Minneapolis Catholic School Shooting, and we ought to begin with the official details released this far. The two people killed in the attack were children aged eight and 10. Their parents have been notified, although their identities have not yet been released. Of the 17 people injured, 14 are children and three are adults. Two of the children are in critical condition, but all of the remaining victims are expected to survive. Minneapolis police chief Brian O’Hara also added that there is, however, a wide range of injuries.

The shooting took place just before 08h30 AM local time, during a worship service marking the first week of school. The assailant approached the outside of the building and began firing a rifle into the windows toward the children sitting in the pews. Law enforcement said that a rifle, a shotgun and a pistol all had been lawfully purchased by the shooter, adding that they believe the shooter acted alone; and also fatally shot themself behind the church. The shooter has been named as Robin Westman, aged 23, by local news outlets. Westman reportedly grew up in Richfield, Minnesota, and his mother worked at Annunciation School.

Then, FBI director Kash Patel has announced that the FBI is now investigating the shooting as an act of domestic terrorism and a hate crime targeting Catholics. Local police refused to be drawn on a motive for the attack. Officials further stated that the shooter had scheduled a manifesto to be released on YouTube. The police said it “appeared to show him at the scene and included some disturbing writings”. The content was then taken down with the assistance of the FBI. Then, finally, in light of the occurrence, US president Donald Trump has ordered American flags to be flown at half-mast following the mass shooting until the 31st of August. Here’s the statement that was given by the school principal, Principal Matthew DuBois.

WHY IT IS VALUABLE THAT THE FBI IS INVESTIGATING THE SHOOTING AS A HATE CRIME

I’ll be honest, while I am grateful that there is intent not to overlook the fact that the shooting occurred at a Catholic school, and thus recognising that there was intent to harm Christians, I am, however, upset at some of the ways that this case is being handled. However, let’s begin with why it is valuable that the FBI is investigating the shooting as domestic terrorism and a hate crime against Catholics. In essence, this reflects and implements a necessary shift away from bias against Christians in the FBI.

For some context, in February 2023 (which was during the Biden-Harris administration) an FBI intelligence document, referencing a January intelligence product from the Richmond Field office, was leaked that revealed FBI targeting of Catholics who adhere to traditional beliefs on abortion and other cultural issues. This led to an April 2023 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch along with CatholicVote Civic Action against the FBI and the Department of Justice after their failure to respond to a March 2023 requests for records about the FBI’s intelligence memo targeting what they called “radical traditionalist” Catholics.

Now, on July 22nd this year, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) released a new interim staff report on former President Joe Biden’s Catholic spy ring. Thanks to FBI Director Kash Patel, some of the information is new. And when pieced together with what we already knew, the picture that emerges is one of an FBI that went off the rails, while Christopher Wray, who led the FBI under Biden, bears much of the blame.

What the report indicates is that this targeting of Catholics by the Biden-Harris administration was not a mistake; rather, it was a well-planned effort to intimidate and harass practicing Catholics. [PAUSE] Once again, the FBI was apparently focused on “radical-traditionalist Catholics”, and concerning details emerged when the question was posed on: Who (exactly) are these radical-traditionalist Catholics, by FBI standards? First, according to the FBI’s own internal review of this matter, “investigators found that many FBI employees could NOT even define the meaning of ‘radical-traditionalist Catholic’ when preparing, editing, or reviewing” the Richmond Field Office memorandum that authorized the probe.

In other words, the FBI decided that Catholics were a problem, even though agents were unable to explain who they are. FBI agents were convinced that the so-called radical-traditionalist Catholics were “linked” to “racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists.” What made them think this way is still a mystery, even though reports indicate that they found nothing. That’s because there is no record of very conservative Catholics linking up with violent persons. And so, indeed, on this basis alone there was no reason to investigate them. But, of course, this did NOT stop some FBI operatives from categorising “certain Catholic Americans as potential domestic terrorists.” They came to this absurd conclusion based on articles employees read. In fact, one titled (quote) “How Extremist Gun Culture Is Trying to Co-opt the Rosary” is one of the articles they named as evidence of the nefarious agenda of “radical-traditionalist” Catholics.

Then secondly, this latest report shows that the FBI proposed a probe of “mainline parishes.” It says that “FBI employees believed without evidence that mainstream Catholic churches could serve as a pipeline to violent extremist behavior.” And this was all without evidence! Also, “The FBI seems to have considered Catholic churches as a potential hot spot for radicalization and viewed investigating Catholic churches as an ‘opportunity.’” As an example of this mad search for wrongdoing, the FBI even investigated Catholics who evinced “hostility toward abortion-rights advocates.” In other words, Catholic activists who exercised fidelity to Church teachings on abortion — meaning they are called pro-life Catholics — they were considered a domestic threat by the FBI. Similarly, those who espoused “Conservative family values/roles” were labeled “radical.”

And so, this tells us all we need to know about the politicisation of the FBI under the Biden-Harris administration. In particular, it tells us of institutional rot that had very anti-Christain inclination, especially because it was not even dissident Catholics who expressed a desire to weaponise violence that the FBI was concerned about. It was simply Catholics who expressed views consistent with what they were taught about abortion and family values. But, before we proceed, kindly have a listen as Representative Jim Jordan challenged the controversial investigation into what the FBI called “Radical Catholics” – signalling a war on Christian values in the Biden-Harris FBI.

So, all of this is to say, that in investigating the Minneapolis Catholic School Shooting as domestic terrorism and a hate crime against Catholics, the FBI in this second Trump administration is necessitating and making practical a shift away from bias against Catholics in the FBI. In other words, this time around, the FBI has to help and see as a target for violence the same people that it was propped up to antagonise and vilify. And this shift should absolutely be celebrated in a society that was being moulded to wage a war on Christians and our values.

THERE IS A FAILURE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE PATTERN OF TRANSGENDER SHOOTERS

This then brings us to the less satisfactory elements of the response to the Minneapolis Catholic School Shooting, and it is that the transgender (and possibly even the SSRI) discussion is less prevalent in official reports. For some context, the shooter has been identified as a transgender woman (meaning he is a biological male) who went by the name Robin Westman, but was initially known as Robert Westman before his so-called transgender transition. According to court documents, Westman had applied to change his birth name from Robert to Robin in Dakota County, Minn., when he was 17 years old, That name change was granted in January 2020; and the petition for the name change added that Westman (quote) “identifies as a female and wants her name to reflect that identification.” But, five years later, he seemed to have backed away from that identity.

So, why does this seemingly personal detail matter? Well, it matters because it proves a pattern that law enforcement has been casually skipping over for years now. In particular, in recent years in the US, both the Denver shooters, being Devon Erickson and Maya ‘Alec’ Mckinney identified as transgender. The Aberdeen shooter, Snochia Moseley, identified as transgender. The Nashville shooter, Audrey Hale, identified as transgender. The Georgia shooter, Colt Gray, identified as transgender. The Philadelphia Shooter, Kimbrady Carriker also identified as transgender. And perhaps to mix things up, the lowa shooter, Dylan Butler, identified as gender fluid.  But then the Uvalde shooter, named Salvador Ramos, identified as transgender, while the Colorado Shooter also identified as transgender. So, it would seem like there is a pattern, but also a parallel failure to recognise, or openly acknowledge this pattern.

And so, this is the latest in a string of mass killings carried out by members of the trans community, and the second against a Christian school. Rather than focusing on the victims, Minnesota authorities have chosen instead to prioritise exonerating the transgender people as a whole, with no mention of the hugely disproportionate number of mass killings that have been carried out by trans people over the last few years.

WHY IS THERE A PATTERN OF TRANSGENDER SHOOTERS IN SCHOOLS & BROADER SOCIETY?

So, let’s contribute to the discourse and actually ask the question on: Why is there a pattern of transgender shooters in schools and broader society? I think it comes down to two things, the first is that cross sex hormones and puberty blockers combined with mental illness is a seriously deadly combination.

For instance, a 2011 study originally claimed there were no mental health issues after puberty blockers. But, now, a re-examination of the data found that puberty blockers actually “reliably deteriorated” the mental health of more children than it helped.

But, that is one study among many that are rife with misrepresentations. In fact, a particularly egregious misrepresentation, which is repeated multiple times, is the contention that puberty blockers are completely reversible and generally helpful to the youth. Many so-called medical practitioners have stated and continue to state the same fraudulent claim in their private practices as well as their public appearances and in the media. BUT, this is an entirely false and extremely dangerous misrepresentation to make and advocate to the public, particularly since the affected audience are children and adolescents (and their families).

In truth, puberty blockers are KNOWN to impact children’s bone density and can lead to early onset osteoporosis and decreased bone density. AND… they can also impact a child’s mental illness. In fact, on the package insert for Lupron, which is one of the most commonly prescribed puberty blockers, it lists ‘emotional instability’ as a side effect and warns to “[m]onitor for development or worsening of psychiatric symptoms during treatment” – which is a massive red flag, that should serve as a pre-warning against prescribing puberty blockers! In addition, Lupron has also been associated with and may be the cause of mood disorders, seizures, cognitive impairment, and sterility if the patient proceeds to take cross-sex hormones.

But, it does not stop there, because a leading expert on the subject noted in relation to a recent experimental trial of puberty blockers, stated that (quote) “There was no statistically significant difference in psychosocial functioning between the group given blockers and the group given only psychological support – thus proving that puberty blockers have NO positive impact on mental health related issues. In addition, there is unpublished evidence that after a year on [puberty blockers] children reported greater self-harm, and the girls also experienced more behavioral and emotional problems and expressed greater dissatisfaction with their body; THEREFORE, puberty blockers actually exacerbated so-called gender dysphoria, which is evidently a mental illness.”

But, there is actually a simple reason for this, which is that when you give puberty blockers to a developing child, you do not merely prevent the development of their reproductive organs, you fundamentally infringe on how that child’s brain also functions by trying to manipulate the child’s body from undergoing a natural physiological development, and thus also create a lot of detrimental hormonal dysregulation as well. And many people actually take for granted how interrelated the human body’s systems are. For instance, in research years ago, I discovered that a number of female body builders (in the course of training) become significantly thin, especially due to a restrictive diet and excessive exercise, and it can lead to a hormonal imbalance that causes menstruation to stop, which is a condition known as amenorrhea. And this happens because a restrictive diet and excessive exercise cause a mental stress trigger, where the body interprets a lack of energy and low body fat as a stressor, and thus enters what is called “survival mode”, where the body then lowers the production of essential reproductive hormones like estrogen. This can result in health risks such as bone loss and infertility. And so, similarly, if you suppress certain bodily functions, there are going to be ripple effects on the body, including how a child’s brian develops.

So, the impact of puberty blockers on the brain, are one of the reasons I think we see this pattern of transgender shooters. And when you watch the videos of Robert, the Minneapolis Catholic School shooter, he does not present as sane AT ALL. His manifesto videos included drawings where he was looking into the mirror but saw himself as the devil – he obviously was not sane.

Then, the second reason I think we see this pattern of transgender shooters is social contagion – and this matters in the event that Robert and other transgender shooters were not on puberty blockers. In light of social contagion, trangender persons are often of the far left or ultra-liberal end of the political spectrum. For instance, the Minneapolis Catholic School shooter had writings (including on his gun) that included “kill Donald Trump” and “Israel must fall”; and “Jew gas”.

Evidently, Robert sounds like the product of ultra-left thinking and violence mongering – much like that which celebrated Luigi Mangione, who shot the UnitedHealthcare CEO, Brian Thompson. He is the product of Democrat leaders and notable figures openly talking about killing Donald Trump or locking up his supporters in concentration camps. And so, really, social contagion coupled with mental illness is also as deadly as puberty blockers coupled with mental illness.

The fact of the matter is that there are organisations and groups of people who wish to parent children, in the absence of objections from their parents, and socio-political indoctrination is one of the avenues they wish to accomplish this. For instance, while parents are being gaslit and told that their children will allegedly commit suicide if they are not allowed to socially or medically transition, not only awoke schools teaching children that they can identify as trees more that they are concerned about their grasp of alegra. Similarly, Democrats and other liberal actors are trying to convince children of their superior understand (even to the extent of challenging their parents), even trying to codify this into law by allowing schools to socially transition children without informing their parents – ALL WHILE the transgender and puberty blocker industry has become a multi-billion dollar industry!

“CONFIRMING A KID’S CONFUSION IS NOT COMPASSION, THAT’S CRUELTY”

But now, I genuinely believe that no sane parent ever does anything with the hope of potentially raising a child who will become a school scooter. And so, here is what I believe is crucial to note: whether with puberty blockers or as a product of social contagion, confirming a child’s confusion is not compassion – rather it is cruelty. And this is something that Vivek Ramaswamy has become famous for stating – and it is true. Parents have a categorical imperative to protect their children from socio-political nuances that have nothing to do with a godly, happy and optimistic upbringing. Children should not have to try to grapple with ideas of gender, or whether Donald Trump is a dictator who must be killed, or even whatever drag story hour is. And the absence of this protection of the socio-political innocence of children is to allow their grooming, especially to function as children of the state – something that the President of Loveworld incorporated has warned about. And so, ultimately, it is cruel to confirm a child’s confusion.

Finally, one of the details that were reported in light of the shooting features a boy aged 10 and his friend Victor. The boy aged 10 survived the attack and he told reporters that his friend saved him from bullets by lying on top of him. He said (and this is a direct quote) “I was like two seats away from the stained glass window,… My friend, Victor, saved me though, because he laid on top of me, but he got hit… My friend got hit in the back, he went to the hospital… I was super scared for him but I think now he’s okay.” It is always these stories that get me. First, because this reminds us of the Words of the Master Jesus in John 15:13, when he said “Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends.”; and it is inspiring to see this mindset appropriated by children, afterall the Master Jesus also said that “…the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these”.

The second reason why these stories get to me is that they highlight a painful reality where children have a better understanding of a protective duty than adults who are supposed to be responsible. As admirable as Victor’s actions were in laying on his friend to protect him, and taking the hit himself, the truth of the matter is that it should not have been Victor’s responsibility to take bullets at all! He is a child who is entitled to protection as well. And in failing to adequately recognise patterns that could improve how society and government as a whole respond to issues that lead to school shootings, Victor has had to grow up rather quickly in a space of minutes – robbing him of the innocence, sense of wonder and incurable optimism that all children should enjoy – which I certainly pray he never loses.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

Patel’s nomination faced strong opposition from Democrats and a pair of moderate Republicans, who criticized his previous calls for retribution against Trump’s critics, arguing this made him unfit to lead the FBI. However, the nomination overcame this resistance thanks to strong backing from Republican senators.

A supporter of gun rights, Patel has garnered praise from the Gun Owners of America lobby group. He is expected to lead a significant shift in the ATF’s operations, focusing less on firearm regulation. During his presidential campaign, Trump had accused the ATF of unfairly targeting gun owners and revoking licenses without proper justification.

In a related move, Attorney General Pam Bondi dismissed the ATF’s longtime chief counsel, Pamela Hicks, on Thursday, having security escort her from the building without prior warning or explanation, according to a source. Bondi later told mainstream media  that she fired Hicks because “these people were targeting gun owners.” Bondi had previously instructed the ATF to prioritize supporting the Department of Justice in tackling illegal immigration, while reducing its focus on regulating firearms, alcohol, and tobacco.

Patel is not the only Trump administration official taking on multiple roles. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is also acting as the administrator of the United States Agency for International Development, an agency Trump wants to eliminate by integrating it into the State Department. Meanwhile, Russ Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, is also serving as the acting head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, another agency the administration seeks to dissolve.

Despite opposition from moderate Republicans like Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, as well as all Democrats, the overwhelming Republican support for Patel’s nomination ensured its success. Collins and Murkowski raised concerns about Patel’s strong ties to Trump, but these objections couldn’t overshadow the broad support for his leadership and vision for the FBI.

Patel steps into the role at a crucial moment as President Trump’s allies work to reorient the FBI and the Justice Department, ensuring these agencies prioritize the rule of law and the president’s key policy objectives over political bias. His appointment is part of Trump’s broader push to bring balance back to the federal government and ensure that the agencies serve the American people rather than pursue politically motivated agendas.

Under President Trump, the Justice Department has already made significant strides toward restoring fairness, including addressing attempts to undermine the president and his allies. The department has worked tirelessly to refocus its efforts on prosecuting real criminals, rather than engaging in politically charged investigations against Trump and his supporters.

Kashyap ‘Kash’ Patel’s confirmation also marks a historic milestone as the first FBI Director of Indian descent. This achievement highlights President Trump’s commitment to diversity and excellence in leadership. With Patel at the helm, the FBI is set to move away from past political entanglements and towards a more effective, nonpartisan approach to law enforcement, ensuring the agency can regain public trust and fulfill its mission to protect and serve.

The White House celebrated Patel’s confirmation as a key moment in advancing President Trump’s vision to restore the integrity of American institutions, reaffirming his commitment to the rule of law and the interests of the American people.

Who is Kash Patel?

Kash Patel, born in New York in 1980 to Gujarati parents, spent much of his childhood in East Africa. He completed his high school education at Garden City High School in Long Island. According to his profile with the Department of Defense, Patel earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Richmond before moving back to New York to pursue a law degree, along with a certificate in International Law, from University College London in the UK. Patel has also held positions as the National Security Advisor and Senior Counsel for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI).

The Trump administration’s actions have been met with resistance from a bureaucratic system that has long been entrenched in a tradition of independence—one that was shaped by post-Watergate reforms after President Richard Nixon’s resignation in 1974. However, the administration’s bold moves are necessary to break free from a system that has grown too comfortable with its status quo.

One of the most significant events was the decision by acting deputy attorney general Emil Bove to drop the Adams case, a move that caused uproar within the ranks. The top federal prosecutor in Manhattan and several other prosecutors in New York and Washington resigned in protest, with many questioning the motives behind the decision. However, some argue that these resignations reflect a resistance to change rather than a genuine concern for justice.

The Justice Department responded, calling out these prosecutors for what they saw as misplaced priorities. Meanwhile, Trump-appointed officials made necessary moves to remove more than a dozen lawyers involved in politically motivated cases against the former president and nearly 18 prosecutors connected to the January 6 investigation, sending a strong message that there would be accountability for any bias in the system.

The FBI was already facing internal challenges even before Patel took charge. Bove requested a list of agents involved in the Capitol attack investigation for an internal review, sparking backlash from FBI leadership and law enforcement groups. Many of these groups were concerned about the scrutiny on career agents who had simply done their jobs. Some even took legal action, fearing public exposure of agent identities. Yet, the Trump administration made it clear that agents who were merely following orders would not face repercussions and reassured the public that no FBI agents involved in the January 6 probe would be identified—further demonstrating a commitment to protecting those who are just doing their duty.

What to Expect from Patel?

Patel has committed to keeping politics out of his leadership of the FBI, despite concerns from Democrats and legal experts about his close ties to Trump. As he steps into the role, he aims to focus on strengthening the FBI’s efforts in tackling illegal immigration and violent crime—key priorities from the previous administration. By “letting good cops be cops,” he intends to enhance the agency’s effectiveness in these areas.

Patel also plans to shift some of the FBI’s resources away from its Washington headquarters, where many national security, counterintelligence, and public corruption investigations are currently managed, in order to streamline operations and refocus the Bureau’s priorities. His stance on reducing internal distractions and increasing operational focus may be a refreshing change for the agency.

A vocal advocate for addressing what he sees as a “deep state” undermining political leaders, Patel is poised to rebuild trust in the FBI. In a journal essay, he emphasised the need to restore confidence in the Bureau, signalling his commitment to meaningful reforms.

Patel’s nomination, made after Trump’s 2020 victory, reflects an effort to create stronger, more effective leadership within federal law enforcement. His appointment as FBI Director follows a turbulent period marked by leadership changes, including the firing of James Comey and the replacement of Christopher Wray. As Patel takes the reins, he will likely prioritise reform and efficiency within the FBI, appealing to those seeking a more accountable and transparent institution.

Though his confirmation hearing raised questions from critics about his past rhetoric, Republicans view Patel as a reformer committed to challenging any misuse of power and realigning the FBI with its core mission. With Patel at the helm, many are hopeful that the agency will undergo a period of transformation, focusing on its essential role in protecting national security and upholding the rule of law.