👹 Azerbaijani President
Ilham Aliyev's security guards assaulted protesters on Pennsylvania
Avenue in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, February 19
👹 The Aliyevs took part
in the conference, held from 13–15 February.
Azerbaijani Vice President
Mehriban Aliyeva, wife of President Ilham Aliyev, has insulted
journalist Emin Huseynov at the Munich Security Conference. Huseynov
claims that Aliyev’s security detail has also prevented him from
asking the president questions during the conference.
On 14 February, Huseynov, who
lives in exile in Switzerland, tried several times to ask Aliyev a
number of questions outside the conference hall. The Azerbaijani
president answered questions from pro-government journalists, but
ignored him.
Huseynov claims that Aliyev’s
security detail appeared to recognise him, and did not allow him to
remain with other journalists. He was forcibly pushed back several
times, but still tried to ask Aliyev about his crackdown on political
opponents in Azerbaijan. Huseynov also asked Aliyev to answer
questions from independent media.
In the video, Aliyev is seen
turning to Huseynov and saying: ‘there is no independent media in
the world’.
Huseynov claimed that Aliyev’s
bodyguards did not allow him to leave until the president’s
departure.
Huseynov shared a separate video
on 15 February showing his interaction with Aliyeva as she was
leaving the conference hall. In the video, Huseynov asks Aliyeva
about the political situation in Azerbaijan. She stops, and asks
Huseynov to identify himself. After he does, she insults Huseynov,
saying that he had hid in the Swiss Embassy in Baku dressed as a
woman.
❖ "Do not have Jesus
Christ on your lips, and the world in your heart" Saint Ignatius
of Antioch
👉 Courtesy:Zerohedge.com,
by Tyler Durden, Thursday, Dec 25, 2025
Authored by John & Nisha
Whitehead via The Rurtherford Institute,
“When the song of the angels
is stilled, when the star in the sky is gone, when the kings and
princes are home, when the shepherds are back with their flocks, the
work of Christmas begins: to find the lost, to heal the broken, to
feed the hungry, to release the prisoner, to rebuild the nations, to
bring peace among the people, to make music in the heart.”—Howard
Thurman, theologian and civil rights activist
Every Christmas, Christians
celebrate the birth of a child born into oppression—an occupied
land, a climate of political fear, and a government quick to crush
anything that threatened its authority.
Two thousand years later, the
parallels are unmistakable.
If Jesus were born in modern
America, under a government obsessed with surveillance, crackdowns on
undocumented immigrants, religious nationalism, and absolute
obedience to a head-of-state rather than the rule of law, would he
survive long enough to preach about love, forgiveness and salvation?
Would his message of peace, mercy, and resistance to empire be
branded as extremism?
As familiar as the Christmas
story of the baby born in a manger might be, it is also a cautionary
tale for our age.
The Roman Empire, a police state
in its own right, had ordered that a census be conducted. Joseph and
his pregnant wife Mary traveled to the little town of Bethlehem so
that they could be counted. There being no room for the couple at any
of the inns, they stayed in a stable (a barn), where Mary gave birth
to a baby boy, Jesus. Warned that the government planned to kill the
baby, Jesus’ family fled with him to Egypt until it was safe to
return to their native land.
Yet what if Jesus had been born
2,000 years later?
What if, instead of being born
into the Roman police state, Jesus had been born at this moment in
time? What kind of reception would Jesus and his family be given?
Would we recognize the Christ child’s humanity, let alone his
divinity? Would we treat him any differently than he was treated by
the Roman Empire? If his family were forced to flee violence in their
native country and sought refuge and asylum within our borders, what
sanctuary would we offer them?
A singular number of churches
across the country have asked those very questions in recent years,
and their conclusions were depicted with unnerving accuracy by
nativity scenes in which Jesus and his family are separated,
segregated and caged in individual chain-link pens, topped by barbed
wire fencing.
Those nativity scenes were a
pointed attempt to remind the modern world that the narrative about
the birth of Jesus is one that speaks on multiple fronts to a world
that has allowed the life, teachings and crucifixion of Jesus to be
drowned out by partisan politics, secularism, materialism and war,
all driven by a manipulative shadow government called the Deep State.
The modern-day church has
largely shied away from applying Jesus’ teachings to modern
problems such as war, poverty, immigration, etc., but thankfully
there have been individuals throughout history who ask themselves and
the world: what would Jesus do?
What would Jesus—the baby born
in Bethlehem who grew into an itinerant preacher and revolutionary
activist, who not only died challenging the police state of his day
(namely, the Roman Empire) but spent his adult life speaking truth to
power, challenging the status quo of his day, and pushing back
against the abuses of the Roman Empire—do about the injustices of
our modern age?
Dietrich Bonhoeffer asked
himself what Jesus would have done about the horrors perpetrated by
Hitler and his assassins. The answer: Bonhoeffer was executed by
Hitler for attempting to undermine the tyranny at the heart of Nazi
Germany.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn asked
himself what Jesus would have done about the soul-destroying gulags
and labor camps of the Soviet Union. The answer: Solzhenitsyn found
his voice and used it to speak out about government oppression and
brutality.
Martin Luther King Jr. asked
himself what Jesus would have done about America’s warmongering.
The answer: declaring “my conscience leaves me no other choice,”
King risked widespread condemnation as well as his life when he
publicly opposed the Vietnam War on moral and economic grounds.
Their lives make clear that the
question “What would Jesus do?” is never abstract. It is always
political, always dangerous, and always costly.
Even now, there remains a
disconnect in the modern church between the teachings of Christ and
the suffering of what Jesus in Matthew 25 refers to as the “least
of these.”
Yet this is not a theological
gray area: Jesus was unequivocal about his views on many things, not
the least of which was charity, compassion, war, tyranny and love.
After all, Jesus—the revered
preacher, teacher, radical and prophet—was born into a police state
not unlike the growing menace of the American police state.
Jesus was not born into comfort
or security. He was born poor, without shelter, in an occupied land
ruled by force and fear, under the watchful eye of a government
obsessed with control, compliance, and the elimination of perceived
threats. His parents were politically powerless. His birthplace was
makeshift. His earliest days were shaped by fear of state violence.
Herod’s response to the news
of the Messiah’s birth was not humility or reflection, but
paranoia. Threatened by the mere possibility of a rival authority,
Herod turned to brute force. The lesson is timeless: this is how
tyranny operates. Unchecked power, when gripped by insecurity, will
always seek to eliminate dissent rather than allow its own corruption
to be confronted.
Modern governments, including
our own, cloaked in the language of security and “law and order,”
behave no differently. Any challenge to centralized power is treated
as a threat to be neutralized. In such an environment, speaking truth
to power is dangerous. Challenging imperial authority invites
retaliation.
From the moment of his birth,
Jesus represented a threat—not because he wielded violence or
political power, but because his life and message exposed the moral
bankruptcy of empire and offered an alternative rooted in justice,
mercy, and truth.
When Jesus grew up, he had
powerful, profound things to say—things that would change how we
view people, things that challenged everything empire stood for.
“Blessed are the merciful,” “Blessed are the peacemakers,”
and “Love your enemies” are just a few examples of his most
profound and revolutionary teachings.
When confronted by those in
authority, Jesus did not shy away from speaking truth to power.
Indeed, his teachings undermined the political and religious
establishment of his day. It cost him his life. He was eventually
crucified as a warning to others not to challenge the powers-that-be.
Can you imagine what Jesus’
life would have been like if, instead of being born into the Roman
police state, he had been born and raised in the American police
state?
Consider the following if you
will.
Had Jesus been born in the era
of the American police state, his parents would not have traveled to
Bethlehem for a census. Instead, they would have been entered into a
vast web of government databases—flagged, categorized, scored, and
assessed by algorithms they could neither see nor challenge. What
passes for a census today is no longer a simple headcount, but rather
part of a data-harvesting regime that feeds artificial intelligence
systems, predictive policing programs, immigration enforcement, and
national security watchlists.
Instead of being born in a
manger, Jesus might have been born at home. Rather than wise men and
shepherds bringing gifts, however, the baby’s parents might have
been forced to ward off visits from state social workers intent on
prosecuting them for the home birth.
Had Jesus been born in a
hospital, his blood and DNA would have been taken without his
parents’ knowledge or consent and entered into a government
biobank. While most states require newborn screening, a growing
number are holding onto that genetic material long-term for research,
analysis and purposes yet to be disclosed.
Had Jesus’ parents been
undocumented immigrants, they and their newborn child might have been
swept up in an early-morning ICE raid, detained without meaningful
due process, processed through a profit-driven, private prison, and
deported in the dead of night to a detention camp in a third-world
country.
From the time he was old enough
to attend school, Jesus would have been drilled in lessons of
compliance and obedience to government authorities, while learning
little—if anything—about his own rights. Had he been daring
enough to speak out against injustice while still in school, he might
have found himself tasered or beaten by a school resource officer, or
at the very least suspended under a school zero tolerance policy that
punishes minor infractions as harshly as more serious offenses.
Had Jesus disappeared for a few
hours let alone days as a 12-year-old, his parents would have been
handcuffed, arrested and jailed for parental negligence. Parents
across the country have been arrested for far less “offenses”
such as allowing their children to walk to the park unaccompanied and
play in their front yard alone.
Rather than disappearing from
the history books from his early teenaged years to adulthood, Jesus’
movements and personal data—including his biometrics—would have
been documented, tracked, monitored and filed by governmental
agencies and corporations such as Google and Microsoft. Incredibly,
95 percent of school districts share their student records with
outside companies that are contracted to manage data, which they then
use to market products to us.
From the moment Jesus made
contact with an “extremist” such as John the Baptist, he would
have been flagged for surveillance because of his association with a
prominent activist, peaceful or otherwise. Since 9/11, the FBI has
actively carried out surveillance and intelligence-gathering
operations on a broad range of activist groups, from animal rights
groups to poverty relief, anti-war groups and other such “extremist”
organizations.
Jesus’ anti-government views
would certainly have resulted in him being labeled a domestic
extremist. Law enforcement agencies are being trained to recognize
signs of anti-government extremism during interactions with potential
extremists who share a “belief in the approaching collapse of
government and the economy.”
While traveling from community
to community, Jesus might have been reported to government officials
as “suspicious” under the Department of Homeland Security’s
“See Something, Say Something” programs. Many states are
providing individuals with phone apps that allow them to take photos
of suspicious activity and report them to their state Intelligence
Center, where they are reviewed and forwarded to law-enforcement
agencies.
Rather than being permitted to
live as an itinerant preacher, Jesus might have found himself
threatened with arrest for daring to live off the grid or sleeping
outside. In fact, the number of cities that have resorted to
criminalizing homelessness by enacting bans on camping, sleeping in
vehicles, loitering and begging in public has doubled.
Jesus’ teachings—his refusal
to pledge allegiance to empire, his warnings about wealth and power,
his insistence that obedience to God sometimes requires resistance to
unjust authority—would almost certainly be interpreted today as
signs of ideological extremism. In an age when dissent is
increasingly framed as a threat to public order, Jesus would not need
to commit violence to be labeled dangerous. His words alone would
suffice.
Viewed by the government as a
dissident and a potential threat to its power, Jesus might have had
government spies planted among his followers to monitor his
activities, report on his movements, and entrap him into breaking the
law. Such Judases today—called informants—often receive hefty
paychecks from the government for their treachery.
Had Jesus used the internet to
spread his radical message of peace and love, he might have found his
blog posts infiltrated by government spies attempting to undermine
his integrity, discredit him or plant incriminating information
online about him. At the very least, he would have had his website
hacked and his email monitored.
Had Jesus attempted to feed
large crowds of people, he would have been threatened with arrest for
violating various ordinances prohibiting the distribution of food
without a permit.
Had Jesus spoken publicly about
his forty days in the wilderness, his visions, or his confrontations
with evil, he might have been labeled mentally ill and subjected to
an involuntary psychiatric hold—detained not for what he had done,
but for what authorities feared he might do. Increasingly,
expressions of distress, spiritual conviction, or nonconformity are
pathologized and treated as grounds for confinement, especially when
paired with homelessness or poverty.
Without a doubt, had Jesus
attempted to overturn tables in a Jewish temple and rage against the
materialism of religious institutions, he would have been charged
with a hate crime. More than 45 states and the federal government
have hate crime laws on the books.
Had anyone reported Jesus to the
police as being potentially dangerous, he might have found himself
confronted—and killed—by police officers for whom any perceived
act of non-compliance (a twitch, a question, a frown) can result in
them shooting first and asking questions later.
Rather than having armed guards
capture Jesus in a public place, government officials would have
ordered that a SWAT team carry out a raid on Jesus and his followers,
complete with flash-bang grenades and military equipment. There are
upwards of 80,000 such SWAT team raids carried out every year, many
on unsuspecting Americans who have no defense against such government
invaders, even when such raids are done in error.
Instead of being detained by
Roman guards, Jesus might have been made to “disappear” into a
secret government detention center where he would have been
interrogated, tortured and subjected to all manner of abuses. Chicago
police have “disappeared” more than 7,000 people into a secret,
off-the-books interrogation warehouse at Homan Square.
Charged with treason and labeled
a domestic terrorist, Jesus might have been sentenced to a life-term
in a private prison where he would have been forced to provide slave
labor for corporations or put to death by way of the electric chair
or a lethal mixture of drugs.
Indeed, whether Jesus had been
born in his own time or in ours, the outcome would likely be the
same. A government that demands obedience over conscience, order over
mercy, and power over truth will always view a figure like Jesus as a
threat.
The uncomfortable truth is that
a nation willing to surveil, detain, and silence Jesus today is a
nation far removed from the Gospel it claims to honor.
Christmas, then, is not merely a
celebration of the Christ child’s birth. It is a recognition of all
that follows it: what happened in that manger on that starry night in
Bethlehem is only the beginning of the story. That baby born in a
police state grew up to be a man who did not turn away from the evils
of his age but rather spoke out against it.
That contradiction forces a
reckoning.
The work of peace, justice, and
compassion does not begin in the manger and end with a holiday, but
demands courage long after the carols fade.
This reality stands in stark
contrast to the brand of Christianity increasingly embraced and
promoted by the government and its enforcers. A faith fused with
nationalism, militarism, and obedience to authority bears little
resemblance to the teachings of Christ.
What makes this moment
especially dangerous is that this distortion of Christianity is no
longer marginal—it is increasingly mainstream.
In too many cases, the modern
church has not merely failed to challenge the machinery of empire—it
has baptized it. When religious leaders bless endless wars, celebrate
militarism, and portray violence as divinely sanctioned, they invert
the Gospel itself.
Yet Jesus did not preach
dominance, conquest, or submission to empire. He stood with the poor,
the imprisoned, and the outcast—and he paid for it with his life.
As I make clear in my book
Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its
fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, we must decide, once
again, whether we will march in lockstep with the machinery of a
military empire—or with the child born under its shadow who dared
to resist it.
😈 89 % of Arab
Muslims in The Middle East and North Africa Believe in Magic,
Sorcery, and Witchcraft
The The data of the PEW
Research Center survey verify the wide-spread idea in the folk
culture of the Arab World about the Maghreb as a place filled by
jinn, magic, and sorcerers - as Tunisia and Morocco are on the top of
the list.
The victim’s father said
she refused her husband’s repeated ritual demands
A 29-year-old
Tunisian woman was left permanently blind after her husband gouged
out both of her eyes, allegedly acting under instructions from a
self-proclaimed sorcerer who demanded a “sacrifice” to lift a
supposed ancient curse.
The assault
took place in the town of Sbikha, in the Kairouan governorate of
central Tunisia, and has sparked widespread outrage across the
country.
👹 The
following nations are 100% Ruled by Satan and Its 'Human' Agents
☆ France
☆ Britain
☆ Italy
☆ Switzerland
☆ Australia
+ New Zealand
☆ China
☆ India
☆ South
Africa
☆ Kenya
☆ Nigeria
☆ Ghana
☆ Haiti
☆ Argentina
☆ Brazil
☆ All
57 Islamic Countries
Many others are
on their way to be fully controlled by Satan.
😈 Demonic Looking Tunisian President Calls For Black
people to Be Hunted Down
