I thought it was a joke by ultra-traditionalists to shame the bishop or embarrass him. No bishop in his right mind would create a document like that other than someone with freaky control issues. 

Well, evidently it is true, but the bishop is relenting for the time being! Pray that the bishop’s control issues are properly addressed and pray for the Diocese of Charlotte.

Read the Pillar article by pressing title:

Sources: Charlotte bishop shelves Mass manifesto, for now

After TLM pushback, liturgical controversy continues in North Carolina

In an effort to combat “potential public corruption,” the nation’s top law enforcement agency is revisiting one of the most significant and high-profile unsolved cases from the Biden administration era. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Deputy Director Dan Bongino announced Monday that he and FBI Director Kash Patel are going to “re-open” an investigation into the consequential 2022 leak of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, which sparked widespread violence across the nation, including at least one attempted assassination of a Supreme Court justice.

“Shortly after swearing in, the director and I evaluated a number of cases of potential public corruption that, understandably, have garnered public interest. We made the decision to either re-open or push additional resources and investigative attention to these cases,” Bongino shared. He continued, “I receive requested briefings on these cases weekly, and we are making progress. If you have any investigative tips on these matters that may assist us then please contact the FBI.”

John Malcolm, vice president of the Institute for Constitutional Government and director of Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at the Heritage Foundation, told The Washington Stand, “The Dobbs leak was a gross abuse of trust by someone within the court system.” He explained, “I doubt that the Dobbs leak itself had much impact on how the public views the court’s legitimacy and impartiality. The public’s view of such matters is more governed by whether they like the results in particular cases and by ill-considered, harsh rhetoric challenging the integrity of some of the justices and criticizing opinions in controversial cases.” He continued, “In a very real way, though, the Dobbs leak imperiled the lives of the justices and their families.”

Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ//

In May of 2022, Politico published a draft Supreme Court opinion, authored in February by Justice Samuel Alito, in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The draft opinion made it evident that not only was the Supreme Court all but certain to rule in favor of the Mississippi pro-life law at the center of the case, but that a majority of justices on the Supreme Court were prepared to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, prior Supreme Court opinions (handed down in 1973 and 1992, respectively) which had extended broad federal legal protections to the practice of abortion.

Politico cited a “person familiar with the court’s deliberations” to confirm that Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett had already voted in favor of Alito’s opinion following oral arguments in December of 2021, yielding a five-justice majority to strike down Roe and Casey, as the abortion-centered precedents are known colloquially.

Chief Justice John Roberts, who sided with the majority on Mississippi’s pro-life law but did not join in overturning Roe and Casey, publicly confirmed that the leaked draft opinion was authentic. He said in a written statement at the time that “this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations…” Roberts added, “This was a singular and egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the Court and the community of public servants who work here.” CNN later reported that Roberts had been attempting to sway his fellow Republican-appointed justices to join him in his own opinion, which would not have affected Roe and Casey, but would have still upheld Mississippi’s pro-life legislation. The news outlet said that the leak of the draft opinion “made the effort all but impossible…”

When the Supreme Court issued its final verdict in late June, the published opinion was almost identical to the leaked Alito draft, and Alito was joined by Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, just as Politico had anticipated. Of course, other news outlets — such as SCOTUSblog, CNN, and CNBC — had made similar predictions following oral arguments, over six months before the Supreme Court rendered a final ruling, based purely on the line of questioning pursued by Republican-appointed justices.

Although the draft opinion leak was declared “unprecedented” by some news outlets, there have been some leaks in the past. It has been reported that the Supreme Court’s 1857 ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford, holding that black slaves were not legally classified as U.S. citizens, was leaked to then-President-elect James Buchanan just a few days before the ruling itself was published. However, the narrow scope of the leak naturally narrowed its impact, only allowing Buchanan to prepare to deal politically with the Supreme Court’s ruling.

In 1973, the Supreme Court’s Roe ruling was leaked to Time Magazine. While this leak was broader in scope than the Dred Scott leak, being published in a well-read national news magazine, it still had little impact on the court’s actual ruling. Larry Hammond, a clerk for Justice Lewis Powell, gave a copy of the opinion to a Times reporter, expecting the ruling to have been published by the Supreme Court before the magazine could publish its next issue. A slight delay in the Supreme Court’s publication of the decision, however, meant that the text of the controversial opinion was printed and published by Time hours before the Supreme Court published its decision officially.

The Dobbs leak was, perhaps, equally broad in its scope but significantly deeper in its impact. The Supreme Court, in this instance, was not mere hours away from publishing an already-finalized opinion — as the final opinion itself makes clear, Alito made several changes between February and the date of the Supreme Court’s final ruling — but was still in the late stages of deliberation and would not officially render an opinion for nearly two months. A lot can happen in two months.

Already anticipating a possible ruling aborting Roe and Casey, groups like Planned Parenthood had planned a series of demonstrations and protests, but rapidly re-organized the events in the wake of the Dobbs leak. Thousands of pro-abortion activists marched through Washington, D.C. and major metropolitan centers like New York City and Los Angeles less than two weeks after the Dobbs leak. Some pro-abortion groups warned that the nation could expect a “summer of rage” if the Supreme Court followed through on the leaked opinion. With the disastrous Black Lives Matter riots of 2020 — which cost unparallelled billions of dollars in property damages, injured at least 700 police officers in a matter of mere months, and claiming 25 lives or more — fresh in the minds of many Americans, the threat was not taken lightly.

In fact, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) specifically warned in a memo that political violence was likely to occur as a result of the Dobbs leak and would only “persist and may increase leading up to and following the issuing of the Court’s official ruling.” While the memo, issued under the tenure of pro-abortion then-President Joe Biden, claimed that “racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists’ embrace of pro-life narratives may be linked to the perception of wanting to ‘save white children’ and ‘fight white genocide,’” the DHS ultimately warned that political violence would most likely be carried out by pro-abortion activists.

Pro-abortion activists made clear their intent to target pro-life pregnancy resource centers and Catholic parishes in response to the Dobbs leak. DHS reportedly warned the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) of credible threats against Catholic parishes and leaders. The Catholic Church, of course, has long opposed abortion and Justices Alito, Thomas, Kavanaugh, and Barrett are all Catholics; Gorsuch was raised Catholic and educated by Jesuits, and both Roberts and Sotomayor identify as Catholic, although Roberts did not join the majority in reversing Roe and Casey and Sotomayor has long been an abortion proponent. The advocacy organization CatholicVote reported that there have been, to date, nearly 340 attacks on Catholic churches in the U.S. since the Dobbs leak, ranging from vandalism and property destruction to attempted arson and firebombing.

Five weeks after the Dobbs leak, a man flew from California to D.C. with the intention of going on a killing spree. His target: Supreme Court justices. Nicholas Roske went to Kavanaugh’s house first, in Montgomery County, Maryland. He was armed with a pistol and equipped with gear to break into the justice’s house undetected. Roske confirmed that he intended to kill at least three justices and specifically cited the leaked Dobbs opinion as his inspiration. Notably, the Chief Justice had been courting Kavanaugh as a potential ally in defecting from the majority and joining him in his own opinion, which would have effectively split the Supreme Court and preserved Roe and Casey. Thanks to the increased presence of U.S. Marshals deputies providing security for Kavanaugh and the other justices, Roske turned himself in to police. He is slated to be sentenced in October of this year.

Malcolm commented to TWS, “This should not have been surprising.” He explained, “The would-be assassin no doubt figured out that if he could kill one of the justices in the majority, that would not only change the outcome of the case (since a four-to-four tie would have left the lower court opinion, which upheld Roe, in place), but also would have resulted in President Biden getting to replace one of the Republican appointees; there is no question that anyone he would have appointed would vote in a future case to uphold Roe. Thankfully, that assassination attempt failed.”

Immediately following the leak, Roberts ordered Supreme Court Marshal Gail Curley to conduct an investigation determining who leaked the draft opinion and how. Nearly nine months later, in late January of 2023, Curley and the Supreme Court admitted that the investigation had been unsuccessful. The investigation included forensic analysis, nearly 130 interviews with staff members, and an examination of Supreme Court policies and processes regarding the circulation of drafts and the use of technology. A report from Curley’s office concluded that “investigators have found no forensic evidence indicating who disclosed the draft opinion.”

Glenn Fine, a former Inspector General (IG) for the Department of Justice and deputy I.G. for the Department of Defense, wrote a scathing critique of Curley’s investigation in March of 2023. “This result did not surprise me,” Fine said of the investigation’s lack of resolution, noting that, in his prodigious experience, leaks “are notoriously difficult to resolve.” The IG extraordinaire wrote, “Unfortunately, the leak investigation … demonstrates how not to conduct a leak investigation.” He continued, “The first problem in the Court’s leak investigation was whom the Court asked to conduct it.” Fine pointed to Curley’s lack of experience in “conducting this type of complex investigation” and the fact that she “did not have the necessary independence to conduct the investigation. In essence, she was asked to investigate her bosses, the justices, who are in the universe of potential leakers. They supervise her and can fire her.”

Fine also noted a point that numerous news outlets, political pundits, and armchair investigators had also raised their eyebrows over when Curley’s report was first published: while the investigation interviewed nearly 100 staff members, law clerks, and others under oath, the justices themselves were not put under oath. Interviews were conducted with them, sometimes multiple interviews, but neither the justices nor their families were put under oath or asked for sworn depositions. Fine wrote that Curley did not give “any reason for this double standard. It was an Alice in Wonderland investigation: The conclusion seemed to come first — let’s focus on the clerks and employees, not the justices, as the likely source of the leak — rather than result from a consistent investigation focusing on all potential leakers.”

Although Bongino announced that the FBI will “re-open” an investigation into the Dobbs leak, the law enforcement agency never formally opened an investigation in the first place. Concerned with ensuring the Supreme Court’s independence and autonomy, Roberts did not ask the FBI to intervene but instead suggested that the Supreme Court investigate itself.

Malcolm commented, “While I do not know whether the initial investigation was inadequate, I do know that the FBI has certain tools at its disposal that the Supreme Court’s Marshal’s Office and an outside contractor do not have.” Those tools include “being able to issue subpoenas, obtain electronic evidence, and convene a grand jury to receive evidence, including live testimony. I hope that with these tools the FBI will be able to uncover the identity of the leaker,” he added.

Malcolm further anticipated that the leaker, if identified, could face years of prison. “The leaker could be subjected to criminal penalties. Two crimes come to mind. First, obstruction of justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503), which carries a potential 10-year sentence, makes it crime to ‘corruptly … endeavor[] to influence, intimidate any … court of the United States … or endeavor[] to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice ….’” Malcolm explained. He continued, “The second, conversion of government property (18 U.S.C. § 641), which carries a potential 10-year sentence, makes it a crime to ‘knowing[ly] convert[] to his use or the use of another … any record … or thing of value of the United States or of any department of agency thereof ….’” He added, “And, of course, if the perpetrator lies to a federal agent or before a grand jury during the course of this investigation, there are additional criminal statutes that would apply.”

LifeNews Note: S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

The post FBI Will Investigate Unsolved Dobbs Leak appeared first on LifeNews.com.

The German chancellor has claimed that Moscow is obstructing the Ukraine peace process and vowed to “increase pressure”

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has pledged to do “everything” to prevent the Russian Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from being launched. The gas inter-connector from Russia through the Baltic sea to Germany was destroyed by a series of underwater explosions in September 2022 in an act of sabotage that Russia believes was orchestrated by Western intelligence agencies.

Merz’s declaration comes as Moscow and Kiev draft respective proposals for bringing about a ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict, following their first direct peace talks in three years in Istanbul.

The talks marked a shift for Kiev, which abandoned diplomatic efforts in 2022 in favor of seeking a military victory on orders from the West. While Moscow has reported progress on its proposal, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and his EU backers have accused Russia of stalling.

During a joint press conference with Zelensky in Berlin on Wednesday, Merz vowed to “further increase pressure on Russia” and “weaken Moscow’s war machine” through sanctions, including on Nord Stream 2.

“I say on behalf of the Federal Republic of Germany, we will do everything in this context to ensure that Nord Stream 2 cannot be put back into operation,” he stated. He claimed that the measures aim to “pave the way for negotiations,” despite Moscow’s repeated criticism of Western sanctions policy.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said earlier this month that Brussels had planned an 18th sanctions package to include measures aimed at Nord Stream 2 AG, the Swiss-based entity that owns the pipelines, and any other companies necessary for their restart and operation.

Media reports have claimed that Merz has supported the move and that he has opened talks in Berlin and Brussels to prevent any revival of energy trade with Russia.

A number of European officials have opposed targeting the pipelines. Florian Philippot, a prominent French Euroskeptic, has warned that such a move would amount to a “death sentence” for European industry. Michael Kretschmer, the prime minister of the German state of Saxony, has argued that “Nord Stream is a possible opening for a conversation with Russia,” adding that such talks would benefit Germany as its economy needs Russian gas supplies to function normally.

READ MORE: German politician urges talks on restoring Nord Stream

Earlier reports have also claimed that Russia and the US were exploring ways to resume shipments through the still-intact line of Nord Stream 2.

The long-range weapons are a “taboo,” but Berlin would likely provide Kiev with other arms, the report says

Germany will not supply Ukraine with Taurus long-range cruise missiles, Bild reported on Wednesday, citing sources. Officials in Berlin have for months been reluctant to greenlight the shipment over concerns that it could lead to a major escalation.

While Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky is expected to meet with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in Berlin on Wednesday to discuss continued Western military assistance, a “big breakthrough is unlikely to happen,” according to Bild.

Merz is not expected to approve the delivery of Taurus cruise missiles, which have a range of up to 500km, the newspaper claimed, adding that officials in Berlin are still avoiding discussing the so-called “T-question” which is seen as “taboo.”

While Taurus deliveries reportedly remain off the table, the German government is expected to offer Kiev alternative systems. According to Bild, these could include more Mars-2 multiple rocket launchers, a system already supplied in 2022 and which have a maximum range of 85km.

The German newspaper noted, however, that M30 and M31 missile that accompany the system are GPS-guided munitions and hence have limited utility, given that Russian forces have been able to counteract such technology.

Germany is also reportedly planning to support Ukraine’s domestic weapons production by allocating millions of euros to assist Kiev in developing and manufacturing its own long-range cruise missiles, some with ranges up to 2,500km.

Earlier this week, Merz said that Ukraine was no longer limited in range to use Western-supplied weapons to strike inside Russia, claiming the decision had been made months ago. In contrast, Ukrainian leader Zelensky said he had not yet received formal approval from his European backers, although he suggested that the green light could come soon.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov warned on Tuesday that the lifting of range restrictions for strikes inside Russia would mark a “serious escalation” and would “most severely undermine attempts for a peaceful settlement.”

The previous German government under Chancellor Olaf Scholz long resisted calls to supply Taurus missiles to Ukraine, arguing that doing so would risk drawing Berlin into the conflict. In the spring of 2024, Scholz stressed that deliveries of German-made long-range weapons to Ukraine would “only be sensibly supplied if they would involve the deployment of German soldiers.”

A group of congressmen have also raised concerns over the EU’s silence on Warsaw’s refusal to release campaign funds to the opposition party

US lawmakers have called on the European Commission to address suspected election fraud in Poland, voicing concern over what they describe as a biased approach ahead of the country’s June 1 presidential runoff.

In a letter to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Brian Mast and fellow members expressed “profound alarm” over developments “undermining the integrity of democratic processes” in Poland. The letter cited foreign-funded online campaigns backing liberal Warsaw Mayor Rafal Trzaskowski and the Polish government’s refusal to release public funds to the opposition Law and Justice (PiS) party.

The concerns centered on political ads favoring Trzaskowski, backed by Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s Civic Coalition, which were allegedly financed from abroad. Poland’s digital watchdog NASK earlier this month flagged paid Facebook ads that promoted Trzaskowski while targeting right-wing candidates Karol Nawrocki and Slawomir Mentzen.

While the funding source remains unverified, a Polish outlet linked the campaign to a local NGO connected to US Democratic donor George Soros’ Open Society Foundations. US lawmakers warned the campaign “may have occurred in contravention of Polish law.”

Another matter raised in the letter was the Polish government’s refusal to release public campaign funds to the PiS party. The funds had previously been blocked due to the party’s alleged spending violations during the 2023 parliamentary race. The Supreme Court later overturned the decision, but the verdict was issued by judges appointed under the former PiS-led administration – whom the current government considers illegitimate – and Warsaw has refused to comply and continued to withhold the money.

The US lawmakers believe the move violates the rule of law. They also noted that despite the European Commission’s vocal criticism and decision to withhold over $150 billion from Poland for alleged rule-of-law violations under the previous PiS government, it has been “conspicuously silent” in this case.

“This double standard suggests a deliberate effort to tilt the electoral playing field. Such selective enforcement undermines the EU’s credibility as a guardian of democratic principles,” they stated.

“These actions, occurring under the European Commission’s watch, expose a troubling double-standard in the EU’s approach to Poland’s rule of law, which demands urgent attention.”

The lawmakers requested a briefing with Commission representatives to discuss the concerns.

Trzaskowski won 31.1% in the first round, while Nawrocki took 29.7%. Trzaskowski, seen as the pro-Brussels and pro-Ukraine frontrunner, backs increased defense spending and continued support for Kiev. Nawrocki also supports military aid for Ukraine, but opposes NATO and EU membership for Kiev unless Ukraine acknowledges World War II-era massacres of Poles.

The European Commission has declined to comment directly on the letter. A spokesperson told Politico, however, that election oversight is a national matter and that the Commission “does not address electoral processes.”

(h/t KK in the combox)

Bishop Martin ‘thrilled’ about new Pope Leo XIV

CHARLOTTE — When Bishop Michael Martin met April 1 with Cardinal Robert Prevost in Rome, he had no idea he was sitting down to talk with a future pope.

On Thursday, Bishop Martin said he is thrilled that the Chicago-born cardinal – now known as Pope Leo XIV – had become the 267th pope. At a press conference at the Diocesan Pastoral Center in Charlotte, he called the election “a unique blessing” for Catholics worldwide and in the Diocese of Charlotte.

“I’m very surprised – I never would have dreamt that we would see a pope born in the United States in my lifetime,” Bishop Martin said. “I admit that as I was sitting there watching him walk out onto the loggia, I was very shocked. At the same time, I knew he had been considered, and at least in my dealings with him I felt he certainly had the qualifications for it and has had experiences in diverse parts of the world that allow him to bring to this position a unique blessing that I think we’re going to see very quickly.”

Bishop Martin’s meeting with Cardinal Prevost came in the pope’s former capacity as the Vatican’s head of the Dicastery for Bishops, the office that handles appointments of bishops worldwide. During the hour-long meeting, Bishop Martin said he gained a sense of the future pope’s personality as well as his deep knowledge of issues affecting the Church…

https://catholicnewsherald.com/90-news/local/11633-bishop-martin-welcomes-news-of-new-pope-leo-xiv

Republican Virginia Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears’ gubernatorial campaign rolled out a new ad Wednesday morning, the Daily Caller News Foundation has learned.

The release of the ad, titled, “Always,” is the second video the Earle-Sears campaign has put out highlighting the lieutenant governor’s background, including her service in the Marines, working class roots and status as a first-generation American. The Earle-Sears campaign is putting $1 million behind the 30-second video, which spotlights her work with Virginia Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin to lower taxes and improve education.

“I’m no typical politician,” Earle-Sears says in the ad. “I’m a first generation American, joined the Marines, graduated college as a working mom, raised a family, became a grandma, 1st woman elected lieutenant governor.”

Youngkin, who is barred from running for a second consecutive term due to Virginia state law, endorsed Earle-Sears’ candidacy in November. The race between Earle-Sears and her Democratic opponent, former Virginia Rep. Abigail Spanberger, is one of the most-watched contests of 2025 and is likely to be seen as an early indicator of the two parties’ performances in the 2026 midterms.

LifeNews is on GETTR. Please follow us for the latest pro-life news

A poll commissioned by Virginia FREE, a business advocacy organization, published Thursday found that Earle-Sears is trailing Spanberger just outside the margin of error — 48% to 52%. Another poll also released Thursday showed Spanberger with a significantly larger lead of 17 percentage points.

Though Spanberger is not mentioned by name in the ad, Earle-Sears makes a veiled critique of her Democratic opponent’s ties to Washington.

“If you want another typical politician, look to Washington,” Earle-Sears says in the ad. “But if you want a United States Marine who will always fight for Virginia, I’d be honored to have your vote.”

Spanberger served three terms in Congress beginning in 2019, before launching her gubernatorial bid.

Winsome-Sears has recently gone on the offensive in criticizing her opponent’s left-wing voting record.

The former Democratic congresswoman voted against legislation that would have barred biological males from girls and women’s sports and a bill seeking to crack down on illegal immigration, known as the Laken Riley Act, which President Trump signed into law in January with bipartisan support.

“She [Spanberger] has voted against building the wall,” Earle-Sears told Fox News in February. “She has voted for amnesty, for criminal illegals, she has voted against qualified immunity to — so that the morale of our law enforcement will stay up and their personal possessions won’t be subject to being taken from them because they are doing their job keeping us safe.”

Earle-Sears has also sought to put Spanberger in the hot seat over her shifting views on Virginia’s right-to-work law, which prohibits mandatory union membership or paying union dues as a condition of employment. Though Spanberger has supported legislation in Congress that would have effectively banned state right-t0-work laws, she announced on May 8 that she does not support a full repeal of Virginia’s statute.

Earle-Sears has challenged Spanberger to sign a pledge to preserve the commonwealth’s right-to-work law.

Though Spanberger could have several advantages heading into November, including an edge in fundraising and significant Democratic voter enthusiasm, Earle-Sears has fiercely pushed back on reports suggesting a Democratic victory in November is a predetermined outcome.

“I am focused on what matters: making Virginians’ lives better,” Earle-Sears told the DCNF on May 21. “Washington chatter won’t distract me from that.”

LifeNews Note: Adam Pack writes for Daily Caller. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience.

The post Pro-Life Republican Winsome Sears Releases New Ad in Campaign for Virginia Governor appeared first on LifeNews.com.

America and Argentina will create a new alternative to the pro-abortion WHO after both countries leave the controversial UN agency.

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his Argentine counterpart on Tuesday announced the United States and Argentina are creating an “alternative international health system” to the World Health Organization (WHO). President Donald Trump on his first day in office signed an executive order that began the year-long process of withdrawing from the WHO for multiple reasons, including its abortion advocacy and botched handling of COVID.

Kennedy and Argentine Minister of Health Mario Lugones criticized the WHO in a joint statement saying its poor performance left “devastating global consequences.”

“The absence of meaningful reforms, disproportionate financial demands, and the increasing politicization of the organization have ultimately led the United States and Argentina to withdraw from the WHO,” they said. “Withdrawal marks the beginning of a new path—toward building a modern global health cooperation model grounded in scientific integrity, transparency, sovereignty, and accountability.

LifeNews is on GETTR. Please follow us for the latest pro-life news

“Our shared commitment is to cost-effective, evidence-based public health interventions that prioritize prevention, especially in children, by addressing root causes such as environmental toxins, nutritional deficiencies and food safety standards,” they said.

“Under President Donald J. Trump, the United States is restoring a sovereign, results-driven approach—putting people above politics,” the statement continued. “Argentina, likewise, supports public health systems rooted in autonomy, transparency, innovation, and scientific rigor. We can no longer support a system that fails to protect our people or deliver on its mandate.

“The United States and Argentina invite all nations committed to scientific integrity, transparency, and the defense of human dignity to join us in shaping a new era of global health cooperation,” they added.

“That’s a big one,” Trump said before signing the document to leave WHO.

As LifeNews previously reported, a branch of the WHO spends approximately 11% of its budget promoting abortion:

The Human Reproduction Programme (HRP), run by the WHO, directed 11% of its funds for 2022-23 on projects related to abortion.

Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and videos.

Activities that this funding is spent on include developing an ‘evidence base’ that has been used to lobby governments around the world to introduce ‘DIY’ at-home abortions. The report also details their work to ‘scale up’ the availability of Mifepristone and Misoprostol, the two ‘commodities’ used in medical abortions.

Only 5% of the budget is directed to programmes tackling violence against women and girls. And only 15% of the budget funds maternal and perinatal health. The high proportion of money set aside for abortion provision indicates where the WHO’s priorities lie.

Right To Life UK spokesperson Catherine Robinson said “It is shocking to see the priorities of the World Health Organization. When millions more dollars are spent on abortion than preventing violence against women and girls, it is clear that something has gone terribly wrong”.

Raimundo Rojas, the Outreach Director for the National Right to Life Committee, has also condemned the WHO and its radical pro-abortion activities, though he hoped Trump would keep the US in the WHO and reform it from within.

“In recent years, the World Health Organization (WHO) has become a contentious arena where life issues are debated on a global stage. The organization’s policies and partnerships increasingly reflect the interests of entities that profit from abortion, often to the detriment of vulnerable populations,” he said. “Now, more than ever, a pro-life American presence is essential to counter the overwhelming support the WHO provides to organizations promoting abortion.”

The post America and Argentina Will Create Alternative to Pro-Abortion WHO appeared first on LifeNews.com.

From tanks to tactical missiles, Warsaw’s rearmament raises new questions about stability in Eastern Europe

Poland, a NATO member sharing a long border with Belarus and situated near the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad, has announced plans to conduct its largest divisional military exercises in recent memory. Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz made the statement on Monday, underscoring Warsaw’s growing alignment with Western military structures. While details remain classified, the scope of the maneuvers signals a continued escalation of Poland’s military posture in the region.

The exercises are being framed by Polish officials as a direct response to Zapad-2025, a large-scale joint military drill planned by Russia and Belarus for September. In Poland, however, what was once cautious strategic planning has given way to an increasingly belligerent tone from political and military leaders. Discussions of a potential conflict with Russia – a nuclear-armed state – are now voiced with unsettling frequency in Warsaw’s political mainstream.

Prime Minister Donald Tusk and Chief of the General Staff Wieslaw Kukula have both spoken openly about possible war scenarios. President Andrzej Duda, who only a year ago dismissed the idea of a Russian invasion, now presides over a government that appears fully committed to preparing for confrontation. Some members of parliament have even declared, half in jest and half in earnest, that they would send their own wives to the front lines.

But rhetoric is only one part of the picture. In recent years, Poland has launched a sweeping military modernization campaign that has transformed its defense policy into one of the most aggressive in Europe. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Poland’s defense budget has surged from $15.3 billion in 2021 to a staggering $38 billion in 2024 – more than doubling in just three years. The implications of this buildup – in a region already steeped in historic mistrust – raise serious questions about whether Poland is enhancing regional security or inflaming geopolitical tensions.

Tanks, artillery, and the largest rearmament in Europe

On March 27, 2025, Poland took a major step in overhauling its land forces by ordering the first batch of 111 domestically built Borsuk infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs). The €1.5 billion contract, signed with the Polish Armaments Group (PGZ), anticipates deliveries by 2029. Ultimately, Warsaw plans to acquire around 1,000 of these IFVs, in addition to 400 specialized vehicles built on the same platform.

The Borsuk is emblematic of Poland’s approach: National production with extensive foreign collaboration. The IFV features the American-made Mk44S Bushmaster II 30mm chain gun and Israeli Spike anti-tank missiles. Its design reflects lessons learned from the American Bradley vehicle, and South Korean firms may be involved in building its chassis.

Beyond its combat version, the Borsuk platform will spawn a family of specialized vehicles – including Zuk reconnaissance units, Oset command vehicles, Gotem medevac systems, Gekon armored recovery units, and Ares CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear) reconnaissance platforms. Poland also plans to mount the M120 Rak 120mm mortar on the Borsuk chassis, expanding its battlefield versatility.

The Borsuk IFV program is only a piece of a much larger puzzle. From 2010 to 2025, Poland has become the top purchaser of armored vehicles in Europe. Its inventory now includes:

• 250 American M1A2 SEPv3 Abrams tanks, with deliveries expected by 2026 – in addition to 116 M1A1s already in service;

• 220 German Leopard 2A4/2A5 tanks, received and upgraded;

• 1,000 South Korean K2 Black Panther tanks, of which 110 have already been delivered, with local production planned;

• Over 550 Finnish Rosomak wheeled IFVs, assembled partly in Poland.

The Rosomak platform alone supports numerous roles – from troop transport to artillery coordination. Meanwhile, Poland is also producing over 800 South Korean K9 Thunder 155mm self-propelled howitzers under license, while continuing to build at least 300 domestically designed Krab howitzers. Older Soviet-era equipment, such as PT-91 Twardy tanks and BWP-1 APCs, remains in limited use.

Missile capability is another key pillar of modernization. Poland is acquiring 500 American HIMARS and around 300 South Korean K239 Chunmoo multiple launch rocket systems. These platforms can fire precision-guided missiles at distances ranging from 36 to 300 kilometers – including ATACMS-class munitions – and provide NATO with a high-mobility strike force deep in Eastern Europe.

South Korean tech, American firepower, Polish industry

At the heart of Poland’s military transformation is its deepening partnership with South Korea. Seoul’s defense industry has become a cornerstone of Warsaw’s rearmament effort, supplying not only weapons systems, but also helping build local production capacity.

The K2 Black Panther – Poland’s largest defense contract – is a 55-ton main battle tank with advanced targeting systems, active protection armor, and a 1,500-horsepower engine. It rivals the Russian T-90 and is expected to eventually outnumber all other tanks in Poland’s arsenal. In contrast, older Western tanks like the Leopard 2 and M1 Abrams are being relegated to supporting roles or phased out altogether.

South Korean expertise also supports the Krab howitzer (based on the K9 chassis), the Chunmoo rocket system (mounted on Polish Jelcz trucks), and key components of the Borsuk IFV. Finnish and American companies round out the collaboration: Patria co-develops the Rosomak platform, while Oshkosh supplies vehicle chassis.

Once procurement is complete, Poland will not only field NATO Europe’s strongest armored corps but also rank among its most capable missile powers.

When it comes to missile systems, Poland’s ambitions go far beyond tanks. Once its defense procurement plans are fully implemented, the country will become not only the strongest tank power in NATO’s European theater, but also a major missile force. The K239 Chunmoo tactical missile system – a key element of this effort – features modular launchers that can fire rockets at distances ranging from 36 to 300 kilometers. Comparable to the American HIMARS system, it can also launch precision-guided missiles, including operational-tactical ATACMS munitions, with ranges of up to 300 kilometers. Both systems are satellite-guided, highly mobile, and designed for fast, flexible strikes – together forming the backbone of a powerful new strike capability.

And there are even more ambitious goals. Warsaw has openly discussed hosting American nuclear weapons and deploying medium-range missile systems on its territory. While those talks remain preliminary, they reflect a clear shift in Polish strategic thinking – away from defense and toward deterrence, or even forward-postured confrontation.

So what?

Poland is undergoing a major transformation of its ground forces, and by the end of this decade, it may become the most powerful strike force in Europe. What’s driving this shift? Most of the upgrades are justified by the supposed threat from Russia – a narrative that, while questionable, has proven politically convenient for many NATO members. It appears that Poland’s leadership genuinely believes it.

Another likely motivation is the development of Poland’s domestic defense industry. Many of the new programs involve building local production and assembly lines, which supports industrial growth and helps Poland gain access to advanced technologies.

This modernization effort may be the most expensive and ambitious military program in Europe. Once completed, it will position Poland as NATO’s leading eastern force. Such a vast rearmament requires justification – and perhaps that’s why the Russian threat narrative has been so actively promoted in recent years.

Poland’s cooperation with the current government in Kiev is also an important factor. Warsaw supplies Ukraine with artillery, armored vehicles, and ammunition – though it has not offered its modern tanks. Meanwhile, Poland is close to meeting its NATO commitments on defense spending.

What does this mean for Russia, and how might it respond? In the future, there may be efforts to establish new agreements limiting conventional weapons in Europe, involving both long-time NATO members and newer ones like Poland, as well as Ukraine. At the same time, Russia and Belarus may deepen their military integration – not just in terms of conventional forces but also advanced missile systems.

Russia already fields brigades equipped with both Iskander-M and the new Oreshnik systems. This opens the door to both nuclear and non-nuclear deterrence, the latter of which may be more practical in avoiding all-out conflict.

As for Poland’s rearmament – the problem is, as the old theatrical saying goes, if a gun is hung on the wall in the first act, it will eventually be fired.

In a commentary at the NcR, Fr. Reese tries to claim Pope Leo at a heterodox member of their NcR’s ideology, but that masks the serious nervousness of the heterodox left of which Reese is a member. Simply stated the left is freaking out and waiting for the shoe to drop on their heterodoxy. 

He is nervous about how papal Pope Leo looked at his first appearance and subsequently. 

He is nervous about how nice Pope Leo was to the Vatican Curia compared to the ugliness of Pope Francis toward them.

He is nervous about the first talk that Pope Leo gave to the College of Cardinals listening to them, being nice to them and calling them his “closest collaborators” in complete contrast to Pope Francis who had a disdain for them and never consulted with them.

He is nervous that Pope Leo, unlike Pope Francis, will have many extraordinary consistories with all of the cardinals for their advise.

He is nervous that Pope Leo is gentler than Pope Francis.

He is nervous that Pope Leo has avoided speaking in ways that would cause controversy and hasn’t commented on LGBTQ Catholic ideologies, the Latin Mass or women deacons.

He is nervous that when Pope Leo starts getting his diverse choir to sing in harmony he will be too clear about Catholic orthodoxy that will make the heterodox uncomfortable. 

Pope Leo XIV this week appointed Monsignor Renzo Pegoraro — longtime chancellor of the Pontifical Academy for Life involved in a controversy over his 2022 comment suggesting contraception could be permissible in certain cases — as the academy’s new president.

Msgr. Pegoraro succeeds Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, who became president in 2016. Msgr. Pegoraro studied in Padua and Rome, where he obtained a licentiate in moral theology and a diploma in advanced bioethics, according to the Academy for Life website. He was president of the European Association of Centers of Medical Ethics from 2010 to 2013, and he has served as a bioethics lecturer at the Theological Faculty of Trivento.

Pope John Paul II established the Pontifical Academy for Life in 1994, charging it with the task of “defense and promotion of the value of human life and of the dignity of the person,” according to its Vatican profile. Its main actions are to study problems related to promoting and defending human life; assist, through Catholic initiatives, the pro-life formation of persons; and inform Church leaders, the media, other organizations, and civil society in the findings of its research.

REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.

In a statement posted to the Academy’s website, Msgr. Pegoraro thanked Pope Leo for his new appointment.

“The work carried out over these past years alongside H.E. Monsignor Vincenzo Paglia and previously with H.E. Monsignor Ignacio Carrasco de Paula has been both fascinating and stimulating, in line with the operational and thematic guidelines of the late Pope Francis,” he added.

Msgr. Pegoraro’s appointment has raised reactions of concern among Catholics amid reports of controversial comments he made in 2022 about assisted suicide and contraception.

According to a December 2022 article in The Wall Street Journal, Msgr. Pegoraro suggested that the use of contraception might be morally permissible in a certain case.

In November 2022, about 24 Catholic theologians and others held a conference in Rome in efforts to defend and explain Church teaching that contraception is a grave evil, articulated strongly in St. Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae. The conference came together amid debate in recent years among Catholic theologians on the issue and other topics such as divorce, according to the Journal.

The outlet did not specify if Msgr. Pegoraro attended the conference, but did quote him commenting to article author Francis Rocca on the topic at hand:

“The letter of the law can change, but not to invalidate it but rather to deepen its meaning and promote the values at stake,” said Msgr. Renzo Pegoraro, rector of the Pontifical Academy for Life. The rule against contraception “signals values that must be preserved in married life—in particular the sense of sexuality and the transmission of life—but it is also true that other values worth protecting may be present in the situation that the family is experiencing.”

For instance, Msgr. Pegoraro said, contraception might be permissible “in the case of a conflict between the need to avoid pregnancy for medical reasons and the preservation of a couple’s sex life.”

Following his appointment as president of the academy, Rocca, now a Vatican EWTN editor, posted to his X account recalling this interview. Providing further context to the exchange, Rocca also shared a link to an accessible version of the full 2022 Wall Street Journal article.

Replying on X to a report of Msgr. Pegoraro’s contraception and assisted suicide comments, New York-based Catholic bioethicist Charlie Camosy called for prayers for the academy’s new president, writing: “Let us pray for a changed mind and heart in such an important leader.”

Msgr. Pegoraro was also involved in a controversial debate relating to assisted suicide, euthanasia, and the lesser of two evils in 2022, when he weighed in as the Italian parliament considered legalizing assisted suicide. According to a February 2022 La Croix International article, the parliament was caught between either legalizing assisted suicide or abolishing a prohibition on “murder of a consenting person” in such a way that would open the door to euthanasia. Msgr. Pegoraro at the time said that neither option “represents the Catholic position.”

However, a law will be passed regardless, he said, continuing, “And of the two possibilities, assisted suicide is the one that most restricts abuses because it would be accompanied by four strict conditions: the person asking for help must be conscious and able to express it freely, have an irreversible illness, experience unbearable suffering and depend on life-sustaining treatment such as a respirator.”

La Croix posed the question of whether the Church is opting for the lesser of two evils.

Msgr. Pegoraro commented, “Rather, to make good of the better one. It is a question of seeing which law can limit evil.”

He emphasized that the Church condemns both assisted suicide and euthanasia. He said that the main question at hand in this situation, however, “is about knowing how the Church can participate in the discussion in a pluralist society.”

“Obviously, the ideal would be that assisted suicide and euthanasia be prohibited,” he said, “But I believe that today we must agree to discuss laws that we know will differ from the Church’s morality.”

According to the Academy for Life article announcing Msgr. Pegoraro’s new appointment as president, he said he plans to “continue working along the lines of the themes and methodology developed in recent years, enhancing the specific expertise of our broad and distinguished international and interreligious group of Academicians.”

“I particularly highlight the themes of Global Bioethics, dialogue with scientific disciplines through the transdisciplinary approach promoted by Pope Francis, artificial intelligence and biotechnologies, and the promotion of respect for and the dignity of human life in all its stages,” he said. “It will also be important to further enhance the work of the entire staff at the Central Headquarters, now located in the Vatican’s San Callisto complex.”

Palazzo San Callisto is a Vatican-owned property in Rome’s Trastevere neighborhood and an extraterritorial property of the Holy See that was established by the 1929 Lateran Treaty between the Vatican and Italy. Located near the Basilica of Santa Maria, the Palazzo San Callisto houses several key institutions of the Roman Curia and international Catholic organizations and includes offices, chapels, and conference facilities.

LifeNews Note: McKenna Snow writes for CatholicVote, where this column originally appeared.

The post Pope Leo XIV Appoints Controversial New Pontifical Academy for Life President appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Among the traditional titles with which the pope is honoured is that of “Patriarch of the West”, which dates back to the first centuries of Christianity. This title was abandoned by Benedict XVI in 2006 but, at the behest of Pope Francis, it curiously reappeared in the Annuario Pontificio of 2024. What is the meaning […]

The post Leo XIV: Patriarch of the West? appeared first on Voice of the Family.

A vandal who appeared to be a UCLA student recently spraypainted — in broad daylight — several pro-life signs set up on campus by pro-life organization Justice For All.

Justice For All published a video of a young man wearing a “UCLA Law” baseball cap using  black spraypaint to cover images of unborn babies and pro-life messages. Onlookers — including one who said he himself did not agree with the pro-life messages — asked him to stop, but he ignored their requests.

“We’re having a discussion,” the onlooker can be heard saying in the recording.

REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.

The College Fix reported that “a campus source” said UCLA’s student pro-life club, Live Action, had invited Justice for All to host an event on campus “centered on promoting peaceful dialogue between pro-life and pro-choice people, and building common ground for dialogue.”

According to a Justice for All Instagram post, the same vandal had also stolen some of the organization’s pro-life signs during an event in 2023, but he has not yet been found by police. The organization also added that it has filed a police report, and it plans to press charges for the vandalism and the theft.

“Thankfully, most pro-choice people are not like this,” Justice for All added. “They are respectful and willing to dialogue and wouldn’t think to do something like this … Most of our outreaches are peaceful, and we are able to have respectful conversations with those on the other side. Sometimes that’s not the case though.”

Justice for All continued, “We care about this student which is why we want him held accountable. This behavior is unacceptable.”

According to The College Fix, Bekah Dyer, a Justice for All staff member, condemned the vandalism on Instagram.

“He stole signs in 2023. Wasn’t caught,” she reportedly wrote. “We have his picture and videos of that crime. Now he’s vandalizing signs this year. When will this stop? @uclapd.”

LifeNews Note: Hannah Hiester writes for CatholicVote, where this column originally appeared.

The post Pro-Abortion Vandal Defaces Pro-Life Signs at UCLA appeared first on LifeNews.com.