Despite several years of decolonisation in Africa, parts of the continent are still enmeshed in neocolonialism, imperialism, and other forms of subtle colonial control. And I think that part of the reason for this is that, while previous attempts have interrogated the subject matter, emphasis has often been placed (almost exclusively) on the political aspect of decolonisation (specifically looking at gaining independence of the political order – which (make no mistake) is certainly important. However, with this (almost exclusive) focus on the political aspect of decolonisation, African countries have been missing crucial aspects of the neocolonial paradigm. For instance, neocolonialism does not primarily manifest in the form of nation states attempting to take over the territory and political systems of others, rather, it is largely orchestrated through international organisations and philanthro-capitalism – both of which come under the pretence of offering aid to respective African and Asian nations.

In fact, this should bring to mind what Professor Patrick Lumumba highlighted in his keynote address at the International Conference on Africa’s Democracy 2025, this past month of July, which is that neo-colonialism poses a threat far greater than colonisation itself, because this time around the colonial actors are faced with desperation. And so, in the post colonial and post WWII era, neocolonists created international organisations that technically respect the provisions of laws and treaties that demand a respect for human rights and sovereignty in Africa, BUT that simultaneously create a legal justification for plunder.

Immediately, you could think of the Bretton Woods institutions, and their structural adjustment programmes that threaten the sovereignty of national economies because they allow an outside organisation to dictate a nation’s economic policy. By minimising a government’s ability to organise and regulate its internal economy, pathways are also then created for multinational companies to enter states and extract resources in Africa. Furthermore, upon independence from colonial rule, many nations that took on foreign debt were unable to repay it, because they were limited to production and exportation of cash crops, and also restricted from control of their own more valuable natural resources (such as oil, rare earth minerals) by SAP free-trade and low-regulation requirements.

And so, clearly, in the neocolonial paradigm, it is NOT just political systems that are captured with the intention to form a satellite state that is some form of extension of the colonial one – in the way that Australia and Canada were the extension of the British Empire, or in the way that Congo was supposed to be the extension of Belgium. Rather, in the neocolonial paradigm, economic policies and inclinations are also of great interest to those who wish to continue the subjugation of African (and Asian, and South America) countries. And this is rooted in the need to destroy the people of these nations, while looting their wealth. And so, herein lies one of the crucial markers of the new dispensation of African leadership. This is leadership that is not exclusively interested in having political power (as symbolic and systematic proof of decolonial efforts in their respective nations). Rather, the new dispensation of African leadership understands that those who profit from your destruction do not have a vested interest in your upliftment, and that there is a need to decrease dependence on international organisations. Afterall, Africa is the new world, with hardworking people.

So, who then are these African leaders, at the fore of this strategic new dispensation of leadership? And to begin with, let’s talk about recent developments from Ibrahim Traore in Burkina Faso. On the 22nd of August, Burkina Faso halted a Bill Gates-backed project that had seen genetically modified mosquitoes released in a claimed bid to eradicate malaria and other insect-borne diseases.

Target Malaria, which is an organisation funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, is the latest NGO to come under pressure from the Ibrahim Traore-led administration. In a communique, it was ordered to stop “all activities”. This is said to be in part related to the verdict on the works produced by an organisation with a similar focus. In particular, the Gates foundation funded Oxitec, which is a British biotechnology company to the tune of $41 million to create Genetically Modified Mosquitoes, which Gates and his cohorts claim will end Malaria. HOWEVER, the verdict is that many health experts actually refer to Gates’ mosquitoes as “flying syringes,” explaining that the hidden aim of these mosquitoes is to secretly vaccinate the general population with dangerous vaccines that would induce sterility in both males and females without them knowing it, which the people ordinarily would not accept in a traditional sense – so women become barren and men go impotent – and that’s just one of the potential risks associated with these mosquitoes.

Now, the Traore administration’s response is not reflective of the usual position that African countries take towards what are said to be generous, philanthropic pursuits that seek to alleviate problems like Malaria in their respective nations. But, clearly the leadership in Burkina Faso is suspect of the colonial inclinations – not only of nations like France – but also of philanthro-capitalists like Bill Gates – and necessarily so, because first, Gates’s billions have not been intended at generously solving problems, rather, they have purchased a stunning level of control over public policy, private markets, scientific research, and the news media. Whether he is pushing new educational standards in America, health reforms in India, global vaccine policy during the pandemic, or Western industrialised agriculture throughout Africa, Gates’s heady social experimentation has shown itself to be not only undemocratic, but ultimately aimed at purchasing influence and power more than anything else.

On an international scale, this is perhaps exemplified in the relationship between Bill Gates and the WHO. RFK Jr, the Secretary of the US Department of HHS explained that Bill Gates gets tax deductions for giving money to the WHO, while he gains control of the WHO. Meanwhile, the WHO finances the health ministries in virtually every country in Africa, so Bill Gates can establish conditions for receiving that money, which can translate into the WHO transferring those conditions on nations. These conditions could also include conditionalising the receipt of funding on the vaccination numbers and status of the country. On top of that, the vaccines that countries are buying are owned by companies that Gates owns or has shares in. Therefore, at the end, the punchline on almost all of his philanthropic projects is that he ends up making money.

Secondly, Bill Gates actually does not have the good reputation and track-record that many assume he does! In essence, the claim of vaccine efficacy AND SAFETY (which has been the bane of Bill Gate’s push for vaccines) is actually not based on proven studies. Rev. Dr Chris Oyakhilome has asked for those studies. RFK Jr has ALSO asked for those studies, in fact, with the polio vaccine and the DTP vaccine, both Rev Dr Chris Oyakhilome and RFK Jr respectively proved that the safety of vaccines is always alleged, and not based on scientific evidence!

For instance, with the DTP vaccine (that is the diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis vaccine) Bill Gates asked the Danish government to support the program behind DTP vaccines, and said it saved 30 million lives. The Danish government asked Gates to show them the data. But, he interestingly was not able to. So the Danish government came to the African continent and did their own studies, in which they looked at 30 years of DTP data. [PAUSE] What they found shocked them: they found that girls who got the DTP were dying at 10 times the rate of unvaccinated girls. So, did Bill Gates not know this? Where were the 30 million lives saved? Or could it be that he maybe did have studies but studies that only looked at short term effects, below the 30 year mark? Well, irrespective: this proves that the data that Bill Gates tried to use as a selling point to the Danish government was false. The safety of the DTP vaccine was alleged, and therefore, the benefits were perceived at best.

This is crucial to note because it tells that – similarly – Bill Gate’s reputation and track record of doing good and alleviating health problems is alleged at best. It only appears factually accurate because it is repeated by his cohort, while truth was buried for the longest time.

Again, crucial to note is that this sterilisation project was tested in an African country, being Kenya. Which highlights (once again) why it is crucial that the Traore administration has rejected a similar effort in their country. But, of course, to the outside, ultra liberal world, Traore’s administration is a violent military government that poses a threat to democracy – especially since his administration began with a coup.

COUPS IN AFRICA ARE SEEMINGLY A RESPONSE TO CORRUPT, WESTERN-INSTITUTED GOVERNMENTS

But, important to take note of concerning Western instituted coups is that the figures who subsequently gained power were often figures friendly to the Western nations and their agenda – meaning these were people, who had no genuine and plausible aspiration to serve the people they were meant to lead in their respective country – or perhaps lost that aspiration once they were bombarded by the agenda set for them by the West.

Let’s take Gabon as a notable example. As you would recall, on the heels of a military takeover in Niger in 2023, a group of senior Gabonese military officers announced on national television they were seizing power in the central African nation, overturning results in a disputed presidential election. But, Before his removal in a military coup, Gabon’s hopelessly corrupt President Ali Bongo was courted by Obama and feted from Washington to Davos.

For half a century, the Bongo family ruled the resource-rich country but has been recently accused of abusing power and amassing exorbitant wealth. Military officials called themselves the “Committee of the Transition and the Restoration of Institutions” and said that “irresponsible, unpredictable governance” has led to a collapse in social cohesion. But, of course, president Bongo’s arrest was met with indignant condemnations from Washington and Paris, which had propped him up as he pillaged his country’s vast oil wealth. BUT…his ouster represented a particularly sharp rebuke of former President Barack Obama, who groomed the Gabonese autocrat as one of his closest allies on the continent, and leaned on him for diplomatic support as he waged a war on Libya that unleashed terror and instability across the region. And so, the US war on Libya which destabilised the region may not have succeeded without him.

Ultimately, so close was the bond between Obama and Bongo that Foreign Policy branded the Gabonese leader, “Obama’s Man in Africa.” With Obama’s help, Bongo attempted to fashion himself as a reformist moderniser. He travelled repeatedly to Davos, Switzerland to attend the World Economic Forum, where was appointed an “Agenda Contributor.” There, he pledged to accelerate the Fourth Industrial Revolution in Africa by implementing lucrative digital identification and payment systems among his country’s heavily impoverished population. And so, this exposes that so-called civilian led governments (that are said to be a contrast of military governments) are not always plausible – especially where they are infiltrated by external influences. And so, Traore is a military leader, who came in through a coup (as it was in Gabon) – BUT he is exactly what his people desired.

AFRICAN LEADERS NEED TO CEASE TO PRIORITISE FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT

Now, while we see certain leaders at the forefront of prioritising the best interests of their people, we also need to consider how we standardise this calibre of African leadership. I would argue that we ought to begin with eradicating a dependent and almost beggarly attitude in some African leaders, especially because some African leaders have relied on an interpretation of national wealth that prizes foreign direct investment and high dollar reserves, or an IMF and World Bank validated fiscal and monetary policy. All of these things do not amount to wealth, and an increase in the standard of living of their people. What they are tools for the creation of perpetually defendant economies that are hamstrung by the dictates of lenders.

For instance, in April this year, the South African president expressed that foreign direct investment is the means through which to curb unemployment. Not the development of local industries, not increased support for small and medium enterprises, not even an increased government investment into technical and vocational education, which gives people practicals skills that they can use to find early employment or even begin their own business – which would also serve a catalyst to liberate the South African work economy from regarding a university degree as an important prerequisite for employment (despite formal education doing little to prepare people for work). But, yes, despite all of these more reliable measures, the South African president says that foreign direct investment is necessary for more job creation.

By the way, this narrative of key developments in the South African economy being hinged on foreign direct investment was once again rehashed after the meeting with members of the Trump administration at the White House. In what was concerningly viewed as a successful re-opening of trade relations with the US, in pursuit of FDI, the president of South Africa highlighted that not only is FDI allegedly needed, but that South Africa (and other nations) curate regulatory frameworks to attract foreign investors.

What is being missed by the South African presidency (and many other nations who uphold the FDI model for development), is that it is inherently predatory. The fact that nations have to restructure development plans and policies in order to attract foreign investors is equivalent to opening doors to a trojan horse. Which is why foreign direct investment culminates in the disenfranchisement of the people and business of the country! For instance, as opposed to merely increasing competition, FDI displaces local business because large foreign companies, with their economies of scale and access to global markets, often drive out local businesses that cannot compete. This ironically leads to job losses and a decline in local economic activity. Furthermore, FDI can lead to a concentration of economic power in the hands of foreign entities, potentially even undermining local economic development and reducing the ability of local actors to influence policy decisions – in fact, this is exemplified by the concession from the South African president in stating that they curated regulatory frameworks with the intention of attracting foreign investors (which means that domestic priorities become secondary to the appeasement of foreign investors).

This should not come across as a sound or sustainable plan for economic or industry development. Which brings us to the message from the President of Loveworld Inc. – which needs to be the new modus operandi for African leaders, and especially the president of South Africa.

AFRICAN LEADERS ALSO NEED TO EXTRICATE THEIR COUNTRIES FROM DIABOLICAL ORGANISATIONS

Secondly African countries need to extricate themselves from dangerous organisations and treaties – and the WHO is at the top of them. We mentioned earlier that the WHO has been sterilizing Kenyan women through vaccines, and the biggest sterilization happened when they brought what they termed as a “tetanus eradication vaccine”, where women were to be vaccinated to prevent the kids they will give birth to from getting tetanus – when in actual fact they were being rendered sterile. But, now, the people of Kenya have woken up to the evils of the WHO, and need to demand their government be removed from WHO associations.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

Weaponising the law in pursuit of trying to use these 7 areas for their agenda; and what it means that at the centre of the projects being pursued by the globalist is Bill Gates, through his philantro-capitalism. Let’s begin with the weaponisation of laws.

Once again, God’s Prophet to the Nations and the President of Loveworld Inc, being the highly esteemed Rev. Dr Chris Oyakhilome DSc. DSc. DD., re-echoed the warning against the satanic plans of globalists, in which they intend to use various other methods to try to control nations, looking at 7 areas that these respective globalist figures intend to manipulate. A key medium for their manipulative efforts is the weaponisation of the law, and there are important reasons why this is the case.

The first is that laws are a socialisation agent; and one that is often ignored. When we talk about socialisation agents, the tendency is to think about the most social aspects of society and thus restrict the definition of socialisation agents to entities like one’s family, school, social group, and similar considerations. But laws are actually a massive socialisation agent – when you consider the relationship that society and government has with the law.

For our collective clarity, when we speak of socialisation agents, we speak of those individuals, groups, or institutions that influence how a person learns and even internalises what are presented as the values, norms, and acceptable behaviours of their society. As a result, these socialisation agents play a crucial role in shaping an individual’s social development and (more broadly) their understanding of the world.

Here’s how laws are socialisation agents: the values, norms and behaviours of a society do not exist in a vacuum, and are thus often susceptible to some influence and change – positive or otherwise. Driving this change are the interests of certain groups, or at times even the government. And how the government influences or changes these societal values, norms and behaviours is by systematically nudging people to begin to think and act a certain way through legislating a new set of values, norms and behaviours.

So, this is quite significant because when a law is implemented, there are usually subtle or overt propaganda efforts that purport the legitimacy of that law. For example, the UK government keeps claiming that the Online Safety Act is about protecting children, and so when they say that enough about the Online Safety Act, that begins to be what people associate with it. This measure is also significant because it preys on the more liberal inclinations of certain sects of society and the impressionable minds of a younger generation without pre-existing ideals. Again, in the UK, the end of life Bill failed to pass years ago with an older more conservative society, but it passed in newer more liberally inclined one, where even younger members of society claimed they wanted so-called merciful deaths for their aging relatives.

Now, as stated earlier, we see this socialisation capacity of the law play out positively and negatively: on the one hand, we saw people in liberal democracies where the freedom of movement was supposed to be guaranteed, be systematically nudged to suddenly accept being imprisoned in their homes in the name of “flattening the curve”, because the law dictated that it was illegal to move at will. On the other hand, we see governments enact laws against the gender mutilation of children to systematically nudge society away from assuming the inherent correctness of sex changes. And so, the point is not that all laws are bad and manipulative, but it is to highlight that law is very much a socialisation agent, and that governments use it as such. And knowing this, globalists also want to use laws to try to enforce a new set of values, norms and behaviours in society – which paints a picture of how systemic their vain ambitions are. And here’s the President of Loveworld Incorporated warning about the weaponisation of laws, and emphasising our role as the Church in this time.

The second reason globalists have this diabolical ambition to weaponise laws is because – in addition to laws being socialisation agents – they often come with the expectation of general application. This is because laws typically demand compliance, and in order to enforce that compliance, it should be expected of all if not the majority of people. Therefore, weaponising laws for globalists is about trying to use the law to guarantee a massive impact of their pursuits – ensuring that their diabolical efforts are of general applications, with few exceptions.

Here’s an example, if you regularly watch ‘The War Room’, you would know I do not regard international law and actual law because it has no enforcement capacity. For the most part, all it tends to be is a bunch of agreements that nations may choose to organise resources and enforcement capacity to achieve, usually through incorporating some aspects of the international agreement into an act from the legislative body – otherwise, international law is inconsequential. At best they could either sanction nations to try to disincentive certain conduct, or offer trade benefits to encourage it – but, again, otherwise, international law is inconsequential.

Now, I think the globalists caught on to this reality, because they then weaponised domestic law, capacity and enforcement towards a diabolical, international law-related agenda, which is the pandemic accord and the international health regulations. More specifically, the amendments to the IHR made a diabolical adjustment to make the WHO decrees enforceable. How they did this is that the IHR requires every country to appoint a National IHR Authority. This is a local enforcement body that takes orders from the WHO. It won’t answer to your vote, your courts, or your constitution. It will coordinate “compliance” with global health law. In other words, the WHO is by-passing constitutional sovereignty, meaning that the constitution in your country (as far as health and related policies are concerned) will no longer be the highest law of the land; but also that they capture domestic enforcement mechanisms to enact their agenda. And so, this desire to make laws of general application, while also capturing domestic enforcement capacity is another reason why globalists want to weaponise the law for their 7 fold agendas.

Then the final consideration on why globalists want to weaponise the law, is that they wish to evade accountability, and so they want to make governments legislate things in their favour. There are two key examples that attest to this. First is the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, which was signed into law in the United States as part of a larger health bill on November 14, 1986. This Act’s purpose was to eliminate the potential financial liability of vaccine manufacturers due to vaccine injury claims to ensure a stable market supply of vaccines, and to provide cost-effective arbitration for vaccine injury claims. And this happened because pharmaceutical companies made the case that they simply would not be able to profit if they were open to liability.

Second is Agrochemical companies are taking a page from big pharma’s playbook, in that they are seeking a TOTAL liability shield against claims against them! This is to say that while the pesticides that agrochemical companies like Bayer and Monsanto utilize have been “linked to cancer, to learning disabilities, to infertility, to hormone disruption … and they impact children more than the rest of us..” they are, nevertheless, fighting for a liability shield to prevent people from taking legal action against them for injury and death.

And so, just like vaccine manufacturers have zero liability for the harms their vaccines cause, agrochemical companies, like Bayer are seeking similar protections. While Congress has allocated a special fund for those who have been injured by vaccines, the chemical companies are proposing no such plans.

BILL GATES: AT THE CENTRE OF GLOBALIST PROJECTS THROUGH PHILANTRO-CAPITALISM

This then brings us to the second part of our discussion, in which we address the fact of bill Gates being at the centre of the  globalist plans exposed by the President of Loveworld Inc., and this being done through his modus operandi of philantro-capitalism. In essence, through his philantro-capitalism, Bill Gates transformed himself from a tech villain into one of the most seemingly admired people on the planet. Even as allegations of misconduct have recently tarnished his public image, the beneficence of the Gates Foundation, celebrated for spending billions to save lives around the globe, is taken as a given. But as investigations have revealed, Gates is still exactly who he was at Microsoft: a bully and monopolist, convinced of his own righteousness and intent on imposing his ideas, his solutions, and his leadership on everyone else. At the core, he is not a selfless philanthropist but a power broker, a clever engineer who has innovated a way to turn extreme wealth into immense political influence—and who has made some people believe that they should applaud his acquisition of power, and not challenge it – something that the president of Loveworld Inc. and God’s Prophet to the Nations has exposed.

But, like the media, Gates also uses gaslighting inorder to sanitise and justify his diabolical philatro–capitalism dealings. For instance, Gates once exclaimed in an interview that he has been taken aback by the volume of (what he calls) “crazy” and “evil” conspiracy theories about him and Dr. Anthony Fauci spread on social media during the COVID-19 plandemic – which is an interesting attitude towards people demanding accountability from people like him, who had imposed a tyrannical order, during the pandemic.

THE COST OF BILL GATES’ PHILANTRO-CAPITALISM ON RECEPIENT NATIONS

Now, there is a notable reason why Bill Gates has pursued philantro-capitalism, which answers the question of what is the cost of being a recipient nation of his schemes, falsely presented as philanthropic works. In particular, Gates’s billions have purchased a stunning level of control over public policy, private markets, scientific research, and the news media. Whether he is pushing new educational standards in America, health reforms in India, global vaccine policy during the pandemic, or Western industrialised agriculture throughout Africa, Gates’s heady social experimentation has shown itself to be not only undemocratic, but also ineffective. In many places, Bill Gates is hurting the very people he claims to help.

Now, you’d also recall that Bill Gates has openly articulated his belief the world needs billions less people. Everything he does, supports, and funds, actively promotes achieving his psychotic death wish for those he considers useless eaters. Gates funded Event 201 in October 2019, laying out the master plan for the Covid plandemic, while at the same time funding the vaccines for a disease that supposedly didn’t exist yet. Of course, he was also front and centre in pushing billions across the globe to be injected with this untested toxic DNA altering concoction. It is now unequivocally provable these vaccines killed millions immediately, millions more slowly and methodically, and stopped millions more from ever being born by drastically altering the fertility of young people who had ZERO risk from covid, but were forced to be injected by the authorities and their bought off lackeys.

Let’s zoom into Gates’ claims that his involvement in the health affairs of nations is about a rational and humane decrease in human population. He claims that they are merely making information and products for better health available, which in turn encourages families to decide to have fewer children. This is a weird argument and it’s sad that not a lot of people have said this to Bill Gates and his team at the Gates Foundation. First, this claim by Bill Gates presupposes that parents who choose to have more children typically lack knowledge and products that promote their health and wellbeing, which also sounds like the people Gates is supposedly talking about have a perpetual inclination to making bad decisions that leave them in worse conditions – no! Being fruitful and multiplying is not a consequence of poor health education and products.

Secondly, one would expect that when health becomes better, parents would want to have more children because the health facilities required for adequate care are more available. And so, this tells us something about the Gates’ Foundation proposed solutions for health – they likely contribute to population decline, especially when we look at vaccines and how they have destroyed the reproductive capacity of many around the world, if not killed the vaccine recipients completely.

Well, we have surely prayed, and continue to pray. Therefore, in this glorious Year of Completeness, all satanic and globalist agendas are suspended; they will live in our world, and we will not live in theirs, as we wrap up the Church age. And so, let us keep fighting the good fight of faith, because we have truly already won.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

The influence of witchcraft, and as we alluded to at the beginning of our discussion, the influence of witchcraft, when understood from the Scriptures, is notable in various dynamics and settings: from families and homes to even global politics. Now, during the July Edition of the monthly Global Fasting and Prayer with the President of Loveworld Inc., the highly esteemed Rev. Dr Chris Oyakhilome DSc DSc DD. exposes the polarisation effect that is orchestrated through witchcraft, and how this has application beyond what many people have actually observed.

THE INFLUENCE OF WITCHCRAFT IN THE POLARISATION OF NATIONS

We ought to zoom into this polarisation effect further, against the backdrop of two notable conflicts in the world – namely the proxy war between Russia and NATO being fought in Ukraine, and the conflict between Israel and Hamas. With the proxy war between Russia and NATO, it is notable that the war in Ukraine has significantly polarised nations globally, particularly in Europe, with a divide emerging between those aligned with Western liberal democracies and those perceived to be more aligned with Russia and China. This polarisation is further fueled by three factors; namely: (1) varying degrees of support for Ukraine, (2) differing perspectives on the conflict’s causes and implications, and (3) the role of the NATO alliance.

Here’s what is troubling, and ultimately revealing of the spiritual influence behind the polarisation driven through this proxy war; and we’ll start with the varying degrees of support for Ukraine… Despite the fact that Ukraine is comparatively magnitudes behind Russia in population numbers and military strength, there is no consensus on its victimhood in this conflict – and this is not for lack of trying. In fact, most of the world has been exposed to efforts of the liberal and mainstream media at portraying Ukraine as a victim of Russian aggression and invasion, while propping it up as a beacon of democratic excellence. However, despite all of this work, there is no overwhelming support for Ukraine’s presence in this conflict, because there is discernment and a protruding awakening to the fact that it is a war based on deceptive and nefarious agendas.

For one, there was an agreement between NATO and Russia that NATO will no longer expand closer towards Russia; particularly that NATO will not expand eastward of Germany to draw near the Russian border – BUT NATO did not uphold its end of this agreement. Secondly, the Ukrainian government under Zelenskyy became an oppressor to the people it claimed it was protecting from Russian aggression – especially when you look at the persecution of the Orthodox Church and forced conscription of men. Then, thirdly, there was also a propaganda effort, where the media spewed lies about Russia in a parallel information war, which not only contradicted facts that we already knew (such as the information about referendums from Crimea and the Donbas region; but also the conflict between Ukraine and the Donbas since 2014). And so, it became suspicious for many to hear a narrative that claimed Russian invasion, when recent history showed there were longstanding discussions on session in Ukraine.

And so, clearly, there was no just war effort from Ukraine and its backers. Clearly, this war became a polarisation effort through deceiving nations and (in particular) their leaders, into propping up this proxy war with resources that should have otherwise been spent on their people. And I would say the greatest proof of this is the extent to which the so-called liberal democracies and the Ukrainian government undermined diplomatic and peaceful options for resolving the conflict. You’d recall that they hosted gatherings and peace summits ALL while excluding Russia, which is one of the fighting parties. Moreover, this proxy war was a pre-meditated effort, when you consider that in the course of 2014, Putin called repeatedly for a negotiated peace, which led to the Minsk II Agreement in February 2015 based on autonomy of the Donbas and an end to violence by both sides. Russia did not claim the Donbas as Russian territory, but instead called for autonomy and the protection of ethnic Russians within Ukraine. Then, years later, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel blurted out the truth, which is that the Western side treated the agreement not as a solemn treaty (meaning a disingenuous diplomatic engagement on their part), that was only entertained to give Ukraine time to build its military strength, because NATO members told Zelenskyy that it was important that he defeat Putin on the battle field.

Well, the Bible says to test the spirits whether they are of God. And if God is a God of peace, then those who are working to start or prolong a war are influenced by a contrary and polarising spirit – ergo, exposing the influence of witchcraft in the polarisation of nations!

SIMILARLY, THERE IS A NOTABLE INFLUENCE OF WITCHCRAFT IN CIVIL STRIFE

Similarly, this polarisation of nations is seen even in the conflict between Israel and Hamas. Think about it: for the most part, many in the world would agree that if a violent insurgent group murders innocent civilians, that group committed a condemnable act of terror. And yet, there has been a jarring display of moral rotation through the outright support of Hamas, disguised as support for suffering Palestinians from a number of deceived people around the world. Similarly, Iran is a KNOWN state sponsor of terrorism – and not just from the perspective of Israel or the US, but even a number of middle-eastern nations share this issue with Iran: from Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates. But, they suddenly had fans rooting for them in ignorance during the Operation Midnight Hammer period.

However, it does not end with interstate conflicts, even domestically, we can observe the polarisation effect of witchcraft through civil strife. For instance, when you genuinely consider the history of the apartheid system in South Africa and Namibia, you cannot refute that it was an evil invention! It was a system built on the inherent dehumanisation of people on a superficial basis (being race), so much so that officials were tasked with coming up with innovative ways to oppress and kill others. Well, the Bible says it is the devil who came to steal, kill and destroy. Additionally, the phrase “inventors of evil things” appears in the Bible, specifically in Romans 1:30; and it is part of a larger description of people who have turned away from God and embraced sinful behavior (in other words, people who are rebellious, which the Bible says is equivalent to witchcraft) – again, ergo the polarisation effect of witchcraft.

But, what is particularly interesting about Romans 1:30 is that the verse refers to individuals who are not only engaging in evil actions but are also actively devising new and creative ways to do evil. When you consider the rise of the AIDS epidemic in South Africa and Africa at large, you can discern the influence of witchcraft further.

In essence, it has since come out in the open that Africans were intentionally inoculated with the AIDS virus, with the intention to kill them – a confession that came from one of the intelligence officers who worked for the South African Apartheid regime, through a unit of the South African Institute for Maritime Research (SAMIR) which was actually an intelligence and mercenary group.

But, the officer in question, a Mr Alexander Jones, doesn’t say that this operation was exclusive to South Africa, thus making it implausible to say that this was an exclusive pursuit by the Apartheid regime. In fact, he instead says this was an undertaking that was directed towards Africans in general. Here’s why this matters: it shows that when a group of people are villainised, problematised or even regarded as less than deserving of equal moral concern, they are treated and even killed in the most heinous ways. And while this is discussed in the context of the apartheid regime that discriminated against black South Africans, this problem actually transcends racial politics! At its core is a fundamental disregard for human life, once the people committing the atrocities have convinced themselves that those they are fighting are an enemy.

This influence of witchcraft in civil strife is not just retrospective. We see it in those labouring to fuel unrest in modern day society. For instance, it should not be lost on anyone that George Soros is behind a lot of socio-political instability and moral rot through the organisations he funds. For one, we recently saw an organised wave of protests against president Trump in the US, also in light of the tariffs. Considering that they were organised, there was certainly nothing organic about these protests. However, when following the money, it becomes even more but even more revealing that this was bought-and-paid for domestic terrorism, funded by oligarchs. In fact, the Soros-funded organisation called ‘Indivisible’ is openly admitting they are behind the 1300 paid protests that took place in all 50 states. And it’s not just them, there is also MoveOn, Third Act and others.

Additionally, President Trump made a post that remarked, “Paid Insurrectionists” in light of the LA riots. And he was not wrong, because there are people fueling these riots behind the scenes. For one, Leftwing nonprofit groups are openly helping to fuel anti-ICE riots here by handing out “F–k ICE” packs with protective equipment — as protesters continue to take over downtown every night and engage in rolling battles with cops, federal agents and National Guard troops. Chilling footage even revealed one unidentified group handing out a truckload of face shields and other riot gear to protesters in downtown Los Angeles. The “F–k ICE” packages — which include goggles, facemasks, gloves and a phone number for “jail support” — are being assembled and distributed by a nonprofit called Operation Healthy Hearts.

It’s just one of several organizations that started as grassroots community aid agencies, but have been wading into politics and throwing their weight behind left-wing street protests. LA Poverty Department (which is another organisation) was handing out PPE in the midst of that with the help of another community group, Mutual Aid/Social Therapy (MAST), which describes itself as “a decentralized project that uses the principles of mutual aid to put the tools of the psychological disciplines in the hands of the people.” But rather than focusing on spreading therapy practices, the group has been passing out goggles and gear to help protesters evade tear gas and rubber bullets, while stoking anti-law enforcement sentiment on social media.

And like the other groups, Operation Healthy Hearts (which we mentioned earlier) generally organises community service like food drives for the homeless on LA’s Skid Row, but in addition to creating the “F–k ICE PPE” packs, has a long history of pumping out left-wing rhetoric on its social media — and has been denouncing law enforcement since protests started. So, clearly, there is nothing organic about these protests, and there is an influence of witchcraft driving people to sponsor the unrests

PHARMAKEIA: WHY THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY IS EVIDENTLY PRACTICING WITCHCRAFT

This then brings us to pharmakeia. We’ve highlighted here on ‘The War Room’ that the UK terminally Ill Adults or End of Life Bill represents a digression from Godly Wisdom. When significant changes take place as a consequence of sinister influence, it is often a gradual process. A catalyst takes place, the slow burn begins, and then a threshold is crossed, and suddenly the narrative changes. For instance, Europe was pivotal in taking the Sopel to other continents, and yet, today, the Christian faith and doctrine in Europe is not as valued as it was; in fact, in a number of places, people have great reverence for their government and secular law instead.

This highlights the significant shift in social narrative in Europe, and the gist of the spiritual war in today’s discussion; which is that when laws are made in the UK, it is not the Wisdom of God and Scriptures that are at the fore of the discussion, rather it is diabolical activities of witches in the UK, and something must be done. And considering that the End of life bill has influence from the diabolical activities of witches in the UK, and that the medical industry is being used as a conduit of these diabolical activities, this exposes another crucial fact about witchcraft, which is its association with pharmakeia, which the Bible reveals is also sorcery.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso