conflict
Hundreds of Nigerian Christians killed, injured in brutal attack over Christmas
From LifeSiteNews
“Not a day goes by when Christians are not terrorized in western Africa in the most grotesque ways imaginable”
More than 100 Nigerian Christians were brutally murdered and hundreds more were injured in brutal attacks carried out over Christmas, according to numerous reports.
The attackers struck more than 20 villages in a range of counties of Nigeria’s Plateau State on Christmas Eve, according to International Christian Concern.
Reports vary concerning the number of people killed, with estimates ranging from between 140 and nearly 200 people in the majority-Christian areas. Many of those killed were women, children, and the elderly.
International Christian Concern cited numbers from Amnesty International Nigeria, which said that a total of 194 people had been killed in the attacks. The group also said that over 300 people were injured and some 29,350 were displaced.
Christianity Today reported that the massacres are suspected to have been carried out by “extremists among Fulani Muslim herdsman against Christian farming communities.”
Reacting to the massacres, Nigeria’s International Society for Civil Liberties and Rule of Law (Intersociety) openly declared that they see “the latest butcheries” of “not less than 160 defenseless Plateau Christians” as evidently the “clear handiwork of Fulani Jihadists (Jihadist Fulani Herdsmen and Jihadist Fulani Bandits)” as well as “conspiratorial security chiefs and operatives particularly the operatives of the Nigerian Army, the Nigeria Police Force and the DSS.”
The organization expressed suspicion that the murders were carried out as a “coordinated revenge killing” in response to two airstrikes by the Nigerian Defense Headquarters of the Nigerian Armed Forces that killed more than 120 innocent Muslims taking part in a festival on December 3.
“The ‘class criminalization’ sort of revenge killing of over 160 defenseless Plateau Christians must have also arisen from ‘transfer of criminality responsibility’ through class criminalization and ethno-religious hatred and bigotry,” the organization surmised.
A spokesperson for the U.S. State Department told Fox News Digital that the “U.S. Mission in Nigeria condemned the recent attacks in Plateau State and expressed heartfelt condolences for the tragic loss of life.”
“Not a day goes by when Christians are not terrorized in western Africa in the most grotesque ways imaginable,” he said. “Christians are killed for sport, especially Christian children.”
He also suggested that reported murders do not reflect the true numbers.
“For every massacre which you hear about there are probably 10 others which happened in the shadows,” the spokesperson said. “The death tolls are routinely in the hundreds.”
International Christian Concern reported that “Nigeria is one of the most dangerous places for Christians, particularly in the Middle Belt region,” noting that millions of Christians have been displaced in the region and over 50,000 have been murdered in the past two decades alone.
Suspicion concerning the involvement of local Islamic jihadists comes as the phenomenon increased in recent years in Africa amid unsuccessful efforts by western militaries to curb its spread, LifeSiteNews previously reported.
A 2021 report by the Brookings Institute noted that “jihadi insurrections have persisted and are even expanding” in several geographical regions in Africa, including “West Africa, with the border region between Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso particularly affected.”
The rise of the Islamic terror threat comes “[d]espite massive efforts by European nations and the United States — with France and the United Kingdom on the front lines,” the report continued, noting that the U.S. had roughly 6,000 boots on the ground at the time in Africa. Most were tasked with combating the jihadist terror groups.
And recent Islamic violence isn’t isolated to Africa.
Last month, four people were killed and dozens injured in the bombing at a Catholic Mass on a university campus in the Philippines on Sunday. ISIS militants claimed credit for the attack.
In October, hostilities in a decades-long conflict between the Muslim government of Azerbaijan and a small group of Armenian Christians broke out anew, killing hundreds and forcing nearly all of the roughly 120,000 Christian residents of a region known as Nagorno-Karabakh to flee to Armenia.
And on October 7, Islamic Hamas terrorists invaded Israel from the Gaza Strip, mutilating, raping, and murdering over 1,000 civilians, including women, children, and the elderly, and injuring thousands more. Hundreds of Israeli Defense Forces soldiers were also killed in the blitz, and nearly 250 people were taken hostage, launching the Middle East back into bloody conflict as Israel declared war with the stated intention of eliminating Hamas.
conflict
Trump has started negotiations to end the war in Ukraine
For the first time since Russian soldiers entered Ukraine in February 2022, the US is negotiating with Vladimir Putin. Surprisingly it’s not President Biden’s team at work, but President Elect Donald Trump. Trump has been working through Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban. President Orban traveled to the US to meet with Trump a day before he had an hour long phone conversation with Russian leader Vladimir Putin.
Clearly Trump is looking for at least a quick de-escalation if not an all out end to the conflict in Ukraine. Alex Christoforou and Alexander Mercouris of The Duran podcast explain the current situation.
conflict
Sending arms to Ukraine is unnecessarily placing American lives in danger
U.S. President Joe Biden signs the guest book during a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the Ukrainian presidential palace on February 20, 2023, in Kyiv, Ukraine
From LifeSiteNews
By Bob Marshall
Joe Biden’s direct military support, coupled with ignoring peace efforts and sidelining containment principles, could spark global conflict.
To understand why a congressional budget fight over continuing or possibly expanding the Ukraine-Russia war is so fraught with dangers, some background of the relevant history and politics must be considered.
Ukraine-Russian hostilities
On February 24, 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin initiated what he designated as his “special military operation.” He undertook this action in Ukraine which was an extension of the hostile acts that started in February 2014 with a U.S.-supported coup of the Ukraine government. But, recall that Putin approached Biden in late December 2021 through mid-February 2022 with proposals to forestall or avoid Russian military action mainly centering around assurances that Ukraine and other countries would not join NATO, an expansion policy which had its proximate beginnings at the end of the Cold War right after the reunification of Germany.
Putin did not approach Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky with such proposals because the United States, and specifically President Biden, was the sine qua non for making such a decision regarding Ukraine’s entrance into NATO both for the U.S. and NATO. Basically, Biden told Putin there was nothing to talk about, especially with regard to reaching any agreement on Ukraine not entering NATO.
Biden rejects Ukraine-Russia peace agreement
Biden and British Prime Minister Johnson refused to accept bona fide peace agreements reached and worked out between Ukraine and Russia during the first weeks of this unnecessary conflict achieved with the assistance of Israel’s 13th prime minister, Naftali Bennett. Former Fox News commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano wrote that Biden and Johnson urged Zelensky to reject a more than 100-page peace treaty, “each page of which had been initialed by both sides, and its essence accepted by the Kremlin and by Kyiv,” and that by trusting the U.S. and Britain for military assistance, eastern Ukraine could be protected and Ukraine would not have to make concessions to Putin.
For these reasons, Biden and Great Britain own this war and bear partial responsibility for the Ukraine, Russian, and other lives lost as well as other war costs incurred after the treaty’s rejection.
So, American, Russian, and Ukrainian citizens now suffer the political, economic, and military consequences of the myopic and imprudent judgments of Joe Biden, Boris Johnson, and perhaps much less so by Volodymyr Zelensky who apparently believed promises of continued economic and military support from Biden and Johnson.
Biden trashes Kennan Containment Doctrine
In one feckless and politically vindictive act, Biden put our troops and the American homeland in harm’s way. He obliterated George Kennan’s highly successful “containment” policy, which our country has skillfully employed since 1947 in Europe and East Asia as a means of avoiding a direct military confrontation with communist governments across several conflicts and near conflicts and the resulting horrors of nuclear exchanges with Russia, China, and North Korea.
Containment worked! America avoided nuclear war.
Direct U.S./NATO Attacks on Russia
The headlines, of course, say that “Ukraine fires UK-made missiles” and that “Russia says Ukraine attacked it using U.S. long-range missiles.” Not so fast. Zelensky may have given the order to fire, or maybe even pushed the buttons, but the White House needs to explain to the American voters who paid for these weapons, who guided the missiles to their targets in the Russian homeland, and why it is not constitutionally and morally irresponsible for Joe Biden and U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer to risk a much wider or even a worldwide nuclear holocaust to call Vladimir Putin’s bluff.
On November 24, Rebekah Koffler, a former Defense Intelligence Agency official, told Fox News that “we are now on the escalation ladder inching towards a nuclear war. Those ATACMS do not fire by themselves.”
Even if Ukrainian soldiers technically pushed the button, “the targeting of the weapons systems, ensuring that there is a proper flight trajectory of the missile, that it destroys the right target, and the actual battle damage it achieved that we wanted it to achieve, all requires U.S. personnel and U.S. satellites. This is why the Russians have stated that the United States and European targets are now in the crosshairs. In every wargame that we conducted back in the intelligence community ended up in a nuclear war.”
This is direct engagement.
In September, Vladimir Putin explained why a decision like Biden’s is radically different from all other “redlines.”
[T]his is not a question of whether the Kiev regime is allowed or not allowed to strike targets on Russian territory. It is already carrying out strikes … using Western-made long-range precision weapons. … This can only be done using the European Union’s satellites, or U.S. satellites. … [O]nly NATO military personnel can assign flight missions to these missile systems. … Therefore … It is about deciding whether NATO countries become directly involved in the military conflict or not. If this decision is made … this will mean that NATO countries – the United States and European countries – are at war with Russia.
Biden finesses radical policy change
Biden has still refused to take public ownership of his radical departure from George Kennan’s Cold War containment policy of communist powers when he committed the one cardinal sin of American diplomacy: authorizing the direct military attack of a nuclear opponent, however “small.”
The initial press coverage from the Associated Press on November 17 announced that President Biden had authorized Ukraine, for the first time, to use U.S.-made long-range missiles for use by Ukraine inside Russia, “according to a U.S. official and three people familiar with the matter…. The official and the people familiar with the matter were not authorized to discuss the decision publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.”
The stark refusal of even one Biden official to put their name to this monumentally dangerous and radical policy change is astonishing. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) noted on X that, “Joe Biden just set the stage for World War III[.] Let’s all pray it doesn’t come to that[.] Otherwise, we may never forget where we were [t]he moment we received this news.”
AP also noted that “Biden did not mention the decision during a speech at a stop to the Amazon rainforest in Brazil on his way to the Group of 20 summit.”
Press disguises Biden policy switch
Biden’s “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” approach to not acknowledging the political-military consequences of his own actions was received with favorable “silent” coverage from the nation’s compliant mainstream media.
Indeed, none of the following news organizations told readers that Biden has converted American military personnel and civilian employees into warfighters who are directly engaging Russian troops, equipment, buildings, and territory by his direction: Associated Press, New York Times, NBC-Washington, Los Angeles Times, Bloomberg News, ABC-News, Public Broadcasting, Seattle Times, Minnesota Star Tribune, Miami Herald, and The Hill.
Checking the White House, the State Department, and the Defense Department websites for this period reveals no press releases, fact sheets, or acknowledgments about the unprecedented and radical missile policy change with Ukraine or any of its particulars. However, Biden’s White House website posted a note on November 20 expressing sympathy with the Transgender Day of Remembrance but is silent on the possible escalation toward World War III.
Even a week later, National Security Advisor John Kirby still did not acknowledge that Biden has authorized direct attacks on Russia in obvious disregard of Kennan’s successful policy of avoiding nuclear war by avoiding direct military to military conflict with nuclear powers. Below is an exchange between National Security Advisor John Kirby and a reporter at an “on the record” press gaggle:
QUESTION: In the past, you kind of downplayed [the] potential impact of the ATACMS on the battlefield and warned that allowing Ukraine to strike deep into Russia could lead to escalation by the Kremlin. How do you see it now?
KIRBY: Right now, they are able to use ATACMS to defend themselves, you know, in an immediate-need basis. And right now, you know, understandably, that’s taking place in and around Kursk, in the Kursk Oblast. I’d let the Ukrainians speak to their use of ATACMS and their targeting procedures and what they’re using them for and how well they’re doing. But nothing has changed about the – well, obviously we did change the guidance and gave them guidance that they could use them, you know, to strike these particular types of targets.
Biden’s war escalation ladder
At this point, in light of the grim statistics about a completely avoidable war killing and maiming young men and women, Americans are entitled to the truth, not to a rehash of tired legalisms about Ukraine’s right to defend itself.
On November 25, Judge Andrew Napolitano cited 27-year veteran former CIA analyst Ray McGovern, a frequent guest on Napolitano’s “Judging Freedom” podcast, as confirming that Biden made the decision to let Ukraine use the ATACMS missiles without any input from his Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, which is highly unusual.
Biden and weakening Russia
Previously, Austin admitted on April 25, 2022 that the point of the war is “to see Russia weakened,” and Zelensky told The Economist on March 27, 2022, that “there are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives.” As Leonid Ragozin wrote in May 2024:
The West has crossed many red lines and is willing to try even more, but it is impossible to predict how the close-knit group of criminally inclined individuals which rules Russia will act if their country begins losing. It has always been a tough proposition to play chess with a guy who is holding a hand grenade. And it makes no sense, as Biden’s predecessors knew very well during the Cold War.
Biden initiated direct but “lower level” hostilities with Russia on November 19, and Biden ally, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, followed suit with similar hostile bombardments of Russia on November 20, partially fulfilling the goal of British and American war hawks attempting to push Russia into larger hostilities under Biden’s lead, or that of his “handlers,” to turn the second cold war with Russia – the aspirations of Washington and London’s armchair generals – into a conflict more likely in their minds of bringing Putin into a more contentious and uncontrollable situation that would relieve Putin of power.
This article is reprinted with permission from the Family Research Council, publishers of The Washington Stand at washingtonstand.com.
-
Alberta1 day ago
Proposed $70 billion AI data centre in MD of Greenview could launch an incredible new chapter for western Canadian energy
-
Brownstone Institute8 hours ago
A Potpourri of the World’s Unexposed Scandals
-
Alberta1 day ago
Your towing rights! AMA unveils measures to help fight predatory towing
-
Economy6 hours ago
The White Pill: Big Government Can Be Defeated (Just Ask the Soviet Union)
-
conflict5 hours ago
Trump has started negotiations to end the war in Ukraine
-
COVID-194 hours ago
Esteemed UK Doctor pleads with governments to cancel COVID-19 vaccines
-
Business3 hours ago
The CBC gets $1.4 billion per year, but the Trudeau government wants to give it more
-
COVID-199 hours ago
Biden HHS extends immunity for COVID shot manufacturers through 2029