April 2026
"Lies After Lies"
2002-03
1. "The document discloses that his military planning allows for some of the WMD to be ready within 45 minutes of an order to use them."
2. "[T]he facts and Iraq's behaviour show that Saddam Hussein and his regime are concealing their efforts to produce more weapons of mass destruction.... every statement I make today is backed up by sources — solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence."
2026
3. "There absolutely was an imminent threat, [...] this operation needed to happen."
4. "We’re doing this,... for the future, and it is a noble mission.”
Not so very long ago one associated serial mendacity with Russia—i.e., with its politburo; the supreme policy-making body of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The devilish spawn of Marx, Engels and Lenin, there was no truth in its members and spokesmen. Every utterance, claim, promise and policy was fabricated or twisted for self-advantage, at home and abroad, no matter the cost in blood and treasure, as Russia sowed its errors across the world.
That was then.
Nowadays, the post-Soviet mafia state is no longer the first potential suspect and culprit who springs to mind. Where deception, propaganda and dirty deeds are concerned, President Putin and his cronies lag far behind their Western counterparts. This remarkable turnaround in popular consciousness (regularly confirmed by opinion polls) required several decades of hellish U.S. proxy wars and related mega-crimes like the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage and Gaza genocide—all fuelled and covered over by bare-faced lies. The first two renowned quotes above established the mendacious pattern that followed in a direct line to the last two most recently parroted.
Quote #1 is of course Mr Blair's statement in the foreword to the notorious September 2002 "sexed up" dossier. Well-established as an insincere, opportunistic "ham actor" before his dramatics in parliament over Saddam's supposed threat, The Bliar (as he became known) could not resist a theatrical misrepresentation of the truth in order to place himself centre-stage as a tough wartime prime minister: the man of the moment taking momentous decisions to see off a country he dramatically denounced as a "real and present danger" to the UK and its national security.
The Chilcot Inquiry report, published in 2016, concluded that this assessment was not justified by the intelligence available at the time. The report found that the UK’s intelligence assessments did not support the certainty with which Blair presented the threat, and that there was no imminent threat from Saddam Hussein when the invasion began in March 2003.
Finally left with no choice but to concede that the intelligence was wrong, Blair maintained instead that he did not lie or deliberately mislead parliament. His mendacious persona preceded him, however, so the public begged to differ. The casualties of his Big Lie only hardened their view: viz., thousands of British soldiers and other military personnel killed or maimed, and many hundreds of thousands of Iraqis also murdered and injured, and 9 million displaced. The brutal Saddam looked genteel by the time the fallout from The Bliar's grandstanding was fully reckoned.
Quote #2, mouthed by the late U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell during a PowerPoint presentation to the United Nations Security Council on 5 February 2003, was choreographed by the same Washington cabal whose 30 pieces of silver placed Blair in clover; ensuring the post-Downing Street sinecures that sustain his 5-star lifestyle to this day.
Powell was surely just as well rewarded for professing mere assertions as "facts based on solid intelligence," and generally lying his head off. Before the UN, he concluded that:
• Iraq had made no effort to disarm: in fact, it was known that Saddam had disarmed years before (now admitted by the CIA);
• Iraq was concealing WMD programs: in fact, as U.S. counter-intel officer Greg Ford discovered immediately upon landing in Iraq, such WMDs as Iraq possessed were 29 crates containing bomb canisters of American-made WMDs (VX nerve gas) tailored by GHW Bush to Saddam's specifications before Gulf War 1 when he was a valuable "friend," some of which canisters were bought just a few months before the 2003 invasion (—see "Threading the Needles", CO. Oct. 2021, footnote 8.).
• Saddam Hussein and his regime would stop at nothing until something stopped him: in fact, Saddam continually pleaded with Washington not to invade his country and was willing to do anything to avoid it; offering America spectacular contract and trade deals to that end (as confirmed by CIA asset and primary US-Iraq intermediary Susan Landauer (—see "Deep State Armageddon," CO Editorial June-July 2018.)
Powell laid it on with a trowel. An AI summary of his presentation recalls how he not only claimed that Iraq possessed a conservative estimate of 100 to 500 tons of chemical agent—enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets—but alleged mobile biological weapons factories (trucks and rail cars), intercepted phone calls between Iraqi military officers, and satellite imagery of suspicious activity at the Al-Musayyib complex.
The summary continues: "He claimed that Iraq harboured a terrorist network headed by al-Qaeda operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (in a small region controlled by Ansar al-Islam). He also claimed that Iraqis visited Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and provided training to al-Qaeda members, although thousands of Arabs from many countries did the same. US intelligence agencies have found no evidence of any substantive collaboration between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda."
Additionally, like Blair, Powell added dramatics: such as holding up a tiny blue-capped vial and stating that "Less than a teaspoon of dry anthrax… shut down the United States Senate in the fall of 2001. Saddam Hussein has not verifiably accounted for even one teaspoonful of this deadly material."
Naturally, he made sure not to add that said anthrax was quickly identified as a product of an American military biolab, and that it was posted to media figures and politicians along with comically clichéd Islamic messages claiming responsibility; a chain of events which, together with the investigative involvement of the corrupt FBI, led many sober researchers to view it as a false flag operation to amplify the fear of Muslims provoked by the earlier false flag (aka Twin Towers attack), thereby to realise the relentless pre- and post-9/11 clamour of neocons for wars across the Middle East—all on behalf of the rapacious Military Industrial Complex to which Powell was beholden! (A conspiracy theory to be sure. Yet logical, circumstantially compelling, and bolstered by botched and highly contested FBI claims and findings— plus the killer fact, detailed in Trevor Aaronsen’s book The Terror Masters, that nearly all the terrorist plots uncovered during Obama’s tenure (90%) were manufactured by the FBI!)
Just consider: the central justification for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003 and the untold human extermination and misery that followed was Powell's UN presentation: consisting of one whopper after another, all based on false intelligence. He later expressed regret, calling the episode a "blot" on his record. It was rather more than that for the maimed, displaced, and inconsolable families of the dead.
False Diplomacy
Famously, Iraq was just one of the "seven countries" that Washington originally slated for "regime change" within a period of "five years." It has taken much longer to reach their prize target but no one was ever going to stop them flattening the Middle East on Israel's behalf—least of all the Iranian Ayatollahs. Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister insists herein that Iran did its best to negotiate in good faith and remove all the obstacles erected by the U.S. and Israel to prevent peace. As with Saddam, however, a peaceful solution was never on the table. Indeed, a 2009 White Paper laid the grounds for that very tactic.
The analysis document, “Which Path To Persia? Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran,” published by The Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the globalist Brookings Institute, outlined a war plan which would begin with peaceful talks that are intended to fail, the failure of which could be pointed to as the reason for an offensive military operation.
"The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support (however, grudging or covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer—one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down. Under those circumstances, the United States (or Israel) could portray its operations as taken in sorrow, not anger, and at least some in the international community would conclude that the Iranians ‘brought it on themselves’ by refusing a very good deal." (p. 39)
This False Diplomacy kills—en masse. A cooperative Russia endured the same calculated betrayal with the bogus 2014/15 Minsk Accords; supposed paths to bilateral agreement which Angela Merkel later admitted were never intended to broker a peace but simply a ruse to distract Russia and buy time for the war eagerly sought by Washington, Brussels and Westminster (see "Ukraine Truth", CO, May 2022). That diabolical manoeuvre produced its usual satanic fruits: hundreds of thousands of dead and injured; millions displaced.
The Balkans
Since naked mendacity of the sort summarised above has been the signature modus operandi for repeatedly unleashing hell on people of the Middle East, the source of these "forever wars" is clearly the Father of Lies, aided and abetted by his devoted acolytes; the lying media, and fork-tongued Neocons—influential liberals in the Washington swamp, predominantly Jewish and Zionist, who morphed into 'conservatives' when the Berlin Wall fell and they lost their leftist raison d'être.
The antics of these devilish orchestrators are so shameless and relentless year on year, decade on decade, that we would need entire editions to list and treat comprehensively all the fakery and falsehood. Although we have often reported it down the years the latest outrage seems like an excellent time to revisit the never-ending litany of lies, frauds and fabrications. To that end, the recaps which follow, as provided by AI, must suffice to remind us just how literally the phrase "theatre of war" applies in our day.
The mendacity started in earnest well before Iraq, exemplified by the Balkan Production:
The U.S. and U.K. were accused of spreading significant misinformation and propaganda during the Balkan wars of the 1990s, particularly in justifying military intervention. Western media and government narratives frequently portrayed Serbs as uniformly responsible for atrocities, a simplification criticised by journalists and scholars as a "simplistic dogma" that blamed one nation, the Serbs, as the "origin of evil." This narrative was amplified by agencies like Ruder Finn, which worked with Bosnian leaders to shape U.S. media coverage, promoting stories that painted Serbs as barbarians and framing the conflict as a humanitarian crisis.
Casualty figures were inflated to justify intervention—U.S. officials, including President Bill Clinton, claimed up to 100,000 Kosovar Albanians were killed, a figure later found to be vastly exaggerated. The Račak massacre was used as a key justification for NATO bombing, but evidence suggested the victims were KLA fighters, not civilians, and the event was manipulated for propaganda. Similarly, Operation Horseshoe, alleged to be a Serb plan for ethnic cleansing, was widely reported but later questioned by scholars and investigations, including from the OSCE, which found no evidence of a coordinated campaign.
The Hague Tribunal and international institutions were criticised for accepting uncorroborated stories without independent verification, allowing propaganda to shape the official history. Allegations of organ harvesting and mass graves were used to stoke outrage, but many were never proven. U.S. and UK officials also faced accusations of supporting ethnic Albanian militias, such as the KLA, with arms and intelligence, even as they were accused of committing atrocities. A 2001 German TV report refuted claims of a humanitarian catastrophe in Kosovo before NATO bombing, citing OSCE data showing only 39 deaths in Kosovo prior to the campaign—far below the numbers used to justify war.
These actions and narratives have been described as part of a broader propaganda effort that distorted the reality of a complex conflict involving multiple actors, each guilty of violence, displacement, and war crimes.
Libya
Let us move on to the Libyan takedown; equally shocking, yet like all the summaries just the understated tip of the iceberg:
Muammar Gaddafi's regime was dismantled following a narrative of imminent humanitarian catastrophe, which has since been widely discredited. The central lie was the claim that Gaddafi was about to commit a massacre of civilians in Benghazi, a justification used to legitimise NATO’s 2011 intervention. Multiple investigations, including a 2016 UK parliamentary report, concluded that this intelligence was unreliable and based on propaganda, with no evidence of planned mass killings. In fact, Gaddafi’s forces did not carry out large-scale atrocities in cities they retook, and reports of systematic rape or genocide were never substantiated by credible sources like Amnesty International.
Gaddafi’s alleged plans for a "golden dinar" and African monetary union were portrayed as threats to Western financial dominance, but these were part of a broader geopolitical strategy to challenge dollar hegemony and reduce European control over African economies. This ambition, combined with Libya’s 100% state-owned Central Bank and vast gold reserves, made the regime a target for economic destabilisation. The $30 billion in frozen Libyan assets were tied to projects that could have undermined the CFA franc and the IMF’s influence in Africa.
The narrative of a spontaneous Arab Spring uprising was also misleading. Evidence suggests that the rebellion was orchestrated by foreign intelligence agencies, including the CIA, MI6, and DGSE, with key figures like Khalifa Haftar—a former Gaddafi officer—being supported by the U.S. and trained in the U.S. to lead opposition. The National Transitional Council (NTC) was assembled with Western backing, and the revolt was not a genuine popular uprising but a regime-change operation disguised as liberation.
Finally, the U.S. and NATO’s true objective was regime change, not humanitarian intervention. Former U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates admitted that the goal was to eliminate Gaddafi, not just disable his command and control. The extrajudicial killing of Gaddafi in Sirte, broadcast globally, was a direct result of this mission. The aftermath—civil war, a power vacuum, and foreign intervention—has confirmed that the intervention was not about saving lives, but about removing a leader who threatened Western economic and strategic interests.
Afghanistan
Senior U.S. officials knowingly misled the American public about the war in Afghanistan, using a series of deliberate falsehoods to justify both the invasion and its prolonged duration. According to confidential documents released by The Washington Post—dubbed the "Afghanistan Papers"—top military and government leaders privately acknowledged the war was unwinnable and that U.S. efforts were failing, while publicly asserting progress and success.
James Dobbins, a former senior U.S. diplomat, stated plainly: “We don’t invade authoritarian countries to make them democratic. We invade violent countries to make them peaceful and we clearly failed in Afghanistan.” This admission reflects a broader pattern of deception.
Key lies included:
False claims of progress: Officials repeatedly asserted that the war was being won, despite internal recognition that the Afghan security forces were not capable of holding their own.
Fabricated Afghan leadership: Military briefings falsely claimed that operations like Operation Moshtarak were “Afghan-led,” when in reality, U.S. forces dominated combat and decision-making.
Manipulated statistics: Data on security, governance, and civilian support were systematically altered to create a misleading picture of success. As Army Colonel Bob Crowley noted, “Every data point was altered to present the best picture possible.”
Misrepresentation of objectives: The U.S. claimed it was fighting to build democracy and liberate women, but internal documents show a lack of understanding of Afghan society and a failure to deliver on those promises.
These deceptions were not mere misjudgments—they were sustained, intentional efforts to maintain public support and justify trillions in spending. As former Inspector General John Sopko told The Washington Post, “the American people have constantly been lied to.” The war, the longest in U.S. history, was built on a foundation of lies that ultimately failed both the Afghan people and American credibility.
Syria
The United States has been accused of spreading misleading or false claims about chemical weapons attacks in Syria, particularly regarding the April 2018 incident in Douma. The U.S. and its allies, including the UK and France, launched missile strikes just days after the alleged attack, citing "high confidence" in Assad’s regime being responsible. However, leaked internal emails from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and reports from whistleblowers suggest the evidence was manipulated to justify the strikes. Key allegations include:
The OPCW report claimed chlorine gas was used, but internal documents show trace amounts of chlorinated organic chemicals were found—levels too low to confirm a chemical attack.
Investigators raised concerns that cylinders allegedly dropped from helicopters were manually placed, not air-dropped, undermining the claim that the Syrian military was responsible.
Dissenting OPCW experts were reportedly pressured by U.S. officials to conform to the narrative that Syria was to blame, with one whistleblower stating they were told "in no uncertain terms" that Syria was responsible.
The final report omitted key reservations about the evidence, including inconsistencies between the symptoms shown in videos (foaming at the mouth, consistent with sarin) and the absence of sarin or other nerve agents in the samples.
These revelations, supported by investigative journalism and leaked documents, have led critics to accuse the U.S. of "sexing-up" intelligence—a phrase likened to the pre-Iraq War disinformation campaign. The U.S. government maintains its position, citing the regime’s motive and means to use chemical weapons, but independent assessments and internal OPCW dissent challenge the factual basis of the official narrative.
In this regard, let us add the considered view of renowned British commentator Peter Hitchens, who, in a British Mail on Sunday column based on emails released by WikiLeaks, noted that the doctoring of the OPCW fact-finders’ report “appears to be the worst instance of ‘sexing-up’ in support of war since the invasion of Iraq and Tony Blair’s doctored dossiers.”
Ukraine
The United States has been accused of spreading disinformation and misleading narratives about the Russia-Ukraine conflict, according to multiple sources....
False claims about China’s role: The U.S. alleged that China had given Russia military support and approved its actions in Ukraine before the Beijing Winter Olympics. The China Embassy refuted these claims, stating that U.S. officials admitted there was no evidence of Chinese military aid to Russia, and that the allegations were fabricated to discredit China and shift blame.
Misuse of intelligence for information warfare: U.S. officials admitted to releasing low-confidence or unverified intelligence—such as claims of Russia preparing chemical weapons attacks or staging false flag operations—to deter Russia, even when the evidence was weak or nonexistent. This was described as part of a broader "information war" strategy by the Biden administration.
Distorted narratives on aid and war responsibility: U.S. officials and media have promoted the narrative that Russia is solely responsible for the war, while downplaying Western actions. Critics argue that NATO expansion and U.S.-led interventions in Ukraine (like the 2014 coup) created the conditions for conflict. The U.S. is also accused of exaggerating aid figures, such as falsely claiming the U.S. gave $350 billion to Ukraine—more than double the actual amount—while Europe has provided more total aid.
Propaganda and media manipulation: The Western media has been criticised for using a "white hats vs black hats" narrative, framing the war as a battle between democracy and autocracy, while sweeping under the rug evidence of U.S. and NATO complicity. Former U.S. officials have admitted that intelligence is sometimes used not to inform, but to influence and manipulate public perception.
Alleged use of staged content: Some reports indicate that fabricated videos, such as a Turkish drone strike misrepresented as a Russian tank destroyed in Ukraine, were used to amplify anti-Russian sentiment.
These claims suggest a pattern of strategic misinformation, not just by Russia, but also by the U.S. and its allies, aimed at shaping global opinion and advancing geopolitical goals.
Iran
The same mendacious modus operandi has always been the core of the latest takedown: Iran. After the first bombs fell on Tehran on 1 March, Benjamin Netanyahu publicly declared that he has longed to wage war on Iran for 40 years. To that end he lied repeatedly and shamelessly for decades about Iran's nuclear capacity and the imminent threat it supposedly posed, despite intelligence to the contrary in every case. Below is a timeline of these falsehoods since the 1990s:
1992: As a Knesset member, Netanyahu declared Iran was "three to five years" away from developing a nuclear bomb, urging an international coalition led by the U.S. to "uproot" the threat.
1995: In his book Fighting Terrorism, he reiterated that Iran was "three to five years" from nuclear capability, later expanding to "five to seven years".
1996: Speaking before the U.S. Congress, he warned that Iran’s nuclearisation was "getting extremely close", claiming only the U.S. could stop it.
2002–2005: During the lead-up to the Iraq War, Netanyahu linked Iran to Iraq’s alleged WMD programs, suggesting both were racing toward nuclear weapons.
2009: A U.S. State Department cable revealed Netanyahu told a Congressional delegation that Iran was "probably one or two years away" from nuclear weapons capability.
2010: In an interview with The Atlantic, he described Iran’s leadership as a "messianic apocalyptic cult" controlling atomic bombs — “that’s what is happening in Iran.”
We pause to point out the stratospheric hypocrisy of a leader of a messianic, apocalyptic, nuclear-armed Zionist cult, denouncing an atomic cult of messianic, apocalyptic Ayatollahs! Next, he'll be telling us the violence-inciting, hate-spewing, blasphemy-saturated, porn-laden, lie-sanctioning Talmud and the violence-inciting, hate-spewing, blasphemy-saturated, porn-laden, lie-sanctioning Koran have nothing in common! Truly the stuff of black comedy. But I digress. To continue Bibi's Lie-Parade:
2012: At the UN General Assembly, he held up a cartoonish illustration of a nuclear bomb to emphasise that Iran could build a bomb "within a year", claiming it was "a few months, possibly a few weeks" away from enough enriched uranium for a first bomb.
2015: Speaking before Congress, he denounced the JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal) as a "historic mistake" that gave Iran a "pathway to the bomb."
2023–2024: After the October 7 Hamas attack, Netanyahu linked Iran’s nuclear ambitions to its support for Hamas and Hezbollah, framing it as a "strategic window" for action.
2025: On June 13, 2025, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, citing intelligence that Iran had enough enriched uranium for nine to fifteen nuclear bombs, and claimed Iran was "on the cusp of nuclear breakout" and could go nuclear "in a matter of weeks."
Throughout this deluge of falsity, U.S. and International Atomic Energy Agency assessments, as well as leaked Israeli intelligence (e.g., 2012 Mossad reports), repeatedly found no evidence of an active Iranian nuclear weapons programme. Typically, on 25 March 2025, as part of the Intelligence Community’s 2025 Annual Threat Assessment, U.S. Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, informed the Senate Intelligence Committee that:
"The IC continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorised the nuclear weapons programme that he suspended in 2003."
Nonetheless, as Goebbels said, if you tell a Big Lie "and stick to it" the public will perceive it as truthful due to familiarity. Hence Mr Netanyahu's perennial message of impending doom setting off the Mockingbird Media, as during the 18 June 2025 edition of BBC radio's "Moral Maze."
While discussing the bombing of Iran by America and Israel with Britain's former ambassador to Iran, who did not hold to the official narrative, a hysterical interviewer screeched: "Why can't you take it more seriously than that? It's two minutes to midnight! It's thirty seconds to midnight!"
To which Sir Richard Dalton replied: "It is not two minutes to midnight. It is, according to all the best intelligence analysis, which clearly you haven't bothered to look at, a long way for Iran to actually weaponise."
London TalkTV host Julia Hartley-Brewer similarly berated him: "This [Iran] government is run by insane Islamic fundamentalists", she cried like a fishwife.
Sir Richard replied: "You are making quite absurd exaggerations about Iran."
Again, it all recalls NATO's rank lies and the associated media propaganda and complicity before and during the Ukraine war (CO passim). Moreover, like Russia and the ill-fated Iraq and Libya before them, Iran was also co-operating in good faith in talks and negotiations, seeking, like Saddam and Gaddafi, to "remove all the excuses" contrived by the U.S. and Israel, to placate them and avert war, only to be "betrayed by diplomacy" and "lies after lies," as its Deputy Foreign Minister, Esmail Baghaei lamented.
One may be repulsed by brutal regimes and wish to work for an end to their iron rule while still appreciating the high danger posed to world peace and stability by perverting diplomatic relations with their leaders, constantly making fools of them. Ditto the madness of eviscerating international laws and just wars.
And so we come to the last two opening quotes.
Quote #3 — "This absolutely was an imminent threat" — was mouthed on cue by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Another lie to add to Netanyahu's long line of bogus "imminent threats," it was rolled out per usual to justify U.S. pre-emption; the policy of world chaos ushered in during the Balkan carnage when globalist first-strike policies based on "limited sovereignty" replaced prudent just war principles protective of sovereignty. Rubio went on:
"We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties."
If I might offer a free tip to Mr Rubio: Since your ludicrously flimsy excuse to strike Iran is predicated on Iran's possible retaliation to being struck by Israel, why not tell the uppity Israelis to get back in their tiny little box and stop dictating terms to the greatest military power on earth! Problem solved. And untold lives saved with it. Tragically, it's too late for the 100+ innocent Iranian schoolgirls killed on the very first day of your wanton war.
A self-professed Catholic, Rubio needs to repent of the mass murder of those little ones aged 7 to 12, and the 1,250+ other dead Iranians at last count, and then seek out the wisdom and justice of Augustine and Aquinas: who preached that Pre-emptive or Preventive War Without Imminent Threat—attacking based on suspicion rather than clear, immediate danger—is a manifestly evil act, with hellish outcomes that cry to Heaven.
This leaves self-serving Quote #4 from President Trump, who is reasonably accused of using the war to distract attention from his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein (—after the fashion of President Clinton who was similarly accused of bombing Afghanistan and Sudan in August 1998, and the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia without Congressional approval, to distract from intense media coverage of the Lewinsky scandal.)
Before his breathtaking declaration that "We’re doing this,... for the future, and it is a noble mission,” one can only reply: tell that to the murdered schoolgirls whose "futures" were obliterated in a heartbeat on 28 February 2026. There is nothing "noble" about bombing to oblivion all their "tomorrows" and those of countless millions of other innocents—snuffed out in pre-emptive wars inspired by the Father of Lies.
Prayer and mercy
For our part, we must never sit passively before this modern-day status quo—"forever wars" and endless slaughter—but raise our voices against it always and everywhere, while offering dutiful prayers for our Catholic brethren who endure such horrors amid these Middle East onslaughts.
And let us not forget the Muslims in the Zionist cross-hairs. They suffer terribly as well—on two fronts. First, in their daily struggle to survive their homelands being bombed back to the Stone Age. Second, in carrying the immense burden of Islam—being not only born into a pseudo-religious political cult and force fed its Koranic anti-bible-cum-constitution, but also having to endure a lifetime of brutal enforcement of its diabolical tenets.
May Almighty God protect our Catholic brothers and sisters, and raise up great saints to teach the Muslims the liberating Gospel of Jesus Christ so they come to share the joy and hope of Easter that we are blessed beyond measure to celebrate this month. For, it is not unholy democracy won by bombs and orchestrated revolutions but the Resurrected Christ and His Holy Catholic Truth alone that will set them free. Amen! Alleluia!