Tribute to Veterans

Today, I joined the parade a short drive in the neighboring town. My daughter was part of it together with her girl scout troop and we as the parents walked behind. At the end of the parade, I was able to shake hands with two retired vets. A very old vet of which I don't know which part of the Armed Forces he served in, and his son in-law who was former Air Force (with a hot old Trans Am I might say). And as I walked later on with my friend and his dog in his neighborhood, we passed a house with pretty landscaping and all decked out in US and Marine flags. We stopped and I rang the bell. As the son answered and since his dad wasn't available at this time, I asked him to tell his dad that I thank him for his service. It is not much that we can do and for me, I never had served in the military, it is the least. But it is important to those to know that we do appreciate what they were willing to do for us so that we can enjoy our freedom.

Yet, as I'm writing this, I think about our troops today and the wars that they are asked to fight. Not that it is not important, but when our leaders don't step in to stop soldiers of being able to be court marshalled for alleged crimes, even so we fight an enemy that does not fit any norm of a regular soldier, how can we honestly expect them to give their all. More so, when our own government is not willing to identify the enemy but instead rubs shoulders with the very same countries that would like to see us taken over by Islam on one hand, or being wiped out as a major power, i.e. Hugo Chaves on the other. As we are fighting a people that doesn't shirk back from using women and children as cover for the sake of Islam and who are using mosques and holy places as cover and storage depots for their arms, we are walking as on egg shells in order not to be insensitive when they show know sensitivity to us at all.

Birgite Gabriel talks with FOX NEWS about the mosque being build around ...

It says it all. Don't even let yourself get lured into believing one word this Mike Ghouse says. It's white washing of Islam known as takijjah. Lying for the advancement of Islam which is allowed in the Q'uran.

The Paganization of America

• Posted by Editor on May 25, 2010 at 8:34pm
  
• Send Message   View Editor's blog
  

By Tim Dunkin

America as we see it today is not the same nation as the America in which my parents grew up. It is certainly not the America that was founded over 230 years ago by a group of patriots who had just won a war of liberation against the most powerful monarchy in the world at that time. These changes, this degradation of America, has accelerated in the last 40 years, however, as a moral sea change swept over this land, driven by the purposeful rejection of America's Christian foundations and the system of government that was influenced and established under their auspices.

Let us make no mistake – while America was not founded as a Christian nation in the sense of the establishment of Christianity as the state religion, nevertheless America was a Christian nation at her inception. The entire warp and woof of society was permeated with the biblical worldview. Our Founders, realizing the truth of the Christian doctrine of the inherent sinfulness of man, established a government in which power was divided at the federal level between three competing, contrary branches with specifically-defined powers. Further, political power was divided between what was supposed to be a relatively weak federal government and the state governments. The intention underlying this choice was to dilute the ability of any one man or group of people from being able to exercise power, naturally corruptible, over their fellow citizens. This intention, we must understand, was a spiritual and moral one, based upon biblical understandings of the nature of man.

The biblical worldview informed many of the decisions and beliefs of the Founders, not least of which being the claim, embodied in no less a document than our Declaration of Independence, that all men are created equal, and endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights. The purpose of government was to protect each citizen in the enjoyment of these rights. The right to self-defense, embodied in the 2nd amendment, derives ultimately from Scripture. The right of each man to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience is consistent with a true understanding of New Testament religion, regardless of what may have happened under the established religions on the European continent. Some colonial writers even claimed to have found a mandate for representative republican government with democratic institutions (like voting and jury trials) in the commands of God to the Israelite commonwealth to choose leaders from among their own people to serve as judges. Clearly, the men of this generation respected the Bible, looked to it for political and philosophical guidance, and were steeped in a worldview that accepted the truths of Scripture.

Despite the attempts at historical revision by some, biblical religion had a strong and tempering influence on our nation in her early years. Some claim that our Founders, and those of their generation, were "rational Deists" who rejected the Bible and its truths. This idea must be flatly rejected, however, when we look at the sum total of what these men said and did, instead of pulling a few quotes out of context, as the atheists and "freethinkers" do. Indeed, one of the first acts of Congress under the new Constitution was, at public expense, to have Bibles printed and distributed to citizens of our nation living in what were then frontier areas. This is not the action of people who rejected Scripture and sought to establish a radically secular nation, such as was seen with the revolution in France.

The biblical worldview, and the system built upon it, helped to protect Americans from many of the ills and vices that have befallen so many other nations throughout history. Pagan nations, by which I mean nations that have rejected the Creator's worldview in favor of some form or another of purely manmade sentimentality, have traditionally been very different than those societies in which the Judeo-Christian ethic and worldview have been pervasive. These nations have typically been rife with corruption, have considered human life to be a very cheap thing, and have not blushed at even the vilest of immoralities.

For much of her history, America could have been counted among those nations that rejected the pagan for the Judeo-Christian. She was one of a few nations, along with Great Britain and her daughter colonies and a handful of northern European nations, that were holistically Christian nations. As each of these societies has gradually rejected their moral bases, they have drifted into pagan, God-rejecting ways. America is no different. Since the 1960s, the gradual trend towards devolution that was caused by unbelieving, liberal theology accelerated to a breakneck pace. We are to the point now where America cannot credibly be called a truly Christian nation. We have a small residue of those who hold to a truly biblical worldview, but even many of those who call themselves "Christian" hold to a worldview that is utterly alien to the worldview upon which our nation was founded. We, as a nation, are regressing backwards towards a set of social and moral conditions that have characterized pagan, God-rejecting nations all throughout history.

How are we doing this?

In pagan societies, there was no sense that God was the Creator, that the universe and all that is in it is the product of a loving, perfect God who made it by His own hand, and placed mankind into it as a steward. Instead, most pagan societies held to some version of a creation myth in which the "stuff" of creation was always there and was merely shaped by finite and limited gods or other supernatural forces. There was no understanding of creation ex nihilo among them. Instead, the gods, man, and everything else were all just a part of some eternally pre-existent matter that might change in form, but certainly could not be said to have been a product of special creation by a loving, all-powerful God to Whom we will one day give an account of ourselves. As a result, pantheism sooner or later would recommend itself to them as the "obvious" choice for explaining reality, as it did the Stoics in Rome and the Hindus in India.

This, naturally, leads to two outflowings. The first is the placing of humanity and the natural world around us on the same level. A man is equals to a dog is equal to a mouse is equal to a tree. The most obvious example of this is the view of the transmigration of the soul as it is expressed in karmic Hinduism. In this worldview, a man may very well end up being a dog in his next life, or a tree, depending on how good or bad he was in this life. Even among the Greeks and others pagans, however, there was this same sense of man having an intimate connection with nature. This formed the basis of the sympathetic magic and astrology that were practiced throughout so much of the ancient world – they arose out of the pantheistic belief that all of physical existence was connected, and that the actions of one part would subtly influence other parts. The motions of the stars would control our destinies. Using the right ingredients and speaking the right formulae would influence anything from the weather to the emotions of other people.

We see this same general mindset today in the rise in astrology, the occult, alien Eastern religions, and so forth, all of which rest on the same pantheistic foundation. However, the most pervasive example of the inroads that this worldview has made into the psyche of our nation is to be found in the widespread acceptance of the principles and beliefs embodied in the environmentalist movement. While I believe that there is certainly a place within the biblical worldview for a proper stewardship over the earth and its resources, the modern "Green" movement goes far beyond this. Instead of viewing the earth as a special gift of God to man for his use and benefit, the Green movement views the earth as something which transcends man, a system in which man is simply one little cell in the greater mass of life which is called "Gaia." There are many thousands in our nation who, literally, worship the earth as a mother goddess, just as the pagans in many societies did thousands of years ago. But there are millions more who, while not revering the mother goddess openly, still accept the implicit teachings of pantheistic environmentalism. "We belong to the earth," they say, "it does not belong to us." That is an anti-God statement, and one which is as likely to be said by a religionist in a liberal church as it is an earth-worshipping Gaiast. The whole "Earth First" movement is predicated on the notion that man, by exercising his industry and intelligence to improve the world around him, is acting on an alien and desultory instinct which is "ruining" the earth. Man needs to know his place, to be "in harmony" with nature. Indeed, man, because he uses earth's resources, deserves to be "culled" according to some of the more radical Greenies. Even the belief, imparted to our children in the public schools and in many children's entertainment programs, that we need to "save the earth" by crash recycling programs, ending CO2 production, and saving the rain forests is predicated on pantheistic Green assumptions. Need I say it, but Captain Planet was nothing more than a high priest of Gaiasm, tasked with converting your children to his religion.

Coupled with radical environmentalism, we also see the advance of the religion of evolutionism – which is a religious and mystical belief system, rather than a scientific. Again, materialistic evolution finds its basis in the myth that all of existence has been eternally – there is no God who called it into existence from nothing. Whether all that exists is now ordered from some hypothetical Big Bang (the initial point of explosion itself existing without a beginning), or through some sort of eternally contracting and expanding steady-state system, the fundamental constant in all this is the rejection of any need for God the Creator. Instead, all of us, and everything else, are just flashes in the pan in that great cosmic stream of non-consciousness. Life arose from non-life, and is just another form that matter happens to take, much like crystals and planetoids. When you get right down to the nuts and bolts, that is what materialistic evolutionism is – a worldview that exists to give its believers a reason to reject a personal God to whom they will one day be accountable, and to replace it with a soulless diversity of "change" in which we just form one point on an ever-evolving continuum of existence, all of it interconnected and interrelated. In evolutionism, man really is no better than a dog or a mouse or a tree, for that's merely what man was millions of years ago.

The other outflowing of the pantheistic ethos is the devaluation of human life. If we're all just part of some great big Everything, then no single one of us really matters for much. Our nation is well on its way to losing the sense of the uniqueness and value of innocent human life. In godly societies, it is understood that man was created in the image of his Creator, and that he occupies a special and revered place in the estimation of God. To assault the life of man, except under very stringent and atypical circumstances clearly delineated by God Himself (such as capital punishment for very specific crimes), is to assault God Himself.

In pagan societies, life was cheap. The Greek and Roman myths are full of stories of unwanted babies who were exposed – left to die on mountains or in the wilderness. In the stories, these babies were often taken in by kindly strangers. In real life, this was a standard practice in these societies for getting rid of unwanted children, especially girls (who were less valued), and usually, nobody was there to take them in. In the games of Rome, men fought to the death, spilling each others blood and lives onto an arena floor, all for the entertainment of a hooting crowd. In war, there was no concept of "human rights," no distinction between civilian and combatant. When the Assyrians, the Mongols, or the Romans conquered you, the best you could hope for was a relatively short period of bloodletting and rapine, followed by the enslavement of the survivors. Human life was just another commodity, and a cheap one at that. Even today, in non-Christian societies all over the world, we see the same contempt for the value of human life – how else can one describe, for instance, the genocide committed by a paganized Germany under the Nazis, or the Rwandan massacres in Africa?

But what of America today? What can we say of a nation where a million babies a year are aborted in the womb, practically always because they are inconvenient to one or both of the parents? How is that really any different from leaving the baby to freeze to death or to be eaten by wolves on a mountain? Abortion is a thoroughly pagan practice, and nobody who accepts that it is a woman's "right" can credibly claim to be a Christian. Nobody. It is a pagan abomination, the existence of which shows starkly the terrible depths to which our land has fallen.

But let's look beyond that. What about our popular entertainments, the movies and video games and the like, in which blood and gore are glorified? Our people are entertained, amused and titillated by seeing graphic, on-screen depictions of people's lives being destroyed in a splatter of blood. Our children play video games where the object is to kill and maim in as grotesque a fashion as possible. How are these any different from the jeering Roman crowds who urged gladiators to behead and disembowel each other as spectacle?

Another practice that was common in pagan societies was the acceptance and practice of sodomy, so-called "homosexuality." This sin was rife among the filthy pagan societies of the Canaanites. The pagan Greeks practiced it with abandon. The Spartan system of military training for their boys included conditioning to sodomy. The Thebans had their "Sacred Band," 150 couples of male lovers who were honored as the highest warriors in their city-state. The Romans, as they became more decadent, cast aside their repugnance at this sin and it became widespread among their upper classes. Even in religion, sodomy has been revered by a pagan, anti-God world. The role of male temple prostitutes in the Baal religion of the ancient Near East, against which God and His prophets objected so strenuously, is well-known. The Greeks, especially the Spartans, had entire festivals devoted to the "carrying away" of young teenage boys by older men as lovers, in emulation of the myth of the abduction of the young man Ganymede by Zeus. Far from being abhorred, sodomy was a virtue in many pagan systems.

And so it is today in America. Sodomites form a protected class, afforded special protections by law that are unavailable to those who follow normal patterns of sexuality. "Gayness" is held up as laudable and good by our popular entertainment, in the movies, on television shows, among the chattering classes. What was once the most shameful of practices is now performed openly and without punishment on the streets of many of our cities. We are even on the brink of appointing an open lesbian to the highest court in the land. Even religion, so-called "Christianity" as it is practiced in our liberal, unbelieving "churches," is a part of the mainstreaming of sodomy. Just look at the denominations today who are seeking to openly place practicing homosexuals into their clergy, and who are at the forefront of the condemnations leveled at those who hold to the biblical position on this sin. "Gay is good," we are told even by churchmen in these denominations, while those who side with God are bigots and hateful. Our society has advanced far down the path of pagan rejection of God.

One final way in which we see our nation rejecting the biblical worldview and regressing to the same standards of behavior as seen in pagan nations throughout history is in the acceptance of institutionalized corruption in politics and government. Granted, human nature being what it is, there has always been corruption to one degree or another in every government ever conceived, even our own back in the good old days. But late Republican Rome set a new standard for such behavior. Offices were bought and sold with impunity. Patrician notables with personal armies would invade the Republic's neighbors for the purposes of extracting gold, slaves, and glorious acclaim back in Rome. Provincial governors openly milked as much tax revenue as they could without inciting open rebellions, so as to fund lavish lifestyles and the furthering of their political power back in Rome. Bribery was rampant. Members of the ruling class used the courts as a tool to destroy each other, instead of exacting true justice. Despite the moralizing against the effects of this corruption by a few lonely voices, there seems to have been little moral or ethical concern that would have served as a brake on the advance of corruption.

Rome wasn't the only corrupt society. Even into modern history, the extent of corruption among government officials and others at high levels in society generally correlates inversely with the degree to which biblical Christianity and the biblical worldview had penetrated into the consciousness of a nation. As they lose that influence, they lose their good government by honest people.

So today, in America we see a system in which bribery is increasingly accepted as "politicians being politicians." We have a President who dithers in his response to grave natural and environmental disasters such as we have seen recently in Tennessee and Louisiana, because those states voted for his opponent. The present administration has been involved in selling Senate seats to the highest bidder. It has tried to bribe a sitting member of Congress with the promise of a high office if he would refrain from running against the President's chosen candidate in a senatorial primary. This President has surrounded himself with ethically questionable individuals like Van Jones and Valerie Jarrett, and only got to where he is because of his ties to a political machine dominated by such sterling examples of ethical goodness as "Hot Rod" Blagojevich and "Fat Tony" Rezko. Obama's campaign for the presidency was financed in part by foreign money, funneled into his treasury from various Middle Eastern sources. This administration's immigration enforcement apparatus has openly said that it "may not" process illegal immigrants arrested under an Arizona law that the President doesn't like, thereby positively refusing to do its duty under law. Obama and those around him have not been shy about using thugs – Black Panthers, SEIU mobs, and ACORN operatives – to intimidate voters, opponents, and those who are being made into examples to the rest.

Even before the current administration, Bill Clinton was able to get away with high crimes and misdemeanors because he was popular and well-liked, and was able to convince the gullible people of this country that he was merely being persecuted by prudish Republicans for whom it was "all about sex." Of course, Clinton also got away with financing his campaign through foreign money, when Al Gore facilitated the entry of Chinese money through his fundraising at a Buddhist temple. Other candidates for office, from John Kerry to Richard Blumenthal, have been given passes by the media and their own supporters, despite their bald-faced lying about their war records in Vietnam.

The list goes on and on. But you know why this is the case? Because the people love to have it so. These politicians get away with what they do, and continue to get a pass election after election after election, because the mainstream media and the people themselves are willing to accept and condone this ever-increasing lawlessness and corruption. We the people could change this if we wanted. But too many of us don't want to, because the corruption in Washington is merely mirroring the corruption in the personal lives of many in this nation. To really and truly get serious about holding (Democrat) politicians accountable would mean that too many liberals, and even moderates, in this country would have to face up to their own culpability for many of the same sorts of things, only on a smaller and less noticeable scale. The corruption is not merely at the top in this country. It goes all the way through, and it is so because a large portion of this country's population has rejected biblical morals and the biblical worldview – we have become a pagan nation in the way that a goodly share, perhaps the majority, of the people themselves think and act in their personal lives. Just as in Rome, the patrician class got away with corruption because the people were too busy with their bread and circuses and with their own increasingly immoral lifestyles, so it is in 21st century America.

So what can we do? How can we, as conservatives and Christians, oppose the seemingly inevitable march towards the paganization of America? Well, first and foremost, we have to get serious about standing up and making our voices be heard on the matter, regardless of who wants to naysay, regardless of who wants to criticize, regardless of who opposes us. We have to be willing to vote our consciences, instead of constantly compromising with every moderate, RINO, and social libertarian who comes along and says they are a fiscal conservative. We have to start demanding that our candidates and those who claim to speak for us on the national stage hold to our worldview – that they respect human life as a gift from God, that they respect God as our Creator, that they oppose the perversions that are increasingly stamping themselves onto our culture. We have to make the case in positive terms to those around us, showing them why abortion is bad, why gay marriage is detrimental, why environmentalism is not what it is cracked up to be.

Even more so, we have to get serious about living the biblical worldview ourselves, instead of merely telling other people about it. We have to practice what we preach. We have to make our words and our testimonies match, and we have to be able to present them to those around us who have accepted the pagan philosophies and worldview, and show why ours is better. In our free society, we do not – nor should we – have the right to impose our worldview by force of arms or violence. We do have the right to present it into the marketplace of ideas, and we have the responsibility to make it so obvious that it imposes itself, by the iron force of reason and wisdom. So let's get busy doing so.

 

This is just like in my earlier blog post today. But it says it so much better and truly shows what is wrong with America.

STEVE COOLEY - NO FRIEND OF PRO-FAMILY CONSERVATIVES

• Posted by Editor on May 25, 2010 at 8:58pm
  
• Send Message   View Editor's blog
  

Rev. Louis P. Sheldon—Chairman
Benjamin Lopez—Treasurer
100 S. Anaheim Blvd, Suite 350
Anaheim CA 92805

 

CONSERVATIVE VOTERS BEWARE!

ATTORNEY GENERAL CANDIDATE STEVE COOLEY
IS NO FRIEND OF PRO-FAMILY CONSERVATIVES

May 25, 2010

Pro-Family & Pro-Life Friends:

We are writing you today because there is a dangerous pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage candidate seeking the Republican nomination for Attorney General. This anti-family candidate is Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley and in his own words he publicly states unapologetically, "Let me be clear, I support a woman's right to choose."


Not only does Cooley not value life, but he opposes the sanctity of marriage too.

The Bay Area Reporter newspaper, which self-describes itself as "serving the Gay, Lesbian and Transgender Communities," praised Cooley as having exemplary support for LGBT issues. They even call Steve Cooley "a marriage equality backer." When it comes to marriage Steve Cooley is on the side of homosexual marriage activists. The position of Attorney General in California is of extreme importance. The Attorney General is the one who will either defend Proposition 8 in court or work against it in court.

While Cooley has been widely criticized for his attempts to undermine California's "Three-Strikes-and-You're-Out" anti-crime law, his views on family issues haven't been much publicized. Cooley's public positions on these important issues are just as anti-family as current Attorney General Jerry Brown, who refused to defend Prop. 8, the California Marriage Protection Act. In fact, when it comes to traditional values there is no difference between Republican Steve Cooley and the pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage ideals of the Democrat candidates for Attorney General. Be warned that Steve Cooley is just another liberal that embraces the secularization and amoral societal descent that we battle daily.

The deception about Steve Cooley concerned us greatly that we could not remain silent any longer. Please spread this on to others. We cannot afford to let others be deceived.

For Life and the Family,

Rev. Louis P. Sheldon Chairman TVC Victory Fund   As I stated on Facebook. WE HAVE TO STOP! Stop what? We have to stop voting party over moral issues. In New Hampshire, as in Utah if I'm not mistaken but New Hampshire for sure, we made a big deal that we got a Republican pundit back into office and showed Obama that he will indeed have a very hard time to keep the Democrats in office and that things will change in 2010. But what does this Republican look like? Did anyone notice that he is pro-abortion? And the same in Utah, at least he was a candidate unless he had been elected to office. How will God judge us when we stand before him one day and he says Jim, Peter, Thomas, Andy, why did you give your vote to someone who murders the children I give as a gift to raise and nourish and cherish and train them to grow up walking in my ways? What will we answer then?		Benjamin Lopez Treasurer TVC Victory Fund

 

BP And The Relevance To Actions Concerning Israel.

The Balfour Agreement, the major decline of the British Empire, British Petroleum (BP), Valdez, Horizon and their Israel connections - Bill Koenig

The Anglo-Persian Oil Company, the Balfour Agreement and the British Empire

The Anglo-Persian oil company, that became British Petroleum in 1954, pressured the British government and the League of Nations to back off their commitment to the Balfour agreement; thus, Israel received approximately twelve percent of the land intended for them.

At the time of the Balfour Agreement (1917), at the peak of its power, it was often said that "the sun never sets on the British Empire" because its span across the globe ensured that the sun was always shining on at least one of its numerous territories.

The British Empire comprised the dominions, colonies, protectorates, mandates, and other territories ruled or administered by the United Kingdom, that had originated with the overseas colonies and trading posts established by England in the late 16th and early 17th centuries. At its height it was the largest empire in history and, for over a century, was the foremost global power. By 1922, the British Empire held sway over a population of about 458 million people, one-quarter of the world's population at the time, and covered more than 13,000,000 square miles (33,670,000 km2): approximately a quarter of the Earth's total land area. As a result, its political, linguistic and cultural legacy is widespread. (Reference Wikipedia)

On September 11, 1922, the British government presented a memorandum to the League of Nations stating that Transjordan would be excluded from all provisions of dealing with the Jewish settlement. From that point forward, Britain recognized the land west of the Jordan as Palestine (which was 23 percent of the entire territory), and the land of east of the Jordan River as Transjordan (constituting 73 percent of the mandated territories). In 1923 Britain transferred a part of the Golan Heights to the French Mandate of Syria, in exchange for the Metula region.

Important to many Jews was the permission to settle in the British-controlled Mandate of Palestine.In order to try to maintain peace between the Jewish and Arab populations, especially after the 1936-1939 Arab revolt in Palestine of the 1930s, Britain strictly limited immigration. This limitation became nearly absolute after the White Paper of 1939 all but stopped legal immigration. During the War, Zionists organized an illegal immigration effort, conducted by "Hamossad Le'aliyah Bet" (the precursor of the Mossad) that rescued tens of thousands of European Jews from the Nazis by shipping them to Palestine in rickety boats. Many of these boats were intercepted and some sank with great loss of life. The efforts began in 1939, and the last immigrant boat to try to enter Palestine before the end of the war was the Struma, torpedoed in the Black Sea by a Soviet submarine in February 1942. The boat sank with the loss of nearly 800 lives. (Reference Wikipedia)

The British Empire's days were numbered, and on the whole, Britain adopted a policy of peaceful disengagement from its colonies once stable, non-Communist governments were available to transfer power to, in contrast to other European powers like France or Portugal, which waged costly and ultimately unsuccessful wars to keep their empires intact. Between 1945 and 1965, the number of people under British rule outside the UK itself fell from 700 million to five million, three million of whom were in Hong Kong. (Reference Wikipedia)

The Exxon Valdez and the Israel connection

The Exxon Valdez accident happened less than 48 hours after President George H.W. Bush and Secretary of State James Baker's staff opened talks with the Palestinians on March 22, 1989. The Valdez problem began to develop late in the night of March 23 with the first spill at 12:05 a.m. on March 24.

On March 21, 1989: U.S. Secretary of State James A. Baker concludes that Israel may have to negotiate directly with the PLO

Secretary of State James A. Baker III, attempting to soften the impact of his conclusion that Israel eventually may have to negotiate directly with the Palestine Liberation Organization, Tuesday reaffirmed the Bush Administration's opposition to the creation of an independent Palestinian state.

"It is the policy of the United States that we do not support an independent Palestinian state," Baker told a House panel. His statement was intended to reassure Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, who has vowed that his government will never relinquish control over the West Bank and Gaza Strip territories that Israel occupied during the Arab-Israeli war of 1967. (Los Angeles Times)

March 22, 1989: Palestine Liberation Organization today rejected a halt in the violent

After its first formal contact with the Bush Administration, the Palestine Liberation Organization today rejected a halt in the violent uprising in the Israeli-occupied territories to encourage peace negotiations.

The move was a rebuff to the approach to the Arab-Israeli conflict outlined by Secretary of State James A. Baker 3d, who has sought to encourage a reduction of violence and tension and bring about direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. (Reuters)

March 23, 1989: Arafat said that the second formal meeting between U.S. and PLO representatives was positive

Yasser Arafat said today that the second formal meeting between U.S. and PLO representatives was positive and reflected the desire of both sides to make the dialogue a success.

To a reporter who asked the smiling chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization whether Wednesday's meeting was responsible for his good mood, Arafat replied: "Yes, exactly."

He described the content of the meeting between U.S. Ambassador Robert H. Pelletreau and Yasser Abed-Rabbo of the PLO Executive Committee as "positive and serious," but gave few details of the discussion.

"There is a mutual interest and intention to lead this dialogue to success," Arafat said. (Associated Press)

Pelletreau and Abed-Rabbo met for 4 1/2 hours at the Tunisian government's Dar el Maghreibia guest house, with two senior advisers present on each side. The ambassador would not talk about the meeting and referred all inquiries to the State Department. (New York Times)

March 23, 1989: Jewish Leaders Avoid Comment on Peace Talks:

Jewish leaders from around the world issued a general statement of support for Israel on Wednesday but skirted the increasingly contentious issue of the shape of future Middle East peace talks.

The final proclamation, the fruit of a three-day solidarity conference here attended by about 1,500 delegates, kept to tried and true themes.

March 23-24, 1989: Exxon Valdez Accident

Exxon Valdez left the Valdez oil terminal in Alaska at 9:13 pm on March 23, 1989 bound for Long Beach, California. A harbor pilot guided the ship through the Valdez Narrows before leaving the ship and returning control to Joseph Jeffrey Hazelwood, the ship's master. The ship maneuvered out of the shipping lane to avoid icebergs. Following the maneuver and sometime after 11 pm, he left Third Mate Gregory Cousins in charge of the wheel house and Able Seaman Robert Kagan at the helm, both of whom had not been given their mandatory 6 hours off duty before their 12-hour duty began. The ship was on autopilot, using the navigation system installed by the company that constructed the ship. The outbound shipping lane was covered with icebergs so the ship's captain, Hazelwood, got permission from the Coast Guard to go out through the inbound lane. The ship struck Bligh Reef at around 12:04 am March 24, 1989.

Beginning three days after the vessel grounded (March 27), a storm pushed large quantities of fresh oil on to the rocky shores of many of the beaches in the Knight Island chain.

The result was the largest oil spill in US history: 11 million gallons covering 11,000 square miles, including 1,300 miles of pristine shoreline. The spill devastated the local economy as well as the environment. Estimated losses in the sport fishing industry alone were almost $600 million over the two years following the accident. Within days an estimated 250,000 seabirds perished, along with thousands of otters and seals. Despite billions of dollars in cleanup, the environmental effects of the spill still linger. Much of the oil seeped below the surface of affected beaches, decaying at a rate of about three to four percent per year. Animals that dig in the sand for their food continue to be contaminated. (Wikipedia)

British Petroleum's (BP) Horizon Oil Spill Began on April 20

BP's Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico began on April 20 — at the very time Obama's team was pressuring Israel to restart talks. BP and the U.S. are still working to contain the oil spill, which is expected to be larger in size than Exxon Valdez.

The two largest oil spills in U.S. history corresponded to U.S. actions on Israel's covenant land and talks with the Palestinians. The spills have and will cause America to forgo more offshore exploration and become even more reliant on rogue nations for oil.

from Worldwatchdaily

 

This was send to me from a friend of mine. Just as I mentioned before what my thoughts are on the Gulf Oil Spill, this confirms it quite nicely. If not only abandon but conspire against G-d's "apple of his eye" you will seek the Almighty's wrath. Now for some this may be too simple minded and can be explained away with a number of reasons. But remember, as valid as these reasons are they haven't caused a problem all these years. But just a Katrina formed as a tropical storm, not 24 hours later after the last Jewish settler got kicked out of Gaza and Samaria, this also followed straight on the heel of Obama's pressure to restart talks between Israel and the Arabs. Sorry, I'm disinclined to use the term Palestinian since there is no such people group.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a very long read but it's worthwhile. I even brought this up to my pastor and a person he was talking with. When they talked about not understanding why things are the way they are, I said that it's done by device. We teach our kids "multiculturalism" and "political correctness" to the point where they do not know right from wrong and are puzzled if we takel issues like "same sex marriage" or euthanasia, abortion and many other issues that are based on Judeo-Christian principle. Our children are taught to be "global citizens," not to excel in order to become whatever they dream off. It is way easier to control mindless people than those that have moral convictions.

Breakup Of U.S. Is Inevitable

By Chuck Baldwin

May 19, 2010

 

 

This column is archived at

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=1592

 

 

People all over America are discussing freedom's future. In short, they are worried. In fact, many are actually talking about State secession. In coffee shops and cafes, and around dining room tables, millions of people are speaking favorably of states breaking away from the union. Not since the turn of the twentieth century have this many people thought (and spoken) this favorably about the prospect of a State (or group of states) exiting the union. In my mind, this is a good thing.

 

Even many of those who oppose the prospect of secession understand the increasing tyrannical nature of the current central government in Washington, D.C., and that something must be done about it.

 

The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines tyranny as "1: oppressive power . . . 2: a government in which absolute power is vested in a single ruler . . . 3: a rigorous condition imposed by some outside agency or force . . . 4: a tyrannical act."

 

Even a casual observer would have to conclude that most of the actions proceeding forth from DC today match at least Webster's 1st and 3rd definitions of tyranny. Besides, who would argue the advantage of the tyranny of an oligarchy over the tyranny of a monarchy? A tyranny of many cannot be distinguished from a tyranny of one in most cases--especially not by those poor souls who are at the point of the spear of Government's cruelties.

 

The fact is, there is collusion between Big Government and Big Business (as each feeds and profits off the other) to strip the American people of their God-given liberties. Without a shadow of a doubt, had America's Founding Fathers not sagaciously cemented the Second Amendment into the US Constitution, the Jackboots would have marched over us years ago.

 

That freedom-loving people are reaching a point of frustration--and even fury--is quite understandable. And State secession is, very properly, the last best option for freedomists to maintain fidelity to the principles of liberty. All of America's founders understood this--all of them! And millions of modern-day American patriots are just now beginning to become reacquainted with this great, historic doctrine.

 

However, whether one subscribes to the doctrine of secession or not is quite immaterial. The breakup of the US is inevitable! Short of another Great Awakening, nothing can stop it. And given the spiritual deadness of most American churches these days, the prospect of a modern-day national revival seems remote at best.

 

It is a historical fact that no empire can sustain itself. And America is more and more becoming a global empire. For the sake of simplicity, I ask readers to ponder this question: How can one sustain a global economy without global government to manage and control it? Answer: One can't.

 

This is why elitists in politics, economics, and the military have been calling for global government for decades. People such as George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Tony Blair, Walter Cronkite, Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Gideon Rachman, Warren Christopher, Walt Rostow, Richard Gardner, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Robert Pastor, et al. Furthermore, organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Bilderbergers, and the Trilateral Commission are constantly promoting regional or global unification. Moreover, institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, the World Trade Organization (WTO), and, of course, the United Nations (UN) all contribute to the escalation of globalism.

 

I have written two previous columns outlining much relevant information on this very real promotion of globalism. See them at:

 

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=84

 

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=86

 

Therefore, it is safe to say that, for the most part, America's foreign policy is (and has been) controlled and manipulated by globalists.

Accordingly, America's armed forces are used more and more as international policemen to patrol the streets of the world on behalf of this international cabal of merchants and politicians. The cover for this is the mantra of fighting an international "war on terrorism." But the real agenda is, keeping our troops fighting in perpetual war so that they might be available to the globalists at the UN and US State Department (not to mention countless "off the books" operations being run by the CIA and a host of other agencies) for the purpose of maintaining the "global economy" (and only God knows how many illegal enterprises).

 

Perpetual war also allows the Machiavellians who desire to turn America into a police state to increasingly encroach upon constitutionally protected liberties by keeping the populace in a perpetual state of fear. After all, as long as our troops are "over there" fighting (and making) enemies, we will always need Big Brother to keep us safe "over here." And the only way he can do that is by putting us all in cages; but hey, it's for our own good, right?

 

And, of course, this new "global force for good" must itself be reshaped into an image compatible with the political correctness of the New World Order. Hence, more and more women are being placed in combat units. In fact, females are now the fastest growing group of enlistees within the US armed forces. And for the first time in US history, women are now approved to serve aboard submarines. (I am sure submariners' wives are thrilled about

this!)

 

"How does flooding the US military with women fit into the scheme of the globalists?" you ask. Simple. By reducing the overall efficiency and effectiveness of our military forces, it requires them to be part of a "coalition" force. Come on, folks, figure it out: our troops are always part of some sort of global "coalition" army. They always serve in concert with NATO, or the UN, or at the behest of some other global entity.

 

And please, I don't need readers to write me with great indignation, calling me "sexist." Get real! If women can serve in combat equally with men, why not have an all-female combat infantry division? How about an all-female tank division? Let's have an all-female Navy warship! What about an all-female Navy SEAL team or Army Special Forces team? If, then, women are inefficient in combat as a unit, they are equally inefficient in combat individually. Wise up, people! It is critical to the globalists controlling Washington politics that our military be integrated with foreign entities.

Allowing the weaker vessels to dilute the warrior-strength of our combat units helps to accomplish this in spades!

 

Folks, this new American empire is not sustainable. Mark it down: the American empire will follow every other notable empire of antiquity and collapse under its own weight. The signs are already ubiquitous.

 

In its attempt to entice illegal aliens (a necessary component to the globalization of America) by providing them with almost complete and universal welfare benefits, the Empire has saddled the states with a monstrous debt and has planted the seeds for its own fragmentation.

 

The American Southwest is a boiling caldron. Revolutionaries, violent criminal gangs, agitators, drug runners, human traffickers, and agent provocateurs--all loyal to Mexico--have been allowed to freely unleash their anti-American vitriol to the point that, in desperation, the State of Arizona is now trying to fight back. It is probably too little too late, however. Both the central government in Washington, D.C., and the national news media are sympathetic to the cause of La Raza. Look at how those brave legislators and governor in Arizona have been lampooned by the national press corps.

 

The call for the "reconquista" of America's great Southwest will continue to escalate. It is all part of the globalists' plan to regionalize the United States. The template is already in place. CFR's Robert Pastor has already done the legwork. The North American Community (or Union) is past the drawing table stage; it is now being implemented. The NAFTA superhighway is being built and La Raza has been unleashed on the frontier. It's only a matter of time.

 

Furthermore, take a look at the staggering debt that this government in Washington, D.C., has burdened the American people with. To talk numbers is

meaningless: they total more than we can possibly begin to fathom. These numbers shock sensibilities and strain comprehension. In this regard, toss away all notions of partisan politics. Both major parties in DC have forever plunged our children and grandchildren's future into a chasm of indebtedness so deep that it can never be recovered. Never!

 

Yet again, perpetual war has accomplished its purpose: unmitigated debt has allowed international bankers to print and loan vast sums of paper money that can be used to further their dreams of a global economy, complete with a mutually palatable system of burgeoning global governance.

 

I say again, the American empire is not sustainable; the breakup of the United States is inevitable. It is only a matter of time. The real question is not IF the US will breakup, but WHEN and HOW?

 

Globalists are already planning America's breakup. Indeed, their plans for the future global economy DEMAND that America fracture. So, all of those who want to parade around and pontificate about the "unconstitutionality" and "impracticality" of secession can do so to their hearts' content. It changes nothing. The breakup is coming.

 

What is yet to be seen, of course, is if there will be enough states (the last vanguards of liberty) with the foresight to recognize the rise of tyranny and globalism as it approaches, and muster the courage and fortitude to do what principled patriots and lovers of liberty have always done: draw their line in the sand for freedom. Call it what you will; debate the definitions and language all you like; it all comes down to the same thing:

either men fight for freedom and independence or they allow themselves and their children to be sold into slavery. At some point in the future (how far in the future, no one knows), we Americans will, once again, have to face that decision.

 

In the meantime, keep talking about freedom around your coffee tables; keep writing about freedom in your books and columns; keep praying about freedom in your churches and closets; keep dreaming about freedom in your hearts and minds. Real freedom--where a man can be left alone; where a man can keep what he earns; where a man can make his own choices; where a man's property is his own; where harassing agents of an oppressive central government are nowhere to be found; where a man doesn't have to sell his soul in order to sell his wares; where a man's worship of God is not subject to political correctness (or the IRS); and where a man can actually exchange commerce and correspondence without the prying eyes of Big Brother--is worth any price.

ANY PRICE!

 

As Barry Goldwater said, "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice."

Amen! And if the pursuit of freedom requires the extremism of secession, I say, LET IT COME!

Sean Hannity Show: Pamela Geller Debates Ghouse (Muslim American Congres...

This is interesting, especially since the Muslim who debates Pamela Geller from "Atlas Shrugs." The Muslim of course tells Mrs. Geller that the Q'uran she reads from is a corrupted translation which does not represent the true face of Islam which would never allow something like 9/11 to happen. Mrs. Geller counters rightly so that her sources are all former Muslims like Norma Darwish, Wafta Sultan and others like them. This is nothing unique and it's very common in Islam. It's called "Takijjah," which is, even so lying is forbidden by Allah, but when it's done to further the spread of Islam which its goal is world dominion, it's perfectly legitimate. This is just another facet of Islam, one of many that the West over and over fails tounderstand. Maybe by design.

Friday's News

Muslims Burn Christian Center Under Construction

http://www.newmediajournal.us/culture_wars/0505.htm

Today's news in The New Media Journal talks about Muslims burning a Christian center that's being build. Gee, I wonder how can that be. I thought Islam is a religion of peace or so we are told. That's why Eric Holder's tongue is stuck to his palate when he's being asked if the Times Square Bomber could have been driven by radical Islam. Note, when being asked the person asking the question stressed that he meant radical Islam, not Islam even so we all know that this is fundamental to the tenets of the Q'uran. Yet, Mr. Holder still wouldn't take that into account


The Hutaree Militia Raid

necessarily.http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=1177

Just as I told you about Eric Holder not wanting to name the enemy which is Islamic Jihad, or if you prefer "radical Islam," this article by Chuck Baldwin comes over the newswire so to speak. It looks like the FBI did a raid on a militia group and hauled them before court because of the speech they have been given rather than any action for which they could be tried. Even the judge thinks it's a no case.

However people like congressman Andre Carson (D-Indiana) said that outside of the Tea-Party, whose members she considers terrorists, there are many, not just those with an Islamic face but also mostly coming from supremacist groups. This leaves the spectrum wide open. Anyone could be labeled an enemy of the state just because they do not like your view point and they look at you as a road block for their agendas.
Oh well!


The Third Temple And The Third World War

http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=128&view=item&idx=2042

Now this is interesting. There is a prophecy by one of the old sages saying that when the Hurva Synagogue is rebuild, it will usher in the construction of the third temple which Jews and Christians alike believe would usher in the Messianic age.