Showing posts with label Islam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Islam. Show all posts

In Hollywood’s Blacklist: Allah Is Loving, But Non-Acceptance of Homosexuality Leads to Violence, Sadism and Terror


In Hollywood’s Blacklist: Allah Is Loving, But Non-Acceptance of Homosexuality Leads to Violence, Sadism and Terror

By Julio Severo
Usually, in Islamic cultures fathers kill homosexual sons. Even in the Western culture, they kill them. For example, a FoxNews headlinesaid, “Los Angeles father allegedly killed son because he was gay.” This father was Shehada Issa, a Muslim man.
Yet, because in Hollywood reality makes no sense, in an episode titled “The Djinn” in the American crime thriller television series The Blacklist, the script was fantastically unreal. A Muslim businessman in the U.S. had been kidnapped, and while the U.S. police, even the FBI, are searching for him, no one knows that he is imprisoned in the bedroom of his alleged daughter Nasim, whose fantasy is to torture and kill him.
In a point, with her father bound and tortured, Nasim said, “Allah teaches us forgiveness.” This was the only mention of Allah in the movie: a loving god who supposedly teaches that instead violence, his adherents should practice love and forgiveness. But this is an artistic Allah made in USA, because the real non-forgiving Allah, who teaches his adherents to kill 100,000 Christians a year, makes no sense to politically correct minds.
So Allah needed to be reinvented by Hollywood to have an American fictitious image of what it is not in the Islamic cultures, and also to be a part of a money-making machine for a Hollywood that turns real nightmares into profitable fantasies.
Then Nasim adds, “But some things are unforgivable.”
It is obvious that for the real Allah, a Muslim accepting Jesus Christ as his Savior is “unforgivable.” But what is “unforgivable” for Hollywood and its Allah? Non-acceptance of homosexuality!
Emerges the criminal-hero Raymond “Red” Reddington (played by actor James Spader) and Nasim says to him: “What do you want?”
Reddington: “To offer my sympathies.”
Next, in one of the greatest “moral” sermons in The Blacklist, and perhaps in all the Hollywood history, he lectured how Nasim had been born a man, but his father, against his will, made him into a “woman” to protect his family from disgrace. The Reddington character uses and abuses the word “choice” in a perverse Hollywoodian way.
“Choice” is a very misleading word in Hollywood and America. You are a criminal in America if you force a woman to abort her unborn baby. But if she chooses to abort by her free will, it is not a crime. In fact, you are labeled a criminal if you try to hinder her from killing her baby!
Choice, Allah, Islam and homosexuality are sacred cows in the script, never to be mentioned negatively. Let us see their conversation:
Nasim: I know who you are.
Reddington: And I know who you are, Nasim. What a beautiful name. It means “breeze” in Farsi. But you weren’t born Nasim. You were born Nasir — “the victorious.” How ironic. But a boy. A perfectly healthy boy.
Another character says to Nasim: We know you’re The Djinn.
Reddington: And this must be your father. The butcher. Tell me, Bahram, was it so horrific to discover that your 19-year-old son, your eldest son, was gay? So horrific that you forced him against his will to go under the knife, change his gender, to give you a daughter instead of your son, who is gay?
Bahram, Nasim’s father, shakily: Clerics accept… People can get trapped in the body of the wrong sex. The law says…
Nasim: I wasn’t trapped. I liked my body. I liked men.
Bahram: I wanted to protect you, Nasim. They could have killed you.
Reddington: For being gay. They’re so homophobic that being gay is a hideous crime, but chopping off a man’s penis isn’t? Honestly, is it just me, or is the human race, armed with religion, poisoned by prejudice, and absolutely frantic with hatred and fear, galloping pell-mell back to the dark ages? Who on earth is hurt by a little girl going to school or a child being gay? Let’s be frank, Bahram. You didn’t change your son to protect him. You changed him because he disgusted you.
According to his Hollywood script, Nasim became “The Djinn,” a sadistic criminal who helps fulfill revenge fantasies through terroristic kidnappings, not because of Allah, but because his father did not accept his homosexuality. Islam is innocent in the violence of Nasim and his father.
According to Muslim demonology, the Djinn is one of a class of spirits that inhabit the earth, assume human and animal forms and exercise supernatural power. Is it any wonder that The Blacklist episode titled “The Djinn” seemed inspired by demons?
According to the Hollywood view inspired by demons, it is not Islam, or Mohammed or the Koran which leads Muslims to terrorism. It is non-acceptance of homosexuality!
Non-acceptance of homosexuality leads people to violence, sadism and terrorism — in the evil world of Hollywood. The script made it clear that its Hollywoodian Allah had no role in the violence by its Islamic adherents.
In real life is very different. The majority of Muslims in the East consider harsh treatment of homosexuals to be perfectly justified.
Textbooks for Islamic Studies, officially used by the Saudi Ministry of Education, say:
“Homosexuality is one of the most disgusting sins and greatest crimes.... It is a vile perversion that goes against sound nature, and is one of the most corrupting and hideous sins.... The punishment for homosexuality is death… [the perpetrator] is to be burned with fire. It has also been said that he should be stoned, or thrown from a high place.”
Saudi Arabia, a U.S. ally, is the capital of Islam in the world.
Ten Muslim nations officially impose the death penalty for homosexuals. They are Saudi Arabia, Iran, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates, Yemen and some states in Malaysia.
Other Muslim countries have no official death penalty for homosexuals, but homosexuals are murdered anyway by police and the population.
In the real Islamic world Nasim would have, by force or not, been given no opportunity to live. Homosexuality is punished with death in Islam. So the sermon given by the criminal-hero Reddington about not giving free choice to homosexuals is not about Islam, which in real life kills homosexuals, but which in Hollywood has a loving Allah. It is about Christianity.
Hollywood, which fears to treat Islam as a religion controlling people and leading them to violence, feels free to make this negative depiction of Christianity. For example, in the “Sir Crispin Crandall” episode, The Blacklist has a scene where the wicked CIA director interrogated a criminal by using the Bible. He said, showing the pictures of the criminal’s children,
 “Are you acquainted with the Bible, Mr. Karpos? I am. At one point, I actually considered the priesthood. Can you imagine? There’s a passage — Exodus 20:5-6. ‘For I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children.’ We wouldn’t want that. Would we, Mr. Karpos?”
After the “veiled” threat against his children, the criminal revealed all the information the CIA director wanted!
Can you imagine Hollywood depicting a CIA director threatening violence against the children of someone by using the Koran? Hollywood is able to protect Islam and homosexuality at the same time, but not the evangelical Christianity that founded the United States.
Actually, people are controlled by ideologies, which lead them to violence. Hollywood is representative of a liberal ideology which protects violent Islam, portrays Christianity as violent and depicts homosexuality as a good and even compulsory “choice,” including for children.
Hollywood fantasies violently rape truth for the sake of its own profitable lies.
The Hollywoodian Allah forgives and accepts homosexuality. But for Hollywood, non-acceptance of homosexuality is an unforgivable “crime.”
Hollywood is philandering with Allah at the expense of truth, reality and the evangelical Christianity that founded America.
Often the cold-blood Reddington kills other criminals. I wonder what he would do to George Washington, the first U.S. president, who expelled a soldier for homosexuality.
Would Hollywood depict Washington as a criminal to be lectured and even killed by a Reddington?
Would Hollywood depict him as a man in need to learn from the Hollywoodian Allah how to forgive his homosexual soldier?
Would Hollywood depict him as a demon Djinn for his opposition to homosexuality?
Anyway, The Blacklist will never do it to Islam, the Koran and Saudi Arabia. Only Christians and the Bible are in the Hollywood’s blacklist.
What is Hollywood waiting to put Washington in its blacklist?
Recommended Reading:

Former CIA director endorses Hillary Clinton, supports Muslims in CIA and characterizes Trump as Putin’s agent


Former CIA director endorses Hillary Clinton, supports Muslims in CIA and characterizes Trump as Putin’s agent

By Julio Severo
Donald Trump has become a pawn of Russian President Vladimir Putin, presenting “dangers” to American national security that would only grow if he obtains the White House, said a former CIA director who also explained that Muslims do not present dangers to America.
Michael Morell, a CIA officer under Republican President Bush and Democratic President Obama, said Friday in a New York Times op-ed that he is endorsing Hillary Clinton in the presidential race because she is “highly qualified” and Trump is not. 
And if you ask why the U.S. has experienced remarkable failure in its war against terror, Morell unintentionally explains it in his praise of a Muslim serving as the director of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center. He said that the Center was directed by this Muslim for nearly a decade, during the presidency of Bush and Obama. Morell said that he cannot name the director of this CIA agency, but he highly praises him as the Muslim “most responsible for keeping America safe since the Sept. 11 attacks.”
If in the War against Terror (and this is Islamic terror) CIA has an Islamic director to fight Islamic terror, what had CIA in the Cold War? A Soviet Russian director in the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center? Sorry, but it is very hard not get a fit of laughter over CIA and its blunders. “Get Smart” is smarter than this.
“Mr. Trump has taken policy positions consistent with Russian, not American, interests — endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia’s annexation of Crimea and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States,” Morell writes.
Trump has responded in kind and called Putin a “great leader,” he said.
Trump is “damaging our national security,” he argues, and he’s fraternizing with Putin.
Morell warned in the op-ed that Putin, who has been accused by the Obama administration of killing and jailing journalists and political opponents, is manipulating Trump, who has not cared about what Putin has done in Russia, while Morell has not cared about what Muslims have done in America. Only in the 9/11 terrorist attack, approximately 3,000 Americans were killed. Even so, Muslims occupy high-ranking posts in CIA. What about if Russians had been responsible for the 9/11 attack? Would Morell warmly welcome a Soviet Russian as CIA director? Would he praise Soviet Russians in high-ranking posts in CIA? So why is he praising Muslims in CIA?
In spite of the fact that the greatest threat today is Islam, Trump has been heavily criticized by right-wing and left-wing Americans for wanting friendly relations with Putin and Russians and for not wanting such relations with Muslims.
U.S. nationalistic interests, supported by both right-wing and left-wing Americans, see Islam as an ally and Russia, which is the largest Orthodox Christian nation in the world, as eternal enemy.
It is a suicidal nationalism that embraces Muslims as allies. Allies against whom? Russia.
Right-wing and left-wing Americans are united in an anti-Russia nationalistic fanaticism that is willing to embrace Islam and its adherents.
How exactly, according to Morell, is Hillary “highly qualified” and Trump is not?
Morell’s support of Hillary is in harmony with CIA’s politics. Former CIA agent Osama bin Laden created al-Qaeda in the late 1970s to unite Muslims in Afghanistan against Soviet Union. Why does Morell think other Muslim agents in high-ranking posts in CIA could not imitate bin Laden?
In the WND report “Declassified docs: Hillary aided rise of ISIS,” Jerome R. Corsi said, “More than 100 pages of previously classified Department of Defense and Department of State documents implicate the Obama administration in a cover-up to obscure the role Hillary Clinton and the State Department played in the rise of ISIS.” The report mentions shipments of weapons to ISIS.
Another WND report says that CIA has directly been delivering weapons to Syrian Muslim rebels. Many of these rebels, who have connections to al-Qaeda and ISIS, have been raping, torturing and slaughtering multitudes of Orthodox Christians in Syria.
Certainly, Hillary is “highly qualified” to support Islamists against Christians. In contrast, Trump is highly qualified to support Orthodox Christian Russia against Islamists.
So why are right-wing and left-wing Americans willing to go along with Islam, not Russia?
Why are these Americans, including CIA directors, warmongers against Russia, but not warmongers against Islam? Why are they very comfortable with Islam and its adherents, but not comfortable with an Orthodox Christian Russia?
Because Trump is going along with Russia, not Islam, they are indignant.
So America had a Muslim as director of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center for ten years. Now she has Muslim John Brennan as CIA director. And she is besieged by Islamic terror. And what is the concern of right-wing and left-wing Americans? Russia!
Michael Morell wants a Trump against Russia, not against Islam. And because Trump does not fit his neocon mentality, Morell prefers endorsing Hillary, who has proven her high qualities by helping ISIS and supporting the Obama boycotts and sanctions against Russia over a Russian law banning homosexual propaganda to children and adolescents, even though the official excuse by the Obama administration is that Russia annexed Crimea, which for centuries belonged to Russia.
When he was asked on ABC whether he would support the Crimea annexation, Trump said: “I’m going to take a look at it. But, you know, the people of Crimea, from what I’ve heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were.”
In the time of Soviet Union, it made sense to fight this evil empire. This is why I fervently supported Ronald Reagan in that time. But Soviet Union is 25 years gone and the greatest threat today is Islam and it makes sense now to support an American candidate against Islam. Trump is such man. Trump challenges the nationalistic paradigms that favor Islam against Russia.
Americans who endorse Hillary do not care about Christians being raped, tortured and slaughtered by ISIS and other Islamic groups supported by her. Certainly, the Muslim director of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center did not care. And does current Muslim CIA director care?
Trump’s campaign dismissed Morell’s criticism, linking the ex-CIA director to the Obama administration’s public response defending Hillary after the September 2012 Islamic attacks in Benghazi, Libya. Obama administration officials tried to play down the role of Islamist militants in the attacks.
In his Twitter account, Trump respondedto Morell’s op-ed by saying: “Wow, folks! Former CIA chief Michael Morell calls me Putin’s Agent. Endorses Clinton. A TOTAL & COMPLETE DISASTER!!”
Clinton’s campaign subsequently posted a video to her Twitter account drudging up Trump’s past statements about Putin, whom he invited last week to hack her emails.
Alongside the video was a statement that said: “We don’t know why Trump and Putin praise each other so much and share many foreign policies. We’ll let you guess.”
With his vast experience as a former CIA director, Morell is resolute and he promised, “On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure that she is elected as our 45th president.”
He will be not alone. If Hillary intends to support Islam, keep the Obama sanctions against Russia and promote abortion and sodomy ideologies, she has already a major ally: The Communist Party USA, which officially nominated Hillary Rodham Clinton as their undisputed candidate for president of the United States.
Pro-Islam nationalism is a disaster.
With information from DailyMail, WND and Reuters.
Recommended Reading:

A Trap for Trump


A Trap for Trump

Democrats use Muslim to ruin Trump’s candidacy

By Julio Severo
A perfect trap was set for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. His Democratic socialist opponent Hillary Clinton put in the Democratic National Convention last week Khizr Khan, a Muslim speaker, who viciously attacked Trump.
Hillary is not a match for Trump. This is why she needed to resort to a low trick. While Trump brought Peter Thiel, a Republican homosexual, to give a speech at the Republican National Convention to offend conservative Christians by saying that he is proud about his homosexuality, Hillary brought a Muslim to offend Trump by saying that he is proud about Islam.
In Khizr Khan he has finally met his match. In the convention, Khan said, “If it was up to Donald Trump he never would have been in America,” in reference to his dead son and Trump’s plans to ban non-American Muslims from the United States.  
All the U.S. conservative and leftist media is attacking for days Trump, because Khan’s main argument was that his son, a captain in the U.S. Army, was killed in combat in the Iraq War in 2004. Hillary called the late soldier “the best of America.” 
Democrats and Republicans are attacking Trump.
Socialists and conservatives are attacking Trump.
“I don’t know where the bottom is,” sneered Hillary, rejoicing that at last Trump was ensnared.
But the real bottom, said liberal journalist Piers Morgan addressing Hillary, “It’s using grieving parents who lost their son in an illegal, unethical, immoral war that YOU voted for, as a political weapon.”
The Iraq War that killed Khan’s son was approved by then Senator Hillary Clinton, who now uses Khan to attack Trump.
Morgan said about this war, “This was one of the biggest mistakes made in the history of modern America.”
Both George W. Bush and Hillary approved it. From a Christian and humanitarian perspective, this war was a total disaster for Christians.
Before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, there were over 2 million Christians. Today, they number 300,000. The U.S. military presence in Iraq did not protect Christians and even after the genocide, the U.S. has massively opened its immigration doors to Muslims, not their Christian victims.
The ten Islamic terrorists who attacked the U.S. on 9/11 were not from Iraq. They were from Saudi Arabia. Why did not the U.S. invade and attack Saudi Arabia, which is, in fact, the biggest sponsor of worldwide Islamic terrorism?
Saddam Hussein was not a good man, but at least he protected Christian minorities much better than the U.S. did after the invasion of Iraq. The U.S. military mission in Iraq was a failure and eventually brought ISIS and chaos and genocide to Christians.
In no way Khizr Khan is an innocent “American” patriot. According to WND (WorldNetDaily), he “has deep ties to the government of Saudi Arabia—and to international Islamist investors through his own law firm. In addition to those ties to the wealthy Islamist nation, Khan also has ties to controversial immigration programs that wealthy foreigners can use to essentially buy their way into the United States—and has deep ties to the Clinton Foundation.”
Now, Khan has deletedhis law firm website that specialized in Islamic immigration to the U.S. to try to hide his dark secrets. He was being paid to bring more and more Muslims to the U.S.
But the American public is so blind about the Islamic reality, especially when covered up by a supposed American patriotism, that they are attacking Trump.
Veterans of Foreign Wars, which was praising Trump, now attacks him and defends Khan.
Arizona Senator John McCain, who was a Republican presidential candidate in the 2008 election and a hawkish neocon who helped stir a revolution in Ukraine against Russia, told Khizr Khan, “thank you for immigrating to America,” while expressing how much he disagrees with Trump over his call to ban non-American Muslims from entering the United States. 
House Speaker Paul Ryan, a Republican Catholic, also rebuked Trump, saying a “religious test for entering our country is no reflection” of American values. He does not know the history of his country! Actually, when America had such tests in the time of her founders, she was better and more Christian. Now she does not know what she is.
Trump tried to react to the massive attacks, which essentially defended Khan and his Islamic ideology, saying: “This story is not about Mr. Khan, who is all over the place doing interviews, but rather RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM and the U.S. Get smart!”
But it was to no avail. Everybody are united with Khan and against Trump. Conservatives, liberals, hard-core Marxists, hawkish neocons. Everybody.
Trump saw rightly. This is about Islam. While he was facing an Islamic trap set by Hillary, Pope Francis was saying, “It’s not true and it’s not correct (to say) Islam is terrorism.” But he did not face the massive hurricane of criticism Trump did.
The pope added: “I believe that in every religion there is always a little fundamentalist group. I don’t like to talk of Islamic violence because every day, when I go through the newspapers, I see violence, this man who kills his girlfriend, another who kills his mother-in-law. And these are baptized Catholics. If I speak of Islamic violence, then I have to speak of Catholic violence.”
As for the Islamic State group, he said it “presents itself with a violent identity card, but that’s not Islam.”
The European and U.S. media have not attacked the pope for such remarks. Hillary, Obama, John McCain and hawkish neocons have not attacked the pope for such remarks.
But all of them want Trump to soften his stance on Islam. And all of them want him to harden his stance on Russia.
After the daily, relentless attacks by all of them using Khan against Trump’s hard stance on Islam, they are now targeting his “soft” stance on Russia. Besieged by all sides by a powerful media hurricane supporting Khan, Trump seems to be willing to make some sacrifices and backtrack on Russia for the sake of Khan and Islam.
The whole media is attacking him over Russia. When he was asked on ABC whether he would support the Crimea annexation, Trump said: “I’m going to take a look at it. But, you know, the people of Crimea, from what I’ve heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were.”
Most of Crimea is populated with ethnic Russians. But, for geopolitical interests and neocons’ ambitions, the Obama administration has refused to recognize the legitimacy of Russian referendums in Crimea.
Trump, though, suggested the U.S. should accept Russia’s annexation if it would lead to better relations with Russia and stronger cooperation in fighting ISIS militants.
Obama imposed economic sanctions against Russia for annexing Crimea two years ago. But according Dr. Scott Lively, this was a pretext. Actually, Obama provoked and used the Ukrainian chaos to chastise Russia for defying his homosexual imperialism.
The United Nations also doesn’t recognize Crimea as part of Russia, and some top hawkish Republicans staunchly defend the U.S. geopolitical interests in Crimea against what they consider Russian “aggression,” when in reality there was no aggression.
Under Trump, the Republican Party platform softened a stance on military involvement in Ukraine. Although the platform is not pro-Russia, Trump supporters succeeded in preventing a neocon reference to arming Ukraine from being added. 
Many in the U.S., in the conservative and leftist camps, are displeased by his focus on Islam, not Russia. Neocons are working hard to change his focus. And the Khizr Khan case is helping both camps.
In a searing denouncement on defense of Khan, President Obama castigated Trump as “unfit” and “woefully unprepared” to serve in the White House. He challenged Republicans to withdraw their support for their presidential candidate, declaring “There has to come a point at which you say ‘enough.’”
“I think the Republican nominee is unfit to serve as president,” said Obama, who noted his opposition to Trump replacing him goes beyond policy differences with his 2008 and 2012 opponents, John McCain and Mitt Romney.
“I didn’t have a doubt that they could function as president,” he said. “I think I was right and Mitt Romney and John McCain were wrong on certain policy issues, but I never thought that they couldn’t do the job.”
If the U.S. is to have a Republican president, Obama supports Romney or McCain. Trump, never.
If Khan were Russian, Obama, McCain, Romney, the whole Democratic Party, the whole Republican Party and the whole (liberal and conservative) media would be supporting Trump. But he is Muslim, and this grants him special privileges.
Hillary introduced Muslim Khan in the elections to ensnare Trump, and Trump seems to have fallen into the trap. Why did Trump introduce Peter Thiel, the PayPal founder? To ensnare conservatives? To lead the conservative moment to fall into a trap? In 2011, I was victim of Thiel’s abusive power favoring the homosexual movement. You can watch this Catholic video (https://youtu.be/fSSjmMwQNn4) and this evangelical video (https://youtu.be/oZ8fzSkiB5A) on my case.
Definitely, it was not cool for Hillary to use Khan to provoke Trump. And it was not cool for Trump to let the Republican Party and his staff use Thiel to provoke conservative Christians.
While neocons want everybody worried and panicked over Russia, so that they may keep profiting from arm trade and wars, it is Islam that is showing a formidable capability of defeating Trump through democratic weapons used by liberals and misguided or false conservatives and blind patriots.
If Trump does not follow neocons’ interests, they will have everybody worried and panicked over him. From Hillary’s trap to neocons’ trap.
They want him to make certain sacrifices. Russia will be one of them. Islam? Never.
With information from DailyMail, WND and Associated Press.
Portuguese version of this article: Uma armadilha para Trump
Recommended Reading: