and a unitary state is as doomed to failure as the Tower of Babel. We need to emulate examples of excellence such as the decentralised model of Switzerland and the free enterprise model of Singapore.
The Legacy of the Berlin Conference
The Berlin Conference of 1884-1885, also known as the Congo Conference, or West Africa Conference, sought to avoid conflict by regularising European protectorates and colonies in Africa to effectively eradicate the slave trade and to avoid conflict between the European powers. The European powers gathered at the European conference, were also seeking to prevent rising American, Russian and Japanese encroachments on Africa. However, due to lack of information and a very incomplete understanding of the realities of Africa, often borders were drawn along lines of longitude, or latitude, or utilising a river. The fact that tribes and nations lived along both sides of those arbitrary border markings, was doubtless not realised at the time.
Maps Need to Be Redrawn
However, in my missionary work, it has become clear that the map needs to be redrawn. Half of the Shangaan people live in Mozambique and speak Portuguese and the other half live in South Africa and speak English. Half of the Ovambo people live in Angola where they learned Portuguese and drove on the right hand side of the road, whereas the other half were in South West Africa/Namibia learning Afrikaans or English and driving on the left hand side of the road. Moreover they were in two different time zones, despite being North and South of one another. The Chichewa people are divided between Malawi, Zambia and Mozambique and so one could continue throughout Africa.
To Prevent Wars
The greatest conflicts in Africa, including the Biafran Civil War in Nigeria, 1967–1970, most of the Congo wars and the long conflict in Sudan, would have all been averted, if the maps had reflected demographic realities and not forced some people to be minorities in their own country, oppressed by other tribes, cultures, or religions.
South Sudan’s Independence Gives Hope to Other Secession Movements
It is inexcusable that since independence the Organisation of African Unity has steadfastly refused to allow maps to be redrawn. The apparent exception being Eritrea. But Eritrea was a separate entity and only forced to be part of Abyssinia after the Second World War. This led to a longstanding civil war until Eritrea’s independence was re-established in 1991. So, the redrawing of the maps and recognising of independence of South Sudan was a monumentally important precedent.
Dr. Peter Hammond
P.O. Box 74 Newlands 7725
Cape Town South Africa
To listen to an audio of Successful Secessions in the Bible and in History, which includes, Eyewitness to Successful Secession movements, click here.
To view a video presentation on Successful Secessions in the Bible and in History, which includes Eyewitness to Successful Secession movements, click here.
Successful Secessions in the Bible and History
A Case for Cape Independence
To see a video related to this article click here
WE ARE A SICK SOCIETY
Consider this: every two minutes, a child is exploited in the sex industry. Children, some as young as 8 or 9 years old, or younger – are being bought and sold for sex worldwide. Reread and let that statement soak in! We are a sick society!
Sex trafficking of young girls is an evil trade that is even more profitable than drugs, and that is conducted by organized crime, corrupt politicians and even used to finance terrorist operations in Asia, Africa and other parts of the world. Governments, politicians and corrupt police either turn a blind eye to it, or, in many instances, run interference for and participate in the profits from this abominable sex industry. The selling of these human beings is a multi-billion dollar industry, which has increased from approximately $7 Billion per year in 2000, to now approximately $150 Billion every year (www.FreetheSlaves.net). Many thinking people are aware of this sex trade but there are very few who are willing to speak out against it or fight back to rescue these girls.
SLAVERY IS ALIVE AND THRIVING IN OUR SOCIETY
Researchers estimate that there are 40.3 million people enslaved in the world today (International Labour Organisation). In Africa, over two million people are trafficked annually and of this number there is an estimated 30 000 children as young as 4, who are being prostituted currently in South Africa (National Centre for Justice and Rule of Law). It is estimated that there are millions of victims; though only about 50-100,000 cases are found or reported each year in South Africa. The University of Johannesburg reports that trafficking occurs at a slightly higher rate for girls than boys, with 55% of all trafficked people in South Africa being female and 45% being male. It is estimated that more than three quarters of all victims are between the ages of 12-25. Counter Trafficking Data Portal looked into 286 accounts of trafficking in South Africa, 70% of the cases were females; and 55% of the cases were people being trafficked for sexual exploitation, with the remaining percentages being exploited for other trafficking purposes such as organ harvesting or forced labour.
UNDER OUR NOSES
Child sex tourism is prevalent in and between a number of South African cities, notably Johannesburg and Cape Town. Women and girls from other African countries are often imported to South Africa for commercial sexual exploitation, domestic servitude and other jobs in the service sector. Occasionally, these women are taken as far as Europe for sexual exploitation. Many Thai, Chinese, and European women are often trafficked to and sexually exploited in South Africa. Organized criminal groups, syndicates, local gangs and individual policemen facilitate trafficking into, out of and within South Africa, particularly for the purpose of commercial sexual exploitation. Trafficking rings choose transit locations where government officials and police are corrupt, leaving traffickers with little risk of being caught and victims with little hope of being helped.
THE MOST LUCRATIVE COMMODITY: LITTLE GIRLS
Sex trafficking – especially when it comes to the buying and selling of young girls – has become big business – the fastest growing business in organized crime and these enslaved people have become the most lucrative commodity traded illegally – even more so than drugs and guns. As investigative journalist Amy Fine Collins notes, “It’s become more lucrative and much safer [for the traffickers] to sell malleable teens than drugs or guns.” Also, “A pound of heroin or an AK-47 can be retailed once, but a young girl can be sold 10 to 15 times [or more] a day.” On average, a girl might be raped by 6,000 males during a five-year period of enslavement. Brook Bello, the founder of the anti-trafficking organization More To Life, states, “We work with victims that are 3 years old and up… The average victim that we work with that’s over 18 started being raped at three.”
BUYING AND SELLING CHILDREN FOR SEX
According to USA Today, adults purchase children for sex at least 2.5 million times a year in the United States alone. Who buys a child for sex? Sadly, the answer is otherwise ordinary men from all walks of life. “They could be your co-worker, a businessman, doctor, pastor, or spouse,” writes journalist Tim Swarens, who spent more than a year investigating the sex trade in America. And we cannot look only to America with disgust, as this is happening right under our own noses in South Africa too. This is an industry that revolves around cheap sex on the fly, with young girls and women who are sold to up to several dozen men EACH DAY.
This is not a problem found only in major cities or poverty stricken third world countries. It’s happening everywhere, right under our noses, in suburbs, cities and towns across the globe. Ernie Allen of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children points out, “The only way not to find this in any city is simply not to look for it.” Don’t fool yourselves into believing that this is merely a concern for lower income communities or immigrants. Most girls aren’t volunteering to be sex slaves. They’re being lured – forced – trafficked into it.
HEART OF THE PROBLEM
But let’s look at the heart of the problem, human trafficking is thriving due to simple economics: Supply and demand. A sick and perverse society is driving the demand. The evil and widespread sex trafficking industry is fueled by an unceasing demand. Because the demand is so great, traffickers are filling that demand with an increased supply of forced sex workers. They are filling that demand with our children.
PROTECTING PIMPS AND WHOREMONGERS
And what’s horrifying, is often those fueling the demand, those sick abusers of children, are protected. One investigator in an interview with Fox News pointed this out when he said, “Historically, we've allowed the sex buyer to hide behind a mask of anonymity and actually call them a ‘John’.” “We don't even call them by their name, because we let them stay behind that mask of anonymity. And the only way we're going to attack the supply side is by going after the demand. And that means the sex buyer [also] needs to be held culpable for the damage and trauma that he or she is causing to these children.”
OVER-SEXUALISED SOCIETY GROOMING GIRLS FOR EXPLOITATION
A 25-year-old victim of trafficking, after being rescued stated, “For every 10 women rescued, there are 50 to 100 more girls who are brought in by the traffickers. Unfortunately, they’re not 18 or 20-year-olds anymore,” she says, “They’re minors as young as 13 who are being trafficked. They’re little girls.” I ask you: Where did this sick appetite for young girls come from? Look around you. Young girls have been sexualized for years now in music videos, on billboards, in television ads, and in clothing stores. Marketers have created a demand for young flesh and a ready supply of over-sexualized children. Jessica Bennett from Newsweek points out, “All it takes is one look at [social media] photos of teens to see examples – if they aren’t imitating porn they’ve actually seen, they’re imitating the porn-inspired images and poses they’ve absorbed elsewhere…Latex, corsets, and stripper heels, once the fashion of porn stars, have made their way into middle and high schools. It doesn’t take a genius to see that sex, if not porn, has invaded our lives. Whether we welcome it or not, television brings it into our living rooms and the Web brings it into our bedrooms. According to a 2007 study from the University of Alberta, as many as 90 percent of boys and 70 percent of girls aged 13 to 14 have accessed sexually explicit content (porn) at least once.” Many view it regularly! In other words, the culture is grooming these young people to be preyed upon by sexual predators. And then we wonder why our young women are being preyed on, trafficked and abused? Don McAlvany of McAlvany Intelligence Advisor comments, “And sadly, there are large numbers of revolting [males] who are so sick that they want to have sex with a young girl [or young boy].”
PORNOGRAPHY FUELS PROSTITUTION AND PERVERSION
Pornography is causing greater and more bizarre sex addictions. Agents at the Cyber Crimes Center in Virginia, report that when it comes to sex, the appetites have now changed. What was once considered abnormal is now the norm. These agents are tracking a clear spike in the demand for harder-core pornography on the Internet and subsequently for brutal sex. As one agent noted, “We’ve become desensitized by the soft stuff; now we need a harder and harder hit.” Just like any other addiction, you need more increased and intense doses. A study of the life and final confessions of serial rapist and killer, Ted Bundy, who sexually brutalized and murdered 43 women, reveals that it all started with pornography and escalated to more and more wild and violent sexual atrocities. Sadly, dark spiritual forces have achieved incredible control over nearly every institution in modern society, including the news media, public education, the tech giants, politics, pop culture, banking, and finance and is having a phenomenal impact on society. Now not only is sexual violence being glamourized in Hollywood films, but it is happening on a mass scale in reality all around us.
With a growing demand for sexual slavery and an endless supply of girls and women who can be targeted for abduction, this is not a problem that’s going away anytime soon. For those trafficked, it’s a nightmare from beginning to end. Those being sold for sex have an average life expectancy of seven years and those years are a living nightmare of endless rape, forced drugging, humiliation, degradation, disease, pregnancies, abortions, miscarriages, torture, pain and always the constant fear of being killed, or having those you love hurt or killed. A common thread woven through most survivors’ experiences is being forced to go without sleep or food until they have met their “sex quota” of at least 40 men. Barbara Amaya was repeatedly sold between traffickers, abused, shot, stabbed, raped, kidnapped, trafficked, beaten, and jailed – all before she was 18 years old! “I had a quota that I was supposed to fill every night. And if I didn’t have that amount of money, I would get beaten, thrown down the stairs. He beat me once with wire coat hangers, the kind you hang up clothes on, he straightened it out and my whole back was bleeding.”
TRICKED – TRAPPED – TRAFFICKED
Debbie, a straight-A student who belonged to a close-knit Air Force family, is an example of this trading of flesh. Debbie was 15 when she was snatched from her driveway by an acquaintance-friend. Forced into a car, Debbie was bound and taken to an unknown location, held at gunpoint, and raped by multiple men. She was then crammed into a small dog kennel and forced to eat dog biscuits. Debbie’s captors advertised her services on Craigslist. Those who responded were often married with children! And the money that Debbie “earned” for sex was given to her kidnappers. The gang raping continued. After searching the apartment where Debbie was held captive, police finally found Debbie stuffed in a drawer under a bed.
Holly Austin Smith was abducted when she was 14 years old, raped and then forced to prostitute herself. Her pimp, when brought to trial, was only made to serve a year in prison. He should have been executed!
THE GIRLS NEXT DOOR
One woman recounts how her trafficker made her lie face down on the floor when she was pregnant and then literally jumped on her back, forcing her to miscarry. Peter Landesman paints the full horrors of life for those victims of the sex trade in his New York Times article “The Girls Next Door”, he writes, “Andrea told me that she and the other children she was held with were frequently beaten to keep them off balance and obedient. Sometimes they were videotaped while being forced to have sex with adults or one another. Her cell of sex traffickers offered three age ranges of sex partners – toddler to age 4, 5-12, and teens – as well as what she called a ‘damage group.’ ‘In the damage group, they can hit you or do anything they want to,’ she explained. ‘Though, sex always hurts when you are little, so it’s always violent, everything was much more painful once you were placed in the damage group.’”
I ask you again, how do you define a sick, grotesquely perverse and dying culture?
And this growing evil is, for all intents and purposes, out in the open. Trafficked women and children are advertised on the Internet, transported on our freeways, and bought and sold on our streets. Our culture is off-the-charts evil. But does anyone care? Does this make you angry?
The truth is that the government’s war on sex trafficking, like the war on drugs, or the war on terrorism, is a farce. Drugs, terrorism and sex trafficking are about huge money and certain politicians and high-up influential people are profiting from all of these fake wars. If the government wanted to stop this sex trafficking, it could. But it doesn’t! They could pass laws making sex trafficking a capital offense – or at least punishable by life imprisonment. But they won’t – in part because some powerful people are actually participants (i.e., customers) in this evil sexual abuse of little girls.
So, what can you do? Firstly look out for your own children and family members. Educate yourself and your children about this growing evil. Watch your children closely in public – even in big shopping centers, churches, or other public places. Watch closely what they are doing on social media – this is where many innocent and naïve young girls are being recruited. Eliminate or limit social media from your home, but explain to your children why so that they understand and don’t just keep doing it secretly. These are all precautionary defensive strategies. And ultimately, stop feeding the monster: Sex trafficking is part of a larger spectrum that includes sexualized television, the glorification of sexual culture and a multi-billion-dollar sex industry encompassing pornography, music, movies, entertainment, etc.
THE PORNOGRAPHY PLAGUE
There are an estimated 4 million porn sites on the Internet, all of them only a click away on your child’s cellphone, tablet, laptop. We have to educate our children on this, as sadly it is no longer will our child know how to respond IF they come across porn, but rather WHEN they come across it. In fact, Dr. Eve’s curriculum, Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE), is in many overseas schools and is now trying to be brought to South Africa, where children as young as grade 4, are taught how to masturbate! They are exposed to pornography as “entertainment” and they are taught they can be whatever gender they feel like! It is a radical explicit sexualisation of children. The UN and Unesco promote this, to children as young as 6 years old, teaching them things such as anal sex is normal and good, and they should start exploring there sexuality. They are trying to make this curriculum compulsory. But parents should be able to choose who teaches their children about the sanctity of sex, at what age, with sensitivity and Biblically, but the state is trying to take the right to make these decisions away from parents.
This epidemic is largely one of our own making, especially in a corporate age where the value placed on human life takes a backseat to profit. It is estimated that the porn industry brings in more money than tech giants like Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Apple, or Yahoo. Call on your city councils, elected officials and police departments to make the battle against sex trafficking a top priority, more so even than the so-called war on terror and drugs. Focus on prosecuting the pimps AND buyers (customers/perverts/rapists) who victimize these young girls. It’s not just the supply that’s the problem, but the demand too. Legislators need to pass legislation aimed at prosecuting traffickers and abusers, the sick people who drive the demand for sex slaves. They need to be prosecuted with long prison sentences. Hotels need to stop enabling these traffickers by providing them with rooms and cover for their dirty deeds. Consider how you would feel about these reprobates if your own daughter was a victim. We need to turn off Hollywood. We need to restore basic principles of morality and ethics to our schools, our town halls, and our families. Only then may we seek the mercy of God and pray for forgiveness for the tens of millions of children already exploited or murdered. We need to pray for forgiveness for the evil WE have passively allowed to take root and grow in our nation – in the name of “progress” and “tolerance.”
The bottom-line, that so many women and children continue to be victimized, brutalized, and treated like human cargo is due to four factors: 1) A sex crazed, sick culture that is addicted to pornography – where large numbers of perverse people are eager to have sex with little girls or boys (i.e., pedophilia); 2) Sex trafficking is very profitable – even more-so than drugs (a multi-billion dollar, flourishing industry); 3) A level of corruption so massive on both a local and international scale that there is little hope of working through government channels for change; and 4) An eerie silence from individuals. Most people either don’t know, or just don’t care.
And so the truth is that we are all guilty of contributing to this human suffering. The traffickers are guilty. The sick male customers who want to have sex with little girls are guilty. The corrupt law enforcement and government officials who ignore the trafficking or are actually profiting from it are guilty. The women’s rights groups who do nothing are guilty. The foreign peacekeepers, aid workers and military personnel who contribute to the demand for sex slaves are guilty. And every individual who does not raise an objection to the atrocities being committed against trafficked children in almost every nation around the globe is guilty. And everyone who is voting for political parties that legalize pornography and essentially prostitution are guilty. As Edmund Burke said: “All that is necessary that evil triumph is that good men (and women) do nothing.”
“Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.” Ephesians 5:11
We are all guilty, but we serve a God who is gracious and merciful, and even though we are underserving, God says, “if my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land.” 2 Chronicles 7:14. Let’s humble ourselves, let’s confess our sin, let’s pray, let’s seek God’s face, let’s be renewed in our minds by meditating on His Word – Then God is faithful and just and He will forgive us and heal us. Let’s do this today.
BE THE SOLUTION
Thankfully, there are some voices now rising against this evil. But ask yourself: are you angry, or more accurately, enraged, at this growing evil and the evil described above? Are you, your church, your pastor, your friends, your family members speaking out against it? If not, why not? Is our silence a result of ignorance or cowardice? Now that you know, do not stay silent, remaining part of the problem.
“Who will rise up for Me against the wicked? Who will stand for Me against those who practice iniquity?” Psalm 94:16
PROBLEM OF THE HEART
The major underlying reason for this great evil is the collapsing of culture, morality and spiritual life – an evil culture that is now being spread all over the world – a culture where most people can no longer even recognize great evil – let alone fight back against it. Earlier generations would never have tolerated pornography available on every computer and cell phone; or the death of marriage and family that we now see – nor would they have tolerated a sex industry that is turning hundreds of thousands of young girls into sex slaves. We are reaping what we have sown. We must stop the wicked from exploiting, abusing, mutilating, and murdering innocent children, because they are all God’s creatures. Will we ever stop being passive? Will we ever get angry as a people and say: “This is enough! This will go no further!” Will we ever fight back?
“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute.” Proverbs 31:8
By Emma Vaughan-Jones
Henry Morton Stanley School of Christian Journalism Researcher
email@example.com | firstname.lastname@example.org
Sources: The information in this article is taken largely from a McAlvany Intelligence Advisor’s article written by Don McAlvany.
To listen to an interview on this subject on From the Frontline, click here.
See also: Slavery Today – Setting the Captives Free
Women’s Day Anti-Trafficking Campaign
To view this article www.ReformationSA.org website with pictures, click here.
To listen to this presentation on Sermon Audio, click here.
To view as a video, click here.
Atom bombs were dropped on Hiroshima, 6 August 1945 and Nagasaki, 9 August 1945.
Suspicion Over 70th Anniversary Events in Japan
What led to this researched article and presentation, for which there are video and audio links, was when my youngest son, Calvin, was to join the Scouts Jamboree (an international, every four year event), in Japan, August 2015. I was immediately suspicious that they were going to use this International Scout Jamboree event for some anti-American propaganda concerning the A-bomb which everyone knew was essential to end WW2 and to save both America and Japanese lives.
The Facts Can Really Ruin a Good Story
That was why I poured myself into research and was astounded to find that all America’s top military leaders, at the time, opposed it! I am not politically correct, I have never been part of the social justice warriors. I am not part of a “we hate America” movement. I have written many pro-American articles, countered much of the anti-American rhetoric of the left, in camps, courses, on radio, on TV, at public meetings, in schools, in colleges, in debate, for over 40 years. That is why American patriots like Dr. James Kennedy had me regularly on his radio programme, TV programme and in his pulpit.
The Battle to Understand History
I do not support socialists like Chomsky. However, even a stopped clock can be right twice a day. For this reason, I occasionally even quote Karl Marx. Marx said that the first battlefield is the re-writing of history, his disciples have been super busy doing that.
American Military Leaders at the Time Opposed It
In this presentation, I am quoting from Admiral William Leahy, General Douglas McArthur, General Curtis le May, Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz and other American leaders including U.S. President Herbert Hoover.
American Conservatives Opposed the Liberal Democrats Use of the A-Bomb
It astounded me that throughout the late 40s and 50s, American opposition to the use of the A-bomb in Japan was consistent among conservatives. It was the liberal democrats who were justifying this A-bomb attack, while the Republican conservatives were in opposition. For the reasons given.
USAF Assessment of the Ethics and Effectiveness of Bombing Cities
My good friend, General Ben Partin, U.S. Air Force retired, is a Board member of Frontline Fellowship. General Partin was the first to explain to me how counter-productive the saturation bombing/strategic bombing campaigns of the RAF and USAAF were during WW2. It was General Partin who pioneered the precision guided weapons. Because of his conviction, as a Christian USAF Weapons Specialist, he was convinced that the strategic bombing campaign/saturation bombing of cities prolonged the war and of course, greatly increased the “collateral damage” of civilian deaths. He therefore promoted and energetically dedicated his life to the development of LAZER, GPS, button batteries, producing, in time, cruise missiles.
Truth Does Not Fear Investigation
I am not a pacifist and I am by no means anti-American. It is a mark of a Christian to be self-critical in a balanced way. Military ethics are my concern as one who has regularly lectured the military and trained military chaplains. What is the point of this study? To show the truth of what General George Patton wrote about in 1945, that communist agents of influence had infiltrated the U.S. State Department and White House to such an extent that they were serving the cause of communism in both Asia and Europe. The U.S. Military were against it. The scientists were against it. Even many senior politicians, such as U.S. Secretary of Defence, Under Secretary of the Navy and Military Intelligence opposed it. However, as Admiral Nimitz reported: “Truman succumbed to a tiny handful of people putting pressure on the President to drop atom bombs on Japan.”
We Need to Learn from History to Build a Better Future
It would also be helpful to read Freedom Betrayed by President Herbert Hoover & Patrick Buchanan’s, Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War.
My concerns are for the best for both America and for the world, which is our mission field.
Did the Atomic Bombs Actually Save Lives?
I was taught that the U.S. dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in order to end WWII and save both American and Japanese lives. But most of the top American military officials at the time said otherwise. The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey group, assigned by President Truman to study the air attacks on Japan, produced a report in July of 1946 that concluded: "Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability, prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered, even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."
Atomic Weapons Were Not Needed to End the War, or to Save Lives
General (and later president) Dwight Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of all Allied Forces, said: "The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing." (Newsweek, 11/11/63, Ike on Ike). Eisenhower also noted: "In July 1945, Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act… I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of ‘face'. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude…."
Unnecessary and Unethical
Admiral William Leahy, the highest ranking member of the U.S. military from 1942 until retiring in 1949, who was the first de facto Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote: "It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons. The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."
No Military Justification
General Douglas MacArthur agreed: "MacArthur's views about the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were starkly different from what the general public supposed…. He saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb. The war might have ended weeks earlier, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor."
The Potsdam Threat
Moreover: The Potsdam Declaration, in July 1945, demanded that Japan surrender unconditionally, or face 'prompt and utter destruction'. MacArthur was appalled. He knew that the Japanese would never renounce their emperor, and that without him an orderly transition to peace would be impossible anyhow, because his people would never submit to Allied occupation unless he ordered it. Ironically, when the surrender did come, it was conditional, and the condition was a continuation of the imperial reign. Had the General's advice been followed, the resort to atomic weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have been unnecessary.
Assistant Secretary of War John McLoy noted: "I have always felt that if, in our ultimatum to the Japanese government issued from Potsdam (July 1945), we had referred to the retention of the emperor as a constitutional monarch and had made some reference to the reasonable accessibility of raw materials to the future Japanese government, it would have been accepted… We missed the opportunity of effecting a Japanese surrender, completely satisfactory to us, without the necessity of dropping the bombs."
The War was Already Won
Under Secretary of the Navy, Ralph Bird said: "The Japanese were ready for peace, and they already had approached the Russians and the Swiss. And that suggestion of giving a warning of the atomic bomb was a face-saving proposition for them, and one that they could have readily accepted. In my opinion, the Japanese war was really won before we ever used the atom bomb. Thus, it wouldn't have been necessary for us to disclose our nuclear position and stimulate the Russians to develop the same thing much more rapidly than they would have if we had not dropped the bomb… The Japanese were becoming weaker and weaker. They were surrounded by the Navy. They couldn't get any imports and they couldn't export anything. Naturally, as time went on and the war developed in our favour it was quite logical to hope and expect that, with the proper kind of a warning, the Japanese would then be in a position to make peace, which would have made it unnecessary for us to drop the bomb and bring Russia in." (War Was Really Won Before We Used A-Bomb, U.S. News and World Report, 8/15/60
It Had Nothing to do with Ending the War
General Curtis LeMay, the tough cigar-smoking Army Air Force "hawk", stated publicly shortly after the nuclear bombs were dropped on Japan: "The war would have been over in two weeks… The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all."
No Invasion was Necessary
The Vice Chairman of the U.S. Bombing Survey Paul Nitze wrote: "I concluded that even without the atomic bomb, Japan was likely to surrender in a matter of months. My own view was that Japan would capitulate by November 1945. Even without the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it seemed highly unlikely, given what we found to have been the mood of the Japanese government, that a U.S. invasion of the islands scheduled for 1 November 1945 would have been necessary."
Opening up Asia for Communism
Deputy Director of the Office of Naval Intelligence Ellis Zacharias wrote: "Just when the Japanese were ready to capitulate, we went ahead and introduced to the world the most devastating weapon it had ever seen and, in effect, gave the go-ahead to Russia to swarm over Eastern Asia. Washington decided it was time to use the A-bomb. I submit that it was the wrong decision. It was wrong on strategic grounds. And it was wrong on humanitarian grounds." (Ellis Zacharias, How We Bungled the Japanese Surrender, Look, 6/6/50)
Immoral and Unnecessary
Brigadier General Carter Clarke, the Military Intelligence officer in charge of preparing summaries of intercepted Japanese cables for President Truman and his advisors, said: "When we didn't need to do it, and we knew we didn't need to do it, and they knew that we knew we didn't need to do it, we used them as an experiment for two atomic bombs. Many other high-level military officers concurred. For example: The commander in chief of the U.S. Fleet and Chief of Naval Operations, Ernest J. King, stated that the naval blockade and prior bombing of Japan in March of 1945, had rendered the Japanese helpless and that the use of the atomic bomb was both unnecessary and immoral."
A Double Crime
"Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz stated in a press conference on 22 September 1945, that 'The Admiral took the opportunity of adding his voice to those insisting that Japan had been defeated before the atomic bombing and Russia's entry into the war.' In a subsequent speech at the Washington Monument on 5 October 1945, Admiral Nimitz stated 'The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace before the atomic age was announced to the world with the destruction of Hiroshima and before the Russian entry into the war.' It was learned also that General Eisenhower had urged Truman, in a personal visit, not to use the atomic bomb. Eisenhower's assessment was 'It wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing… to use the atomic bomb, to kill and terrorize civilians, without even attempting negotiations, was a double crime.' Eisenhower also stated that it wasn't necessary for Truman to 'succumb' to the tiny handful of people putting pressure on the president to drop atom bombs on Japan."
"British officers were of the same mind. For example, General Sir Hastings Ismay, Chief of Staff to the British Minister of Defence, said to Prime Minister Churchill that 'when Russia came into the war against Japan, the Japanese would probably wish to get out on almost any terms short of the dethronement of the Emperor.' On hearing that the atomic test was successful, Ismay's private reaction was one of 'revulsion.'"
Why Were Bombs Dropped on Populated Cities Without Military Value?
Even military officers who favoured use of nuclear weapons mainly favoured using them on unpopulated areas, or Japanese military targets… not cities.
Special Assistant to the Secretary of the Navy Lewis Strauss proposed that a non-lethal demonstration of atomic weapons would be enough to convince the Japanese to surrender… and the Navy Secretary agreed: "I proposed to Secretary Forrestal that the weapon should be demonstrated before it was used… the war was very nearly over. The Japanese were nearly ready to capitulate… My proposal… was that the weapon should be demonstrated over… a large forest of cryptomeria trees not far from Tokyo… Would lay the trees out in windrows from the centre of the explosion in all directions as though they were matchsticks, and, of course, set them afire in the centre. It seemed to me that a demonstration of this sort would prove to the Japanese that we could destroy any of their cities at will… Secretary Forrestal agreed wholeheartedly with the recommendation… It seemed to me that such a weapon was not necessary to bring the war to a successful conclusion, that once used it would find its way into the armaments of the world…"
Warning Should Have First Been Given
General George Marshall agreed: "'these weapons might first be used against straight military objectives such as a large naval installation and… a number of large manufacturing areas from which the people would be warned to leave - telling the Japanese that we intend to destroy such centres….'"
Neither Hiroshima nor Nagasaki were deemed militarily vital by U.S. planners. (This is one of the reasons neither had been heavily bombed up to this point in the war.) Moreover, targeting at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was aimed explicitly on non-military facilities surrounded by workers' homes.
Historians Agree that the Bomb Wasn't Needed
Historians agree that nuclear weapons did not need to be used to stop the war or to save lives. As historian Doug Long notes: "U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission historian J. Samuel Walker writes, 'The consensus among scholars is that the bomb was not needed to avoid an invasion of Japan and to end the war within a relatively short time. It is clear that alternatives to the bomb existed and that Truman and his advisors knew it.'" (J. Samuel Walker, The Decision to Use the Bomb: A Historiographical Update, Diplomatic History, Winter 1990)
Politicians Agreed that Atomic Bombs were Not Needed
Ex-president Herbert Hoover said: "The Japanese were prepared to negotiate all the way from February 1945… up to and before the time the atomic bombs were dropped;… if such leads had been followed up, there would have been no occasion to drop the atomic bombs."
The Japanese Wanted to End the War
Under Secretary of State Joseph Grew noted: "In the light of available evidence I myself and others felt that if such a categorical statement about the retention of the dynasty had been issued in May 1945, the surrender-minded elements in the Japanese government might well have been afforded by such a statement a valid reason and the necessary strength to come to an early clear cut decision. If surrender could have been brought about in May 1945, or even in June, or July, before the entrance of Soviet Russia into the Pacific war and the use of the atomic bomb, the world would have been the gainer."
Why Then Were Atom Bombs Dropped on Japan?
If dropping nuclear bombs was unnecessary to end the war, or to save lives, why was the decision to drop them made? Especially over the objections of so many top military and political figures?
Scientists Like to Test their Toys
One theory is that scientists like to play with their new toys: On 9 September 1945, Admiral William F. Halsey, commander of the Third Fleet, was publicly quoted extensively as stating that the atomic bomb was used because the scientists had a:"toy and they wanted to try it out… The first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment… It was a mistake to ever drop it."
Even Scientists Opposed Using the Atom Bomb
However, most of the Manhattan Project scientists, who developed the atom bomb, were opposed to using it on Japan. The scientists questioned the ability of destroying Japanese cities with atomic bombs to bring surrender when destroying Japanese cities with conventional bombs had not done so. They recommended a demonstration of the atomic bomb in an unpopulated area of Japan.
Precipitating an Atomic Arms Race
Albert Einstein, an important catalyst for the development of the atom bomb (but not directly connected with the Manhattan Project), said: "'A great majority of scientists were opposed to the sudden employment of the atom bomb'. In Einstein's judgment, the dropping of the bomb was a political, diplomatic decision rather than a military or scientific decision. Indeed, some of the Manhattan Project scientists wrote directly to the Secretary of Defense in 1945 to try to dissuade him from dropping the bomb. 'We believe that these considerations make the use of nuclear bombs for an early, unannounced attack against Japan inadvisable. If the United States would be the first to release this new means of indiscriminate destruction upon mankind, she would sacrifice public support throughout the world, precipitate the race of armaments, and prejudice the possibility of reaching an international agreement on the future control of such weapons." (Political and Social Problems, Manhattan Engineer District Records, Harrison-Bundy files, National Archives (also contained in: Martin Sherwin, A World Destroyed)
Launching the Cold War
History.com notes: "In the years since the two atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, a number of historians have suggested that the weapons had a two-pronged objective…. It has been suggested that the second objective was to demonstrate the new weapon of mass destruction to the Soviet Union. By August 1945, relations between the Soviet Union and the United States had deteriorated badly. The Potsdam Conference between U.S. President Harry S. Truman, Russian leader Joseph Stalin, and Winston Churchill (before being replaced by Clement Attlee) ended just four days before the bombing of Hiroshima. The meeting was marked by recriminations and suspicion between the Americans and Soviets. Russian armies were occupying most of Eastern Europe. Truman and many of his advisers hoped that the U.S. atomic monopoly might offer diplomatic leverage with the Soviets. In this fashion, the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan can be seen as the first shot of the Cold War."
A Crime Against Humanity
The conventional explanation of using the bombs to end the war and save lives is disputed by Peter Kuznick and Mark Selden, historians from Cornell University in Ithaca, New York. New studies of the US, Japanese and Soviet diplomatic archives suggest that Truman's main motive was to limit Soviet expansion in Asia.
New Scientist reported in 2005: "The US decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 was meant to kick-start the Cold War rather than end the Second World War, according to two nuclear historians who say they have new evidence backing the controversial theory. Causing a fission reaction in several kilograms of uranium and plutonium and killing over 200,000 people was done more to impress the Soviet Union than to cow Japan. 'He knew he was beginning the process of annihilation of the species', says Peter Kuznick, director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University in Washington DC, US. 'It was not just a war crime; it was a crime against humanity.'"
Japan was Searching for Peace
According to an account by Walter Brown, Assistant to US Secretary of State James Byrnes, Truman agreed at a meeting three days before the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima that Japan was 'looking for peace'. Truman was told by his army generals, Douglas Macarthur and Dwight Eisenhower, and his Naval Chief of Staff, William Leahy, that there was no military need to use the bomb. "Impressing Russia was more important than ending the war in Japan."
Russia was our Real Enemy not Japan
John Pilger points out: "The US Secretary of War, Henry Stimson, told President Truman he was 'fearful' that the US Air Force would have Japan so 'bombed out' that the new weapon would not be able 'to show its strength'. He later admitted that 'no effort was made, and none was seriously considered, to achieve surrender'… General Leslie Groves, Director of the Manhattan Project that made the bomb, testified: 'There was never any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and that the project was conducted on that basis.' The day after Hiroshima was obliterated, President Truman voiced his satisfaction with the 'overwhelming success' of 'the experiment'".
Conservatives Opposed the Atom Bomb as Immoral
University of Maryland professor of political economy, and former Legislative Director in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, and Special Assistant in the Department of State, Gar Alperovitz declared: "Though most Americans are unaware of the fact, increasing numbers of historians now recognize the United States did not need to use the atomic bomb to end the war against Japan in 1945. Moreover, this essential judgment was expressed by the vast majority of top American military leaders in all three services in the years after the war ended: Army, Navy and Air Force. Nor was this the judgment of 'liberals', as is sometimes thought today. In fact, leading conservatives were far more outspoken in challenging the decision as unjustified and immoral than American liberals in the years following World War II.
Serving the Cause of Communism in Asia
"Instead of allowing other options to end the war, the United States rushed to use two atomic bombs at almost exactly the time that an 8 August Soviet attack had originally been scheduled: Hiroshima on 6 August and Nagasaki on 9 August. The timing itself has obviously raised questions among many historians."
The most illuminating perspective, however, comes from top World War II American military leaders. The conventional wisdom that the atomic bomb saved a million lives is so widespread that most Americans haven't paused to ponder something rather striking to anyone seriously concerned with the issue: Not only did most top U.S. military leaders think the bombings were unnecessary and unjustified, many were morally offended by what they regarded as the unnecessary destruction of Japanese cities and what were essentially noncombat populations. Moreover, they spoke about it quite openly and publicly.
A Political Decision
General George C. Marshall is on record as repeatedly saying that it was not a military decision, but rather a political one.
On 11 August 1945, the Japanese government filed an official protest over the atomic bombing to the U.S. State Department through the Swiss Legation in Tokyo, observing: "Combatant and non-combatant men and women, old and young, are massacred without discrimination by the atmospheric pressure of the explosion, as well as by the radiating heat which result therefrom. Consequently there is involved a bomb having the most cruel effects humanity has ever known… The bombs in question, used by the Americans, by their cruelty and by their terrorizing effects, surpass by far gas or any other arm, the use of which is prohibited. Japanese protests against U.S. desecration of international principles of war paired the use of the atomic bomb with the earlier firebombing, which massacred old people, women and children, destroying and burning down Shinto and Buddhist temples, schools, hospitals, living quarters, etc. They now use this new bomb, having an uncontrollable and cruel effect much greater than any other arms or projectiles ever used to date. This constitutes a new crime against humanity and civilization."
In 1963, the bombings were the subject of a judicial review. The District Court of Tokyo found, "the attacks upon Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused such severe and indiscriminate suffering that they did violate the most basic legal principles governing the conduct of war."
The Hague Conventions
In the opinion of the court, the act of dropping an atomic bomb on cities was at the time governed by International Law found in the Hague Regulations on Land Warfare of 1907 and the Hague Draft Rules of Air Warfare of 1922 - 1923 and was therefore illegal.
In the documentary The Fog of War, former U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara recalled General Curtis LeMay, who relayed the Presidential order to drop nuclear bombs on Japan, said: "If we'd lost the war, we'd all have been prosecuted as war criminals. And I think he's right. He, and I'd say I, were behaving as war criminals. LeMay recognized that what he was doing would be thought immoral if his side had lost. But what makes it immoral if you lose and not immoral if you win?"
Indiscriminate Mass Murder
Takashi Hiraoka, Mayor of Hiroshima, said in a hearing to The Hague International Court of Justice (ICJ): "It is clear that the use of nuclear weapons, which cause indiscriminate mass murder that leaves effects on survivors for decades, is a violation of international law". Iccho Itoh, the mayor of Nagasaki, declared in the same hearing: "It is said that the descendants of the atomic bomb survivors will have to be monitored for several generations to clarify the genetic impact, which means that the descendants will live in anxiety for [decades] to come... with their colossal power and capacity for slaughter and destruction, nuclear weapons make no distinction between combatants and non-combatants or between military installations and civilian communities... The use of nuclear weapons... therefore is a manifest infraction of international law."
University of Chicago historian Bruce Cumings states there is a consensus among historians "the Nagasaki bomb was gratuitous at best and genocidal at worst."
Professor R.J. Rummel's definition of democide includes not only genocide, but also an excessive killing of civilians in war, to the extent this is against the agreed rules for warfare; he argues the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes, and thus democide. Rummel quotes among others an official protest from the US government in 1938 to Japan, for its bombing of Chinese cities: "The bombing of non-combatant populations violated international and humanitarian laws." He also considers excess deaths of civilians in conflagrations caused by conventional means, such as in the Tokyo bombings, as acts of democide.
In 1967, Noam Chomsky described the atomic bombings as "among the most unspeakable crimes in history". Chomsky pointed to the complicity of the American people in the bombings. The definition of terrorism is "the targeting of innocent civilians to achieve a political goal".
Unnecessary Suffering and Destruction
The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 set rules in place regarding the attack of civilian populations. The Hague Conventions stated that religious buildings, art and science centres, charities, hospitals, and historic monuments, were to be spared as far as possible in a bombardment, unless they were being used for military purposes. The Hague Conventions also prohibited the employment of "arms, projectiles, or material calculated to cause unnecessary suffering".
"When you besiege a city for a long time while making war against it to take it, you shall not destroy its trees…" Deuteronomy 20:19
Dr. Peter Hammond
P.O. Box 74 Newlands 7725
Cape Town South Africa
An audio CD of this presentation, with PowerPoint, is available from: Christian Liberty Books, PO Box 358, Howard Place 7450, Cape Town, South Africa, Tel: 021-689-7478, Fax: 086-551-7490, Email: email@example.com and Website: www.christianlibertybooks.co.za.
Pray for Japan (also in PowerPoint).
Mitsuo Fuchida - From Pearl Harbour to Calvary (also in PowerPoint, video and PDF Tract).
UNCENSORED NEWS FROM
HENRY MORTON STANLEY SCHOOL OF CHRISTIAN JOURNALISM
Freedom of Religion South Africa Roadshow
On Tuesday, 28 May 2019, I attended the FOR SA Roadshow Conference and was gripped by the pressing threats to freedom we are currently facing in South Africa.
Contesting Our Freedom
As Advocate Nadene Badenhorst, pointed out, “We need to be proactive in contesting for our freedom. Once laws have been passed it is way more difficult to undo them, than it is to originally stand against them and stop them from changing.” We need to protect and promote our religious freedom or we will lose it. Laws are being implemented that are eroding Biblical values. There is a global trend developing, in which activists are teeing-up a [State] commission against certain organizations, churches and individuals, like pastors. Even if the activists don’t win the case against whom they are accusing, they often bankrupt the accused in the process, which stops them anyway. Which is the result they were initially aiming at. This is undermining Christian organizations all over the world. We need to be knowledgeable of this and be a part of the solution. We cannot be willingly ignorant in the desire to stay hopeful.
It is a time for us to be wise - wise as Christians, wise as businessmen and wise as citizens. We are not to be ashamed of the Gospel. Even back in Bible times Christians were labelled as troublemakers, just as we are today. We are labelled troublemakers, because sadly, the truth is considered hate speech, to those who hate the truth. There is no need though, to be fearful or overwhelmed, but rather we should know what rights we have, and implement them. This, being coupled with being filled with the Spirit, will empower us to stand firm in our Faith and stand up for what the Word of God says. Not just believing it, but being able to say what we believe and living it out in our daily lives!
Living Out Our Beliefs
Today people say you can believe whatever you want to believe, but then we Christians are not allowed to say it, and we are not allowed to live out what we believe. “You are free to believe what you want! But for goodness sake, don’t say it and definitely don’t act in accordance!” But according to the existing South African Constitution, our religious freedom doesn’t only give us the right to believe what we want, but the right to be able to say it and live it out too.
FOR SA speakers, Adv. Nadene Badenhorst and Michael Swain, pointed out how challenges against our religious freedoms manifest in two ways. Firstly, through the changing of laws, threatening to limit what we can say or do, and, secondly, through strategic court cases, where the outcome has far-reaching ramifications, because through these outcomes future laws are shaped. It is important to understand that court cases shape precedents, where a previous case or legal decision, may then be followed in subsequent similar cases in the future. In the case of binding precedent, the previous result has to be followed! So, a court case has higher reaching ramifications than just those directly involved with that specific court case, as those outcomes are then used in future cases and in future laws being made.
There are now laws trying to be passed in South Africa, such as the proposed Prevention and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill (“the Hate Speech Bill”), which, if passed by Parliament, will limit our ability to say what we believe. There are many cases where churches, pastors, Christian authors and anyone expressing their views and beliefs, are being taken to court for stating what it is that they believe. What they are able to say is being limited. In effect, people are not being permitted to say, write, or preach what they believe. Or any aspect of it! For example, child discipline - by saying that parents may not give their children hidings, or any form of physical discipline, what they are technically saying is we need to scratch those verses out the Bible. That’s not acceptable! It’s not about whether they have interpreted it correctly or not, or whether spanking is right or not. It’s a problem of freedom of religion, because if they can scratch out one Scripture, however it may be being interpreted, then what stops them from trying to scratch out any other Bible verse next?
Hate Speech or Not Hate Speech? That is the Question!
The definition of hate speech in our Constitution (which is the highest law of the land and to which every other law must conform) is very narrow. It defines hate speech as speech that advocates hatred (i.e. it stirs up hatred) in the listeners and that incites them to then go and cause harm. For example, “Kill the Boer! Kill the farmer!”, or “ISIS must come kill all the gays”. That then is incitement to harm others, and that needs to be regulated, prevented and punished. Where there is a call to action of harm, the state does need to intervene, but it already has the power to do so as there are existing laws in place to enforce that. We don’t need to add any more, infringing further on our rights of freedom of expression and freedom of religion. Any statement, written or verbal, that does not advocate hate AND incite harm is not actually hate speech, including any scriptural statement, such as “Homosexuality is a sin. God puts parameters in place for marriage. For example you cannot marry your brother or sister, you cannot marry a child, you cannot marry the same sex.” That is not hate speech as its neither advocating (i.e. stirring up) hate, nor inciting harm against anyone. In fact, it can actually be said out of love. This is why HOW we choose to say something is so important. Just like saying that lying is a sin, doesn’t mean I hate every single person on this earth, because every single one of us is a liar. We are simply stating what God constitutes as sin in His Word, not out of condescending judgement or hate, but out of love for the person and their soul. Just as Jesus hates the sin that we commit, but still loves us, the sinner – as long as we’re not revelling in our sin and we are rather actually repentant and trying to become more Christ-like. If a pastor said that homosexuality is a sin and so you need to kill gays, then that is definitely considered hate speech and there should be consequences. But if there is no advocacy of hatred against the person and there is no provocation of causing the person harm, and someone simply feels offended, that should not be categorized as hate speech.
Who’s Throwing the Punches?
If just anything that someone felt offended by, was considered hate speech, imagine the consequences! It would be absolute chaos! It would turn into he said, she said! Imagine: “Homosexuality is a sin.” “A sin?! I’m offended! I’m taking you to court! You’re a homophobic bigot!” “A homophobic bigot? I am not! I’m offended! I’m taking you to court!” Anything could suddenly be considered offensive, and everyone would just be taking each other to court.
Ironically, the people who take them to court claim that what was said to them is offensive, but in the process they call others: bigots, homophobes, fundamentalists, etc. Isn’t that offensive too? Often the ones shouting loudest, are the ones guilty of the offense they condemn.
Where is the line drawn currently on hate speech? If your dignity is violated then that is an unlawful act in South Africa, punishable up until now, with the crime of Crimen Iniuria. This could result in either imprisonment or a fine. Cases that have made the news headlines that were cases of crimen iniuria include the likes of Vicky Momberg and Penny Sparrow. In the case of Sparrow, she was charged with crimen iniuria and having pled guilty, was given the choice between 12 months in prison or a R5,000,00 fine. She was additionally sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, wholly suspended five years, during which time she must not be convicted again of crimen iniuria. In Momberg’s case, she was found guilty on four counts of crimen iniuria in connection for racist statements and was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment, suspended by one year.
Freedom of speech is a fundamental right, especially in a democracy. How can a democratic government try and control our speech? Freedom of speech is not only valuable, but absolutely necessary for freedom.
Our Constitutional Freedom of Speech excludes three things: incitement of imminent violence, propaganda for war, or the advocacy of hatred (based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion) and which constitutes the incitement to cause harm. (Section 16(2) of the Constitution.)
If offense is taken, that in itself is not hate speech, it needs to incite harm, hatred or war to be legally considered hate speech.
According to our Lord’s Commandments, the only limit to speech, is do not use the Lord your God’s name in vain, and do not give false testimony against your neighbour, do not steal his good name. Other than that we have freedom of speech, as opposed to South Africa that has many laws. Yet for some reason people say that Christianity is just a religion of rules and regulations, and that we live in a free country.
Our existing freedom is being challenged right now in South Africa. The move to legislate against offensive speech and for it to possibly be considered as hate speech, makes hate speech much more subjective – it is no longer the objectively determinable advocacy of hatred (based on four grounds only) AND that incites people to cause harm, rather the question becomes if the hearer feels offended. As, if someone arguably can see that it could possibly hurt someone’s feelings, it would now be considered hate speech.
What makes the proposed Hate Speech Bill so dangerous is that it makes speech a crime – a criminal offence, with a minimum three-year goal sentence and a life-long criminal record. So, if you say something that someone doesn’t like, you can be arrested and taken to prison, whereas before you actually had to stir up hatred (advocate hatred) in others and incite them to cause the person harm, in order for it to be considered hate speech. Just as it would make sense, if the conversation of people conspiring to plan a murder was heard, it would be unlawful.
Under the new proposed terms, hate speech could be a person communicating that he/she believes that there are only two genders (male and female), this statement will qualify as “hate speech” in terms of the Bill.
While God Loves All People, He Doesn’t Approve of All Conduct
God doesn’t approve of drunkenness, or homosexuality, or paedophilia. While that is Biblically accurate, that could be considered hate speech if this bill is passed, and one could receive a criminal record for that! This bill should make us outraged! They are trying to infringe on what we can say and do. The limiting of freedom of religion will then follow right behind.
Broad is the Way to Destruction
So therefore, as we can see, there are already necessary and adequate laws in place, the addition of the proposed new Hate Speech bill is unnecessary. People like Penny Sparrow and Vicky Momberg are being prosecuted on existing laws, so there is obviously no need to extend these laws. Those advocating the Hate Speech Bill are trying to make the law too broad. What they are trying to change it to is unconstitutional. People will eventually just stop speaking and debating, as they are fearful to say something they may be prosecuted for, so people will just shut up. Exactly what the enemy wants.
So, before they succeed in trying to shut us up, we need to make sure our voices are heard. They are trying to encroach on our freedoms, conscience and rights. If we don’t exercise our freedom of speech we will lose it. Just like all of our rights, if we don’t use them, we will lose them.
The State Raising the Youth
There is a threat against parents being allowed to raise children according to their Biblical convictions, with Biblical values and morals. Parents are far better equipped to know what is better for their children than the state is. Of course where there is abuse, the state needs to get involved and there are many existing laws enabling that. We do not need to just keep adding more and more laws, but rather to properly enforce existing ones. If parents are not allowed to raise their children as Christians, not allowed to teach them Biblical values and morals, not allowed to discipline them, not allowed to home educate them, we are going to end up raising a generation that does need more and more laws because they wouldn’t have been taught values and morals, they will have squashed their consciences and will not know the difference between right and wrong and so will need to have laws guiding them. The problem is people deserting God and His Laws.
Radical Explicit Sexualisation of Children
Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE), as it is implemented in many overseas schools, radically sexualizes children. We are now facing it being implemented in South Africa. The UN and UNESCO promote this, to children as young as 6 years old, teaching them things such as how to masturbate, anal sex is normal, they are also exposed to pornography as entertainment and they encourage children to start exploring their sexuality. Some are trying to make this curriculum compulsory. It is a radical explicit sexualisation of children. But parents should be able to choose who teaches these difficult topics, at what age, with sensitivity and Biblically, but the state is trying to take the right to make these decisions away from the parents.
Replacing God’s Laws
The Civil Union Amendment Bill has been passed by the NA, but still has to be passed by NCOP. (I.e. it needs to be passed by both houses of Parliament.) But, in terms of this Bill, all State-employed marriage officers (i.e. both marriage officers that work at DHA and magistrates) will have to solemnise same-sex marriages.
The result is that people who conscientiously object to same-sex marriage and who cannot, on grounds of their conscience, solemnise it, will not be able to become magistrates. So, subsequently, from there, unable to progress through the legal ranks and become an acting judge, judge, chief justice etc. So in effect, by saying that they cannot rule on their conscience, they are trying to take away the laws that God has written on our hearts, and instead write their own laws in their place.
Fulfilling the Forced Speech Agenda
The new Hate Speech Bill fits right in with the LGBT+ Agenda, where before you have any conversation you will have to ask how they would like to be addressed: as a man? Woman? Both? Neither? Building? King? etc. If you don’t then use their preferred pronoun, then there are penalties. Would I be able to request to be addressed as King Emma? Or what if I preferred to be addressed as President Cyril Ramaphosa? Would this be allowed? If the answer is no, and the reasoning is because well, I’m not President Cyril Ramaphosa, then surely that invalidates the argument as a whole? It doesn’t make sense to me. But either way, if a man identifies as a woman, they should have the freedom to feel that way, but we should not be forced to agree or forced to call them by their pronoun or such. Because that’s not free speech, that’s forced speech. That’s not acceptable. We need to fight for freedom not for infringement.
Freedom of Association
Some Churches say that they cannot marry homosexuals, because it doesn’t line up with their values, as it does not fit the Biblical definition of marriage. This is not inequality. They would say just the same thing if witches came and asked to use the church building for a séance. The church would say sorry we can’t allow it because it's not in line with our values. People should be able to have the freedom to say this and vice versa, if a church wanted to use a mosque for a service, the Imam should have the freedom to refuse if he didn’t agree with the service. The problem is that activists are not looking for equality and acceptance; they are looking for conformity, promotion and more privileges than others.
Freedom of Association
In the case of Ecclesia de Lange she was dismissed by the Methodist Church as a minister, because she transgressed their doctrinal beliefs by wishing to marry her same-sex partner. She then took them to court for discrimination. Current laws that are in place allow each organization to decide for themselves where they can draw the line, but if the proposed bills are allowed to go forward, then the organizations would not be allowed to choose for themselves but will be told what to do. This is taking away the churches right of association. It is taking away freedoms. It’s putting the state in charge of even more matters that it has no right to control. FOR SA points out, it’s not about trying to stand for a particular side, saying that yes they must hire her, or no they cannot hire her. What they are saying is that people, the church, etc., should be able to choose for themselves where the line can be drawn on such matters.
The outcomes in such cases are so important, as it sets the precedent for the outcome of future cases. So, as Adv. Badenhorst said, “a win for one is a win for all, but a loss for one is a loss for all.” We need to use our voices and stand together.
Freedom of religion is very much something that needs to be protected. Although many think of religious freedom as only applying to fundamentalist religious zealots, it is a right that is neutral – it applies as equally to my Muslim neighbour as it does to my Christian brother, or Atheist friend. It’s not about whether this is correct for Christians specifically, but rather a freedom for all people to live out what they believe, because if religious freedom goes for my Muslim neighbour, it goes for me. Standing up for freedom of religion is not standing for Christianity only, it’s standing for the right of everyone to believe as their conscience dictates, and to be able to state it, and live it out accordingly. People need to understand that it’s not wrong to fight for freedom of religion. Freedom of religion is to protect the right to believe whatever you want as long as it is lawful (e.g. in line with taxation laws, and in line with immigration laws, and safety laws etc.), but the new bill is trying to limit people from living out and talking about their beliefs. Although there is a religious freedom exemption clause in the new draft of the Bill, it still falls short from adequately protecting people when they state their religious beliefs. People want to “regulate” things that are going on and therefore they want more laws and want the state to bring down a heavy hand on those who disagree. This happens, when people fear what is different. That’s where the problem comes in.
Crimes Must be Dealt With
Having said this though, people have the right to believe what they want, but one cannot hide crimes under the law of freedom of religion. For example, if you do something that is against the law, such as kill someone, assault someone, or incite imminent harm, this is a criminal act. This is not exercising freedom of religion; it is breaking other laws and human rights. So, we don’t need more laws, we just need the existing laws to be implemented.
Regulation or Ruination?
Organizations should not be closed down on their doctrinal or theological values, as this infringes on their freedom of religion and their right to believe what their conscience dictates. If that gets regulated, then our freedom to believe and live in accordance with our conscience dictates, is also infringed on. So, the problem is, if people want individuals to be appointed to make these decisions, they need to think carefully about the implications of this. Who will appoint those people? How do you know that what they believe will be in line with what you believe? What if they’re not? Or what if they are now, but that then changes in the future? So rather than trying to enforce what people can believe, they should rather allow freedom… for all… as long as what they are doing is not violating others’ rights to life, liberty and property.
Good Intentions May Still Have Disastrous Consequences
This is what happens when you start trying to regulate things. You may have good intentions, but the outcome can be disastrous. 6,000 churches were shut down in Rwanda, as they made a regulation that you have to have a 3-year theological degree before you can be a pastor! Does having a 3-year degree warrant you to be a pastor, or does the Lord’s call on your life warrant you? The Lord’s call on your life! Not to say that it wouldn’t then be wise to educate yourself. 2 Timothy 2:15 says, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the Word of Truth.” This could be done through a degree, but that is definitely not the only right way.
2,000 churches were shut down in Angola, as they made regulations stating that one needed 100,000 signatures before you can be a practitioner! Then if you somehow managed to get that right, they were then charged a registration fee per person per year!
There is a big difference between registration and regulation. It may be fine for organizations to choose to be registered, but their theology and doctrine should not be regulated, unless it's breaking real laws, for example if someone is working as an illegal alien, or inciting harm etc.
But you should, for instance, be able to say you are pro-choice if you want to and I can say I am pro-life. But what I can't say, is, “All abortionists should be killed!” That is inciting harm, which is against the law and vice versa, you can’t say all pro-lifers should be tortured and burnt or whatever.
The over-regulation of anything is dangerous. As soon as you get the power of the state combining with any section of religion, it will end badly. The Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities (CRL Rights Commission) is now trying to do this. They are trying to receive executive power, which could then require a change to the Constitution.
Decentralization Is Needed
We need decentralization not further centralization. The CRL’s term of office expired in February of this year (2019). Christians need to apply for chair positions. We need to put action to our beliefs to make a change. If we sit back, people who oppose our views are going to stand up for their beliefs and then limit our freedoms.
What are We Allowing to Happen on Our Watch?
Freedom of religion is freedom for all religions; this is what we should fight for, so that the Gospel can freely be shared. We are fighting for the freedom of all religions and people, because if these bills are passed, everyone’s rights will be infringed upon. We should be fighting for the freedom of Muslims, Hindus, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, whoever, to decide what they want to believe. That is a human right. As Freedom of Religion South Africa (FOR SA) Adv. Nadene Badenhorst, said, “Even though I might not agree with what you believe, I will fight to the death for your right to believe it.” This is a statement I feel we could all do well to adopt.
All these changes are trying to be made on our watch, under our noses, and we are going to be held responsible. We are going to have to give an account to the next generation, as this effects the next generation. What are we allowing to happen on our watch?
“Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.” Galatians 5:1
Africa Christian Action
PO Box 23632
Cape Town South Africa
Tel: 021-689 4480
“Hate Speech” Bill Threat to Free Speech article
“Hate Speech” Bill Threat to Free Speech audio
“Hate Speech” Bill Threat to Free Speech video
“Hate Speech” Bill Threat to Free Speech video in English/Zulu as presented at the
Ministers Conference 2019 at KwaSizabantu Mission
UNCENSORED NEWS FROM
HENRY MORTON STANLEY SCHOOL OF CHRISTIAN JOURNALISM
A record number of 48 political parties registered candidates for the 2019 Parliamentary Elections. This was 19 more parties than contested the 2014 National Elections. Some of these parties opted to contest only in the provincial elections.
Most South Africans Did Not Vote
Although South Africa has a population of over 59 million, only 26,736,803 were registered voters as of 19 April 2018. Roughly 9.3 million registered voters did not turn up to vote in this election. There is another 9 million South Africans who are of voting age, who did not register to vote. That is over 18 million people who chose not to participate in the electoral process.
Most Eligible Citizens Fail to Register or Vote
In the 1994 elections, 19,533,000 votes were cast. More than at any elections since. Even though South Africa’s population has more than doubled since 1994, the number of votes cast has consistently been lower.
Widespread Voter Apathy
The 2019 Elections in South Africa experienced an exceptionally low voter turnout. Compared to previous national elections, it was shockingly low. South Africa has never before had a national elections with less than 70% voter turnout. In 2014, the voter turnout was considered low at 72.5%. The overall turnout for the 2019 national elections (including all overseas voters who filled in the VEC10 forms) was 65.1%. This was much lower than anticipated.
A Pyrrhic Victory that Cast a Slur on its Reputation
Tony Iyare, of E-News Nigeria, wrote: “Pulling its worst performance in 25 years, the African National Congress (ANC) wins last week’s elections, underscoring a full term for Cyril Ramaphosa in a pyrrhic victory that cast a slur on its reputation.”
Disastrous Track Record of Failure
Russian Today observed: “As it re-elects hopeless ANC again, do we finally admit that post-apartheid South Africa has failed? The ANC has yet again won a majority in South Africa’s general election, despite its disastrous record, killing hope that the country will turn in the right direction. The West must stop pretending that this is just a glitch. What is wrong with the country that went to the polls to vote for a new national assembly goes well beyond the hard facts – unedifying as those are. It is not just that half the population lives in absolute poverty, but more than a quarter of adults are unemployed, nor is it that the economic growth rate that has stagnated at the low of 2% average for a decade, even as the rest of the world recovered from the global crisis, or the regular blackouts, the violent crimes rates, or that one in five adults is infected with HIV. The story since 1994 is of a country given a historic chance to show the way to prosperity and democracy for Africa – and failing, exactly as the pessimists predicted…”
Re-Electing Corrupt Failures
Sisonke Msimang, of the Washington Post, wrote: “Now that the job is officially his for the next term, the honeymoon must end. On paper, Ramaphosa is the perfect candidate for the clean-up job. He has projected himself as an outsider, the ideal person to lead, because he ostensibly has an arms-length distance from corruption. In reality, Ramaphosa is the ultimate insider. The ANC core-campaign strategy was to confess to its sins – of which there are many. As senior leaders criss-crossed the country in campaign mode, they apologised and promised not to make the same mistakes. Voters seem to have accepted their apologies. The ANC out-paced the next biggest party, the Democratic Alliance, by almost three votes to one. The Economic Freedom Fighters, led by Julius Malema, did well to secure nearly 11% of the national vote, but this was still a distant third.”
Who Won What
A total of 14 political parties won seats in the national South African Parliament. With the majority ANC/South African Communist Party/COSATU Alliance winning 213 parliamentary seats followed by the Democratic Alliance (DA) winning 84 seats and the extreme leftist, Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), winning 44 seats. The Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) won 14 seats and the Vryheid Front Plus (VF+) won 10 seats to claim the fourth and fifth positions in parliament. The other 18 seats were split amongst 9 parties.
Lost Deposits Enrich IEC
The competing parties who failed to win a seat in parliament lost their deposits. Parties paid a R200,000 deposit to contest in the national elections and R45,000 for each province they contested. That money was forfeited to the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) who made R16.7 million from the forfeited deposits required of participating parties.
Massive Number of Ballots Rejected as Spoiled
With 26,779,025 people registered to vote, turnout was estimated 65.99%. According to the IEC, they voided 235,449 votes – marked as “spoiled ballots.”
Counting the Votes
According to the website of the IEC, the ANC received 10,026,047 votes out of the 17,668,380 in total votes cast. Which was less than the number of votes they have received in any previous election, including 1999, when the population was half of what it is today. All of this underscores the fact that its popularity is seriously on the wane. The official opposition, the Democratic Alliance (DA) received 3,618,994 votes, representing 20.76% of the votes cast, significantly lower than the 22.2%, or 4 million votes, it received in 2014. So in a country of 59 million people, actually only 10 million voted for the ANC.
Vote Shedding by the DA
Before this election, the DA had been growing in leaps and bounds. From 338,000 votes, 1.73% of the electorate in 1994, to 1,527,000 votes (9.56%) in 1999, to 1,931,000 votes (12.37%) in 2004 to 2,946,000 votes (16.66%) in 2009, to 4,092,000 votes (22.23%) in 2014. The DA engaged in what has been described as “vote shedding” in 2019. Evidently the new leader of the DA, Mmusi Maimane, failed to bring in the “black vote” and managed to alienate many of the white and coloured previous supporters of the DA. The DA received only 4.7% of black votes in all of South Africa.
Dramatic Growth for the Freedom Front
The party that grew the most in the recent elections was the Freedom Front Plus. Receiving over 414,864 votes (2.38% of the national vote), VF Plus has increased from 3 to 10 seats in Parliament, plus two Senators in the National Council of Provinces and seven Members of Provincial Council. This represented an over 300% growth.
The African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP) received 146,262 votes (0.84% of the national electorate), although this was a significant increase from 2014, it was still less than half the votes received by the ACDP in the 1999 elections, when the population was half of what it is today.
Sending Thieves Back to Parliament
Numerous commentators observed that after the ANC leadership had made a big noise about “honest, clean government” and “rooting out the bad eggs”, the ANC candidates for the national assembly included members who have lied under oath in constitutional court and are deeply implicated in the BOSASA and State Capture corruption scandals. In the words of previous ANC president, Thabo Mbeki, the ANC candidate list is “problematic, amounting to sending a whole lot of thieves back to parliament.” Others observed that the ANC list of candidates for the 2019 election looked more like a “most wanted list” at a police station, than a list of potential members of government. Even the left-wings home porn video man was on the ANC list again!
Public Relations Campaign to Convince Voters to Give ANC another Chance to Loot
Mike Davies, founder of political advisory company Kigoda Consulting, told Bloomberg News: “Ramaphosa’s popularity, particularly among constituencies that were deserting the party under Zuma, appears to have played a major role in convincing voters to give the ANC another chance. Ramaphosa promised to address corruption, jobs and inequality have resonated amid ongoing voter skeptism of what opposition parties offer.”
Failure to Prosecute Corruption
However, despite being in office already for 15 months, Ramaphosa has done nothing to bring corrupt ANC officials to prosecution. In fact, to this date, no one can point to anyone even being fired for the Trillions of Rands looted from the country. The African Union calculates that a full 33% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is looted by government corruption every year. Even though Cyril Ramaphosa had been assigned by previous president Zuma to sort out Eskom, the national electricity supply, newspaper headlines declare: “Eskom: R139 Billion Theft Probed – Rampant looting at new power plants pushes state capture costs to R500 Billion.”
Western Cape Rejects ANC
The Western Cape again overwhelmingly rejected the ANC and the EFF, who together barely received 33% of the Western Cape Vote. The DA has twice as many seats in the Western Cape provincial legislature as the ANC. Also interesting is that a poll of DA supporters in the Western Cape revealed that over 66% of DA supporters in the Western Cape would support a Referendum for Independence of the Western Cape (VirtuaCall Survey, April 2019).
South Africa Has Never Had a Free and Fair Election
Founder and President of the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi, declared that “There has never been a free and fair election in South Africa since 1994 and including 1994.”
Seriously Flawed Election Process
ANC control of state news media, SABC and the vast amounts of public treasury taxpayers money voted for campaigning for the ruling party (the ANC spent over R1 Billion on campaigning for the recent elections – more than all other parties combined) and ongoing controversies and scandals about the IEC, voter fraud, the excessive number of spoiled ballots, lack of ballot papers, inordinate delays and voting stations running out of indelible ink to mark voters, have all pointed to the failure of the IEC to guarantee the integrity of elections in South Africa. Also concerning were the smear tactics engaged to spread malicious slurs and slander against some anti-communist parties.
SA Communist Party Controls the ANC
Many people seem to forget that the African National Congress (ANC) is part of a troika. The South African Communist Party, the African National Congress and COSATU are in alliance. If one goes onto the SACP website, you can see that the Communist Party claims that although the SACP will not be placing any candidates in the upcoming election, they advise all cadres to vote for the ANC candidate. In fact every ANC President has been a senior member of the South African Communist Party Politburo.
Are the ANC and EFF Working Together?
Also important to note is that the ANC and EFF are in effective alliance to change the Constitution, removing Bill of Rights safeguards for property rights. If Julius Malema was a deserter who is in opposition, or competition, to the ANC, then would the ANC have wholeheartedly supported the Bill proposed by EFF President, Julius Malema? Every ANC Member of Parliament voted in support of the EFF’s proposed Expropriation Without Compensation (EWC) Bill last year. Many are convinced that the EFF is merely a deception operation, a false-flag, vanguard of the second phase of the Revolution, an integral part of ANC “second phase of transformation” strategy as adopted at the 2012 congress.
Dramatic Loss of Support for the ANC in Every Province
It is also noteworthy that the ANC received more support on the national ballot than in provincial ballots. In every province the ANC received less votes than on the national ticket. Evidently many ANC voters decided to vote for the opposition provincially, perhaps indicating lack of trust in the ANC to actually deliver services on a provincial level. The ANC lost support in every province, most dramatically in KwaZulu Natal where they lost more than 11% of their previous support.
Increased Support for Pro-Life, Pro-Family Parties
Biblical Issues Voters Guides and the www.SAVotersGuide.org website, do seem to have had some good effect as the number of voters voting for pro-life and pro-family parties increased over 300% in the 2019 elections, compared to 2014.
Promising to Help the Poor with Policies Guaranteed to Increase Poverty
Most remarkable is how many parties spoke of wanting to “do more to help the poor”, but advocate socialist economic policies which have always been guaranteed to increase unemployment and aggravate poverty. Following the failed policies of the Soviet Union, Red China, North Korea, Mengistu’s Ethiopia, Castro’s Cuba, Venezuela and Mugabe’s Zimbabwe, the ANC and EFF and also many of the other political parties, including some claiming to be Christians, continue to promote and advocate discredited and disastrous socialist policies, guaranteed to devalue the Rand, massively increase unemployment and further extend poverty.
Socialism is Unworkable
Price controls create an unbalanced, chaotic market. Minimum wage laws result in massive unemployment. Profit restrictions increase consumer costs. Enforced economic equality leads to stagnation, destruction of initiative and even more poverty.
A Cover for Corruption
Concern for the poor has long been used as a justification for all sorts of crime and foolish counter-productive economic policies. Judas Iscariot is a prime example of this. In John 12:4-6, we read of Judas rebuking the woman who anointed Jesus with expensive perfume. “Why was this perfume not sold and the money given to the poor?” asked Judas. John’s Gospel comments that Judas was not really concerned for the poor, but he was in charge of the moneybags and he was a thief.
Destruction is the Essence of Socialism
As Ludwig Von Mises observed: “Socialism is not the pioneer of a better and finer world, but the spoiler of what thousands of years of civilisation has created. Socialism does not build; it destroys. Destruction is the essence of it. It produces nothing. It only consumes what the social order based on private ownership of the means of production has created…” (Socialism: an Economic and Sociological Analysis)
Massive Increase of Unemployment
When commentators observe that the government has “not done enough for the poor” they completely miss the point. The government has done absolutely nothing for the poor, except increase their poverty. They do this by chasing away job creators and investors. In 1994, when Nelson Mandela became president of South Africa, unemployment was over 2 Million. Today, if one includes the “economically inactive” and “discouraged work seekers”, in the official statistics of “unemployed”, one finds that we have more than 30 Million unemployed in 2019. That means that for every year that the ANC has been in power, they have added more than a million more to the ranks of the unemployed. The policies advocated by the vast majority of parties would only aggravate this.
Examples of Excellence
If one really wants to alleviate poverty and increase employment, one needs to follow examples of success, such as Hong Kong and Singapore, by creating tax havens. Bringing taxes way down, in fact, preferably slashing them altogether, is the only way to create full employment. Governments cannot really create jobs, unless they get out of the way. Every government programme requires increased taxation, which chases away the very investors and job-creators that one needs to solve the unemployment crisis. It is an observable fact that the most efficient economies in the world are based on private ownership of property, honest money, free enterprise and a Christian work ethic. None of those components are advocated by the ruling party in this country.
Inflation and Devaluation Steals from Everyone
There was a time when South Africa had one of the strongest currencies in the world. I remember getting more Pounds and Dollars for my Rand, back in the 70’s. When Mandela became president, the Rand was closer to R2 to the Dollar. That deterioration was because of decades of war, sanctions, disinvestments, strikes and riots. Since 1994, with no war, no conscription, no sanctions, or disinvestment, in fact with Foreign Aid, the ANC has so mismanaged and looted this country, that the Rand has plummeted to R15 to the Dollar and R22 to the Pound!
So in effect, the majority of voters in South Africa have chosen more poverty, worse unemployment, further corruption and mismanagement and general failure of the state. “A wise man’s heart is at his right hand, but a fool’s heart at his left.” Ecclesiastes 10:2
Secession Movements Grow
Under the circumstances, it is not surprising that there are growing movements for independence of the Western Cape and the Kingdom of Zululand. “Those from among you shall build the old waste places; you shall raise up the foundations of many generations; and you shall be called the Repairer of the Breach, the Restorer of Streets to Dwell In.” Isaiah 58:12
Municipal Elections 2021
The next elections in South Africa will be the municipal elections in 2021. “Who will rise up for Me against the evildoers? Who will stand up for Me against the workers of iniquity?” Psalm 94:16
Dr. Peter Hammond
P.O. Box 74 Newlands 7725
Cape Town South Africa
Elections in South Africa
Buses, Trains and Police Stations Burn
Deliberate Arson in the Cape
Why No Christian Should Support BBBEE Affirmative Action Racism
Farms and Freedom Under Fire in South Africa
Fraud, Failure and Farce – Land Expropriation Hearings
Is South Africa Entering the Second Phase of the Revolution?
National Suicide of the Xhosa
Why Most Youth Did Not Vote in the Last Election and How We Can Change that in 2019
God and Government articles
God, Government and the Ten Commandments
When All Men Speak Well of You
The Battle for the Mind in the News Media
How Propaganda Changes People and Perceptions
UNCENSORED NEWS FROM
HENRY MORTON STANLEY SCHOOL OF CHRISTIAN JOURNALISM
Burning Buses Cause Traffic Mayhem
Yesterday, 25 April, two buses were destroyed by fire within 3 hours, causing massive traffic congestion on the N2. At around 2:20pm a Golden Arrow bus caught fire as it waited to load passengers at the CBD Terminal next to Golden Acre. Then just before 5pm, at Hospital Bend on the N2, a MyCiti Bus ablaze in the middle lane, compelled traffic to be diverted to the outgoing M3. J.P. Smith, on behalf of the city of Cape Town, reported that the bus had no passengers onboard and the driver had stopped in the middle lane of the N2 on Hospital Bend and escaped, reporting that the engine compartment of the bus had caught fire and quickly engulfed the vehicle.
Train Arsonist Boasts in Court That He Was Responsible
The day before, 24 April, Thobela Xoseni appeared in the Cape Town Magistrates Court and loudly declared through his Xhosa translator: “I set the trains on fire! I burnt the trains!” Reporters observed that Xoseni was smiling as he appeared in the court. The Mayor of Cape Town, Dan Plato, reported on 22 April 2019, that the train coaches lost in the Cape Town station blaze represented a monetary loss of R33 Million to the city’s transportation supplies, Metrorail.
Most Trains Targeted for Arson are in the Western Cape
Transport Minister, Blade Nzimande, responded to a parliamentary question that 214 trains were burned in arson attacks in South Africa in the past 3 years, with 175 of them torched in the Western Cape. 69 coaches were burned in 2016. 41 coaches were burned in 2017. 65 coaches were burned in 2018. The Western Cape suffered 56 coaches out of the 65 burned in 2018. 8 incidents took place in Gauteng and one in KwaZulu-Natal.
Cape Town is the Main Target
Of the 174 trains burned in the Western Cape since 2015, 60 were burned in Cape Town, 23 in Kraaifontein, 16 in Retreat and the rest at various stations across the province, but mainly within the Cape Town metropolitan area.
Massive Cost to Cape Taxpayers
According to PRASA (Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa), train fires in the last three and a half years have incurred a loss to the taxpayer of over R636 Million. 71% of this, or R451 Million worth of damage, due to arson to trains occurred in the Western Cape. This did not include the damage to Cape Town station of R150 Million. Those were all figures discussed at the end of last year and does not include the train fires of 2019.
No Effective Deterrent to Arsonists in ANC Ruled South Africa
Richard Walker, Regional Head of Metrorail, stated that legislation needs to be amended, to act as a deterrent for train arsonists as they can currently only be charged for malicious damage to property because trains were not regarded as a fixed structure.
Mayor Blames ANC Government for Lawless Destruction
The Mayor of Cape Town observed: “Cape Town Central Station has been the target of at least 7 and possibly 8 separate arson incidents since July 2018. Surely after the first incident you put the most stringent measures in place to ensure that this doesn’t happen again? How is it that criminals can so brazenly burn our trains time and again and get away with it? If we are to maintain law and order in the city there needs to be consequences for criminal actions and it is only national government’s SA Police Service, through the detective services and the National Prosecuting Authority who can get results with these cases.”
Three Police Stations Torched
Also on 24 April, it was reported that a 3rd Police Station in the Western Cape was torched, with 250 dockets going up in smoke. Police in the Western Cape are investigating a case of arson after an early morning inferno on 21 April gutted the Ravensmead Detectives offices, destroying over 250 criminal dockets and an internal server. This was the 3rd arson attack reported on South African Police Service (SAPS) premises in the Western Cape in one month. The other two were at Bellville and Klapmuts, earlier in April. The Ravensmead building has since been declared unsafe.
Labour Disputes Disrupt Police Service
Tensions in the SAPS have been reported as running high, with threatened go-slows and strikes by SAPS members, unhappy with reported delays in promotions, resulting in a backlog of 69,214 promotions since 2011.
Disastrous Effects on Economy
The evident lack of respect for life and property, as well as waste of millions of Rands of property and thousands of hours of travellers frustrate over interrupted schedules. These incidents have a disastrous impact on the economy.
Lawless Violence Steals from Everyone
Rampant arson, apparently with impunity, has a catastrophic impact on any economy, chasing away investors and employers, driving down the value of the Rand, stealing from everyone as the Rand/Dollar and Pound exchange rates become more and more punitive to South Africans. The end result is millions more unemployed. The catastrophic chaos and havoc wrecked at peak traffic times, coming along with the general failure of both national and provincial governments to protect lives and property, are even more compelling evidence of the general failure of government. “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin condemns any people.” Proverbs 14:34
Hollow Promises from Hypocritical Politicians
As South Africans prepare to go to election polls 8 May, it seems bizarre that those very politicians and parties most responsible for the failure to keep the lights on, the failure to keep the water flowing, the failure to deal with litter, pollution, crime and violence, continue to make hollow and hypocritical promises, expecting voters to re-elect the same corrupt criminals responsible for the disastrous situation, which increasingly, afflicts every one of us. “But select capable men from all the people - men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain - and appoint them as officials…” Exodus 18:21
Dr. Peter Hammond
Africa Christian Action
PO Box 23632
Cape Town South Africa
Deliberate Arson in the Cape
Your Iniquities Have Separated Your From Your God
Is South Africa Entering the Second Phase of the Revolution?
The National Suicide of the Xhosa
Farms and Freedoms Under Fire in South Africa
Fraud, Failure and Farce – Land Expropriation Hearings
God's Law or Chaos
God, Government and The Ten Commandments
UNCENSORED NEWS FROM
HENRY MORTON STANLEY SCHOOL OF CHRISTIAN JOURNALISM
To see the video of this article click here
To listen to the audio of this article click here
The disastrous Monday, 15 April, burning of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris leads to many questions and serious implications. Notre Dame de Paris (French for Our Lady of Paris), was built between 1163 and 1260. The cathedral was officially consecrated in 1345.
Most Famous Gothic Building in the World
No other building represents France quite like Notre Dame. It has been the most visited monument in France. Notre Dame is without a doubt the most famous Gothic building worldwide. The church of Notre Dame received almost 13 million visitors every year. Notre Dame has dominated the Paris skyline since the 1200s. The wood used for the framing of the cathedral consisted of 1,200 Oak trees, representing 21 hectares of forest.
Desecrated and Hijacked During the French Revolution
The last time the cathedral suffered major damage was during the French Revolution. During the anti-Christian fanaticism of the French Revolution, Notre Dame was turned into a “Temple of Reason” and dedicated to the atheistic “cult of reason”. Later when the “committee of public safety” was waging the reign of terror, Robespierre decreed a worship of a supreme being. The Notre Dame cathedral was re-dedicated to the “Cult of Supreme Being” with a famous prostitute being enthroned as the “goddess of reason” at the high altar. Later the French Revolutionaries converted the cathedral into a storage warehouse. During the French Revolution, 28 statues of Biblical kings located on the West Wall, were beheaded.
Restored by Napoleon
It was Napoleon Bonaparte who restored the cathedral to the Catholic Church in 1801. In 1804, Napoleon was crowned emperor at the cathedral. Pope Pius VII handed Napoleon the crown, which the young conqueror of Europe placed on his own head.
Victor Hugo’s Classic Book Led to Notre Dame’s Restoration
Notre Dame is named in the title of one of France’s literary masterpieces: Victor Hugo’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame, which is known to the French, simply as: Notre Dame de Paris. In 1831, French novelist, Victor Hugo, wrote Notre Dame de Paris, published in English as The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Hugo stated that he wrote this novel in part to bring attention to the value of Gothic architecture and as a protest to the demolishers who were destroying so much of France’s architectural heritage. Hugo’s effort to draw attention to the value of the cathedral and medieval architecture in general, led King Louis Philippe to order that it be restored in 1844.
The cathedral’s pipe organ dates back to the 18th century and is the largest in France. It has 5 keyboards, 109 stops and reportedly 7,374 pipes. In the 1990s the organ was restored at a cost of US$ 2 Million and took 40,000 hours to complete.
As people saw eight centuries of priceless history, artefacts, oil on canvass paintings and architectural masterpieces go up in flames, many wept openly on the streets. Watching such an embodiment of the permanence of their nation burn and its spire collapse was profoundly shocking to every French person.
Terrorism and Arson?
Many immediately speculated whether this could be an act of terrorism, or deliberate arson. The Paris prosecutor’s office said that it had opened an inquiry into the incident. However, president Macron’s government made an official statement, while the fire fighters were still battling to control the blaze that they had ruled out any possibility of it being deliberate arson or an act of terrorism! That seemed unprecedentedly premature to announce such an official verdict before any forensic investigation could have even been begun. Normally it takes many days, or even weeks, for fire brigade investigators to conclusively determine the cause of any fire.
Spate of Vandalism and Arson Attacks on French Churches
Suspicions have been raised by a spate of arson attacks and vandalism directed against Christian churches throughout France. Official police records in France identify 875 churches that were attacked, vandalised, or burned, in France, in the last year. In February, Notre Dame de Enfants in Nimes, was looted, vandalised and desecrated. Also in February, the altar at St. Alain Cathedral in Lavaure was set on fire while statues and crosses were smashed throughout the premises. Two people were arrested for that outrage. In another incident on 4 February, a statue of the Virgin Mary was found smashed on the ground at St. Nicholas Church in Houllise, Yevelines. Just days later the Church of Notre Dame de Dijon was vandalised and desecrated. “Their feet are swift to shed blood; destruction and misery are in their ways. And the way of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes.” Romans 3:15-18
Arson Confirmed on the Second Largest Church in Paris
On 17 March 2019, Paris’ second largest church, St. Sulpice, burst into flames with fire damaging the doors and stained glass windows on the building’s exterior. The police reported that the fire was caused by arson and arrested two people.
Muslims Celebrate the Burning of Notre Dame
The Al Jazeera report, 16 April, mentioned that Notre Dame was a church where crusaders were blessed before they had left for the Holy Land. Reportedly thousands of Muslims have placed pictures of the burning cathedral with happy/laughing face emoji’s on social media. Coming within a week of the sentencing of an Islamic Jihadist attempting to blow up the Notre Dame Cathedral in 2016, the question is: Was the fire in Notre Dame deliberate arson?
Bombing Attempt Thwarted
On 4 September 2016 a car containing six canisters of gas was found parked near Notre Dame in Paris. This led to the arrest of two women and two men, all Muslims, said to be connected with ISIS. One of the women, Sarah Hervouet, 23 years old, was engaged to Adel Kermishe, who was one of the terrorists in the Normandy Church attack who was responsible for killing 85-year old priest, Jacques Hamel, by slitting his throat by the high altar. He also critically wounded an 86-year old man. The Normandy Church attack took place 26 July 2016 at Saint-Etienne-Du-Rouvary, Normandy.
A Symbol of Christian Civilisation
Notre Dame’s importance is more than a monumental architectural achievement. Notre Dame has stood for centuries as an icon of French identity. More than that, Notre Dame is seen as a monolithic achievement of Western Christian civilisation, testifying to the central role of Christianity in the development of Europe.
To the Glory of God
The construction of Notre Dame marked the emergence of Gothic architecture. Gothic architecture was designed to make any person entering into a cathedral feel overwhelmed by the greatness and majesty of Almighty God. The grandeur of any cathedral was to testify that it was all about God and not about man. Man should feel infantismal and have his eyes drawn ever upwards to the spire which points to Heaven and to the Cross which testifies to the Sovereign rule of our Lord Jesus Christ, King of kings and Lord of lords.
The cathedrals dominated the skylines of Europe for centuries, pointing to the central role of Christianity in providing the worldview that made Western civilisation and the preeminence of Europe in culture, art, music and the sciences, possible.
It was the basic structure of Christian thought that made the superstructure of European civilisation possible. It was Christianity that provided the morality, basic truth claims, understanding of the universe and the very meaning of language, which led to the freest, most productive and prosperous civilisations and economies in the history of the world.
Revolutionary Hatred of Christianity
It is for this reason that the French Revolutionaries targeted Notre Dame as it sought to eradicate the Christian heritage of France and Europe. When the Revolutionaries dethroned God and enthroned a prostitute as the “goddess of reason”, it ushered in over two decades of utter chaos, confusion and destructive warfare which engulfed all of Europe.
Recognising Roman Catholic Idolatry
However, the tragic destruction of much of the historic and cultural treasures of Notre Dame should also highlight another tragedy. While the world would see Notre Dame as a national treasure of France and a powerful symbol of Western civilisation and of historic Christianity, Evangelical Christians must note that Notre Dame is a place of Roman Catholic worship. It is specifically named after and dedicated to the Virgin Mary. Above the high altar a massive statue of the corpse of Jesus in the arms of Mary reminds us of the preeminence of Mariolatry, seeing Mary as a co-redemptorex.
Much of news media focused attention on saving what the custodians of the cathedral call the “crown of thorns”. Their cathedral boasts numerous fake relics such as what is said to be the crown of thorns worn by Christ and a piece of wood that was meant to be part of His Cross and a nail that pierced Christ on the Cross of Calvary. Of course there are numerous crowns of thorns venerated in Catholic churches - all claiming to be the true crown of thorns. There are many pieces of “the true Cross”, so-called, venerated in numerous catholic cathedrals and chapels. There are many nails that various catholic churches claim to be one of the three that pierced Christ on the Cross.
Papal Idolatry and Hypocritical Self-Contradictions
For 800 years, Roman Catholic priests have been lifting up a wafer and chalice and worshipping these as the physical body and Blood of Christ. It was at Notre Dame that pope Pius X beautified Joan of Arc, France’s most famous Catholic martyr, after a previous “infallible” pope had condemned her as a heretic!
The Gospel of Christ is the True Treasure of the Church
Protestants do not mourn the loss of idols, nor can we condone any acts of terrorism or arson. We mourn the absence of the Christ-centered Biblical Gospel within that great building.
Cathedrals Need Reformation
While we do mourn the loss of a powerful symbol of historic Christianity, we do not agree with the sacramental design of the cathedral and its elevation of the catholic mass. Protestants have never sought to destroy cathedrals, but rather to reform them. Hence, during the Reformation, altars were demolished and replaced with the Lord’s Table. The dividing barrier between clergy and laity was removed. The screen was taken down so that the laity could be participants during the worship service. Protestants brought pews into churches and made the public reading, teaching and preaching from the Word of God as the central part of every worship service, Instead of standing to listen to a liturgy in Latin, Protestants have involved the laity in congregational singing, responsive liturgical worship in their own language and most importantly, the preaching and teaching of God's Word in the local language.
A Tragedy to be Mourned
We mourn the damage and destruction to this great testament to the centrality of Christianity in Western civilisation. We believe that Protestant Reformers themselves would have mourned the loss of this great cathedral – a symbol of the Christianity they sought to Reform.
A Secular State
However, we also recognise that Notre Dame has been owned by the French state for many years. While the catholic church uses the cathedral for its services, it does not own the cathedral. The French government owns it and pay two-thirds of the funds needed for its upkeep and maintenance. The French see it as a symbol of French identity. Most Frenchmen see Notre Dame as a romanticised ideal of the glory of France, not the glory of God. Rather than a monument to the glory and transcendence of God, most French citizens now see it primarily as a material symbol of French nationalism. Paris is a radical symbol of that secularisation. Today, most in France see Notre Dame as a symbol of their patriotism, not of Theism.
Christian Civilisation Has Been Hijacked and Damaged
Notre Dame should remind us of our great Christian heritage which has been hijacked and undermined, even openly attacked by secularists and Islamists who hate Christianity and are seeking to hijack civilisation. “…If there is calamity in a city, will not the Lord have done it?” Amos 3:6
Return to the Bible to Rebuild Civilisation
We need to do more than rebuild the walls, we need to lay solid foundations to rebuild civilisation on the Bible, applying the Lordship of Christ to all areas of life. “Those from among you shall build the old waste places; you shall raise up the foundations of many generations and you shall be called the Repairer of the Breach, the Restorer of Streets to Dwell In.” Isaiah 58:12
Dr. Peter Hammond
P.O. Box 74 Newlands 7725
Cape Town South Africa
UNCENSORED NEWS FROM
HENRY MORTON STANLEY SCHOOL OF CHRISTIAN JOURNALISM
To listen to an audio of this article in English Only click here
To see a video presentation of this article in English only click here
To listen to an audio of this article in Zulu and English click here
To see a video presentation of this article Zulu and English click here
“And you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” John 8:32
Responsibilities and Rights
The only Biblical restrictions on our freedom of speech in the Ten Commandments are: “You shall not take the Name of the Lord your God in vain” and “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.” Outside of those prohibitions of blasphemy and slander, we have freedom of speech. “Do not commit Adultery” prohibits immorality and pornography in all its forms by upholding the sanctity of marriage. “You shall not commit Murder” prohibits incitement to hatred and violence. So outside of these few Biblical restrictions, we have freedom of speech.
To Proclaim Liberty
“The Spirit of the Lord God is upon Me, because the Lord has anointed Me to preach good tidings to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the broken hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and the opening of the prison to those who are bound.” Isaiah 61:1.
Liberty to the Captives
At the beginning of His earthly ministry, our Lord Jesus Christ quoted this passage from Isaiah:
“The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach the Gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the broken hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed.” Luke 4:18
Freedom of Speech is a Fruit of the Protestant Reformation
Historically, freedom of speech is a fruit of Christianity. As observed by Carlton Hayes, in Christianity and Western Civilisation: "Wherever Christian ideals have been generally accepted and their practice sincerely attempted, there is a dynamic liberty; and wherever Christianity is being ignored or rejected, persecuted, or chained to the state, there is tyranny."
“Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” 2 Corinthians 3:17
Essential Foundations for Freedom
From the Dooms of King Alfred the Great, to Magna Carta of 1215, the Petition of Rights of 1628 and the English Bill of Rights of 1689, political, economic and religious freedom is founded on Freedom of Thought, Freedom of Conscience, Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Speech.
“For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.” Galatians 5:13
In a Time of Universal Deceit
However, anti-Christian forces and tyrants always seek to restrict freedom of speech, freedom of religion and therefore also freedom of thought. This is well illustrated in George Orwell’s insightful book, 1984: “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth can become a revolutionary act.” Free speech is hate speech to those who hate the truth. Truth is truth, even if no one believes it. A lie is a lie, even if everyone believes it!
A Tactic to Silence Dissent
In the past, in the Middle Ages, political leaders could silence dissent by accusing critics of: “treason!” Religious leaders, such as the popes, could silence critics and opposition by accusing: “heresy!” Today, the modern equivalents of these attempts to silence freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion and freedom of speech, are: “racist!”; “homophobic bigot!”; “anti-Semite!”; “Islamaphobe!”; “Nazi!”; “legalist!”; “intolerant!”; “judgemental!” or “sexist!”
War Against Free Speech
“Hate speech” is what governments call free speech which they do not like. This is a worldwide phenomenon and part of a comprehensive war against God. The war against free speech is a threat to freedom. It is a threat to Christian schools, missions, ministries, Christian community radio stations, families and individuals.
Rise of Thought Police
Innocent comments such as: “marriage can only be between a man and a woman” have been construed as “hate speech” in Canada and has been enough for police investigations and criminal charges in parts of the United States, Great Britain and Australia.
Quoting Scriptures, such as John 14:6 “Jesus said to him, ‘I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me’” has been condemned as “intolerant,” “bigoted,” “judgemental” and “offensive”, “hate speech!” Pro-life comments and scientific reality such as: “life begins at conception” and “abortion is murder” have been condemned as “hate speech!” by radical liberals in North America, Europe and Australia.
Where Will This End?
How far can this go? The answer to that is in George Orwell’s 1984, where Thought Police prosecute “thought crimes.” The bias, prejudice and malice being manufactured by secular humanists through Hollywood entertainment, mainstream news media, secular humanist school textbooks and increasingly intolerant political legislation are providing a sinister tool chest, an armoury for anti-Christian intimidation, harassment, prosecution and persecution.
Restrictions on Freedom of Speech will Lead to Prosecutions, Fines and Imprisonments
“Gag rules” and restrictions on free speech are only a prelude for a tsunami of prosecutions, censorship, fines and even, ultimately, imprisonment, for those not willing to sell their soul, violate their conscience and be intimidated into silence.
“Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.” Galatians 5:1
Confronting Government with Christian Opposition to their Bill
On Wednesday, 15 February 2017, Freedom of Religion South Africa (FORSA) hosted a meeting at His People in Goodwood, Cape Town, to discuss potential threats to religious freedom posed by the Hate Speech Bill and the CRL Rights Commission’s proposals to “regulate religion.”
Ministry of Injustice
The meeting was attended by ANC, Deputy Minister of Justice, John Jeffery, who addressed the delegates and gave an example of a minister who he claimed had called for the killing of gays!
Due Process of Law or Taking the Law into Your Own Hand
One of the delegates in the meeting challenged him on this and made the distinction between somebody discussing academically what the Law of God may require as far as law and due process of justice goes and someone inciting people to take law into their own hands. There certainly is a big difference between advocating that abortion be recognised as murder and babies protected by law from the violence of abortion by due process of law and some rabble-rouser, or agitator, calling for individuals to take the law into their own hands and murder abortionists!
Shutting Down Debate
Michael Swain, Executive Director of FORSA (Freedom of Religion South Africa) said, “The Bill’s hate speech provisions have the potential to shut down important dialogue and to entrench a polarisation of viewpoints.”
Criminalising Free Speech
Member of Parliament, Steve Swart, challenged Mr. Jeffery over the danger of criminalising free speech. At a time when our legal system is overwhelmed and not coping with real, serious crimes, such as armed robberies, assaults, murders and rape, is it wise and helpful to swamp the courts even further with time-wasting and money-wasting intrusions into Freedom of speech and Freedom of Religion? Mr Jeffery then opinioned that, in the light of the “wars of religion”, it was necessary to implement the “Hate Speech Bill.”
Death by Government
At this, I stood up and challenged him that is seemed ironic to have a politician talk about “wars of religion”, which after all ended over 350 years ago with the Peace of Westphalia 1648. We have just come out of a century where secular humanist states, atheist states, socialist and communist states, have murdered over 190 million of their own citizens. The “wars of religion,” which ended so many centuries ago, pale into insignificance compared to the colossal body count of secular states in our own lifetimes. Secular humanism has caused most of the wars and massacres in the 20th century as documented by Death by Government, by Professor R.J. Rummel and The Black Book of Communism, which documents, from the archives of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, over 100 million of their own citizens killed in peace-time in the name of Atheism, just between 1917 and 1991. All this started with registering churches and restricting freedoms.
Hypocrisy and Failure
The “Hate Speech” Bill threatens freedom of speech, restricts freedom of conscience and erodes freedom of religion. Who determines what hate speech is? The ANC government has failed in the last 25 years to deal with “kill the Boer, kill the farmer” songs and slogans, which have not only been an incitement to violence, but have actually led to thousands of brutal murders and tortures of South African farmers. Are we to believe that this government is seriously concerned with dealing with genuine hate speech and hate practice such as BLF and EFF espouse daily?
What About Islamic Jihad
Are we to believe that the ANC government really intends to deal with genuine hate speech and incitement to violence, such as is found in many mosques in our country, where Jihad is proclaimed and promoted? Are they really going to monitor Friday messages at the mosque?
What About Pornography and Blasphemy?
Are we to accept that pornography is legally protected as free speech? We are told that even blasphemy is considered free speech! But our sermons, publications and postings are now to be examined to see if anything can be construed as “offensive” by subjective secularists who have a track record of harassing and prosecuting Christians? Freedom of speech is essential for any free society. Freedom of speech is not negotiable.
An Anti-Christian Agenda
There is a clear anti-Christian bias amongst many in this government and we do not believe that political appointees will be fair, even-handed and objective in determining what constitutes “hate speech” and what does not. Thousands of churches have been closed in Cuba and tens of thousands of Christians imprisoned under similar legislation, enacted under Fidel Castro.
An Inadequate Response
Many of the delegates assembled responded to these questions and statements with applause. This seemed to unsettle the Justice Department representative, who stuttered and stammered in trying to formulate a reply, neglecting to address most of the issues raised. Finally, he lamely said: “I do not think that it is constructive to try and compare who was most responsible for deaths in the last century. Let us just agree that some people died because of wars of religion.”
Mr Jeffery claimed that no rights are absolute and all must have “limitations”. Whatever happened to being innocent until proven guilty? Truth does not fear investigation. Stifling debate and criminalising dissent does not make for a free society. Condemning people without granting them a meaningful opportunity to answer accusations is unjust.
Unconstitutional, Unworkable and Unnecessary
The invasive registration process proposed by the Commission is unconstitutional, unworkable and unnecessary. The proposed regulation of religion recommended by the CRL Commission is also not in keeping with the South African Charter of Religious Rights and Freedoms to which the CRL is a signatory.
Charlatans and con artists who exploit the poor and vulnerable in society need to be exposed and dealt with as false advertising. We must also encourage greater discernment amongst Christians.
Constitutional Freedoms are at Stake
From a constitutional perspective, the CRL’s proposed Regulation of Religion in South Africa, if implemented, would violate the Constitutional Rights to Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Thought, Freedom of Association and Freedom of Belief and Opinion.
Enforcement of Existing Laws is Needed
Rather than creating new laws, which would place additional burdens on the already strained resources of government, the police and the courts, the state should focus its energy and resources on enforcing existing laws to address the problems identified. FORSA strongly recommended a Code of Conduct to which religious institutions and practitioners should be encouraged to subscribe. However, one needs to find solutions that are practical and constitutionally permissible without infringing on, or eroding, the freedoms of religion, belief, opinion, speech, conscience and association. The history of registering churches and religious practitioners, as in the Soviet Union, Red China and Cuba, show the disastrous and destructive results of interfering with freedom of conscience.
“For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.” Galatians 5:13
The Rise of the GayGB and the Pink Inquisition
Africa Christian Action recently published the book: The Rise of the GayGB and the Pink Inquisition, which documents how the radical LGBT homosexual lobby is jealous for the loyalty and approval of all. No longer satisfied with freedom, or tolerance, they now demand approval, funding and conformity. Some even demand prosecution of dissenting voices. If you think that the homosexual agenda will not affect you, your congregation, or your family, you are wrong. Homosexualists and the Gender Fluidity movement want to transform the very fabric of society. They want to homosexualise the schools and the next generation and they want government funding (that is your taxes) to force this on all.
“As free, yet not using liberty as a cloak for vice, but as bondservants of God.” 1 Peter 2:16
War Against God's Created Order
Satan’s plan is to invert reality, where blasphemy and perversion become the new normal, but free speech is criminalised as “blasphemy” and “treason” to the New World Order. Pornography becomes an essential aspect of “free speech.” Abortion becomes the blood sacrifice sacrament of the New World Order, replacing the Lord’s Supper. Questioning the multicultural interfaith agenda of the New World Order becomes “treason” and “heresy!” Questioning the secular humanist version of origins through “billions of years” of evolution is intolerable. Questioning the secular humanist New World Order version of “history” is considered “subversive.” Proclaiming and teaching the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ and applying the Lordship of Christ to all areas of life, is condemned as “hate speech” and “intolerance.”
How Should We As Christians Respond?
So, how are we, as Bible-believing Christians, to respond to this war against free speech, criminalising of Christian conscience, prosecution of “Thought Crimes” and pervasive pressure to normalise and accept pornography, perversion and blasphemy?
Where the Battle Rages, There the Loyalty of the Soldier is Proved
Nearly 500 years ago, Professor Martin Luther declared: “If I profess with the loudest voice and clearest exposition every portion of the truth of God’s Word, except precisely that point which the world and the devil are at that moment attacking, then I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Him. Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved; and to be steady on all the battle front besides is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point.”
Wide Gates to Hell
Professor Luther warned: “I am much afraid that schools will prove to be wide gates to hell, unless they diligently labour in explaining the Holy Scriptures, engraving them on the hearts of youth. I advise no one to place his child where the Scriptures do not reign paramount. Every institution in which men are not constantly occupied with the Word of God must become corrupt.”
My Conscience is Captive to the Word of God
We, as Bible-believing Evangelical Christians, must respond as Dr. Martin Luther responded at Worms, before the assembled political and ecclesiastical might of Europe, on 18 April 1521: “Unless I am convinced by Scripture, or by clear reasoning, that I am in error - for popes and councils have often erred and contradicted themselves - I cannot recant, for I am subject to the Scriptures I have quoted. My conscience is captive to the Word of God. It is unsafe and dangerous to do anything against one's conscience. Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise. So help me God. Amen.”
The Price of Principle
Of course, making such bold and Biblical stands comes at a price. Professor John Wycliffe, “The Morning Star of the Reformation,” was kicked out of Oxford University because of his bold Bible-teaching and translation of the Scriptures into English.
Professor Jan Hus, of Prague University, was excommunicated by the pope and burned at the stake at Constance. However, as Jan Hus was pressed to recant, to save his life, he declared: “I would not for a chapel full of gold, recede from the Truth… the Truth stands and is mighty forever.” Hus declared that he would prefer to be burned in public than be silenced in private. “In order that all Christendom might know what I have said in the end.”
To Live is Christ – To Die is Gain
Hus declared that he would gladly seal with his blood the truths that he had taught in his life. “In the truth of the Gospel I have written, taught and preached; today I will gladly die.”
The Goose and the Swan
Jan Hus made a prophecy as he was about to die. “My goose is cooked!” he said. (Hus is the Bohemian word for goose!) “But a hundred years from now a swan will arise whose voice you will not be able to silence.” Many recognised Professor Martin Luther as that voice, hence the prevalence of swans in Lutheran art and architecture.
“Over My Dead Body!”
Interestingly, a century later, as Martin Luther was being ordained into the priesthood, he was required to lie face down before the altar, in Erfurt Cathedral. Martin Luther was actually lying face down over the tomb of the bishop who had burned Hus at the stake. One could imagine that the bishop, hearing Professor Jan Hus predict that a hundred years later a swan would arise, whose voice the pope would not be able to silence, he may have muttered something along the lines of: “Over my dead body!” Indeed, Martin Luther entered the priesthood over that bishop’s dead body.
We Must Fear God Alone
“For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind.” 2 Timothy 1:7.
Our Lord Jesus Christ told us not to fear man. The fear of man can prove to be a snare and a trap. We should fear God who can destroy both body and soul in hell forever. The fear of God is liberating. Better to fear the one true God than to be enslaved to the fear of the multitude of men.
Deception Brings Bondage –The Truth Sets Free
It is the Truth that sets us free. Deception brings bondage. The Truth brings freedom. We need to notice that those people who claim to be concerned with “hate speech”:
“While they promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption…” 2 Peter 2:19
The Worst Hate Crimes
As Christians, we are, of course, against hate, but the “Hate Speech Bill” is not designed to silence genuine hate speech. The worst kind of speech is blasphemy against Almighty God, our Creator and Eternal Judge. Libel and slander are real hate speech and yet so much of our entertainment industry vilify the victims and victimise the villains, inverting reality, slandering God's people and demonizing those whom, blaspheming, God hating perverts, hate. “Whoever hates his brother is a murderer and you know that no murderer has Eternal Life abiding in him.” 1 John 3:15
Christians are Called to Counter Hate with Love
“You shall not hate your brother in your heart. You shall surely rebuke your neighbour and not bear sin because of him.” Leviticus 19:17
“Hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all sins.” Proverbs 10:12
“He who says he is in the light and hates his brother, is in darkness until now.” 1 John 2:9
Our Lord Jesus Christ taught that: “The world… hates Me because I testify of it that its works are evil.” John 7:7. Our Lord Jesus declared: “If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you.” John 15:18. The Lord gave a parable how the people of the world would say of God's Son: “We will not have this Man to reign over us.” Luke 19:14
Always Be Ready to Give a Defense
The Word of God commands us: “But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you…” 1 Peter 3:15
Back to the Bible for Reformation and Revival
500 Years ago, in 1519, Swiss Reformer, Ulrich Zwingli, dispensed with the Latin mass and began Expository Preaching - teaching from Matthew 1:1, verse by verse, chapter by chapter, through the whole of the New Testament. We need to go back to the Bible for Reformation and Revival.
Conviction and Courage
In the face of intimidation and threats from the world, we need to respond with the courage and conviction of the Protestant Reformers, Martin Luther and Ulrich Zwingli. Our conscience must be captive to the Word of God. We must stand on the unchangeable Word of Almighty God. We must not be conformed to this world. We must be willing to be different. Stand up for Jesus. Step out in Faith. Speak up and proclaim the Word of God faithfully and accurately. “And that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will.” 2 Timothy 2:26
Stand Fast in the Liberty by Which Christ Has Set Us Free
Truth does not fear investigation. You shall know the Truth and the Truth shall set you free. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free and do not be entangled again with the yoke of bondage. “For the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death.” Romans 8:2
“Because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.” Romans 8:21
Dr. Peter Hammond
Frontline Fellowship, P.O. Box 74 Newlands 7725, Cape Town South Africa,
UNCENSORED NEWS FROM
HENRY MORTON STANLEY SCHOOL OF CHRISTIAN JOURNALISM
The Christian Legal Centre is currently helping and supporting ‘Sarah’ (not her real name), a survivor of an Islamic sex-grooming gang and raising awareness of the epidemic of Islamic sex-grooming gangs and government cover-ups.
In September, Christian Concern reported on the heart-breaking story of how Sarah was kidnapped, forced into three Sharia marriages, repeatedly raped and abused and forced to endure eight abortions, asking you to cry out to God with us not only for her protection, but also for our nation’s heart to be restored.
Now, as the actions of even more gangs come to light and many are convicted, the injustices that exist within our state are becoming ever clearer. The problem is even more widespread than first thought, and the need for the Church to step up and act is even more urgent.
More recently, it’s been revealed that Sarah’s two children – born to different members of the sex-grooming gang – have now been taken away from her, after social services declared Sarah an ‘unfit mother’.
After suffering through the ordeal of being treated as a sex slave for twelve years, Sarah now suffers post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression.
However, she has said: “When they are taking away my children, it feels exactly the same as what that group did: the same threat, the same anxiety, everything. I am desperate to see my daughter.”
When a Rapist Has More Rights than the Mother
Her son now lives with a member of her family under a special guardianship order, but Sarah is only allowed to see him for four hours a week. What’s more is that the father of her son could be given a role in the child’s future, despite his history of abuse and violence towards Sarah.
However, the case is even worse for her youngest child. Sarah fears that social services may now arrange for her daughter to be adopted, against Sarah’s will by Muslims, after they consulted the father – another one of the sex-grooming rapist gang. Although the rapist father wants nothing to do with the child, the authorities could now treat the child as born of a Muslim father, and therefore, by Sharia Law, of Muslim parentage. “I do not want that, because I do not want my daughter to go through what I went through,” Sarah has said.
The Failure of Social Services
Sarah’s story was raised in the House of Lords earlier in October by Baroness Caroline Cox, who told the Daily Mail, “I agonise over Sarah's continuing ordeal. And it is appalling that she was forced to confront one of her alleged rapists at a court hearing where he was consulted about her son's future. How can the courts and social services allow this cruel treatment?”
Neither Sarah nor Baroness Cox can understand how social services have repeatedly allowed her alleged rapists to have a say in her children’s lives.
The Scandal of Political Correctness
But the growing influence of Islam, alongside the desire ‘not to offend’ or be ‘racist’, has allowed thousands of girls to be “sacrificed on the altar of multiculturalism”, as Tim Dieppe, Head of Public Policy at Christian Concern, has previously written.
Sacrificed on the Altar of Multi-Culturalism
Questioning the government, Baroness Cox asked what policies the government had to support survivors like Sarah and how many criminals had been allowed to get away with it, as “countless girls” have suffered similar ordeals throughout the country.
“Countless girls” Have Been Victimised
It is certainly true that Sarah’s case is not unique. At the end of September, the BBC released the story of ‘Nicole’, a survivor of the convicted sex-grooming gang from Newcastle. Nicole revealed how she felt that the authorities had failed her by missing “warning signs”.
And it appears that the problem is evermore widespread. So far, Asian sex-grooming gangs have been found in multiple different towns and cities across the UK, including Oxford, Rotherham, Huddersfield, Telford, Coventry, Drewsbury, Halifax, Keighley and Bristol. In fact, by the end of 2015, Muslim sex-groomers had been tried and convicted in 27 towns and cities across the UK. And it appears that the number is only growing.
Suffering Victims Matter Less Than Damage Control for Islamic Public Image
In recent weeks, there has been outcry for identifying these sex-grooming gangs as ‘Asian’ for fear of “[rocking] the multicultural boat”. Despite his own Pakistani Muslim background, Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, was called out by many for describing the 20 convicted men of the Rotherham gang as “sick Asian paedophiles”. One Times commentator said: “The suffering of the victims, it seems, mattered less to them [those who criticised Sajid Javid]”.
However, if identifying these men as Asian has been difficult, there has been even less willingness to identify the majority of them as Islamic.
Fear of Being Islamophobia Led the Government to Turn a Blind Eye
On 22 October, Lord Pearson raised the issue before the House of Lords, calling into question how the government planned to respond to the authorities’ fears of being seen as ‘Islamophobic’. He asked: “My Lords, do the Government accept that if we extrapolate nationally the Jay report on Rotherham and other reports from Telford and Oxford, there appear to have been upwards of 250,000 young white girls raped in this century, very largely by Muslim men, usually several times a day for years? … What are the Government doing to prosecute those in authority who turned a blind eye to all this because they were afraid of being called Islamophobic and so on?”
Ignoring the Islamic Connection
Yet, as Tim Dieppe suggests, the government seems determined to deny any Islamic connection to these gangs and the issues raised by them. He says: “The latest statistics for convictions show that 283/325 rape gang convictions are of people with Islamic names, and therefore with Islamic heritage and most likely self-identifying as Muslim. This means 87% of the convictions are Muslims, compared with only 5% of the population being Muslim. Mathematically this means that a Muslim man is some 127 times more likely to be convicted as part of a grooming gang than a non-Muslim.”
Furthermore, the majority of places that these sex-grooming gangs come from are, according to the Muslim Council of Britain, the places where a Muslim population is most concentrated. Drawing on figures from the 2011 census, the Council says, “76% of the Muslim population live in four regions: London, West Midlands, the North West and Yorkshire and The Humber”.
Sharia Law, Sexual Abuse and Western Cowardice
The Gatestone Institute has also recently argued that Islamic religion and culture “has a very different set of rules and legal codes for relations between the sexes” to what is generally accepted in the West and does not restrict men from keeping women as slaves and/or concubines. Thus, within the Muslim community, there almost seems to be an acceptance that some sort of sex-grooming could take place. This could go far in explaining “why child sexual grooming gangs and the collective sexual harassment of women have taken hold in some places”, and account for a shared silence, not least from within the Muslim community itself, but also from other who fear offending the community by highlighting ‘differences in culture’. It concludes: “Sadly, in the case of Britain’s grooming gangs, religious ideology does not play a role in forbidding child sexual grooming. It is important to examine just how crucial a factor this seems to have been in community silence about them.”
The Widespread Problem and a Practical Solution
The problem appears to be much bigger and widespread than the government or authorities are willing to accept. And, as seen in both Sarah and Nicole’s cases – and the countless other girls that have been affected by these rape gangs – the failures in the system do not allow for these girls to be supported. In fact, the government seems far more likely to play into the hands of the Muslim minority for fear of being deemed ‘racist’, as seen in the reaction to Sajid Javid’s comment.
The Church must be ready to respond and act on behalf of these girls. If the state child services and legal system will not support them, then we must be ready to step in.
The government must also answer for its inexcusable failures. Following Baroness Cox’s questioning in the House of Lords, you can write to your MP, asking them to pressure the government to support the victims and survivors of Islamic sex-grooming, rather than allow them to continue to fall captive to the flaws in the system. We must speak up for justice where the state will not.
Christian Concern Links
Read Tim Dieppe’s article on “Sacrificing Girls to Political Correctness”
Read The Challenge of Islam in the UK
2 November 2018, www.christianconcern.com
The Islamisation of Europe – What Can be Done to Stop and Reverse It
Africa Christian Action
PO Box 23632
Cape Town South Africa
Tel: 021-689 4480