Shocking video of Sharia Law “no go zones” could be America’s future

The Democrats’ dream for America is for our country to become a borderless state.

Other Western countries have opened their borders to mass immigration and they are now reaping the consequences.

And this shocking video shows what could happen in America if Democrats get their way.

Lauren Southern is a Canadian independent journalist and investigator. She has over 46 million views on her YouTube channel.

She got banned from the United Kingdom for her video exposing “no go zones” in London.

Now she released a new video where she was threatened by an Australian police officer for filming in a densely populated Muslim community outside of Sydney.

The officer questioned Southern, saying he had “grave concerns that she would cause an imminent breach of the peace” in the majority-Muslim community simply for walking around and asking people questions.

But what he really meant was it’s a “no go zone” for white Christian women.

Watch the full video below.

If the Democrats get their way, these “no go zones” could begin popping up in American cities.

They’re happy to rail against the so-called “white male patriarchy.”

But they refuse to admit that allowing unchecked immigration of foreigners who support Sharia Law would be a disaster for our liberty.

You may also like...

127 Responses

  1. Bob L says:

    OR WE THE PEOPLE WILL. Thank God for the 2nd Amendment

  2. joseph says:

    What ! You had all that and you said nothing.all you had to say was that Islam in their law are horrible they are not a peaceful religion they are the most violent religion or is and we better stop them like Constantine did in the 1300s before they take over the world! lastly, that woman should’ve been allowed down the streets with their cameras asking any question she wanted because if it was a Christianity or Catholic religion you know they were ripped apart!

  3. zee says:

    Please Vasu, please – ‘educate’ me etc re Mohammed/ Muhammed/Islam.
    After that – educate re Hindii.
    Thank you so much.

  4. Vasu Murti says:

    Condemnations of alcohol and drunkenness can be found throughout the Bible. The ancient Hebrews regarded alcohol as both a blessing and a curse. God was praised because “He causes the grass to grow for the cattle and fruits and vegetables for man to cultivate that he may bring forth food from the earth. Wine to gladden the heart of man…” (Psalm 104:14-15)

    On the other hand, alcohol was also an instrument of God’s displeasure: “Thou hast made Thy people suffer hard things; Thou hast given us wine to drink that made us reel.” (Psalm 60:3)

    Wine was permitted for medicinal use. (Proverbs 31:6-7; I Timothy 5:23). At no place in the Bible is alcohol (or any other drug) explicitly forbidden. Drunkenness, or the excesses of alcohol (and presumably all other drugs) is condemned, but not the drug itself.

    Complete abstinence from intoxication, however, was considered a sign of holiness. God commanded His priests to be holy and pure before worship. “Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou nor thy sons with thee, when you go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: it shall be a perpetual statute for ever throughout your generations.” (Leviticus 10:9)

    God also established the order of the Nazarites. The Nazarites distinguished themselves by never allowing a razor to touch their head, abstaining from alcohol, and by their piety before God. “When either a man or woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazarite…. he shall separate himself from wine and strong drink, and shall drink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink, neither shall he drink any liquor of grapes…” (Numbers 6:1-21)

    Wine drinking was equated with sexual immorality and worshiping other gods: “Go, ye, love… an adulteress, according to the love of the Lord toward the children of Israel, who look to other gods, and love flagons of wine.” (Hosea 3:1) “Whoredom and wine and new wine take away the heart.” (Hosea 4:11)

    It appears that wine was never intended for kings or political leaders, because of its intoxicating effects. (Proverbs 31:4-5)

    Excesses of alcohol amongst religious leaders were also denounced in biblical times: “the priest and the prophet reel with strong drink, they are confused with wine, they stagger with strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in giving judgment.” (Isaiah 28:7)

    According to Reverend Alvin Hart, an Episcopal priest in New York, the drinking of wine was frowned upon in biblical times. “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging; and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.” (Proverbs 20:1) Intoxicating beverages were known to be habit-forming (Proverbs 23:35), resulting in violence (Proverbs 4:17) and distracting their imbibers from God (Amos 6:6).

    The Bible says, “…wine is treacherous; the arrogant man shall not abide… woe unto him that giveth his neighbor drink.” (Habbakuk 2:5,15) And: “Who has sorrow? Who has strife? Who has complaining? Who has wounds without course? Who has redness of eyes? Those who tarry long over wine, those who try mixed wine. Do not look at wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup and goes down smoothly. At the last it bites like a serpent, and stings like an adder.” (Proverbs 23:29-32)

    John the Baptist never touched alcohol. Jesus told the multitudes: “John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine…” (Luke 7:33) Jesus warned his disciples: “Be on your guard,” he warned, “so that your hearts are not overloaded with carousing, drunkenness, and worldly cares…be vigilant and pray unceasingly.” (Luke 21:34-36) Referring to Proverbs 23:20, Jesus condemned one who “eats and drinks with the drunken.” (Matthew 24:49; Luke 12:45)

    Peter linked alcoholic excesses to the gentile practices of idolatry and sexual immorality. “For we have spent enough of our past in doing the will of the gentiles — when we walked in lewdness, lusts, drunkenness, revelries, drinking parties and abominable idolatries.” (I Peter 4:3)

    Paul did not forbid wine. Instead, he advocated moderation. Wine is to be taken sparingly, if at all.

    “A bishop then, must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous.” (I Timothy 3:2-3)

    “Likewise, deacons must be reverent, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy for money.” (I Timothy 3:2-3,8) For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled.” (Titus 1:7-8)

    “It was divinely proclaimed,” insisted the early church father Tertullian, “‘Wine and strong liquor shall you not drink, you and your sons after you.’ Now this prohibition of drink is essentially connected with the vegetable diet. Thus, where abstinence from wine is required by the Deity, or is vowed by man, there, too, may be understood suppression of gross feeding, for as is the eating, so is the drinking.

    “It is not consistent with truth that a man should sacrifice half of his stomach only to God–that he should be sober in drinking, but intemperate in eating. Your belly is your God, your liver is your temple, your paunch is your altar, the cook is your priest, and the fat steam is your Holy Spirit; the seasonings and the sauces are your chrisms, and your belchings are your prophesizing…”

    St. Basil (AD 320-79) taught, “The steam of meat darkens the light of the spirit. One can hardly have virtue if one enjoys meat meals and feasts… In the earthly paradise, there was no wine, no one sacrificed animals, and no one ate meat. Wine was only invented after the Deluge…

    “With simple living, well being increases in the household, animals are in safety, there is no shedding of blood, nor putting animals to death. The knife of the cook is needless, for the table is spread only with the fruits that nature gives, and with them they are content.”

    St. Jerome (AD 340-420) wrote to a monk in Milan who had abandoned vegetarianism:

    “As to the argument that in God’s second blessing (Genesis 9:3) permission was given to eat flesh–a permission not given in the first blessing (Genesis 1:29) — let him know that just as permission to put away a wife was, according to the words of the Saviour, not given from the beginning, but was granted to the human race by Moses because of the hardness of our hearts (Matthew 19:1-12), so also in like manner the eating of flesh was unknown until the Flood, but after the Flood, just as quails were given to the people when they murmured in the desert, so have sinews and the offensiveness been given to our teeth.

    “The Apostle, writing to the Ephesians, teaches us that God had purposed that in the fullness of time he would restore all things, and would draw to their beginning, even to Christ Jesus, all things that are in heaven or that are on earth. Whence also, the Saviour Himself in the Apocalypse of John says, ‘I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.’ From the beginning of human nature, we neither fed upon flesh nor did we put away our wives, nor were our foreskins taken away from us for a sign. We kept on this course until we arrived at the Flood.

    “But after the Flood, together with the giving of the Law, which no man could fulfill, the eating of flesh was brought in, and the putting away of wives was conceded to hardness of heart… But now that Christ has come in the end of time, and has turned back Omega to Alpha… neither is it permitted to us to put away our wives, nor are we circumcised, nor do we eat flesh.”

    St. Jerome was responsible for the Vulgate, or Latin version of the Bible, still in use today. He felt a vegetarian diet was best for those devoted to the pursuit of wisdom. He once wrote that he was not a follower of Pythagoras or Empodocles “who do not eat any living creature,” but concluded, “And so I too say to you: if you wish to be perfect, it is good not to drink wine and eat flesh.”

    “Thanks be to God!” wrote John Wesley, founder of Methodism, to the Bishop of London in 1747. “Since the time I gave up the use of flesh-meats and wine, I have been delivered from all physical ills.” Wesley was a vegetarian for spiritual reasons as well. He based his vegetarianism on the biblical prophecies concerning the Kingdom of Peace, where “on the new earth, no creature will kill, or hurt, or give pain to any other.” He further taught that animals “shall receive an ample amends for all their present sufferings.”

    Wesley’s teachings placed an emphasis on inner religion and the effect of the Holy Spirit upon the consciousness of such followers. Wesley taught that animals will attain heaven: in the “general deliverance” from the evils of this world, animals would be given “vigor, strength and swiftness…to a far higher degree than they ever enjoyed.”

    Wesley urged parents to educate their children about compassion towards animals. He wrote: “I am persuaded you are not insensible of the pain given to every Christian, every humane heart, by those savage diversions, bull-baiting, cock-fighting, horse-racing, and hunting.”

    The Bible Christian Church was a 19th century movement teaching vegetarianism, abstinence from wine, and compassion for animals. The church began in England in 1800, requiring all its members to take vows of abstinence from meat and wine. One of its first converts, William Metcalfe (1788-1862), immigrated to Philadelphia in 1817 with forty-one followers to establish a church in America. Metcalfe cited numerous biblical references to support his thesis that humans were meant to follow a vegetarian diet for reasons of health and compassion for animals.

    Although gambling is not explicitly forbidden in the Bible, it does prey upon the individual’s desire for worldly riches. This desire for immediate wealth and self-aggrandizement is contrary to the spirit of New Testament teaching.

    Jesus taught the multitudes to seek the eternal treasures in heaven rather than pursue temporary, earthly gain. He insisted upon the self-sacrifice and renunciation of earthly possessions and family ties and duties. (Matthew 6:19-21, 6:24-34, 8:21-22, 10:34-39, 19:20-21,29; Luke 9:57-62, 12:51-53, 14:25-26,33; James 5:1-3)

    Jesus had no interest in worldly disputes over income and property. (Luke 12:13-14) He taught that life is meant for more than the accumulation of material goods. He condemned those who lay up treasures for themselves, but are not rich towards God. (Luke 12:15-21) In his parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man, Jesus expressed concern for materialistic persons (Luke 16:19-31).

    Jesus taught that it is hard for those attached to earthly riches to enter the kingdom of God. (Matthew 19:16-24; Mark 10:17-23; Luke 18:18-25) His apostles lead lives of voluntary poverty; sharing their possessions with one another. Those among the brethren who did not do so were condemned. (Acts 2:44, 5:1-11)

    “He who loves his life will lose it,” taught Jesus, “and he who hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life…For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?” (Matthew 16:26; Mark 8:36; Luke 9:25; John 12:25)

    In Paul’s words:

    “Piety with contentment is great gain indeed; for we brought nothing into the world and, obviously, we can carry nothing out. When we have food and clothing, we shall be content with these.

    “Those who are eager to be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into numerous thoughtless and hurtful cravings that plunge people into destruction and ruin.

    “For the love of money is the root of all evil. In striving for it, some have wandered away from the faith…But you, O man of God, shun these things and go after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, gentleness.”

    – I Timothy 6:6-11

    Although a representative of the Catholic church once said, “There is no eleventh commandment against gambling,” conservative Protestants have traditionally taken a dim view of gambling.

    “I find it impossible even in my weakest moments,” wrote Richard Emrich in the Christian Century, “when the financial needs of the church are most pressing, to imagine St. John, St. Paul, or St. Peter running a bingo party or our Lord sending out his disciples to sell chances.

    “And I shudder at the thought that some young person might say, “It’s all right to gamble. We do it at church.”

    The Puritans of Massachusetts enacted America’s first law against gambling in 1638. In 1682, the Quakers in Pennsylvania passed their own law against gambling and “such like enticing, vain, and evil sports and games.”

    During the period from 1830 to 1860, lotteries were banned across America. By 1908, nearly every state in the nation had banned horse racing.

    Neil Reagan, older brother to Ronald Reagan, once said of his younger brother, “I don’t think he ever saw the inside of a pool hall,” indicating that even in mainstream secular American society, gambling carries with it a shady connotation.

    Again: the biblical tradition opposes gambling, but this is an implied idea, not clearly spelled out in Scripture.

    I bet this is true of the pro-life position and many other moral positions taken by differing denominations, too!

    My point is Christians today fail to see nondrinking, nonsmoking, abstinence from gambling, sexual restraint, vegetarianism, praising God, etc. as nonsectarian virtues, even though these values are taught in Christianity as well.

    There was an episode of The Brady Bunch in which Greg Brady is caught with cigarettes on him, he pleads innocence, and at the end of the episode, it’s discovered the cigarettes belong to a friend of his whose mother is involved in a campaign against teen smoking. Were the Brady Bunch “Mormon” ? Should we presume the anti-smoking campaign is Mormon? Of course not! Again, my point is Christians today fail to see nondrinking, nonsmoking, abstinence from gambling, sexual restraint, vegetarianism, praising God, etc. as nonsectarian virtues, even though these values are taught in Christianity as well. In recent decades, the straight edge punk scene has embraced these values.

    There was a time, a few generations ago, when being a Christian actually meant something. The values are nonsectarian virtues, and were once considered conservative Christian values.

    George W. Bush quits drinking and drugs, and as governor of Texas, endorses the “True Love Waits” campaign of young Christian teens pledging to save themselves for marriage… and everyone thinks that’s wonderful!

    There are over 40,000 different Christian denominations, from Catholics to Baptists to Unitarians to Mormons to Jehovah’s Witnesses to Christian Science to the United Church of Christ to Seventh Day Adventists, etc… and they all have differing views on grace versus works, the Trinity, the afterlife, the divinity of Jesus, faith healing, speaking in tongues, snake-handling, smoking, drinking, gambling, abortion, etc.

    Whether or not Jesus is God or an empowered representative serving on God’s behalf (which is closer to the Judaic concept of the messiah) and was later deified by his followers, is subject to debate. In Acts 2:22, Peter refers to Jesus as a “man certified by God.” The doctrine of the godhood of Jesus is questionable. (Matthew 12:18, 27:46; Mark 13:32; Luke 23:46; John 14:2, 17:21; Acts 2:22, 3:13).

    Yes, Jesus says, “The Father and I are one” (John 10:30), but he also prays with his disciples, “As You and I are one, let them (the disciples) also be one in us” (John 17:21), implying this “oneness” is a relationship others may also experience. The biblical phrase about Jesus sitting at the right hand of God would also be meaningless if there were not two distinct individuals — God and Jesus: the Lord and His servant.

    St. Peter referred to Jesus as “a man certified by God.” (Acts 2:22) Victor Paul Wierwille, founder of The Way International, wrote an entire book on the subject, entitled, Jesus Christ Is Not God. It is unclear to some Christians, having studied the Sanskrit literatures, whether Jesus is jiva-tattva (one of God’s children, like ourselves) or vishnu-tattva (an expansion of God Himself, like the Trinitarian conception).

    Jesus was a genuine historical personality, like Pythagoras, the Buddha, or Mahavira, around whom many contradictory legends (the resurrection, genealogies, the virgin birth, etc.) have emerged.

    First century Pythagoreanism is described in detail in The Life of Apollonius of Tiana. The ancient texts records this neoplatonic philosopher and miracle worker having a divine birth, absorbing the wisdom of Pythagoras, practicing celibacy, vegetarianism, as well as voluntary poverty; healing the sick, restoring sight to the blind, exorcising demons, foretelling the future, and teaching the innermost secrets of religion. Finally, the text says he never died, but went directly to heaven in a physical assumption.

    Sound familiar?

    But Apollonius of Tiana *was* a genuine historical personality, who lived from 40 – 120 AD!

    Similarly, Jesus *was* a genuine historical personality, around whom many contradictory legends (the resurrection, genealogies, the virgin birth, etc.) have emerged.

    Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille, founder of The Way International, wrote an entire book on the subject, entitled: Jesus Christ is not God.

    In his 1983 essay “A Jewish Encounter with the Bhagavad-gita,” Harold Kasimow discusses ideas “which seem totally incompatible with the Jewish tradition. The most striking example is the doctrine of incarnation, a concept which is as central to the Gita as it is to Christianity. According to the Gita, Krishna is an incarnation (avatar), or appearance of God in human form.

    “A study of the Jewish response to the Christian doctrine of incarnation shows that Jews, and I may add, Muslims have not been able to reconcile this idea with their own scriptural notion of God.”

    It is unclear to some Christians, having studied the Sanskrit literatures, whether Jesus is jiva-tattva (one of God’s children, like ourselves) or vishnu-tattva (an expansion of God Himself, like the Trinitarian conception).

  5. zee says:

    PS. Please Tell All, Vasu, re Mohammad./Muhammad & Islam.
    Forget ‘mixing & matching’ >Tell ALL the REAL Truth. First of
    All, YOU Need to Acknowledge the Truth for Yourself, & experience
    a ‘ComeUppance’ ____ ‘WE’ ‘ Know’. Already.

  6. zee says:

    This VasuMurti IS on a ‘free speech’ Invasion Mission.
    > Erroneous Info at best. Bits& Pieces = True/False/Twisted.
    > Not to mention Lengthy/ Boring, in the ‘twist’/ Time Wasting.
    > All i need is a few Sentences, then Gone !!! So – Vasu, have NO
    Time to read your ‘somewhat ‘thoughts’. GO – PLEASE, Help
    Your Country of 0rigin., Help Your PPL. You Will DO Much Better There.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: