Murder, Intrigues, Confusions, CIA, Sodomy, Putin
When the mass media side with homosexual activists against Christians, the public disagrees.
When the mass media side with Obama against the American people, the public disagrees.
When the mass media side with an anti-Putin version in a case involving a Putin opponent “mysteriously” murdered, does the public agree?
According to Paul Craig Roberts, who was a Reagan official, the “mysterious” murder of a Putin opponent was a destabilizing plot by CIA in the spirit of Obama hostilities against Russia.
And according to Dr. Scott Lively, the most prominent authority on the evils of gay agenda, in the early 1990s Bill Clinton struck down a ban on homosexuals working at CIA and other intelligence agencies.
By Clinton courtesy, for more than two decades homosexuals have increasingly been there: CIA, FBI, NSA, etc.
Dr. Lively makes it clear that wherever they are, homosexual activists produce intrigues, confusions and havoc, always using their occupations for their greater cause and always for its opponents’ disadvantage. And homosexuals occupying posts in the greatest intelligence agency in the world are capable of provoking the biggest damages in the world against those not aligning themselves with their agenda.
Weeks ago, the most prominent homosexual magazine in the U.S. named Putin as an enemy number 1 of the homosexual movement. This did not go unnoticed by homosexuals in the intelligence agencies. In fact, it has not gone unnoticed even by the mainstream media, habitually pro-Obama and pro-sodomy, by insistently against the Russian president.
This is the cost for the president of a great nation today to pass laws to protect children and teens from the obvious evils of homosexual propaganda.
A common citizen opposing the aggressive gay agenda is victim of patently malicious set-ups, slanders, intrigues and threats. Would a president suffer less?
Homosexual activists are ruthless, lying and relentless to common citizens who do not accept their tyrannical agenda. Would they be less ruthless to a president?