Islamic State (ISIS) Claims Responsibility for Chris Mercer Harper Umpqua College Shooting

Share Button

More than just coincidence, the French Train hero Alek Scarlatos was a student at the Oregon Community College where the shooting occurred.  Act of Jihad retaliation is suspect.

This is also why the last thing we need is more gun control.  Leaving the American people unarmed and defenseless in the face of invading Muslim terrorism and take over is at the very least criminal on the part of the Regime! …………….CTP

ByPAMELA GELLER on October 2, 2015
Screen Shot 2015-10-02 at 1.21.12 PM


The Islamic State is crowing on social media, laying claim to the mass murder in Roseberg, Oregon. Not surprising.

There is much we do not know. We know Harper’s only male friend was a jihad sympathizer who praised “the brave Mujahideen heroes.” And said, “The Mujahideen freedom fighters of Palestine. My brothers and sisters keep on doing your thing. Allahu Akbar.”
“my brave soldiers keep on fighting for the liberation of Palestine against Israel. f*ck Israel. Kill the Jews. jews are the only infidels.”
“The Quran ….. holy book of muslims”

Law enforcement removed Chris Harper’s Facebook page. They always do that. The media is trying to make it about blood glory. It wasn’t Harper commented on a news story on a forum (he didn’t have a blog as has been widely misreported). He posted on a forum about random stuff, mundane topics like the death of Wes Craven, and that’s all that law enforcement authorities left up for people to see. What did they scrub? That’s the question.

We know Harper’s only male friend was a jihad sympathizer.

Obama knows. That’s why he jumped in front of the camera like some shrieking harpy to rail against the second amendment, the only protection we have from tyrants like him.

Heavy: A tweet sent out by an allegedly Islamic State affiliated Twitter account claimed responsibility for yesterday’s Umpqua College Shooting carried out in Roseburg, Oregon by Chris Harper Mercer. The tweet was sent out by @K_H_O00, but the account has since been suspended by Twitter for terrorist propaganda. A screen cap can be seen below:



The tweet screen cap lacks a time stamp but the phone screen cap states “4:07 p.m.” The tweet reads:

Again #Oregon #USA #WashingtonDC #IslamicState #ISIS #USA

A meme that states “Slay Americans” in front of a man being beheaded is also visible.

As of now there is no evidence that Mercer was influenced by the Islamic State in carrying out yesterday’s attack that killed nine people. However, witnesses said the gunman told the students in a classroom to stand up and state their religion before he began firing away, the News-Review, a local newspaper, reports.

Email this page

Stay on top of what’s really happening. Follow me on Twitter here.Like me on Facebook here.

– See more at:

Here is the Oregon Shooter’s Profile: Who is Mahmoud Ali Ehsani?

Share Button

The Oregon shooter had a thin social media profile.

On his myspace page, Chris Harper-Mercer, 26, posted a photograph of himself holding a rifle, alongside images of masked IRA gunmen and an IRA terrorist video. The IRA and Palestinian terrorism have a long history.

He has just two friends — a girl and a jihadi. Check out the terror sympathizer’s page — “kill the jews.”

The media has avoided mentioning this at all.

There is not much else — a profile from a “long dormant” dating site and a couple of random posts, thant frankly give little to no insight into motive.

Mahmoud Ali Ehsani’s Page looks like this:




“my brave soldiers keep on fighting for the liberation of Palestine against Israel. f*ck Israel. Kill the Jews. jews are the only infidels.”

 Ana Boylan, 18, was in her classroom at Umpqua Community College when the gunman entered and shot her professor, she told family members Thursday afternoon.

Boylan, who had started attending the college this week, was shot in the back, said her grandmother, Janet Willis. A girl standing next to her was shot, too, Willis said.

“They just laid on the ground and pretended they were dead,” Willis said her granddaughter told her and other family members. Boylan tearfully recounted her ordeal from a hospital bed after she’d been airlifted to a Eugene hospital. As she lay wounded in the classroom, she told her grandmother, she heard the gunman ask others to rise and state their religion. “If they said they were Christians, they were shot again,” Willis said.

—Christine Mai-Duc

A woman who said her grandmother was inside Snyder Hall, where part of the attack took place, described what happened in a tweet.

Police have not yet said whether Harper-Mercer was a student at Umpqua Community College although several reports suggested he was not.


How far will the Obama regime go for gun Control?

Share Button


By Catholic Tea Party


The minute I heard of this latest shooting my first thought was, “Here we go, I can just hear the gun grabbers now”.   This was another gun free zone by the way, you know another one of those mythical areas when the presence of a two dimensional sign with a black gun with a red circle with a cross thru it will automatically repel the perpetrator.


A women called Limbaugh this morning and had a theory that what if this is all staged by the Obama regime to pass gun confiscation and make the 2nd amendment null and void.  She said it was curious how after the shooting on the east coast died down this latest one on the other coast in Oregon struck.  My tin foil hat aside I started to think, there just might be something to it.  We are dealing with a corrupt and brutal regime in the Obama government that will stop at nothing to pass their agenda.  We all remember fast and furious and didn’t that have to do with gun control also?


Here is my theory on how it might work.  Obamas ministers of hate scout out school campus’s, mental institutions, court records, etc. with the express goal of looking for societal malcontents.  Once they find them, they exploit them and egg them on.  May be even supply weapons if need be (again, remember fast and furious).  Their candidate, now fully enraged goes off on a killing spree.  Moments later, Obama, who would ordinarily be on the golf course, comes on TV and makes one of his fake, shocked, heart felt pleas for gun control.  Don’t laugh; look at the history of this regime and what they do to pass their agenda via lies and foul play.  Of course this is all theory but given the track record of this government, it does have some consideration.


The final goal with this administration is obvious. Working with the U.N. they want total gun bans and a cancellation of the second amendment.   That’s what happened in Australia, a total gun ban, and now crime is running rampant in that country and Muslim terrorism is on the incline.  The Obama regime will stop at nothing short of reserving that same privilege for us as well.


I used to think things like that just don’t happen in America.  Time for a wake up call, that America is gone.  In case you have not realized it yet we now live under an oppressive regime.  Bye, Bye liberty!

Netanyahu addresses UN General Assembly (FULL SPEECH)

Share Button

GOD! I wish we had leadership like this in not only my country but my church as well instead of the groveling Marxist idiots we are stuck with!…CTP

Published on Oct 1, 2015

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu addresses the UN General Assembly. Goes on discuss why Israel doesn’t support Iran Deal.

Pope Francis, tear down your wall

Share Button

Hi. I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty®. Did you watch the hysteria and hype when the pope showed up in America last week? I hate to be the one who rains on the unicorns, rainbows, babies and puppies that the mainstream media puts on the screen every time the pope is mentioned. But the reality is this is America, where freedom of speech reigns. And I have to tell you what’s on my mind.

While Pope Francis may be a nice man and he may have good intentions, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The reality is the pope appears to be a hypocrite of the highest order — not just a hypocrite, but more like a Hollywood hypocrite.

As a “man of God,” I would expect Pope Francis to be lecturing us about religion, spirituality and morality. Unfortunately, those weren’t his only topics. The pope often sounded like a Hollywood hypocrite looking for the love and adulation of liberal celebrities and the media, by lecturing us on politically correct economic issues that he clearly knows nothing about.

And then there are his pleas about illegal immigration. That was like East Germany lecturing America about a wall. More on that later.

This pope seems neither to understand nor care that his views on issues like climate change and income redistribution often put him in bed with atheists and socialists, who don’t believe in God, mock religion and think the Bible is a work of fiction. Isn’t that strange company for a “man of God” to keep?

He criticizes the death penalty in America, given to heinous murderers, while saying nothing about the Castro brothers killing people for their political views.

He visited a prison in Philadelphia, but chose not to visit or even be seen with Cubans imprisoned because of their political views.

He played best pals with the Castro brothers without ever mentioning that they are evil, murdering tyrants.

This pope condemns capitalism, yet never mentions the poverty the Castro brothers’ socialism has imposed on the Cuban people. He chooses to ignore that the hundreds of billions, perhaps trillions, of dollars of wealth accumulated by the Vatican are the result of donations by successful Catholics in capitalist nations like America. Capitalism has been very, very good to the Catholic Church.

This pope embraces the religion of climate change, ignoring the conflicts of interest and greed of those scientists, whose belief in climate change and global warming just happens to coincide with million-dollar contracts from the EPA. As wrong as the Vatican was about Galileo, it appears to be just as wrong about climate change.

Just like Hollywood hypocrites, this pope chooses to ride around in a small, politically correct car that paints a picture of a frugal man who cares about the environment. At the same time, he flies around the world on chartered jumbo jets.

How offensive to drive around America in a Fiat while escorted by a dozen extra-long-wheelbase SUVs for security! The pope saves $25 on each fill-up, but spends millions of dollars on gas for his chartered jet and cavalry of gas-guzzling SUV security vehicles.

It’s all absurd. Shouldn’t a “man of God” be above staged photo ops?

This pope embraces President Obama as a friend. How can he ignore Obama’s dark history of lecturing Christians on any act or statement that offends Muslims, while never mentioning, criticizing or taking any reasonable action to fight what is clearly a worldwide war on Christians? He ignores the fact that under Obama, more than 250,000 Muslim immigrants per year have entered America, yet Christians being persecuted can’t get into America. The pope said nothing.

And then there’s the greatest hypocrisy and conflict of interest in the world today. Pope Francis lectured America about illegal immigration without a thought as to how to pay for it all, without a thought as to the pain and misery that paying the higher taxes necessary to support millions of illegal immigrants would cause to his American parishioners.

The media don’t mention the hypocrisy of this scenario. This pope gets the love, adulation and donations of millions of poor illegals, but the U.S. taxpayer gets the bill. How convenient.

Here’s an idea: Let the Vatican pick up the bill. After all, a great many of these illegals will be adding to the collection plates at Catholic churches in the U.S., while all of their bills (welfare, food stamps, education, healthcare, courts, cops, prison) will coming out of American taxpayers’ pockets.

While we’re at it, where is this pope’s pledge to compensate the parents of children murdered by the illegal immigrants he embraces and encourages to come to America?

Or better yet, why not open up the Vatican itself to hordes of illegals. Oh, I forgot. Illegal immigrants can’t get into the Vatican because it’s surrounded by a big, fat wall — the highest wall I’ve ever seen.

Hey, Pope Francis, in the words of Ronald Reagan: “Tear down your wall!”

Why doesn’t the pope fill St. Peter’s Square with tents and porta-potties? Where is the compassion and humanity at the Vatican?

This pope’s views on income redistribution, climate change and illegal immigration show a total lack of economic knowledge or common sense. Socialism and communism have proven to create, not alleviate, poverty. Only capitalism has freed billions of human beings from poverty.

Government regulations to affect climate change and promote illegal immigration will hurt the poor and make them poorer and more dependent on government to survive. But worse, these policies will bankrupt the middle class — the very people who fill the pews at Catholic churches. Doesn’t the pope care about their suffering?

This pope grew up in Argentina under the socialist government of Juan Perón. The result of those policies has been economic disaster. Argentinahas gone from the world’s 14th highest GDP per capita to 63rd today.

That doesn’t sound like income equality to me, more like shared misery. Maybe a “man of God” should learn not to lecture about economics.

If he truly understood those realities, Pope Francis would be condemning socialism and its atheist leaders. He should be widely promoting conservative, free-market economic views like lower taxes so the people can keep more of their own money; reducing the size of government; less government spending on a failed “war on poverty”; and building a wall at the border to save the U.S. economy from bankruptcy. You know, the same wall that the Vatican already has.

America is the most generous nation in world history, but only capitalism has allowed our citizens to accumulate enough wealth to donate to this pope’s Catholic Church.

Is this pope a bad man? I don’t think so. I certainly hope not. Perhaps he’s naïve. Perhaps he’s ignorant of economic reality. Perhaps he doesn’t notice the big wall around his home. Perhaps Pope Francis has good intentions. But the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

My parting message to Pope Francis: Before you lecture us about compassion and charity and opening our homes to illegal immigrants,“Tear down your wall!”

I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty®. See you next week. God bless America and save us from hypocrisy in the strangest places.

Whoa – Reports That Teamsters Union Considering Donald Trump Endorsement….

Share Button

 I believe this!  When I was a Republican precinct committeeman a few years ago I was walking my precinct and at one house gave my literature (at that time for 2010 candidates) to a guy working in his yard.  He read the stuff and told me he was a teamster.  No need to say I was nervous.  Then he told me he and others in his union hated their leaders for all the money they gave the Democrats and told me what they did in the ballot booth was their business and lead me to belief many were fed up with the Democrat crap! ……………CTP

It was obvious early this morning that something was up.  There was a tremor amid the Dark Force as Team Clinton came out with an announcement that she would support a change to ObamaCare that would kill the Cadillac tax on union healthcare plans.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton greets a supporter following her address at the 18th Annual David N. Dinkins Leadership and Public Policy Forum at Columbia University in New Yorkjim hoffa jrtrump with hat


Obviously Hillary Clinton is trying to shore up support from various labor unions who are increasingly finding the Democrat positions at odds with middle America.

The decision by Hillary Clinton NOT TO support the Keystone Pipeline was a serious strike against her.  The decision to support the anti-American Trans-Pacific Trade deal was obviously additional blow.  In an effort to recover credibility Hillary Clinton is now stating she opposes the Cadillac Tax on union healthcare benefits.  However, it might be too little, too late.

According to Fox News insider reporting, the Teamsters Union voted behind closed doors today to withhold support from any presidential candidate until they can determine if Joe Biden will enter the race.  In addition, the Teamsters Union stated they were open to considering putting their support behind Republican candidate Donald Trump.

Donald Trump has a longstanding relationship with the Teamsters Union through his various business interests.   As a builder and developer the Teamsters have stated before they were always treated well by Donald Trump and his affiliates.

An alignment of the Teamster Union with Republicans has not been seen since the Reagan coalition was assembled in 1980 joining conservative Dems (Reagan Democrats or Blue Dogs), with pro-America growth Republicans.

After Reagan, the Teamsters have essentially voted in block with Democrats.  However, today President Jimmy Hoffa Jr. said he was open to considering alignment with Republican Candidate Donald Trump.

Candidate Donald Trump supports U.S. first pro-growth polices including: Keystone Pipeline, renegotiating NAFTA, withdrawal from the current Trans-Pacific Trade Deal, border security, immigration reform and renewed financial efforts targeted to boost the middle-class worker.  These are very favorable policy positions for the Teamsters Union.

An interesting development.

Could be YUGE !

donald trump smirk

The pop tart gun rap song

Share Button

The Pop tart rap song

Jorge Bergoglio, a walking, talking, Argentinian Contradiction

Share Button

Jorge Bergoglio, a walking, talking, Argentinian Contradiction

Francis makes sure the fawning media sees him “carrying his own luggage” as part of his false humility.

By Tridentine Catholic

In the true spirit of Watergate the lame stream Catholic media just got done “leaking” this morning the clandestine meeting between Bergoglio, AKA Pope Francis, and Kim Davis the Kentucky clerk who served jail time for refusing to sign marriage certificates for same sex unions.  At that point the Neo Conservatives went nuts with praise for Bergoglio who hugged Davis and gave her a Catholic rosary.  Now isn’t that special!

Keep in mind this Bergoglio who hugged Davis and lauded her for standing up for her principles was the same Bergoglio who said “who am I to judge” in reference to homosexual unions.  This Pope Francis who gave Davis a rosary is the same Francis who just got done stocking the Synod of the family meeting with liberal, pro homosexual, and pro divorce Catholic Cardinals.  Out of one side of Bergoglios mouth comes, “you go girl, continue to stand up for pro-traditional marriage”  while on the other side comes out, “who am I to judge, we need to make the church more homosexual friendly”.

Another contradiction, Davis is flown to Philadelphia at papal expense.  Probably had money left over from all the air conditioning he cut back on right?!  Oh, I forget, Vatican is exempt from not using the cooling system.  While Bergoglio gladly meets with non-Catholics like Davis any traditional Catholic, let alone a Latin mass Catholic is banned from Papal audiences.  They usually met with the wrath of Francis.  Just ask the traditional order of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate who had their flourishing order literally destroyed for the crime of exclusively offering mass and sacraments in Latin.  The attack dog Father Volpi was unleashed and destroyed the order in a matter of weeks.  Francis could not be bothered to meet with them, just destroy them.

The gift of the rosary is another contradiction of the two face Francis.  He gives a gift of a rosary and then condemns those of us who pray it as “prayer counters” or “little self righteous holy cards”.   He generally does not encourage memorized prayers or traditional Catholic customs, but he flaunts the rosary for good press time.

Religious are required to take vows of humility when they enter their vocation.  In Francis’s case its generally fake humility.  On one occasion aids put his briefcase on his papal jet.  Before Bergoglio boarded he asked where his brief case was and told it’s ok, we already put it on the plane.  Bergoglio said, “get it for me”.  “But its already on board your holiness”,  “I don’t care, get it for me”.  A staff member then got the briefcase and gave it to Bergoglio who flaunted it in front of his fawning media as he climbed on board.   He got the result he was looking for, headlines read, “First Pope to ever carry his own luggage”.  Bergoglio fake humility, it should be trademarked!

Much like the Devil, Bergoglio will tell you 10 truths to pass one lie.  Even his friends will admit his actions are often very confusing.  The American Archbishop Chapalt had commented on one occasion, “confusion is of the devil” in referring to last years Synod.  Basic logic will tell you that if confusion is of the Devil, and Bergoglio’s actions are confusion that just mayber there is a link there!

Now there is evidence that Francis might even be the anti-pope.  This is possible because of the questionable events of his election.  Pope John Paul II set into motion rules forbidding the canvassing or electioneering of votes by Cardinals for any one papal candidate.  The penalty is automatic excommunication for all Cardinals involved including the candidate.   Cardinal Dannels has recently admitted to being part of the Catholic mafia opposed to Pope Benedict and responsible for the election of  Francis.  To me this means both Francis and his cabal of Cardinals who campaigned for him are all excommunicated making Francis a heretical anti-pope.  However, this is probably just another transgression in church law that will go largely ignored.  Like giving holy communion to pro abort politicians such as Pelosi, Durbin, Bidden, and the whole rogues gallery.

Synod of the family II starts Sunday October 1, 2015.  Stand by for more funny business which just might result this time in a full blow Schism.

The Obama-Pope Axis of Marxism

Share Button

The Washington Post is a die-hard Democratic Party newspaper that occasionally recognizes Obama’s drift into Marxism. The December 19th editorial on Cuba is a case in point. Not only does the Post understand the nature of Obama’s betrayal of a free Cuba, it is beginning to wake up to the failures of bipartisan policies that have built communist Chinese economic power in the name of capitalism and reform.

The paper says that Obama “should have learned and applied some of the hard lessons of normalization with China and Vietnam—most notably that engagement doesn’t automatically promote freedom. When the United States debated extending ‘most-favored-nation’ trading status to China, we shared in what was then the conventional wisdom: Economic engagement would inevitably lead, over time, to political reform inside that Communist dictatorship.”

The paper goes on to admit it was duped. But Obama should know better, shouldn’t he?

The Post notes that the Chinese regime has been strengthened, not weakened, by policies of “engagement.” The Chinese communists “were determined to reap the fruits of foreign investment and trade—for themselves and their families, first, but also for their country—without ceding power. So far, confounding expectations, they have succeeded,” the paper commented.

In the case of Cuba, the Post said, Obama could have proposed normalization only after certain freedoms were given to the Cuban people. Instead, Obama “spurned” the “brave freedom fighters” on the island in the form of ordinary citizens risking their lives to protest against the Castro regime and to demand basic rights. Obama simply ignored their struggle.

So what are we to conclude? The Post is the paper which sent a reporter by the name of Dana Milbank to our news conferences over the years to ridicule our warnings of Obama’s Marxism. It looks like the editorial board, at least, is coming around to the realization that Obama is deliberately pursuing a Marxist policy in the case of Cuba. This is a breakthrough.

In a separate editorial, the paper called Obama’s change in Cuba policy a “bailout” of the regime. It said, “Mr. Obama may claim that he has dismantled a 50-year-old failed policy; what he has really done is give a 50-year-old failed regime a new lease on life.”

The editorial fails to take note of the role of Pope Francis in the betrayal. However, a separate article in the paper indirectly took note of the development, highlighting that while Pope John Paul II was “extremely public in his fight against communism,” Francis seems dedicated to being known as a “master builder of bridges” between the communist and free worlds. This is to the advantage of the communists.

The article notes that Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL)—who is Catholic—was critical of the pope, saying he should “take up the cause of freedom” rather than facilitate Obama’s deal with the Castro brothers. But we have heard enough from the pope, in terms of his attacks on capitalism, to know where he stands.

Rubio told ABC News, “The pope is a spiritual leader and he always, naturally, is going to want to bring people closer together. And I respect that as a spiritual leader. But I think it’s also important to say that people deserve the right to be free…our nation was founded on that principle.”

The awareness is growing among Catholics that this pope is radically different than Pope John Paul II. Associated Press quotes Efrain Rivas, a 53-year-old maintenance man in Miami who was a political prisoner in Cuba for 16 years as saying, “I’m still Catholic till the day I die. But I am a Catholic without a pope.”

Miguel Saavedra, described as a 57-year-old Miami mechanic who leads an anti-Castro group and wears a Christian cross, told AP, “The church is contaminated.” He was probably referring to contamination by elements of Marxist-oriented liberation theology.

Catholic writer Vic Biorseth concludes, “I’m afraid it is true—Pope Francis is a Marxist. George Soros is probably celebrating. So is Bill Ayers, Frances Fox Piven, and especially, Comrade President Obama, peace be upon him. We will get through this, and we will be stronger for it.”

This may sound harsh, but the evidence is all around for everyone to see. Perhaps the Post will eventually wake up to that reality as well. But how long will it take?


Jorge Bergoglio: Humility and Hubris

Share Button

Humility and Hubris

Pope Francis & President Obama

Much has been written about the Pope’s humility, and he himself has often spoken about the need for humility. Yet it is possible to detect a certain amount of hubris in the positions he takes on political and scientific matters.

For example, it takes a certain level of hubris for a man to take a public stand on the threat of global warming when he has no background in the subject, and when the evidence for global warming is sketchy. On that score, it would be interesting to know if the Pope or his advisers subscribe to the “hockey stick” model of global warming promoted by Dr. Michael E. Mann of Penn State University, and later given a starring role in Al Gore’s documentary An Inconvenient Truth. If they do, are they aware thatscores of eminent scientists and climatologists are now deserting the Mann model faster than retirees are deserting the frozen-over country otherwise known as the Northeast.

I’m not saying that the Pope is puffed up with pride—just that he must be awfully sure of his opinion to promote the global warming scare at just the point in time when so many prominent scientists are beginning to have their doubts. “The ecological crisis threatens the existence of humanity,” said Pope Francis. Yet the earth has been warming and cooling for millions of years, and will likely continue to do so for a long time to come.

Moreover, one has to be decidedly sure of oneself to stress the urgency of addressing this hypothetical hyper-crisis when there is another ominous and much more obvious threat to global safety. The pope has spoken about the persecution of Christians and other minorities in the Middle East and Africa, but not with the same urgency he reserves for environmental issues. When speaking of the genocide being committed in the name of Islam, Pope Francis tends to use the language of moral equivalence. Thus, when addressing Congress he lamented:

Our world is increasingly a place of violent conflict, hatred and brutal atrocities committed even in the name of God and of religion. We know that no religion is immune from forms of individual delusion or ideological extremism. This means that we must be especially attentive to every type of fundamentalism…

“Religion?” What religion might that be? Although Pope Francis is quick to condemn rapacious capitalist corporations for the crime of environmental destruction, he lets Islam off the hook for the “brutal atrocities.” Rather, he spreads out the blame for “violent conflict” to include generic fundamentalists from every religion. Could be Catholics. Could be Mormons. Could be Buddhists. Best not to look too closely.

The Pope seems quite sure about things that are widely debated. He is sure that global warming is an imminent threat, and he is sure that violence has nothing to do with Islam. Pride, as they say, goeth before a fall, and, in a way, the pope’s sublime assurance that he is on the right side of the issues helps open the door for even more violent conflict. But before going into that, let me say a bit more about hubris—or, to be specific, liberal hubris.

When it comes to strictly theological matters, it’s not wise to try and fit popes into liberal and conservative categories. But otherwise it seems safe to say that on many political and economic issues, Pope Francis (along with others in the hierarchy) tends to line up with liberals and with the big government solutions that liberals favor. The hierarchy often simply borrows the liberal analysis of problems, assuming that a great deal of thought has gone into the analysis.

But anyone who has dealt with liberals knows that, with some exceptions, they are more interested in feeling good about their policies than in checking to see whether the policies work. What allows them to skip over the details is the presumption that they are highly intelligent, because all the smart people—in government, in the universities, and in media—agree with them. The thinking process for liberals consists largely in checking around to see what other liberals are saying. In brief, if your intentions are good, and if all the best people are of the same mind, there’s no need for further research.

I wouldn’t accuse the Pope (and like-minded bishops) of seeking the praise of the world as so many liberals do, but there is something disturbing about their tendency to adopt the most high-sounding policies without giving much thought to the consequences. All that the bishops (many of them, at least) seem to require of a policy initiative is that it be couched in the language of “peace,” “justice,” and “compassion.” For example, when the world powers signed on to the Iranian nuclear deal, the Vatican immediately endorsed it. Vatican officials probably know very little about the details of uranium enrichment, the difficulty of inspecting secret sites, or the apocalyptic mindset of the mullahs. But none of that matters if you’ve been assured by all the smart people that this deal presents “the best chance for peace.”

Whether or not this knee-jerk endorsement of liberal fantasies amounts to hubris, I can’t say. But there’s little evidence of humility in it—not in the sense of humility before the facts. The facts strongly suggest that the Iran deal will bolster Iran’s worldwide terror campaign. And the facts suggest that once Iran has the bomb, it will use it. The end result of the Iran deal looks to be far more deadly in its consequences than a half-degree rise in the earth’s temperature. Yet Catholic prelates continue to prefer nice-sounding narratives to hard facts.

No one, I think, could doubt the Pope’s personal humility. By all appearances, he is not the sort to take himself too seriously. But, judging by his public advocacy of controversial positions, he does take his ideas seriously.

In the minds of many, however, they are half-baked ideas which, if put into practice, would have the opposite effect from the one the Pope intends. For example, in listening to Pope Francis speak about economic models, you come away with the impression that global poverty is somehow caused by capitalism. But most of the basket-case economies of the world are not run along free market lines. Rather, the socialist model which the Pope seems to favor is a far more reliable generator of poverty. As to Francis’ contention that fossil fuel production hurts the poor, even the most liberal economists would admit that fossil fuel-produced energy has done more to pull more people out of poverty than almost any other factor.

The latest and perhaps most ill-considered initiative coming out of the Vatican is its call for Europeans to welcome hundreds of thousands of migrants into their countries. When he addressed the UN, the Pope spoke of the dreams of immigrants to build a “future in freedom.” But what if the dream of a significant number of migrants is to build a Caliphate in Europe? If that dream is fulfilled—and it seems increasingly likely that it will be—it will create a whole new refugee crisis in Europe: Europeans fleeing the continent before the Islamic Curtain comes crashing down.

No one expects the Pope to issue a call for more water cannons and barbed wire on the borders, but the injunction to help your neighbor in his immediate need ought to be balanced by a more realistic assessment of the overall situation. Pope Francis, however, seems unwilling to frame the issue as anything but a simple matter of compassion.

Others are not so sanguine. As Hungarian bishop Lazlo Kiss-Rigo put it: “They’re not refugees. This is an invasion. They come here with cries of ‘Allahu Akbar.’ They want to take over.” Kiss-Rigo added that the pope was misinformed. “He doesn’t understand the situation,” he said.

That would seem to include not only a misunderstanding of the intentions of the migrants (about 75 percent of whom are single males), but also a gross overestimation of the capacity of Europeans to assimilate them. The Catholic Church in Europe can’t even keep Catholics Catholic. What makes its leaders think they know the key to turning Muslims from the Maghreb and the Middle-East into good Europeans? Over the past half century, the number of Catholic churchgoers has declined precipitously, along with the Catholic birthrate. Meanwhile churches are being turned into mosques at an alarming rate; and in some major cities, Muslim children already outnumber Christian children.

Perhaps the Pope believes that the Church in Europe can eventually recover from whatever setbacks it experiences due to the Islamic incursion. But history suggests that Christianity has never been able to recover from Muslim conquests, except in those cases where Christian armies managed eventually to expel the Muslims invaders.

In the face of Christian persecution, too many Christians are relying on the maxim “the blood of martyrs is the seed of the Church.” It’s true that in case of the Roman Empire, persecution of Christians did lead to the growth of Christianity. But that wasn’t the case in North Africa, Byzantium, and the Middle East—places that were nearly one hundred percent Christian until the Muslims appeared. Under Islamic rule, the Christian population steadily declined, until today Christians in these regions face total extermination.

Will Christianity in Europe survive successive waves of Muslim migrants? Considering what’s at stake, the attitude of the Pope and numerous European bishops is puzzling. We expect bishops to remind their flocks of the duty to help those in need. But we also expect them to warn Christians when there are grave dangers involved. They have done the former, but not the latter. Why? Is it simple ignorance of the true dimensions of the situation, as Bishop Kiss-Rigo suggests? Is it ignorance of history? Ignorance of the Islamic doctrine of hijra (conquest through immigration)? Or is it hubris?

For those of a progressive mindset, dreams of the future take precedence over lessons from the past. For that matter, they rarely feel the need to acquaint themselves with the facts surrounding current issues. A little surface knowledge will do—just enough to give them some talking points. The main thing for them is the feel-good factor. Mid-East scholar Raymond Ibrahim asserts that for Western governments, media, and academia “taking in refugees has little to do with altruism and everything to do with egoism.” He continues: “By taking in ‘foreign’ Muslims as opposed to ‘siding’ with ‘familiar’ Christians, progressives get to feel ‘enlightened,’ ‘open-minded,’ ‘tolerant,’ and ‘multicultural’—and that’s all that matters here.”

I don’t believe that’s “all that matters” for some bishops. I think they are motivated in large part by genuine Christian charity. At the same time, it’s difficult to avoid noticing elements of egoism—a certain self-congratulation on their own compassion, tolerance, and superior understanding of world affairs. And even if their knowledge of world affairs is not extensive, they know that their hearts are in the right place—and that, for them, is the main thing.

Are these bishops consciously trying to win plaudits from the press and praise from the Euro elites for their “forward-looking” views? It’s hard to say. But it’s not difficult to imagine that they are subject to the same temptations as the rest of us—and that includes the temptation to pridefulness. That, more than anything else, may explain their uninformed pronouncements on everything from climate change to jihad. If the word “hubris” seems a bit strong, call it “self-satisfaction,” “intellectual complacency,” or “presumption.” Just don’t call it humility.