Radio Lux Lucet 118

You're listening to Radio Looks Lucid. I'm your host Steve Matthews. Thanks for joining me for episode 118. The title of this episode is

One Man Against APAC. Well, thanks for joining me here late night. It's about 11 .45

p .m. on Saturday, June 8th. It's already a week into June.

Hard to believe. You know, it's kind of funny. I get into June, and I mean,

June's a beautiful month. I love the month of June. But there's one thing I don't like about June. Well, other than the fact that it's that Pride Month thing, but no, this has nothing to do with that.

This actually has to do with, I don't like the fact that the summer solstice is in June, because what happens in the solstice is that's the longest day of the year.

That's June 21st, right? Well, anyway, when you get past June 21st, that's the longest day of the year.

Well, the days start getting shorter up until December 21st. I don't like it when the days get shorter.

I don't like that. I love the light this time of year. I always enjoy that. And yeah, even

I've been leading a men's Bible study at church.

We meet at the ridiculously early hours, 6 .30 in the morning on Fridays. And I have to get up early, because I have to get there and open things up and get everything ready, because I get up about 4 .30

in the morning on Fridays. And it starts getting light. I don't know if it's getting light at 4 .30.

Maybe that's not—maybe somewhere around 5 or so. But I mean, by the time I get to the church and all that, it's already light.

I mean, it's substantially light this time of year.

And I always do love the long days that we get here at the peak of the—as we get into the season of the summer solstice.

So yeah, I always look forward to that. And I always kind of dread it when we get to around December 21st, because then it's, the sun goes down here where I am around about 5 .15

or so. So it's pretty much sundown. By the time work gets off, it's pretty much sundown that time of year.

But not this time of year. Yeah, this time of year, it's nice and bright. And I like that a lot. Had a chance to go do some bike riding today.

Got out on the trail. Got out early today. Actually did that. I got up at a fairly recent—well,

I didn't get up super early, but I got out early and did about 20—about 22 miles or so out at one of the local trails.

And I got some good exercise. It was a beautiful day to ride. It was right around 70 degrees or so when

I was out. And there wasn't a lot of wind. You know, wind can really affect you when you're out there on a bike. I mean, sometimes you get out and if you got that—the wind at your back, of course, is great.

You feel like you're just boom. You can feel like you can fly. You get the wind in your face, on the other hand, it feels like you're going uphill the whole way.

It can really slow you down. But there wasn't any wind. It was pretty much neutral today. Anyway.

So let's see. What do we got? I've got a show here. I'm trying something a little bit different here today. I haven't actually done a lot of reading through any of the articles

I'm going to go over. And we're just going to kind of read through them with you here and see how that goes.

So why don't we dive into that? And I wanted to start off—the title of this episode was

One Man Against AIPAC. So you might be thinking, well, what on earth is AIPAC? When I say AIPAC, it's

A -I -P -A -C. I guess that's an acronym. It stands for the

American -Israel Public Affairs Committee. And AIPAC is—sometimes you hear people talk about the

Israel lobby. There was a book written a few years ago by a couple of political scientists called The Israel Lobby. Well, the

Israel lobby is comprised of a lot of different organizations. But if you wanted to pick out one organization that is central to the

Israel lobby, I guess you'd have to say it's AIPAC. They are kind of the 500 -pound gorilla of the

Israel lobby. And they're very influential. If you're on X, I mean, they constantly post on X about all the interference that they engage in.

In American politics. And there was an interview done this past week with—Tucker

Carlson did with Thomas Massey. Thomas Massey is the—he's a Republican representative from Northern Kentucky.

I've talked about him some before. He's—I guess you might call him my favorite congressman. And he's kind of like Ron Paul 2 .0

in a lot of ways. I think he's very much taken up the mantle of Ron Paul in the

House of Representatives. And one of the things that he has become known for is—he calls himself a libertarian -leaning congressman.

And as part of that, he refuses to vote for foreign aid.

Any foreign aid to any country. And this includes Israel. And this just drives the Israel lobby nuts.

It drives AIPAC nuts. And they have run all kinds of ads against him. A couple weeks ago, he had his primary, and they were running all these attack ads against him.

They spent quite a bit of money, about $400 ,000 running attack ads against him. And he won.

Not only did he win his primary, he had two opponents in the primary, but he won 76 % of the vote.

So, I mean, he just blew the competition away, despite all of the money that AIPAC threw at him.

And he sat down with Tucker Carlson this last week. And it was an interesting interview. It was about a two -hour interview.

But I'd like to play a little bit of this for you. Hopefully, this will work and come through on the audio.

We'll give it a shot here. I probably should have tried this first. But let me just try to play this. And this is maybe the part of the interview that's gotten the most focus.

And this is where Thomas Massie is talking about the fact that every member of Congress, or at least every member of the

Republican delegation apart from himself, has what he calls an AIPAC babysitter. It's somebody that is constantly pushing the

AIPAC, the Israel lobby's desires on Congress.

It's a very eye -opening interview. But I'm just going to play a snippet of this, maybe about a minute or so. And hopefully, this works.

So let's give it a whirl here. It's like your babysitter, your AIPAC babysitter, who is always talking to you for AIPAC.

They're probably a constituent in your district, but they are firmly embedded in AIPAC.

Every member has something like this? I don't know how it works on the Democrat side, but that's how it works on the

Republican side. And when they come to D .C., you go have lunch with them. And they've got your cell number.

And you have conversations with them. So I've had like - That's absolutely crazy.

I've had four members of Congress say, I'll talk to my AIPAC person. And it's really what we call them, my

AIPAC guy. I'll talk to my AIPAC guy and see if I can get him to dial those ads back.

Why have I never heard this before? It doesn't benefit anybody. Why would they want to tell their constituents that they've basically got a buddy system with somebody who's representing a foreign country?

It doesn't benefit the congressman for people to know that. So they're not going to tell you that. Have you seen any other country do anything like this?

Russia. Russia obviously determines the outcome of our elections. We keep hearing that. Does anyone have a

Putin guy that they talk to? Not only do they not have a Putin guy, they don't have a

Britain guy. They don't have an Australian guy. They don't have a Germany dude.

It's the only country that does this, that has somebody that uniformly -

I guarantee you there's some spreadsheet at AIPAC where the

AIPAC dude who's matched up with the congressman is there, and then all the congressman's votes on the issue.

Oh, has the congressman been to Israel? They pay for trips for congressmen and their spouses to go to Israel.

I may be - I'm not the only Republican who hasn't taken the AIPAC trip to Israel, but I'm probably one of a dozen that hasn't taken that trip, and the other ones just haven't got around to it.

What's the trip like, Gene? So there you go. There's Thomas Massey talking about the

AIPAC babysitters. And I think that's pretty interesting stuff.

And it helps you understand why you have the kind of obsession with Israel among our congress.

And I got to thinking about some of this, and I thought this was very interesting. There's much more to the conversation, by the way, than that.

They actually probably talked about AIPAC for a good - oh goodness, I'd say at least 20 minutes, maybe longer than that.

It's very interesting stuff. But there was a - and it got me to thinking about an article that I came across a number of years ago.

This was actually published on lewrockwell .com, and it was an interview.

This is - it's not an audio interview, but it was an article, I guess you could say, that quoted from an interview.

It was an interview done with Noam Chomsky. And now you may be wondering, well, why is

Steve quoting Noam Chomsky? Noam Chomsky's some kind of socialist liberal, what have you. Well, yeah, I mean, he is. He's a liberal guy.

He's a liberal, no question about it. He rose to fame. That's been a - he's very elderly right now.

He probably rose to public fame, I'd say maybe in the late 50s, early 60s, as a linguist.

He taught linguistics at MIT for a long time. And he's still a pretty well -known public intellectual, even though I - goodness, he may be 90.

He's not a young man at all. Maybe in his 80s, 90, something like that. I know he's been around a while.

He's been a very public - very famous public intellectual for a long time as well. And one of the things - yeah, it looks like maybe

I'm overdriving my audio here just a little bit. I think I'm going to pad this down. So hopefully I didn't blow everybody's ears out, or I don't have a lot of distortion in this.

That didn't - it looked like it was kind of peeking out there a little bit more than I wanted it to. But anyway, yeah,

Chomsky's been around for a long time. Yeah, he's a liberal. So he's somebody that probably you or I may not have a lot of agreement with.

There's probably a lot of things we would disagree with him on. But I thought he had a very interesting comment about election interference.

And this is something that he - I'll just read a little bit from the article. And this is - again, this is an article from 2019.

And the article - I'll just start reading. This is the - this is not Chomsky speaking.

This is the author of the article speaking. So, quote, he - this is talking about Chomsky - explained in an interview with Democracy Now that the media's focus on Russian collusion with regards to the 2016

U .S. election was a joke. He did not confirm or deny his belief on whether or not it even happened, but rather explained.

And this is the part that quotes Chomsky himself. So I'm going to quote Chomsky. Quote, first of all, if you're interested in foreign interference in our elections, whatever the

Russians may have done barely counts or weighs in the balances compared with what another state does openly, brazenly, and with enormous support.

Israeli intervention in U .S. elections vastly overwhelms anything the Russians may have done. I mean, even to the point where the prime minister of Israel, Netanyahu, goes directly to Congress without even informing the president and speaks to Congress with overwhelming applause to try to undermine the president's policies.

What happened with Obama and Netanyahu in 2015? End quote. So that's what

Chomsky had to say about Israel. And I think this interview with Thomas Massey by Tucker Carlson really proves that out.

You know, there's some information that came out from Massey that I certainly didn't know before. And I think probably most people that follow the

Israel lobby don't know. And that is the idea that you have, if you're in Congress, you got an

AIPAC guy, you got an AIPAC babysitter, to use what Massey said. Very interesting.

Very interesting revelation indeed from that interview. Now, let's see, there was something

I wanted to show you. Oh, oh, I know what it was. I actually got blocked. I actually got blocked.

I want to show this to you. I got blocked by, I guess I'm a very bad person,

I suppose. And I got blocked by Christians United for Israel.

You notice here, this is me, this is my ex -account, and it says, You're blocked. You can't follow or see

Kufi, Christians United for Israel's posts. So I was a very bad person in their eyes.

And I want to show you, let's see, hopefully I can find the offending tweet here.

Now, you might be thinking, oh, you're on there reviling people or saying all kinds of outrageous things or something like that.

Actually, no, not at all. I made a very,

I just actually made a theological point. And let me see if I can,

I thought I had this pulled up and apparently I didn't. So let's see if I can scroll back through my tweets here.

There's a tweet of a Jesuit advocating that we celebrate Pride Month. Christians should do this, says the

Jesuit. Yeah, okay. Yeah, that's great. But that's kind of an interesting tweet there, but that's not what

I'm focused on here. So let's see if I know this is in here somewhere. It's just like, you know, if you make tweets, you know, the, or posts,

I know they're called posts now, they're not tweets. I keep forgetting that. But when you make posts, there's a place you can go back and view all of your old posts.

But, ah, here we go. In fact, you know what I'm going to do? I thought that I did this, but I'm going to just make sure that I did this.

I'm going to go ahead and take a screenshot of that post. All right, there we go.

And let's see here, tag that thing.

I use this program, it's called Evernote, and it's where I, it's actually really good to let you clip all kinds of stuff off the web, like stories and that kind of thing.

I don't think I could do this podcast if I didn't have Evernote. I'd be, be, be in a bad way there.

Okay, so there we go. We just clipped that thing. And all right, here we go.

So, well, that's not what

I wanted it to do. This thing took me someplace I didn't want it to go.

Well, let me try this again one more time. I'm sorry to be taking up so much of your time, but, you know, you got to learn how to improvise a little bit when you do these, these live streams.

Did I tell you I'm doing a live stream? And I'm just kind of, I feel like I'm faking my way through it. I apologize for that.

Let's see here. I'm getting close, getting close, getting close, getting close.

Let's see. Yeah, okay, here we go.

Here we go. I'm going to show you the tweet that got me booted by Christians United for Israel.

And we're going to do this, this, and here we go. Okay, so Christians United for Israel.

This was back on May 19th. And they put out this post and it says,

Christian antisemitism is an oxymoron. Christians cannot hate that which God loves. And God loves all his children, not the least of which are the

Jewish people, who are called the apple of his eye, Proverbs 7, 2. And I replied to that and I said,

God's people are those who have faith in Jesus Christ, not ethnic Jews. And that is in fact true.

That is, that is what the New Testament teaches. It teaches that those, we become children of God, you know, not by the will of man, not by the flesh, but by God.

It teaches those who are Jews are Jews who are ones inwardly, whose circumcision is of the heart, not of the flesh.

Being a physical descendant of Abraham does not make you a child of God. It's faith in Jesus Christ that makes you a child of God.

Well, I put that out there on Christians United for Israel's X feed, and I got promptly blocked by them.

So they don't want to hear that. And, you know, of course, now, you know, here's the thing. Do they have a right to block me?

Well, of course they do. I believe in free speech. And if Christians United for Israel doesn't want to hear what the

Bible has to say about how people become children of God, well, then they can plug their ears and stamp their feet and say,

I can't hear you. You know, they're welcome to do that. But it's pretty lame. It's pretty weak.

I mean, I actually go, and I'll say this to APAC's credit. I go out on the APAC X feed quite a bit and disagree with them quite a bit, and they haven't blocked me.

And I go out on the U .S. Conference of Catholic Bishops website, and I like to troll the

U .S. Conference of Catholic Bishops for all their nonsense that they put out, in particular about immigration.

I've never been blocked by the U .S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. But you put one post out there on Christians United for Israel that they disagree with, you're blocked.

You're out of here, man. So I mean, you know, the Israel lobby and the Roman Catholic U .S.

Conference of Catholic Bishops, they're at least a little more tolerant of divergent views than Christians United for Israel.

When it comes to that lobby, you better toe the line or you are history. So anyway,

I thought that was kind of interesting how they reacted to that tweet. I have to say

I'm not terribly surprised, or particularly crushed by it, but I think it's more interesting than anything else.

Let's see what else we have here. So that's enough about... Well, I do have one more story about the

Israel lobby. Let's take a look at this. This is an article from Politico, and it's from, let's see,

June 1st. So it's from a week ago. The headline is Netanyahu accepts Congress invitation to speak despite blowback.

Tensions have been mounting in recent weeks after Speaker Mike Johnson announced his plan to invite Netanyahu to address Congress. So yeah,

Congress, they can't wait to bring Bibi Netanyahu to come over here and lecture us and tell us how awesome he is and how we better just get in line and fork it over because we're not so awesome.

But he's awesome, and Israel's awesome, and Americans just better just shut up and do what they're told.

Now, there's a lot of people that seem to think this. I know Nikki Haley does.

Nikki Haley's talked about, you know, we need to send aid to Israel. No questions asked, so you're not allowed to ask a question.

You know, heaven forbid, you know, if you're an American and maybe you have some questions about the way

U .S. money's being used by Israel, you're not allowed to ask a question in her mind. Oh, no. Like I say, your job is just to shut up and fork it over.

You just better get in line, mister. Yeah, it's kind of like Christians United for Israel. Just you better get in line.

You better toe that line. No disagreement allowed here. So anyway, yeah,

Netanyahu, he's supposed to come, I think it should say, I thought I heard that it was toward the end of July, somewhere around there.

I don't think it says here. It just says that he accepted. But my understanding is it's supposed to be sometime toward the end of July. So it's probably about another, oh,

I don't know, maybe six weeks or so before he comes. But we'll definitely cover that when that occurs.

Now, on another front here, I wanted to talk some about the whole immigration thing.

It was very interesting today. I actually listened to a podcast. It was Chris Pinto, and he was talking about, it was his podcast from, let's see,

June the 5th. So it was just a few days ago. And in there, he was talking about, he's got a new film coming out called

American Jesuits. And he goes over the Jesuit influence in the United States and on our politics.

Very similar to what goes on with the Israel lobby. And I've referred to this before.

An article was written a number of years ago by John Robbins back in 2006. So you're going back almost 20 years.

That was 18 years ago. It's called The Religious Wars of the 21st Century. And in that particular, in that article, he talks about the interference in American politics by both

Rome and in Israel. And it's actually a very brilliant piece. It's one of, John Robbins, I mean,

I think his body of work was very high quality. He's the biggest influence, the biggest single influence on my thinking.

And in reading his work, I mean, there's really nothing I do, not a sentence in his podcast, not a sentence, anything that I write in my blog, that isn't at least to some degree or another influenced by his work.

I found it just extremely helpful in clarifying my thinking on a whole wide range of topics.

And in fact, let me, you know, I don't have that pulled up, but I think I can find it. I want to read,

I want to read a particular portion of this here.

And because what he does is he deals with, he deals with, let's see, okay, so here we go.

He's talking about the influence of Rome and in Israel on the

United States politics. Let's see, what does he say here?

He says, the prolific authors, Norman Geisler and R .C. Sproul, and many lesser known Protestant theologians and philosophers as well are disciples of the official philosopher for the

Roman church state, Thomas Aquinas. Their influence has misled most Protestants away from a biblical and reformed view of philosophy and apologetics and into a compromise with Rome.

Medieval Islam, now usually called fundamentalist Islam and medieval Judaism with its establishment, with the establishment of the modern state of Israel in 1948 are on the rise as well.

All three religions, Romanism, Islam, and Judaism are false, militant, and violent.

Devout members of each group hate, oppose, and plot against members of the other two. But today the date is 2006 and not 1006.

And the true believers of each of these medieval religions have access to nuclear, biological, chemical, and electromagnetic weapons.

So there you go. And he continues, there's a lot of really good stuff in here.

But there's one other line I want to read you here. He says, agents of both Israel and Rome are active in the United States, both gathering intelligence and influencing policy.

The U .S. government is manipulated by foreign interests. Both Israel and the Vatican see the

United States as a proxy in this religious war. This is exactly right. These are some brilliant comments from John Robbins.

And I say that because I've read an awful lot of stuff on politics and Israel and even some things about Roman Catholicism and its influence.

But I have never seen a single writer make this point that he does, that you've got three medieval religions, they are medieval, they are violent, they are false.

And he talks about, and the three religions he brings up are Romanism, Islam, and Judaism.

And the fact that you've got, in particular, you've got Israel and the

Vatican attempting to influence American policy. Muslims are trying to do some of that too, although I don't think their influence is nearly so great.

You know, we hear a lot in our country about, you know, the dangers of Islamic influence and Sharia law.

But I'll tell you, I will say this. I think that political Judaism is a much bigger threat to our

Constitution. I mean, there was a law that was passed in the House, hasn't been passed in the

Senate yet, but a law passed in the House that attacks free speech. It's a direct attack on our

First Amendment. And Massey and Tucker Carlson discussed that amendment.

I'm not going to go into it here. I think I've talked about that before. We'll probably talk about it again, but I don't want to get too far off track.

But anyway, you've got this tremendous influence in both Israel and the

Vatican. And you really see that. We've already talked some here today about Israel's influence on our policymakers.

And then you've got the Vatican. You know, this immigration, illegal immigration disaster that we're experiencing from the time the

Biden regime took over, is it's the Vatican's immigration policies being implemented by a

Roman Catholic president with close Jesuit ties, by the way. You know, the Jesuits have been trying to flood

America with Roman Catholics since, at least since the mid -1800s.

And who knows, probably earlier than that. But certainly there's proof that they've had these plans to do this since the early 1850s.

170 years ago or so. But here's a story, and this is from the, let's see, this is the

New York Post. Let's take a look here. So here's a story from the

New York Post. It says, Biden administration offers mass amnesty to migrants as it quietly terminates 350 ,000 asylum cases, sources.

So read through this a bit. It says, while the Biden administration is attempting to look like it's getting tough on the border, behind the scenes it's operating a program of mass amnesty for migrants, the

Post can reveal. That shows that since 2022, more than 350 ,000 asylum cases filed by migrants have been closed by the

US government if the applicants don't have a criminal record or otherwise not deemed a threat to the country.

This means that while migrants are not granted or denied asylum, their cases are terminated without a decision on the merits of their asylum claim.

They're removed from the legal system and no longer required to check with authorities. This move allows them to legally indefinitely roam the

US without fear of deportation, effectively letting them slip through the cracks. And I guess probably vote for Joe Biden in the 2024 presidential election.

I think that's one of the reasons why you have all this interest from the

Democrats in letting these people in, because the plan is to make them all citizens, you know, to sort of wave a hand, say, you know, absolvo te.

I absolve, I absolve thee in Latin and bless them and grant them

American citizenship. And of course, to make sure they vote in election for good old Jesuit Joe Biden.

I very much think that that's, I think that's part of the plan to steal the election.

And I think the Democrats are going to steal the election again this year. And I hate to say that.

I almost, I feel bad about saying that because it sounds really, as they like to say sometimes today, it sounds really black pill.

It sounds really negative. It sounds really defeatist. I don't like being that way. And I don't want to come off that way.

With that said, in listening to Chris Pinto, and I think his views on this are very similar to mine.

And of course, and he's not the only one, or I'm not the only one that takes this line. And here's the logic of it.

If you accept the argument that the 2020 election and even the 2022 election were stolen, what that means is there's a,

I think it's very evident in my opinion, that there is massive corruption at the very highest levels of our government.

And the people that stole the election, the presidential election of 2020, they made that theft stick.

They made it stick. They won that thing. I don't like to say this. The bad guys won. And in order to have elections, in my opinion, that actually matter, that the

American people can trust, the people that did that thievery, they have to be held accountable.

There have to be some people that are prosecuted. Some people need to go to jail for this stuff. And has that happened?

I mean, have you seen that happen over the last going on almost four years now? Well, you put that question to me, the answer is no.

There hasn't been anybody go to jail. There hasn't been anybody that's been punished over any of this.

And as a result, I don't think that there's going, I think you're going to see the same thing happen in 2024 as you did in 2020 and 2022.

They're going to steal the election. And there are different ways that they might do that.

I mean, we can all, there are different people that advance different theories. It may be something that nobody's even thought of.

I mean, a lot of people have talked about the illegal alien voting angle. I've seen some stories that say up to a third of illegal aliens are registered to vote.

I don't know if that's true. I wouldn't be terribly shocked if it's true because they have a lot of these states that are now giving illegal aliens driver's license.

And a lot of those states, they have this thing they call motor voter. So you will go to get your driver's license, you're registered to vote.

You don't think that that's happened? I do. There was one member of Congress, his name's escaping me right now.

I should have prepared this note here tonight. But he even floated the idea.

He says, well, the framers of the constitution really never made it clear whether illegal aliens should vote or not.

He's a Democrat. And he's trying to sort of pave the way for Jamie Raskin.

That's who was saying, yeah, Jamie Raskin was talking about this. And I've got a clip saved somewhere. I don't have it handy.

I'm not gonna look for it. But Jamie Raskin, he's a Democrat, pretty hardcore Democrat from Maryland.

And he was raising questions. Well, you know, the framers of the constitution really didn't say anything about, you know, prohibiting illegal aliens from voting.

Well, you know, I think that's part of the plan. I mean, one of the things with the way the election was stolen last time is it was a multi -pronged affair.

It wasn't just one thing. There were a lot of things that went into it. There were a lot of inputs.

There are a lot of various different ways that that election was stolen. The things that they used to tilt the playing field, in the favor of Joe Biden.

And they're gonna do that again this year. I mean, unless something happens between now and the election time, I don't know how that doesn't happen.

There may be one way that Trump could win.

And that is if he is sufficiently deferential to the establishment.

I think there's a wing of the establishment that would prefer him over Biden. You know, sometimes we talk about the deep state sort of as if it's a monolith.

Well, a lot of people that talk about the deep state will tell you that there are different factions within the deep state.

And I think there may be some that support Trump. You know, Trump has, some commentators have noted, has dropped some of the positions that he had back in 2016.

Like for instance, normalizing relations with Russia. I think more than anything else, that stance, his desire to normalize relations with Russia, I think more than anything else, that got him removed from the presidency.

And so, I mean, it's possible maybe that he has won enough friends over.

Maybe there's a faction that would allow him to get in. But I don't think we have free and fair elections.

I don't believe that. I mean, we'll see what happens.

But in my opinion, I think the most likely scenario is that the Democrats rig either

Joe Biden back in or some other Democrat. You know, there's rumors out there of Hillary Clinton somehow sliding in to the presidency.

And that's possible. Again, you can read various accounts of that in people's arguments.

And I don't know if that's true or not. I don't think it's insane. And I don't dismiss it out of hand.

But we'll see. But what I would say is I don't believe that we will have free and fair elections in 2024.

I don't believe that. But we'll see. We'll see what happens.

So anyway, what was I gonna talk about here? Oh, I was talking about just, yeah, Joe Biden and his mass amnesty.

And the fact that you're going to have, there's a very good chance. I personally believe that that is part of the strategy, to have these illegal aliens cast the votes

Americans won't cast. Now, another immigration -related story.

This was, I think, very interesting. Let me get that here in front of us. Just a moment.

All right, so here's the story here. It's got a headline. This is from Zero Hedge. And it says, Wall Street admits biggest economic shocker.

All jobs in the past year have gone to illegal aliens. Very interesting. Just read through this a bit.

For much of the past year, we have been pounding the table on two very simple facts.

Not only has the US labor market been appallingly weak, with most of the jobs gained in 2023, and meant to signal how strong the

Biden recovery has been, about to be revised away. But more shockingly, all of the job growth in the past few years has gone to illegal aliens.

And they show several charts here. In one, it says, Stunning statistic. There has been zero increase in the jobs for native -born workers in over five years, since July 2018.

And they have this graph, if you're watching the audio part of it. There's this graph, and it shows the number of native -born

Americans who are employed versus the number of foreign workers. And in another chart, they show those foreign workers, those are mostly illegal aliens, they say.

And the American native -born workers, their numbers are flatlined, whereas foreign -born workers,

I mean, it's just going up, up, up, up, up, up, at a very steep angle. Here's another one they say here.

Why have all the new jobs since 2018 gone to foreign -born workers, i .e. immigrants? Because you can be an illegal immigrant in deportation proceedings, not to mention anyone seeking asylum, and get authorization to work in the

U .S. for up to five years, no questions asked. I didn't know that. So if you can be, I guess if you're in the process of getting deported, and you can go find a job, well,

I guess you can get an authorization to work in the U .S. and find a way to hang around.

Here's a third set of graphs here from Zero Hedge. It says, Prices have never been higher and are starting to accelerate to the upside again.

All the jobs created in the past year have been part -time. So, you know, they're constantly, you know,

Biden's constantly going around boasting about all these jobs that he's supposedly created. Well, they're part -time jobs. And then they continue with a third point.

There's been zero job growth for native -born Americans since 2018. So six years of no growth for native -born

American workers. All jobs have gone to immigrants, mostly illegals. In fact, let me expand this here.

There's been zero job growth for native -born Americans since 2018. All jobs have gone to immigrants, mostly illegal immigrants.

Real wages have not only been negative for most of Biden's presidency, they just turned negative again. You know, yeah, if you have a job, you may have noticed that all of a sudden your paycheck isn't going as far as it used to.

I mean, I know that I've experienced that and I think a lot of people have. And you keep getting squeezed more and more and more as prices continue to rise and as the government and the

Federal Reserve continue to devalue the dollar through their policies. And then part of the problem is, of course, as they import more and more labor, that drives the price of labor down because the more of something that you have, the less value it tends to have.

You make it less valuable. So if you've got this huge surge of labor coming into the U .S.

market, well, it's gonna tend to drive down the price of labor. That is the wages that working people earn.

Here's another story on immigration. This is interesting. This is from the U .S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that they constantly put out these propaganda pieces.

And this particular one, it's titled, Approach to U .S.-Mexico Border Reflects a Crisis of Conscience, says

Bishop Seitz. Well, Bishop Seitz, that's Bishop Mark Seitz. He's the Bishop of El Paso, Texas.

And he's also the chairman of the U .S. CCB's immigration committee.

This is just from June 4th. One of the things that's interesting, I follow the U .S. Conference of Catholic Bishops pronouncements on immigration for,

I'd say, I don't know, has it been close to 10 years? Now, it's been a long time, I know this. And I could actually go write one of these things for them,

I think, because basically what you have to do is you have to start out crying about some supposedly horrible thing the federal government is doing, and then talk about protecting the most vulnerable among us, and then try to deflect by saying, well, yeah, but nations do have a right to control their borders.

They put out that red herring to make people think that they actually believe that, which they don't. That's a huge lie.

And remember, you're dealing with Antichrist here. Antichrist, the father of Antichrist, it's the devil.

If you wonder why the Roman Catholic Church is so evil, that's why. It's the Antichrist, it's the little horn of Daniel, it's the beast of Revelation 13.

That's what you're dealing with here in the Roman Catholic Church. You're dealing with Antichrist, Satan's masterpiece.

I think John Robbins called it that, Satan's masterpiece. And he was certainly right about that. Let's read a little bit of what

Bishop Seitz has to say here. Quote, we are deeply disturbed by this disregard for fundamental humanitarian protections in U .S.

asylum laws, said Bishop Mark J. Seitz of El Paso today after President Biden issued an approximation restricting access to asylum at the

U .S.-Mexico border. Oh my goodness, this is just the end of the world. And let's see,

Seitz goes on and cries, there is a crisis of conscience at the U .S.-Mexico border. Well, yes, there is.

You know, his policies that Seitz is pursuing is destroying the United States of America.

I would hope that that would bother his conscience, although it probably doesn't bother his conscience. In fact, I'm sure he's cheerleading this thing, just like his predecessors before him in the

Roman Catholic Church, they love doing this. And it's not just in the United States. I mean, Rome is working to destroy all the nations of the

West through this massive flood of welfare migration.

That's what's going on. Let's see here. And so he continues, the crisis of conscience when the vulnerable family seeking safety and means for a dignified life are labeled invaders or illegals.

Well, they are invaders and they are illegals. Terms amass their humanity. No, it doesn't amass their humanity.

It simply is calling them what they are. And this is what they are doing. It's just like when you call somebody who steals a thief.

You call somebody who lies a liar. You call somebody who murders a murderer. And you call people who violate our immigration laws.

Yes, they are illegals and they are invaders. They are invading the United States of America at the behest of the

Antichrist Roman Catholic Church state. That's what's going on. They are carrying out the

Vatican's immigration policy. This sentiment in no way violates a country's right and responsibility to maintain its borders and regulate immigration to the furtherance of the common good.

Well, again, this is one of these throwaway lines where Rome tries to talk out of both sides of his mouth.

Well, I have never once, ever, you know, and I have read, certainly, like I say, it's been close to 10 years.

Never once have I ever seen any press release from the Roman Catholic Church state from Antichrist ever in support anything that was good for the

American people when it comes to immigration. When it comes to immigration, the Roman Catholic Church's stance is shut up and fork it over.

It's just kind of like what the Israel lobby is. You know, the Israel lobby wants you to shut up and fork over all your money to Israel so they can, you know, go bomb people and, you know, supply medical benefits to their citizens and this type of thing.

And you're just supposed to shut up and do it because God said so. Well, I mean, it's the same thing with the Roman Catholic Church.

You know, you're just supposed to shut up and pay the freight, you know, the billions of dollars, hundreds of billions of dollars.

If you're an American taxpayer, it totals into hundreds of billions of dollars just in the taxpayer funds that go into this stuff.

And that doesn't count all of the other social costs that accompany this, such as lost wages. You know,

Americans are not getting more and more jobs. The jobs are all going to these foreigners, these people who are here illegally and who are brought here principally by the

Roman Church state. But Rome doesn't care about that. They just want to get the people in, get them on a dole and keep them in and eventually make them citizens.

Yeah, that's the game plan here. Yeah, and, you know,

Seitz goes on. He continues to whine a little bit. I'm not going to read any more of him. Don't have much use for what he has to say.

But he is a treasonous liar. And he and other people, they really need to be removed from the country.

He is an agent of a foreign power in the same way that the Israel lobbyists, in much the same way,

I should say, that the Israel lobbyists who lobby for Israel at AIPAC are also agents of a foreign power.

That's what they are. That's what, you know, in one serving the interest of Israel, one serving the interest of the

Vatican, neither one of them are serving the interest of the American people. And in fact, the policies that they both advocate are destructive of the

American nation. They amount to theft. And, you know, it's a disgraceful thing that this stuff's allowed to go on.

It seriously needs to stop. And it's not going to stop until the American people say enough is enough.

That's one of the reasons why I do this podcast, hopefully to encourage people to understand what is going on and who's doing this stuff and put a stop to it.

And I mean, as Christians, we need to take the lead on these sorts of things. Here's another story.

This is kind of shifting gears here a bit since I know this is the month formerly known as June. It's Pride Month.

I saw this post out here on X about Jack Phillips.

Jack Phillips, you may be familiar with him. He's a Colorado, I believe he's in Denver, Colorado. He's a baker.

And he's been in court for, I don't know, probably the better part of the last 10 years, if maybe longer than that, because he refuses to bake gay wedding cakes.

If I just read the post here on X, it says, remember the cake designer that declined to bake a cake for a gay couple's wedding?

Well, the Alphabet Mafia is after him again. An activist attorney asked Jack to create a custom cake, pink on the inside and blue on the outside, to celebrate and symbolize a gender transition.

Jack serves everyone, but he won't create a cake with a message that violates his sincerely held religious beliefs.

Well, actually, he doesn't serve everyone. He serves people that he, he will not serve people that promote the gay agenda.

And that's fine. That's actually a good thing that he doesn't do that. One of the problems, and I'm going to read here, this is a, the next story here is related to this.

And it's put out by an organization called Alliance Defending Freedom, and it has a headline here. Here it says, activist lawyer targets

Jack Phillips in third lawsuit. And it says, after over 10 years in court, masterpiece cake shop owner

Jack Phillips is still being sued. And it goes on, explain some of the lawsuits here.

And at the very end of this, this is a legal organization. It's Alliance Defending Freedom.

And it's got a headline here, a header here. It says, how are Jack's rights being threatened? And the response is, we live in a country where freedom of speech and religious freedom are protected while Americans may disagree on certain issues.

We should all be free to express what we believe without being punished by the government. Well, I agree with that. Now the

Israel lobby doesn't agree with that. The Israel lobby wants to punish you if you disagree with Israel.

They want to prohibit you from reading the New Testament. If you read the New Testament where it says that the

Jews killed Jesus, well, they consider that anti -Semitism and they want to have a go at you.

They're not the only ones that are like that. You've got the homosexual lobby is this way. But I think that that's a mistake in this particular case.

I don't think that ultimately, this is really an issue about freedom of speech.

I think the proper way of going about this is this is a matter of property rights. Jack Phillips owns a bakery and he has every right to serve whom he wishes to serve and not serve whom he wishes to not serve.

That's what I mean. I mean, we have that terms, well, it's your business. Well, this is literally his business. But of course, the freedom of association was destroyed back in the 1964

Civil Rights Act. And like so many things, the 1964 Civil Rights Act was actually an attack on civil rights.

It was the exact opposite of what it purported to be. It's just like the Patriot Act was unpatriotic.

It's interesting how everything is always actually the opposite of what the name is. And his case really ultimately needs to be argued as a matter of property rights.

As a Christian baker, he has a right to say no to the request to make a homosexual -themed wedding cake because it's his business and not because of freedom of speech as much as we value freedom of speech.

I mean, fundamentally, this is an issue of property rights and that's how this really should be argued. And I think ultimately it needs to be argued or we're just gonna keep going through this time after time after time.

And let's see, what do I have here? Oh, maybe just use this as a quick closing story here.

This is from the AP, it's about the Southern Baptists. The headline here says, Southern Baptists are poised to ban churches with women pastors.

Some are urging them to reconsider. And let's see, this is an article, actually it's just from a couple of days ago.

I'll read a bit of it here. It says, from its towering white steeple and red brick facade to its Sunday services filled with rousing gospel hymns and evangelistic sermons,

First Baptist Church of Alexandria, Virginia bears many of the classic hallmarks of a Southern Baptist church.

On a recent Sunday, its pastor for women and children, Kim Eskridge, urged members to invite friends and neighbors to an upcoming vacation

Bible school, a perennial Baptist activity to help reach families in the community with the gospel.

But because the pastor is a woman, First Baptist days in a Southern Baptist convention may be numbered. And they kind of go through here and talk about this.

But apparently there's an amendment. It's called, well, I think it's called the Law Amendment, L -E -W, the

Law Amendment. I think that's named after the man who brought it. It essentially says that the

Southern Baptist convention will not permit any church within that convention to have women pastors, which is actually biblical.

I mean, that's what the New Testament teaches. That's what Paul very clearly makes that very clear.

And he talks about the qualifications for elder and for deacon, to be the husband of one wife, et cetera.

I mean, the offices of elder and deacon are open to men only. And of course, as Presbyterian, I consider the pastor to be, that is the role of an elder.

And it's entirely proper that the ministry should be restricted to men. I know that that's very unpopular in today's world.

You know, we have the feminists who have this idea of interchangeability that, you know, men and women are the same and what a man can do, a woman can do, and what a woman can do, a man can do, and blah, blah, blah.

You know, of course, I think, you know, it's interesting, you know, we've got these trans women, quote, trans women.

I mean, they're just men that are pretending to be women, you know, competing in women's sports. And some people don't like that.

And they shouldn't like that. You know, I mean, it's ridiculous. You know, you've got these men invading women's spaces.

But on the other hand, you've got women invading men's spaces. You know, and this is a case where you have these females, these women who want to be pastors, when

God says that they can't do that. You're not allowed to do that. And I know that's highly shocking to a lot of people.

It's deeply offensive to the feminist mindset. But that's what the Bible teaches. And Christians have always understood that until just the last few decades.

And even many still do. And I'm glad to see this amendment here in the

Southern Baptist Church. I don't know if this is passed or not, or if it's even been voted on yet. But this is, in fact,

Mike Law, I guess this is the fellow who's brought this amendment. It says, amendment proponents say the convention needs to reinforce its doctrinal statement, the

Baptist faith and message, which says that the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by scripture. Yes, it is.

And here's a quote from Mike Law. Quote, if we won't stand on issue and be unapologetically biblical, then we won't stand on anything.

Said amendment proponent, Mike Law, pastor of Arlington Baptist Church in Virginia. And it says, law contended the issue has been a canary in the coal mine for liberal denominations, that is, having women pastors, several of which began ordaining women and later

LGBTQ plus people. And that's absolutely right. In fact, I saw a post on X sometime within the last month or so, and I thought it was very insightful.

It was a woman that posted this, and she says, you know, if, and I think it may have even been about this

Southern Baptist law amendment. And she made the point that she said, if you allow women pastors, you know, the next thing that's going to happen is you're going to have

LGBTQ plus pastors. And I think she's absolutely right about that. I mean, once you open that door, just a crack, you know, once you let that camel's nose get in the tent, it's going to be straight downhill.

And you're going to end up with all the, you know, all of the transgender people and lesbians and homosexuals, and they're going to end up taking over the denomination.

So yeah, I think it certainly is the right thing to take that stand that the

Southern Baptist Convention has taken, and you know, let's pray that that happens. I said, maybe they've already voted on it.

I probably should have checked that. I didn't. As I said, I was kind of going through this a bit sort of sight unseen here today.

So, but, you know, keep, you know, as Christians, we should be praying for those who are in positions of leadership in our churches and our denominations.

That they would follow the scriptures. They would have the courage, the wisdom, the knowledge to do what is right.

And I'm glad to see that this Baptist pastor is working to do the right thing.

So something to keep in prayer. All right. Well, I think that wraps it up today. My throat's getting a little bit scratchy here.

And I've been battling here for about an hour. I think that's probably about enough.

So anyway, I wish everybody a blessed Lord's Day. Tomorrow. And until we talk next time, may the spirit of truth guide you in all truth as you read and study