Monday, December 18, 2006

Revising History

One would think those trying to revise history would at least wait until the documentation is lost to rot and decay, some folks have never heard of this place, it's a good resource for scholars, legal and otherwise.

the Library of Congress

Yes, believe it or not, there are sources other than political action committee's to get information on history.

Monday, December 04, 2006

Ahmadinejad's Insanity

You can't beat this lady for sharp observations, I'm not gonna try, I'll just shamelessly link her post on Iran's nutty President.

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Homeland security at it's best!

Pam finds the perfect gift shoppe for the terrorists on your x-mas list!

UPDATE! this story was just featured on "on the record" w/ Greta vanSustern on fox right after I posted this.

Friday, November 24, 2006

French land givaways

You too can possess French land! just move there, demand free everything, be as violent as you can, burn a few cars and you too can own part of what was France!

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Once revered, now despised. The wisdom of our founding fathers

Founding Fathers Quotes
"The country's first two presidents, George Washington and John Adams,
were firm believers in the importance of religion for republican government." --official Library of Congress
"...both the legislators and the public considered it appropriate
for the national government to promote a nondenominational, nonpolemical Christianity."--official Library
of Congress statement
Have you ever read a quote that seemed to show that our Founders weren't Christians?
Click here to see an example of a quote taken out of context, and a tutorial on examining these quotes!
Early Years
The First Charter of Virginia (granted by King James I, on April 10, 1606)
• We, greatly commending, and graciously accepting of, their Desires for the Furtherance
of so noble a Work, which may, by the Providence of Almighty God, hereafter tend to the
Glory of his Divine Majesty, in propagating of Christian Religion to such People, as yet
live in Darkness and miserable Ignorance of the true Knowledge and Worship of God…
Instructions for the Virginia Colony (1606)
Lastly and chiefly the way to prosper and achieve good success is to make yourselves all
of one mind for the good of your country and your own, and to serve and fear God the
Giver of all Goodness, for every plantation which our Heavenly Father hath not planted
shall be rooted out.
William Bradford
• wrote that they [the Pilgrims] were seeking:
• 1) "a better, and easier place of living”; and that “the children of the group were being
drawn away by evil examples into extravagance and dangerous courses [in Holland]“
• 2) “The great hope, and for the propagating and advancing the gospel of the kingdom of
Christ in those remote parts of the world"
The Mayflower Compact (authored by William Bradford) 1620 | Signing of the Mayflower
painting | Picture of Compact
“Having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and
honor of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of
Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God, and one of
another, covenant and combine our selves together…”
John Adams and John Hancock:
We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus! [April 18, 1775]
John Adams:
“ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general
principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general
principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of
• “[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of
devotion to God Almighty.”
–John Adams in a letter written to Abigail on the day the Declaration was approved by Congress
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions
unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break
the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution
was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the
government of any other." --October 11, 1798
"I have examined all religions, as well as my narrow sphere, my straightened means, and
my busy life, would allow; and the result is that the Bible is the best Book in the world. It
contains more philosophy than all the libraries I have seen." December 25, 1813 letter to
Thomas Jefferson
"Without Religion this World would be Something not fit to be mentioned in polite
Company, I mean Hell." [John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, April 19, 1817] | photographs of this
letter: Page 2.... page 1.... page 3... page 4 here to see this quote in its context and to see John Adams' quotes taken OUT
of context!
Samuel Adams: | Portrait of Sam Adams | Powerpoint presentation on John, John Quincy, and
Sam Adams
“ He who made all men hath made the truths necessary to human happiness obvious to
all… Our forefathers opened the Bible to all.” [ "American Independence," August 1, 1776.
Speech delivered at the State House in Philadelphia]
“ Let divines and philosophers, statesmen and patriots, unite their endeavors to renovate
the age by impressing the minds of men with the importance of educating their little boys
and girls, inculcating in the minds of youth the fear and love of the Deity… and leading
them in the study and practice of the exalted virtues of the Christian system.” [October 4,
John Quincy Adams:
• “Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and
most venerated festival returns on this day [the Fourth of July]?" “Is it not that, in the
chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday
of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the Gospel dispensation? Is
it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the
foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human
government upon the first precepts of Christianity"?
--1837, at the age of 69, when he delivered a Fourth of July speech at Newburyport,
“The Law given from Sinai [The Ten Commandments] was a civil and municipal as well
as a moral and religious code.”
John Quincy Adams. Letters to his son. p. 61
Elias Boudinot: | Portrait of Elias Boudinot
“ Be religiously careful in our choice of all public officers . . . and judge of the tree by its
Charles Carroll - signer of the Declaration of Independence | Portrait of Charles Carroll
" Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are
decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure...are undermining
the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."
[Source: To James McHenry on November 4, 1800.]
Benjamin Franklin: | Portrait of Ben Franklin
“ God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without
his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured in
the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I
firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in
this political building no better than the builders of Babel” –Constitutional Convention of 1787
| original manuscript of this speech
“In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had
daily prayers in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they
were graciously answered… do we imagine we no longer need His assistance?”
[Constitutional Convention, Thursday June 28, 1787]
In Benjamin Franklin's 1749 plan of education for public schools in Pennsylvania, he
insisted that schools teach "the excellency of the Christian religion above all others,
ancient or modern."
In 1787 when Franklin helped found Benjamin Franklin University, it was dedicated as
"a nursery of religion and learning, built on Christ, the Cornerstone."
Alexander Hamilton:
• Hamilton began work with the Rev. James Bayard to form the Christian Constitutional
Society to help spread over the world the two things which Hamilton said made America
(1) Christianity
(2) a Constitution formed under Christianity.
“The Christian Constitutional Society, its object is first: The support of the Christian
religion. Second: The support of the United States.”
On July 12, 1804 at his death, Hamilton said, “I have a tender reliance on the mercy of
the Almighty, through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ. I am a sinner. I look to Him for
mercy; pray for me.”
"For my own part, I sincerely esteem it [the Constitution] a system which without the
finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of
interests." [1787 after the Constitutional Convention]
"I have carefully examined the evidences of the Christian religion, and if I was sitting as
a juror upon its authenticity I would unhesitatingly give my verdict in its favor. I can
prove its truth as clearly as any proposition ever submitted to the mind of man."
John Hancock: | Portrait of John Hancock
• “In circumstances as dark as these, it becomes us, as Men and Christians, to reflect that
whilst every prudent measure should be taken to ward off the impending judgments, …at
the same time all confidence must be withheld from the means we use; and reposed only
on that God rules in the armies of Heaven, and without His whole blessing, the best
human counsels are but foolishness… Resolved; …Thursday the 11th of May…to
humble themselves before God under the heavy judgments felt and feared, to confess the
sins that have deserved them, to implore the Forgiveness of all our transgressions, and a
spirit of repentance and reformation …and a Blessing on the … Union of the American
Colonies in Defense of their Rights [for which hitherto we desire to thank Almighty
God]…That the people of Great Britain and their rulers may have their eyes opened to
discern the things that shall make for the peace of the nation…for the redress of
America’s many grievances, the restoration of all her invaded liberties, and their security
to the latest generations.
"A Day of Fasting, Humiliation and Prayer, with a total abstinence from labor and recreation.
Proclamation on April 15, 1775"
Patrick Henry: | Portrait of Patrick Henry
• This is all the inheritance I can give my dear family. The religion of Christ can give
them one which will make them rich indeed.”
—The Last Will and Testament of Patrick Henry
“It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by
religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this
very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom
of worship here.”
John Jay: | Portrait of John Jay
“ Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well
as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for
their rulers.” Source: October 12, 1816. The Correspondence and Public Papers of John
Jay, Henry P. Johnston, ed., (New York: Burt Franklin, 1970), Vol. IV, p. 393.
“Whether our religion permits Christians to vote for infidel rulers is a question which
merits more consideration than it seems yet to have generally received either from the
clergy or the laity. It appears to me that what the prophet said to Jehoshaphat about his
attachment to Ahab ["Shouldest thou help the ungodly and love them that hate the Lord?"
2 Chronicles 19:2] affords a salutary lesson.”
The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, 1794-1826, Henry P. Johnston
Thomas Jefferson:
“ The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend to all the happiness of man.”
“Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern which have come under my
observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus.”
"I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus."
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure
when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that
these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?
Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice
cannot sleep forever.” (excerpts are inscribed on the walls of the Jefferson Memorial in
the nations capital) [Source: Merrill . D. Peterson, ed., Jefferson Writings, (New York:
Literary Classics of the United States, Inc., 1984), Vol. IV, p. 289. From Jefferson’s
Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, 1781.]
Samuel Johnston:
• “It is apprehended that Jews, Mahometans (Muslims), pagans, etc., may be elected to
high offices under the government of the United States. Those who are Mahometans, or
any others who are not professors of the Christian religion, can never be elected to the
office of President or other high office, [unless] first the people of America lay aside the
Christian religion altogether, it may happen. Should this unfortunately take place, the
people will choose such men as think as they do themselves.
[Elliot’s Debates, Vol. IV, pp 198-199, Governor Samuel Johnston, July 30, 1788 at the
North Carolina Ratifying Convention]
James Madison
“ We’ve staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all of our
“We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of
government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our
capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” [1778 to
the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]
• I have sometimes thought there could not be a stronger testimony in favor of religion or
against temporal enjoyments, even the most rational and manly, than for men who
occupy the most honorable and gainful departments and [who] are rising in reputation
and wealth, publicly to declare the unsatisfactoriness [of temportal enjoyments] by
becoming fervent advocates in the cause of Christ; and I wish you may give in your
evidence in this way.
Letter by Madison to William Bradford (September 25, 1773)
• In 1812, President Madison signed a federal bill which economically aided the Bible
Society of Philadelphia in its goal of the mass distribution of the Bible.
“ An Act for the relief of the Bible Society of Philadelphia” Approved February 2, 1813
by Congress
“It is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward
each other.”
• A watchful eye must be kept on ourselves lest, while we are building ideal monuments
of renown and bliss here, we neglect to have our names enrolled in the Annals of Heaven.
[Letter by Madison to William Bradford [urging him to make sure of his own salvation]
November 9, 1772]
At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, James Madison proposed the plan to divide the
central government into three branches. He discovered this model of government from
the Perfect Governor, as he read Isaiah 33:22;
“For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver,
the LORD is our king;
He will save us.”
James McHenry – Signer of the Constitution | Portrait of James McHenry
Public utility pleads most forcibly for the general distribution of the Holy Scriptures. The
doctrine they preach, the obligations they impose, the punishment they threaten, the
rewards they promise, the stamp and image of divinity they bear, which produces a
conviction of their truths, can alone secure to society, order and peace, and to our courts
of justice and constitutions of government, purity, stability and usefulness. In vain,
without the Bible, we increase penal laws and draw entrenchments around our
institutions. Bibles are strong entrenchments. Where they abound, men cannot pursue
wicked courses, and at the same time enjoy quiet conscience.
Jedediah Morse: | portrait of Jedediah Morse
"To the kindly influence of Christianity we owe that degree of civil freedom, and political
and social happiness which mankind now enjoys. . . . Whenever the pillars of Christianity
shall be overthrown, our present republican forms of government, and all blessings which
flow from them, must fall with them."
John Peter Gabriel Muhlenberg | Statue of John Peter Gabriel Muhlenberg
• In a sermon delivered to his Virginia congregation on January 21, 1776, he preached
from Ecclesiastes 3.
Arriving at verse 8, which declares that there is a time of war and a time of peace,
Muhlenberg noted that this surely was not the time of peace; this was the time of war.
Concluding with a prayer, and while standing in full view of the congregation, he
removed his clerical robes to reveal that beneath them he was wearing the uniform of an
officer in the Continental army! He marched to the back of the church; ordered the drum
to beat for recruits and over three hundred men joined him, becoming the Eighth Virginia
Brigade. John Peter Muhlenberg finished the Revolution as a Major-General, having been
at Valley Forge and having participated in the battles of Brandywine, Germantown,
Monmouth, Stonypoint, and Yorktown.
Thomas Paine:
“ It has been the error of the schools to teach astronomy, and all the other sciences, and
subjects of natural philosophy, as accomplishments only; whereas they should be taught
theologically, or with reference to the Being who is the author of them: for all the
principles of science are of divine origin. Man cannot make, or invent, or contrive
principles: he can only discover them; and he ought to look through the discovery to the
“ The evil that has resulted from the error of the schools, in teaching natural philosophy
as an accomplishment only, has been that of generating in the pupils a species of atheism.
Instead of looking through the works of creation to the Creator himself, they stop short,
and employ the knowledge they acquire to create doubts of his existence. They labour
with studied ingenuity to ascribe every thing they behold to innate properties of matter,
and jump over all the rest by saying, that matter is eternal.” “The Existence of God--1810”
Benjamin Rush:
• “I lament that we waste so much time and money in punishing crimes and take so little
pains to prevent them…we neglect the only means of establishing and perpetuating our
republican forms of government; that is, the universal education of our youth in the
principles of Christianity by means of the Bible; for this Divine Book, above all others,
constitutes the soul of republicanism.” “By withholding the knowledge of [the Scriptures]
from children, we deprive ourselves of the best means of awakening moral sensibility in
their minds.” [Letter written (1790’s) in Defense of the Bible in all schools in America]
• “Christianity is the only true and perfect religion.”
• “If moral precepts alone could have reformed mankind, the mission of the Son of God
into our world would have been unnecessary.”
"Let the children who are sent to those schools be taught to read and write and above all,
let both sexes be carefully instructed in the principles and obligations of the Christian
religion. This is the most essential part of education”
Letters of Benjamin Rush, "To the citizens of Philadelphia: A Plan for Free Schools",
March 28, 1787
Justice Joseph Story:
“ I verily believe Christianity necessary to the support of civil society. One of the
beautiful boasts of our municipal jurisprudence is that Christianity is a part of the
Common Law. . . There never has been a period in which the Common Law did not
recognize Christianity as lying its foundations.”
[Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States p. 593]
“ Infidels and pagans were banished from the halls of justice as unworthy of credit.” [Life
and letters of Joseph Story, Vol. II 1851, pp. 8-9.]
“ At the time of the adoption of the constitution, and of the amendment to it, now under
consideration [i.e., the First Amendment], the general, if not the universal sentiment in
America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as
was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious
[Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States p. 593]
Noah Webster:
“ The duties of men are summarily comprised in the Ten Commandments, consisting of
two tables; one comprehending the duties which we owe immediately to God-the other,
the duties we owe to our fellow men.”
“In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in
which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed...No truth is more
evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government
intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.”
[Source: 1828, in the preface to his American Dictionary of the English Language]
Let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers just men
who will rule in the fear of God [Exodus 18:21]. . . . If the citizens neglect their duty and
place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted . . . If our
government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the
citizens neglect the Divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the
laws. [Noah Webster, The History of the United States (New Haven: Durrie and Peck,
1832), pp. 336-337, 49]
“All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice,
oppression, slavery and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts
contained in the Bible.” [Noah Webster. History. p. 339]
“The Bible was America’s basic textbook
in all fields.” [Noah Webster. Our Christian Heritage p.5]
“Education is useless without the Bible” [Noah Webster. Our Christian Heritage p.5 ]
George Washington:
Farewell Address: The name of American, which belongs to you, in your national
capacity, must always exalt the just pride of Patriotism, more than any appellation
derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the
same religion" ...and later: "...reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that
national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle..." | photo of Farewell
address original manuscript
“ It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible.”
“What students would learn in American schools above all is the religion of Jesus
Christ.” [speech to the Delaware Indian Chiefs May 12, 1779]
"To the distinguished character of patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more
distinguished character of Christian" [May 2, 1778, at Valley Forge]
During his inauguration, Washington took the oath as prescribed by the Constitution but
added several religious components to that official ceremony. Before taking his oath of
office, he summoned a Bible on which to take the oath, added the words “So help me
God!” to the end of the oath, then leaned over and kissed the Bible.
Nelly Custis-Lewis (Washington’s adopted daughter):
Is it necessary that any one should [ask], “Did General Washington avow himself to be a
believer in Christianity?" As well may we question his patriotism, his heroic devotion to
his country. His mottos were, "Deeds, not Words"; and, "For God and my Country."
“ O Most Glorious God, in Jesus Christ, my merciful and loving Father; I acknowledge
and confess my guilt in the weak and imperfect performance of the duties of this day. I
have called on Thee for pardon and forgiveness of my sins, but so coldly and carelessly
that my prayers are become my sin, and they stand in need of pardon.”
“ I have sinned against heaven and before Thee in thought, word, and deed. I have
contemned Thy majesty and holy laws. I have likewise sinned by omitting what I ought
to have done and committing what I ought not. I have rebelled against the light, despising
Thy mercies and judgment, and broken my vows and promise. I have neglected the better
things. My iniquities are multiplied and my sins are very great. I confess them, O Lord,
with shame and sorrow, detestation and loathing and desire to be vile in my own eyes as I
have rendered myself vile in Thine. I humbly beseech Thee to be merciful to me in the
free pardon of my sins for the sake of Thy dear Son and only Savior Jesus Christ who
came to call not the righteous, but sinners to repentance. Thou gavest Thy Son to die for
[George Washington; from a 24 page authentic handwritten manuscript book dated April 21-23, 1752]
[William J. Johnson George Washington, the Christian (New York: The Abingdon Press, New York &
Cincinnati, 1919), pp. 24-35.]
"Although guided by our excellent Constitution in the discharge of official duties, and
actuated, through the whole course of my public life, solely by a wish to promote the best
interests of our country; yet, without the beneficial interposition of the Supreme Ruler of
the Universe, we could not have reached the distinguished situation which we have
attained with such unprecedented rapidity. To HIM, therefore, should we bow with
gratitude and reverence, and endeavor to merit a continuance of HIS special favors". [1797
letter to John Adams]
James Wilson: | Portrait of James Wilson
Signer of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution
Supreme Court Justice appointed by George Washington
Spoke 168 times during the Constitutional Convention
"Christianity is part of the common law"
[Sources: James Wilson, Course of Lectures [vol 3, p.122]; and quoted in Updegraph v. The
Commonwealth, 11 Serg, & R. 393, 403 (1824).]
Public Institutions
Liberty Bell Inscription:
“ Proclaim liberty throughout the land and to all the inhabitants thereof” [Leviticus
Proposals for the seal of the United States of America
• “Moses lifting his wand and dividing the Red Sea” –Ben Franklin
• “The children of Israel in the wilderness, led by a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by
night.” --Thomas Jefferson
On July 4, 1776, Congress appointed Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John
Adams "to bring in a device for a seal for the United States of America." Franklin's
proposal adapted the biblical story of the parting of the Red Sea. Jefferson first
recommended the "Children of Israel in the Wilderness, led by a Cloud by Day, and a
Pillar of Fire by night. . . ." He then embraced Franklin's proposal and rewrote it
Jefferson's revision of Franklin's proposal was presented by the committee to Congress
on August 20, 1776.
Another popular proposal to the Great Seal of the United States was:
" Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God"; with Pharoah's army drowning in the Red
Click here for a larger image
The three branches of the U.S. Government: Judicial, Legislative, Executive
• At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, James Madison proposed the plan to divide
the central government into three branches. He discovered this model of government
from the Perfect Governor, as he read Isaiah 33:22;
“For the LORD is our judge,
the LORD is our lawgiver,
the LORD is our king;
He will save us.”
Article 22 of the constitution of Delaware (1776)
Required all officers, besides taking an oath of allegiance, to make and subscribe to the
following declaration:
• "I, [name], do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in
the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the Holy
Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration."
New York Spectator. August 23, 1831
“ The court of common pleas of Chester county, [New York] rejected a witness who
declared his disbelief in the existence of God. The presiding judge remarked that he had
not before been aware that there was a man living who did not believe in the existence of
God; that this belief constituted the sanction of all testimony in a court of justice: and that
he knew of no cause in a Christian country where a witness had been permitted to testify
without such belief.
New England Primer: | Photograph of The New England Primer reprint
Used in public and private schools from 1690 to 1900 second only to the Bible
Some of its contents:
A song of praise to God
Prayers in Jesus’ name
The famous Bible alphabet
Shorter Catechism of faith in Christ

Link to source

foreign policy, Pelosi syle

That's right folks, congressional leadership changes in January. Don't y'all just feel so much safer now? I'm sure the incoming dem. leadership has a solid grasp on the threats our country faces and will act in our best interest.....NOT!!

Friday, October 20, 2006

Quotes from John Jay, 1st Chief justice of the US supreme court

Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” Source: October 12, 1816. The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry P. Johnston, ed., (New York: Burt Franklin, 1970), Vol. IV, p. 393.

“Whether our religion permits Christians to vote for infidel rulers is a question which merits more consideration than it seems yet to have generally received either from the clergy or the laity. It appears to me that what the prophet said to Jehoshaphat about his attachment to Ahab ["Shouldest thou help the ungodly and love them that hate the Lord?" 2 Chronicles 19:2] affords a salutary lesson.” [The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, 1794-1826, Henry P. Johnston, editor (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1893), Vol. IV, p.365]

Think about this, quite a bit different from what your teacher toldy you, eh?

Thursday, October 19, 2006

things to consider on voting day

Consider this:

Government cannot give you anything but what it takes from somebody else, minus administrative fees. (and we're talking govt. here, so fees are usually about 50% or more).

Government does not create wealth, it only takes from it.

no country has ever been taxed to prosperity.

security has historically always been the number one priority of government.

NOT adding more laws on top of mountains of other laws is a GOOD thing.

the simplest organizations are usually the most efficient.

the bigger the government the more money it costs.

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Weird evolutionist's wishful thinking? or what?

I happened across this story by the BBC on Don Singleton's blog, and Just couldn't shake it off. Just exactly what is this Dr. trying to sell here? Is he looking for some group of people in the future to hate? or Envy? or both?

Saturday, October 07, 2006

The Associated press, spinning the GOP kicking Foley out as a BAD thing

Just how far can a reporter go to tell you how to think about an event? the AP thinks they can herd you're mind like a cowboy herds cattle. look at the spin on this story, oh, they forget to mention foley will be investigated by the feds for suspected criminal activity, and will face prosecution if it comes to it, but, apparently, the AP thinks censure by congress would be a greater punishment than the law. (or something like that) read their story here

Thursday, October 05, 2006

A sad but honest evaluation of western culture

from Victor Davis Hanson, a commentary of the decay of western culture:

October 02, 2006, 6:02 a.m.

Traitors to the Enlightenment
Europe turns its back on Socrates, Locke, et al.

By Victor Davis Hanson

The first Western Enlightenment of the Greek fifth-century B.C. sought to explain natural phenomena through reason rather than superstition alone. Ethics were to be discussed in the realm of logic as well as religion. Much of what Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, and the Sophists thought may today seem self-evident, if not at times nonsensical. But that century was the beginning of the uniquely Western attempt to bring to the human experience empiricism, self-criticism, irony, and tolerance in thinking.

The second European Enlightenment of the late 18th century followed from the earlier spirit of the Renaissance. For all the excesses and arrogance in its thinking that pure reason might itself dethrone religion — as if science could explain all the mysteries of the human condition — the Enlightenment nevertheless established the Western blueprint for a humane and ordered society.

But now all that hard-won effort of some 2,500 years is at risk. The new enemies of Reason are not the enraged democrats who executed Socrates, the Christian zealots who persecuted philosophers of heliocentricity, or the Nazis who burned books. No, they are a pampered and scared Western public that caves to barbarism — dwarves who sit on the shoulders of dead giants, and believe that their present exalted position is somehow related to their own cowardly sense of accommodation.

What would a Socrates, Galileo, Descartes, or Locke believe of the present decay in Europe — that all their bold and courageous thinking, won at such a great cost, would have devolved into such cheap surrender to fanaticism?

Just think: Put on an opera in today’s Germany, and have it shut down, not by Nazis, Communists, or kings, but by the simple fear of Islamic fanatics.

Write a novel deemed critical of the Prophet Mohammed, as did Salman Rushdie, and face years of ostracism and death threats — in the heart of Europe no less.

Compose a film, as did Theo Van Gogh, and find your throat cut in “liberal” Holland.

Or better yet, sketch a cartoon in postmodern Denmark, and then go into hiding.

Quote an ancient treatise, as did the pope, and learn your entire Church may come under assault, and the magnificent stones of the Vatican offer no refuge.

There are three lessons to be drawn from these examples. In almost every case, the criticism of the artist or intellectual was based either on his supposed lack of sensitivity or of artistic excellence. Van Gogh was, of course, obnoxious and his films puerile. The pope was woefully ignorant of public relations. The cartoons in Denmark were amateurish and unnecessary. Rushdie was an overrated novelist, whose chickens of trashing the West he sought refuge in finally came home to roost. The latest Hans Neuenfels adaptation of Mozart’s Idomeneo was silly.

But isn’t that precisely the point? It is easy to defend artists when they produce works of genius that do not offend popular sensibilities — Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa or Montesquieu’s Spirit of the Laws — but not so when an artist offends with neither taste nor talent. Yes, Pope Benedict is old and scholastic; he lacks both the smile and tact of the late Pope John Paul II, who surely would not have turned for elucidation to the rigidity of Byzantine scholarship. But isn’t that why we must come to the present Pope’s defense — if for no reason other than because he has the courage to speak his convictions when others might not?

Note also the constant subtext in this new self-censorship: fear of radical Islam and its gruesome appendages of beheadings, suicide bombings, improvised explosive devices, barbaric fatwas, riotous youth, petrodollar-acquired nuclear weapons, oil boycotts and price hikes, and fist-chanting mobs.

In contrast, almost daily in Europe, “brave” artists caricature Christians and Americans with impunity. Why?

For a long list of reasons, among them most surely the assurance that they can do this without being killed. Such cowards puff out their chests when trashing an ill Oriana Fallaci or Ariel Sharon or beleaguered George W. Bush in the most demonic of tones, but prove sunken and sullen when threatened by a Dr Zawahri or a grand mufti of some obscure mosque.

Second, almost every genre of artistic and intellectual expression has come under assault: music, satire, the novel, films, academic exegesis. Somehow Europeans have ever-so-insidiously given up the promise of the Enlightenment that welcomed free thought of all kinds, the more provocative the better.

So the present generation of Europeans really is heretical, made up of traitors of a sort, since they themselves, not just their consensual governments or some invader across the Mediterranean, have nearly destroyed their won freedoms of expression — out of worries over oil, or appearing as illiberal apostates of the new secular religion of multiculturalism, or another London or Madrid bombing.

Europe boldly produces films about assassinating an American president, and routinely disparages the Church that gave the world the Sermon of the Mount, but it simply won’t stand up for an artist, a well-meaning Pope, or a ranting filmmaker when the mob closes in. The Europe that believes in everything turns out to believe in nothing.

Third, examine why all these incidents took place in Europe. Since 2000 it has been the habit of blue-state politicians to rebuke the yokels of America, in part by showing us a supposedly more humane Western future unfolding in Europe. It was the European Union that was at the forefront of mass transit; the EU that advanced Kyoto and the International Criminal Court. And it was the heralded EU that sought “soft” power rather than the Neanderthal resort to arms.

And what have we learned in the last five years from its boutique socialism, utopian pacifism, moral equivalence, and cultural relativism? That it was logical that Europe most readily would abandon the artist and give up the renegade in fear of religious extremists.

Those in an auto parts store in Fresno, or at a NASCAR race in southern Ohio, might appear to Europeans as primordials with their guns, “fundamentalist” religion, and flag-waving chauvinism. But it is they, and increasingly their kind alone, who prove the bulwarks of the West. Ultimately what keeps even the pope safe and the continent confident in its vain dialogues with Iranian lunatics is the United States military and the very un-Europeans who fight in it.

We may be only 30 years behind Europe, but we are not quite there yet. And so Europe has done us a great favor in showing us not the way of the future, but the old cowardice of our pre-Enlightenment past.

— Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is the author, most recently, of A War Like No Other. How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War.

National Review Online -

Wednesday, October 04, 2006

Ann gets it right again, yet another example of selective outrage

Let's see, according to democrats:
Gerry Studds buggering a 17 yr old drunk male page he took on a trip to Europe? O.K.

President Bill Clinton getting a hummer from a schoolgirl in the office bathroom, then lying profusely about it? O.K.

Clinton's sexual harassment of Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Juanita Broadderick, and Kathleen Willey? O.K.

congressman Barney Frank letting stephen Gobie run a whorehouse in his washington apartment, and paying Gobie for sex? O.K.

Gov. Jim McGreevey trolling for dozens of Homosexual encounters with strangers behind his wife's back, and placing one such lover in government office without qualifications for said job? O.K.

Senator Ted Kennedy screwing a drunk teenage girl then killing her? O.K.

Jesse Jackson screwing teenage girls and getting them pregnant behind his wife's back? O.K.

Congressman William Jefferson taking bribes on tape and lying about it? O.K.

Congressman Gary Condit having an affair with an Intern who dies under suspicious circumstances after telling friends she might go public? O.K.

congressman Mark Foley sending rude, crude homosexual comments to teenage pages? NOT O.K!!!!!

the difference between the differing responses? Foley was a REPUBLICAN who resigned immediately, the others, democrats who simply lied and laughed at the public's short memory and sheer stupidity.

Read Ann's story about this

Monday, September 18, 2006

Calling Islam violent could kill you

Is the Irony lost on you? it seems to be lost on our leaders.

eptember 18, 2006 - 10:44 AM

"Jihad" vowed over Pope's speechAdd story to my swissinfo panel

Pope Benedict gestures

DUBAI (Reuters) - An Iraqi militant group led by al Qaeda vowed a war against the "worshippers of the cross" in response to a recent speech by Pope Benedict on Islam that sparked anger across the Muslim world.

"We tell the worshipper of the cross (the Pope) that you and the West will be defeated, as is the case in Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya," said an Internet statement by the Mujahideen Shura Council, an umbrella group led by Iraq's branch of al Qaeda.

"We shall break the cross and spill the wine. ... God will (help) Muslims to conquer Rome. ... God enable us to slit their throats, and make their money and descendants the bounty of the mujahideen," said the statement.

It was posted on Sunday on an Internet site often used by al Qaeda and other militant groups.

Pope Benedict said on Sunday he was deeply sorry Muslims had been offended by his use of a Mediaeval quotation on Islam and violence. The remarks outraged Muslims and triggered protests and attacks on churches in several Arab towns.

Another militant group in Iraq, Ansar al-Sunnah, also vowed to fight Christians in retaliation.

"You will only see our swords until you go back to God's true faith Islam," it said in a separate Internet statement.

Al Qaeda in Iraq and other militant groups have staged suicide bombings and killings of foreign forces and members of the U.S.-allied government and security forces.

another article by Hal

Monday, August 28, 2006

America's axis of Idiots

Compare these thoughts to the drivel you find on the editorial page, Let's see the N Y Times run this piece as an op-ed. LOL.

Saturday, August 26, 2006

Pluto row could lead to Neptune losing planet status

According to this story, scientists who have recently downgraded Pluto's status are considering downgrading Neptune's as well, I think this is a prudent move, because in my humble opinion, no planet deserves the position of last planet in our solar system other than Uranus.

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

The A D L slamming friends of Israel and the Jewish people again

This is the second time Mr. Foxman has slammed a Christian organization who supports Israel, and Jewish rights in recent history.

apparently, the A D L, or Mr. Foxman suffers from a bit of religious intolerance on their own, that's kind of odd, considering the thrust of that organization.

I guess anything other than liberal secularist views are "the enemy" in his mind, seems like Israel could use all the friends it could get right now, Mr Foxman, it seems, disagrees.

What's the biggest danger to the Jewish people? is it Hezbollah? Hamas? Ahmadinejad?

According to Mr. Foxman, It's this presbyterian Minister who, believe it or not, espouses Christian theology and philosophy.

stuff like thou shall not Kill, thou shall not steal, thou shall not bear false witness, and so on is, in his mind, more worthy of criticism than the theology and philosophy of, say, Nasrallah.


ADL's opinion of unseen, yet to be released program

Dr. Kennedy's reply

World net daily's story on the fracas

Monday, August 21, 2006

Believing the French?

Maybe there is something to the argument about Bush's administration being a little inept, who in their right mind would have believed the French would muster several thousand peacekeepers? or stay aligned against terrorists? all that talk about holding out for a "real" peace, yet they folded like cheap outdoor furniture before a week was out, nearly. agreeing to a cease fire that had no teeth whatsoever against terrorist activity, not even a call to disarm the terrorists. WTF!!

Real peace? I don't think we held out for it, to our shame

Phony peace is what it is, and there's no way it can last, here's an article by Hal Linsey on the subject.

Oracle Commentaries 8/19/2006
Israel Can Only Lose Once

During one of Israel's many wars, Golda Meir offered this famous – and tragic – observation: "The Arabs can fight, and lose, and return to fight another day. Israel can only lose once." Golda's assessment became a truism of the Middle East up until now. And the jury is still out as to whether her assessment remains true to this day.

In the strange and surreal world that is the Middle East, Israel lost its war with Hezbollah. And while it remains intact at the moment, her enemies no longer view the Jewish state as invincible.

History tells us that means the current cease-fire is a temporary condition at best, and that next time, Israel will be facing a lot more than an outlaw terrorist organization like Hezbollah.

On second thought, strike that. Hezbollah is only an outlaw terrorist organization in the eyes of the United States. Europe sees Hezbollah as a radical but legitimate political party that constitutes part of Lebanon's legally elected government. The United Nations has yet, in its long history, to come up with a definition of "terrorist," let alone outlaw one.

So let's rephrase it to say that Israel will likely face a lot more formidable enemy than just Hezbollah next time. And make no mistake – there will be a "next time."

Israel, for the first time in its history, failed to meet a single one of its war objectives. It meekly accepted a substandard, U.N.-imposed cease-fire, leaving Hezbollah largely intact, Hassan Nasrallah unscathed; it failed to eliminate Hezbollah's arsenal of rockets; and, worst of all, it came home without the two hostages kidnapped by Hezbollah that prompted the war in the first place.

Until now, it had been an unshakeable article of faith that Israel was capable of imposing whatever outcome it deemed necessary against any Arab force. And, until now, Israel continued to press its military advantage until it had attained its stated goals.

That is no longer the case. After a month-long war, Israeli forces limped home as Hezbollah, Syria and Iran all claimed victory against the Jewish state.

It was defeated by a newly invented international “law of proportional response.” This is the new idiotic idea of the U.S. ‘liberal establishment’ and the vast majority of ‘America-haters’ in the U.N.

It dictates that no nation, especially America and Israel, can achieve a greater victory against its enemies than its enemies are capable of inflicting upon them.

Of course, such a ridiculous law could only be imposed against Israel. The United States did not use “proportional” force against the Taliban and al-Qaida in Afghanistan in 2002.

Osama bin Laden used three commercial airplanes against the United States. The United States used every weapon in its formidable arsenal, with the exception of nuclear weapons, to bomb Afghanistan further into the Stone Age than it had already been.

Were the United States to subject itself to the law of proportional response, we would have sent 19 guys with armed with box knives to exact revenge for Sept. 11. Of course this is beyond stupidity. But it evidently didn't sound as stupid when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice signed on to the idea and surrendered to the U.N. in demanding a cease-fire.

This insane Cease-Fire agreement leaves Hezbollah fully armed, remaining in place, their formidably fortified bunkers with world class electronics in tact and in possession of thousands of rockets and missiles that are still hidden.

Worse, it places the useless Lebanese and U.N. troops between Israel and Hezbollah. This enables Hezbollah to use them as a shield while they re-arm, regroup and prepare for the next attack. Oh, Secretary Rice spoke great, swelling words about not maintaining the status quo, but when it got down to it, she folded up like a cheap lawn chair.

The “status quo” before Israel attacked Hezbollah had the armed terror group ensconced along Israel’s borders, raiding Israeli territory at will, and killing and kidnapping any Israeli soldier within reach of its infiltrating forces, without fear of interference from the incompetent and unsympathetic UNIFIL forces ostensibly stationed there to ensure Israel’s border security.

Following Israel’s month-long war, Hezbollah remains intact, armed with long-range rockets, capable of attacking Israel at will without fear of interference from the UNIFIL forces still stationed there. The only difference is that Lebanon is dispatching a military force that it openly admits has no intention of either disarming Hezbollah or engaging it militarily if it decides to resume its previous infiltration or kidnapping tactics.

The U.N. has yet to put together a credible military deterrent, and so far, the only nations willing to contribute troops are overwhelmingly sympathetic to Hezbollah and Lebanon. The biggest contributor so far is France. Lebanon is a former French colony.

And it is hard to imagine Paris engaging its ally to defend the Jews. France is among the most openly anti-Semitic nations in Europe.

Hezbollah acquired new Russian made anti-tank weapons from Iran via Syria that decimated Israeli armor. Israel’s vaunted Merkava battle tank had no electronic defenses or armor that protected it against this new anti-tank missile. Israel lost between 55 to 60 tanks in the month-long war.

Syria and Iran have both since claimed joint victory against Israel, along with Hezbollah, and have pledged to continue the conflict until Israel has been wiped from the map.

Hezbollah has demonstrated that total Arab defeat is not inevitable – and with this demonstration, Israel has lost its tremendous psychological advantage.

If Hezbollah could hold the mighty Israeli juggernaut at bay, then the possibility that Israel could finally and decisively be wiped from the map of the Middle East by another pan-Arab army is once again feasible.

Hezbollah has emerged as a massive political force. Syria, marginalized in recent years, has re-emerged as a regional player as Hezbollah's patron. Hezbollah's victory represents a victory for Iran and the Shia. Hezbollah, a Shiite force, has done what others could not do.

This will certainly result in both Jordan and Egypt rethinking their own assumptions about the viability of another war of annihilation against Israel. In a sense, the Arabs have little to lose by taking the risk.

If they win, they will have succeeded in reclaiming their lost honor in previous conflicts, with the added bonus of having rid the world of the Jewish cancer in its midst. And if they lose, they can once again count on the U.N. imposing a cease-fire in time for them to remain intact and viable.

One doesn't need a crystal ball to know that Syria and Iran will move quickly to exploit the advantage Israel's defeat at the hands of Hezbollah has given them.

The worst danger revealed in this war is the new majority attitude of the Israelis that is reflected in the government leaders under Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

For the first time, Israeli leadership so restricted the military leadership, that they were not able to mobilize the size of ground force needed to defeat a well-trained and heavily fortified army. Because of concern about world opinion, they so restricted the general’s freedom of attack strategy that there was confusion in the ranks on the field. This is the deadliest revelation of this war.

In all of Israel’s past wars, they have fought with tactical audacity and the immediate all-out commitment of manpower and weaponry against the enemy. They used the “blitzkrieg” or “lightening war” strategy.

In this war, they gradually committed troops, piecemeal, with a day-by-day revision of strategy. This ultimately resulted in strategic hesitation and confusion.

The worst possible consequence is that Hezbollah has claimed to the all-too- willing-to-believe Muslim world that Israel is no longer invincible on the battlefield. Recruits of hot-headed young jihad-seeking Muslims are pouring into Fundamental Muslim training camps to prepare for the final war to annihilate Israel and destroy the United States.

Iran has become the de-facto leader of the Global Fundamental Muslim Movement bent upon jihad.

This is exactly the outcome that both Damascus and Tehran had been hoping for, although they certainly didn't expect it. But now that it is a reality, Golda's words echo with haunting clarity. "The Arabs can fight, and lose, and return to fight another day. Israel can only lose once."

Let us pray that Israel has learned a vital lesson before it is too late. May they boot out the present appeasement minded government and get into power someone like Binyamin Netanyahu.

By: Hal Lindsey


Wednesday, August 16, 2006

Unpleasant choices and hard facts

This is an example of the choices that have to be made when fighting chickenshit weasels. our media needs to realize the heard choices that have to be made by boots on the ground, this is a tough thing to consider, but I have to agree with this post, it sucks, but war 'aint pretty, and there's no way to dress it up as such.

There's a few sane folk in the U.K. yet

Lord Stevens tells the Muslim community they are part of the problem, good for him!

Mainstream Media still defendng their fake photo's

The mainstream media thinks you, the public, are a bunch of idiots. and their contempt for you shows up more and more, with each passing day.

Tuesday, August 15, 2006

To defend ourselves, or not to defend ourselves, that is the question

Western culture is cirtainly under attack, Do we have the will to defend our selves? It doesn't look like it.

Is freedom of speech, freedom of religion, equal rights for women
, not worth it? Do you want your daughters and granddaughters to be subject to Sharia? what the hell is the west thinking? here's just a few reports of how the west is assisting and supporting the terrorism that could well destroy us.

Jawa report

American thinker

American thinker again

Bookworm room


even MORE articles on the West's goofy response to terrorists, do I need to remind some of you of this fact, the only way to appease somebody wanting to kill you is....DIE.




So-called "moderate muslims" still refuse to denounce terrorism

My dog ate my homework.....


That's all you hear from all the muslim groups in the west, and all of them are on the same intellectual level as my first line here, It comes as no suprise then, that, by looking at several blogs, liberals believe these lame-ass excuses more than conservatives by about 8-1, this is not by any means an accurate poll, just the results of my morning wanderings about the blogosphere today.

I can't help but wonder though, what do liberals and jihadi's who want to impose sharia on the whole world have in common?

I couldn't have said it better myself

That's why I'm linking it

A proportionate response? that's not what the international community really wants

A sharp minded editorial, read it!

Israel aquieces to international pressure and exposes it's throat to it's sworn enemies

And Shame on the International community for it's complete lack of regard to the safety of millions, who simply want to live and raise their children in peace.

Shame on anybody who thinks the UN is anything but a device to maintain despots in power.

Monday, August 14, 2006

Iraq is no longer a hub of international terrorism.

Seems like some need a reminder of this fact, yes, local terrorism seems to still be rampant in many parts of Baghdad, but Saddam's not in the terrorism exporting buisiness anymore, is he? Thank you, Troops, I appreciate that a lot.

Israel is no more Jewish than the US is Christian.

Well, maybe half a percent more, Jack Kinsella breaks it down for ya better than I could: read it here

Saturday, August 12, 2006

Many Westerners STILL can't figure out what ideology is driving these terrorists

I can't imagine why this still has so many confused, Mike Wallace is not the only one having trouble figuring this problem out, I guess worldwide supplies of the Quran are in short supply, I guess I'm fortunate in that I got a copy to examine for six bucks at hastings five years ago, shortly after 9/11.

some even can't get a grasp on the fact all these terrorists have been Muslims, for those, I offer these links, and an invite for anyone else to add to these in their comments.

Absurd indeed!

Hot air

Friday, August 11, 2006

Thursday, August 10, 2006

Free Speech Outlawed

Yes, this is old news, but still a thing that hacks me, the fact that this one got thru the cracks should encourage all citizens to seek the appointment of law-upholding, or to use Justice Scalia's term "constructionist" Judges, let's keep the Constitution! It's still the best thing going.

hat tip Wild thing

Lefter than left, why are democrats such a happy bunch?

Lieberman voted the party line 90% of the time, his only deviation from it being not supporting the cut and run when the war in Iraq did not wrap-up in a week. what were connecticut voters thinking? voting for a wealthy inexperienced idjit from a family that's the tie between JP Morgan and Joseph Stalin? I don't get it.

More on this from:

Ann Coulter

The Absurd report

If the shoe fits, wear it

It seems the Counsel of American Islamic relations is in a tizzy because the President stated that we are at war with Islamic fascists, what's this? is CAIR angry because the President's remarks might offend Islamic fascists?
Is this the group CAIR seeks to defend? You bet! thank you CAIR, for being honest.

hat tip lgf

UPDATE: related story

Tuesday, August 08, 2006

Is the Soviet Politburo really dead?

Publius Pundit has compiled a bunch of evidence that makes you wonder.

A look at Darwinism, in court

Just for fun, read this turnaround, a flipside version of the goings-on in courts over the Intelligent design controversy.

This ought to be fun, Newsweek interviews Hal Lindsey

Here's Hal's account of the interview, let's see how Newsweek spins this.

Oracle Commentaries 8/6/2006
NEWSWEEK questions for Hal Lindsey

I am posting this interview that I had with a feature reporter for NEWSWEEK. The reporter is doing research for a future cover story. These are my answers to his questions. It will be interesting to see what NEWSWEEK does with my answers.

NEWSWEEK Q: From where did you get the idea for your groundbreaking book?

Answer #1: The basic ideas for ‘The Late Great Planet Earth’ came from an intensive study of Theologians who took prophecy literally or normally, grammatically and historically. From the 3rd Century until the late 18th Century, the vast majority of Church leaders interpreted prophecy with a very allegorical method. That is, they interpreted passages that clearly had a literal intent as allegory. The majority of leaders in the major denominations still interpret prophecy allegorically. Most of the men who began to interpret prophecy literally wrote from the late 18th Century until the present time. My main contribution was to make prophecy simple and understandable to the average person, especially those without a religious background. On a personal note, I taught about these things on the U.S. College campuses during the tumultuous decades of the 1960s and 1970s. It was the one Bible subject to which students really responded.

NEWSWEEK Q: Do you think its prophecies are being fulfilled today -- and that the current conflict in Israel is just one more sign of that?

Answer #2: The events taking place in the current Iranian/Syrian sponsored Hezbollah and Hamas war with Israel continue to fit precisely into the predicted scenario about which I wrote in the Late Great Planet Earth and in my twenty subsequent books.

NEWSWEEK Q: Will those who oppose Israel eventually be proved wrong?

Answer #3: Yes, but I believe it will take the coming of the Messiah to do it. Dr. John Cumming wrote in his book, The Destiny of the Nations, in 1864, “How comes it to pass that as a nation they (Israel) have been dispersed over every land, yet insulated, separated, and alone amid the nations? The predictions of their restoration are in words as definite only not yet fulfilled, and it is as a nation that they shall be gathered and restored.” This was fulfilled literally, against all odds, in May of 1948. Twenty six hundred years ago, the prophet Ezekiel predicted clues to identify when this would happen, “After many days you will be summoned; in the latter years you will come into the land that is restored from the sword, whose inhabitants have been gathered from many nations to the mountains of Israel which had been a continual waste; but its people were brought out from the nations, and they are living securely, all of them.” (Ezek.38:8 NAS)
Note this would happen in “the latter years” after the Israelites were scattered throughout the world and the land of Israel became a desolation for a long time. History is witness to all of this. The important factors that Ezekiel brings out in chapters 36-39 are these: First, God warns that He will judge the surrounding nations (which are all Muslim today) that have “appropriated My land for themselves as a possession with whole hearted joy and with scorn of soul …” (It is important to note here that God says it is “His land.”) (Ezek.36:5) Second, God predicts that he will restore Israel to the land He promised them even though they do not deserve it, “… It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act … For I will take you from all the nations, gather you from all the lands, and bring you to your own land.” (36:22, 24) Third, God predicts that Israel’s return will finally provoke a conflict that will end with the ‘war of Armageddon.’ The attackers will be led by a nation from Israel’s extreme north (Russia) that will lead a confederacy of surrounding nations and that chief among them will be Persia (modern Iran). Fourth, God promises that even though Israel will go through this holocaust, a believing remnant will be delivered and given all the covenants God unconditionally swore to them through their fathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Fifth, God promises that this restored nation of Israel will never again be destroyed, “They will live on the land that I gave to Jacob My servant, in which your fathers lived; and they will live on it, they, and their sons and their sons' sons, forever; and David My servant (The Messiah) will be their prince forever.” (Ezek.37:25)

NEWSWEEK Q: Is the success and survival of the United States based on its support of Israel

Answer #4 I believe one of the reasons God has protected the U.S., despite the fact we have driven God from the public forum in our country, is because we have sought to protect Israel’s right to exist in secure borders. We have also been a safe haven for Israelites. When God gave the solemn covenant to Abraham that He would make him and his descendents into a special nation, He gave this special promise of protection, “I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse.” (Gen. 12:3) I believe God blesses those who help Israel. The rise and fall of nations can be traced to how they treated the Jews.

NEWSWEEK Q: Will the West need to defeat Islamists for Israel or must radical Islam continue in order for the prophecy to be fulfilled?

Answer #5: I believe the hostility of Fundamental Islam over Israel’s return and re-possession their ancient homeland and Jerusalem is predicted to be the driving force that ignites Armageddon. Twenty-five hundred years ago, the prophet Zechariah predicted, “Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of drunkenness to all the surrounding peoples (Muslim nations), when they lay siege against Judah and Jerusalem. And it shall happen in that day that I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all nations of the earth are gathered against it.” (Zech.12:2-3 NKJ) The whole world will be drawn into this final war that is ignited over possession of Jerusalem.

NEWSWEEK Q: Are you of the belief that the Jewish people are also God's chosen people or will they need to accept Jesus before His coming?

Answer #6: I believe that the Israelites are God’s chosen people for these reasons:
>They were chosen to receive, write down and preserve God’s Word.
>They were to take the knowledge of how to know the true God to the nations.
>They were chosen as the race through whom the Son of God, the Redeemer of mankind, would be born.
>Physically, they are chosen as God’s nation. I love them whether they accept Jesus as Messiah or not. But God repeatedly warns them throughout the Old Testament that their eternal destiny depends upon believing in His atonement for sin. This is why the system of blood sacrifice was instituted at the same time the Law was given. Moses taught that without blood atonement, there is no forgiveness. Isaiah chapter 53 reveals the ultimate atonement of which the animal sacrifices were only a picture. Isaiah wrote, “Surely He has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed Him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way; and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” (Isa.53:4-6) The person described here dies for the sins of Israel. So he cannot be, as most rabbis teach, a personification of Israel. Israel cannot die for its own sins.
Zechariah predicts how the nation will be given forgiveness, “And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on ME WHOM THEY PIERCED. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.” (Zech. 12:10) Isaiah answers when Israel pierced their God above.

NEWSWEEK Q: Can any of the land in Israel -- like the West Bank -- be given up for peace? Can Jerusalem? What are the consequences parts of Israel are given away for political purposes? (Does Israel need to expand?)

Answer #7: I believe God fulfilled His promise to Israel in June 1967. But Israel failed to see the miracle that He gave them. They began to pay more attention to world opinion than to the promises of their God. So they began to give away land for empty promises of peace. It is not a coincidence that everyone responsible for giving away the land God gave Israel met with tragic circumstances. Menachem Begin left office in disgrace after giving away the Sinai. Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated after instituting the disastrous process of the Oslo Accords. The great general, Ariel Sharon suffered a tragic stroke after giving away Gaza. I believe all of this was done because of a lack of faith in God’s promises. I do not believe that Israel should give away another meter of ground to people who demonstrate they do not want a state beside Israel, but a state instead of Israel. After all, Israel is the only nation on earth that has a title deed to its land from the Creator-God.

By: Hal Lindsey


A word from Israeli's, watch this short vid

Israeli's attempt to set the record staight here

Bloggers to the rescue, once again

Just when will these main stream media editors learn they cannot fool us so easy anymore?

Malkin compiles a laundry list of fake photo's, see the lengths reuters
will go to embellish the story here

More on this here

Monday, August 07, 2006

Natan Sharansky looks at the big picture

There are a few people who can see the forest thru the trees, here's one of them:

Reprinted from

Natan Sharansky: Israel's Very Survival at Stake

Kenneth R. Timmerman,
Tuesday, Aug. 8, 2006

JERUSALEM – Former Soviet refusenik and Israeli Cabinet Minister Natan Sharansky believes that Israel's war against Hezbollah is a "test case" for the free world in the war against terror.

If Israel fails in its war to crush Hezbollah, then Iran will be emboldened, Europe will be threatened, and Israel's very survival in the Middle East will be at stake, he told NewsMax in an exclusive interview in Jerusalem.

"Israel is the center of the larger war which is developing between the free world and terror," Sharansky said, "Today, the most dangerous regimes are getting the most dangerous weapons, and they are challenging the free world through proxies.

"Because the proxies are small, highly-motivated terrorist organizations, it is very difficult to fight against them. They can blackmail all the world because they have access to those states."

Iran was Hezbollah's primary sponsor, Sharansky said, although Syria was also deeply involved as an arms supplier and as a conduit to allow Iranian weapons and military advisors to reach the terrorist group inside Lebanon.

"It is extremely important for the fate of the free world, for the fate of democracy, that we win," Sharansky said.

A Hezbollah victory would demonstrate to the world "that you don't need an army, you don't need territory, and you don't need military bases" in order to defeat the strongest army in the Middle East.

"All you need are groups of highly-trained, highly-motivated terrorists equipped with modern weapons, who can destroy whole countries and civilizations through blackmail and threats and provocations and terror."

He added: "If Israel will not defeat them, the free world will be doomed."

While Hezbollah today was waging war against Israel from fortified positions in south Lebanon and by hiding behind civilians in Tyr and other Lebanese cities, Sharansky warned that tomorrow it could wage a similar war against Europe and America from the suburbs of Paris and Detroit.

"Hezbollah is Iran's first line of attack against the world, not just Israel," he said. "Maybe the world is very lucky that it happened now, not two or three years later. This is the last warning. Imagine Hezbollah with a small nuclear weapon!"

While Hezbollah operatives may not have built underground bunkers and tunnels in the suburbs of Paris or Detroit, "their soldiers are there already, in Europe and in America. The ideology is there. The financial structures are more or less in place. And petrodollars keep coming."

Winning the war against Hezbollah will not be about how many terrorists are killed. Nor will it be about occupying territory, or even about stopping rocket attacks on Israel, he said.

The Israeli government of Ehud Olmert has come under increasing criticism in Israel because of its inability to prevent rocket attacks such as those that hit Haifa and a northern Israeli kibbutz Sunday, killing three civilians and 13 army reservists.

Victory must be political, not just military, Sharansky insisted. "The question is, how can you create a political situation where the free world will have absolute intolerance for these groups? This is very difficult."

Even today, after three weeks of Hezbollah rocket attacks against Israel, the European Union still refuses to put Hezbollah on its list of international terrorist organizations or take action such as freezing its assets, Israeli government officials tell NewsMax.

Israeli diplomats have been trying for years to convince the Europeans to enact the same kind of restrictions on Hezbollah and Hamas as the United States enforces through legislation and the State Department's list of international terrorist organizations.

"So maybe the free world is very lucky such a test case happened at a time they can still do something to de-legitimize Hezbollah," Sharansky said.

Sharansky believes the biggest success of the Bush doctrine, that of spreading freedom across the mostly undemocratic Middle East, has not been Iraq, or even the Palestinian Authority, despite recent elections in both places.

"If there was a success early on of the Bush doctrine, it was the weakening of Syria," he said. "When they had to leave Lebanon, it was not because they were strong. I believe that the Syrian regime would have collapsed if America had continued pressing them and isolating them."

Instead, the United States let up pressure and Syria "continues trouble-making against the U.S. in Iraq, and against Israel," he said.

Sharansky criticized the Bush administration for pushing forward with elections in the Palestinian Authority, without first creating the conditions for democracy.

"You can't first have elections, and then convince those who come to power to have democratic reforms," he said. "It was a big mistake [for the U.S.] to permit terrorist groups to be part of this process."

Sharansky says one of his fears is that the world will use the election of a Hamas government as "the best proof that the Bush doctrine does not work." But he remains committed to the spread of democratic institutions to the Muslim world as the best defense against Muslim fundamentalism and terror.

"I have a special chapter in my book ['The Case for Democracy'] arguing that elections are not the beginning of the process, but the end," Sharansky told NewsMax.

In the Palestinian Authority, for example, Sharansky had urged the Bush administration to press for a three-year transitional period, "so people can start understanding their options, and only then you can have elections," he said.

The biggest achievement of President Bush was that "he brought the democratic agenda," Sharansky said. "But when you're alone, it's very difficult to succeed."

He recalled being asked during a trip to Washington once why Bush had so few allies in Europe.

"I responded, I have a much more difficult question for you: How come he has so few allies in Washington?"

Part of the problem in bringing freedom to Iraq, Lebanon, and the Palestinian Authority, he said was that "major players don't believe in it."

He singled out the CIA and the State Department as opposing the president's pro-freedom agenda. "It's great to have the president and the vice-president and some of their advisors believing in this great ideology. But the people who implement it also have to believe in it," Sharansky said.

Natan Sharansky is a founding member and honorary chairman of

Thursday, August 03, 2006

Hal comments on anti Israeli prejudice in the Media

Oracle Commentaries 7/30/2006
Outrage Misplaced?

It appears that Hizbollah has scored a major propaganda triumph through a callously staged carnage of women and children in Qana, Lebanon. You may think this is just another prejudiced attempt at propaganda in favor of Israel. But before you draw that conclusion, consider these established facts:

• Israel has both satellite and drone aircraft videos unmistakably showing Hizbollah trucks pulling into civilian buildings in Qana loaded with katyusha rockets
• Israel also has videos of many katyusha rockets being launched from the particular building containing civilians that was bombed
• Israel had pleaded with all non-combatants to leave the Qana area for several days through leaflets and radio announcements
• Israel had no idea that there were any civilians in the targeted building
• However, Hizbollah knew they were there and continued to launch missiles at Israeli cities from there
• Hizbollah also knew that Israel was tracking those missiles from their launch site

So here are some important questions:

1. Why were those approximately sixty women and children in that building when the rest of the city was virtually empty of civilians?
2. Why did Hizbollah launch multiple missiles from next to the building?
3. Why was there no civilian men found dead there?
4. Why did it take Hizbollah seven hours after the guided bomb hit the building to report it?
5. Did the single Israeli bomb cause the building to totally collapse, or did secondary explosions from rockets stored there contribute to the disaster

An estimated 54 people were tragically killed when the building collapsed, mostly children. This is a real lamentable tragedy that certainly should have been avoided. But the only ones who knew they were there was the Hizbollah combatants who were launching rockets next to the building.

There is good reason to believe that Hizbollah did not allow the women and children to evacuate and staged this carnage.

There are many established incidences of Hizbollah using civilians as human shields while fighting with the Israelis. This is what has made the going so tough for the Israeli soldiers. Hizbollah counts on the fact that Israelis do not intentionally target civilians.

In this case, Hizbollah counted on many other things to achieve their propaganda goals.
They knew they could count on the ingrained hatred of Israel (and the United States) by Muslims everywhere so that they would believe the worst about them despite any factual evidence.

They also knew that showing the bodies of mangled children on television would turn the Lebanese over to their side.
They also knew that these same horrible images would turn the entire world against Israel, and the Muslim world into a mindless rage against Israel and the United States.

They also knew that this incident would incite the Useful Idiot Squad among Western liberals to demand a cease-fire that would live them “victors” in the mind of the Muslim world and still armed with missiles of every kind.

As I have said in other articles, war is hell. It should only be entered when absolutely necessary. Israel had no choice but to go to war when Hamas and Hizbollah took hostage several soldiers, coupled with a rain of rockets on their cities.

In view of Israel’s offensive military capability, they have used remarkable restraint and care to avoid killing non-combatants.

It would be very instructive to remember incidences of past wars to put this incident, though tragic, into perspective – especially for the liberals in the West.

Winston Churchill ordered the RAF to bomb Dresden, Germany on the night of February 13th, 1945. Here is the historical account:

On the evening of February 13, 1945, an orgy of genocide and barbarism began against a defenseless German city, one of the greatest cultural centers of northern Europe. Within less than 14 hours not only was it reduced to flaming ruins, but an estimated one-third of its inhabitants, possibly as many as a half a million, had perished in what was the worst single event massacre of all time … Dresden, known as the Florence of the North. Dresden was a hospital city for wounded soldiers. Not one military unit, not one anti-aircraft battery was deployed in the city. Together with the 600.000 refugees from Breslau, Dresden was filled with nearly 1.2 million people … More than 700.000 phosphorus bombs were dropped on 1.2 million people. One bomb for every 2 people. The temperature in the center of the city reached 1600 degrees centigrade. More than 260.000 bodies and residues of bodies were counted. But those who perished in the center of the city can't be traced. Approximately 500.000 children, women, the elderly, wounded soldiers and the animals of the zoo were slaughtered in one night.” ( The WWII Dresden Holocaust)

Harry S. Truman ordered Nagasaki and Hiroshima to be hit with atomic bombs. Though not as many civilians were killed in those two raids as in Dresden, they will be forever remembered with horror.

In both cases, victory was already assured. But Britain and the United States wanted to end the war with fewer allied casualties than would have been suffered without these raids to demoralize the enemies’ will to fight.

In Israel’s case, enemies who want to annihilate them as a nation and people surround it. They know they can’t afford to loose even once or they will not survive. When this is factored into the present conflict, it is almost unbelievable that they have used such restraint in view of their danger and military capability.

Even though Israel did not know there were women and children in the building they targeted for good tactical reasons, they still have expressed profound regret for the loss of life. But in the historical attacks I listed above, there was never any profound apology expressed, especially over the holocaust at Dresden.

Think about that before you start condemning Israel and demanding a cease-fire that leaves them still in mortal danger.

By: Hal Lindsey


Saturday, July 29, 2006

Some views from Londonistan

Here's some Pic's from a religion of peace lovefest in Londonistan lately, enjoy!

Food for thought.

This is some food for thought, from Hal Lindsey, of late great planet earth fame, and illustrates the obvious modern day anti-semitism.

Oracle Commentaries 7/28/2006
So, What Would They Do?

I was listening with interest when a British reporter was called in by Fox News to give her 'analysis' of the current Middle East conflict between Hezbollah, Hamas and Israel. The context of the interview was in relation to Hezbollah's upping the ante by firing a new, longer range rocket into Afula, some ten miles south of Haifa.

The interviewer pointed out President Bush's statement that the root cause of the violence was Hezbollah and Hamas.

The British reporter, Hillary McKenzie, immediately took exception to Bush's statement, saying that 'in Europe's view' (which obviously was shared by McKenzie) the root of the problem was really Israel's refusal to grant the Palestinians a state of their own.

The fact that every 'occupied' territory vacated by Israel was immediately used to stage new attacks against Israel aside, what would, say, the British do? Let's just suppose that a group of Irishmen living in Ireland wanted an independent Irish state in place of the British mandate in Northern Ireland?

Let's sweeten the pot by pretending that the Irishmen wanting an Irish state on Irish soil in place of the British-ruled state set up by the British after conquering its inhabitants won't take 'no' for an answer?

To make it even more interesting, let's pretend that these Irishmen set up an anti-British terrorist group and gave it a nationalist-sounding name, like, maybe the "Irish Republican Army" with a cool acronym like the Palestinians have in the Palestinian Liberation Organization's acronym, PLO?

So, supposing there was an entity called the IRA that used bombs and terrorist attacks aimed at driving the British off Irish land and setting up an Irish state under Irish rule?

What would the British do?

Would they conduct ground wars against the IRA? Would they imprison the Irish 'freedom fighters' who were fighting with the only weapon they had -- terrorism -- against a ruling external nation much too powerful for the IRA to fight by conventional means?

Or would they, as McKenzie says Europe sees it, immediately turn Northern Ireland over to the Irish 'rebels?'

Indeed, would ethnic Irishmen seeking to free themselves from foreign rule even qualify as 'rebels'? Wouldn't they be 'freedom fighters' like the Palestinians?

What IS the difference between British rule in Northern Ireland and Israeli rule over the West Bank and Gaza? Is there one? You bet there is. Before there WAS a Britain, there was an Israel. And before the British ever discovered there was an island across the Irish sea, the 'Palestinian territories' were part of ethnic Israel. Northern Ireland was never composed of ethnic Britons.

And Britain did not come into possession of Northern Ireland as a consequence of repelling Irish invaders whose goal was the extermination of the British race.

While we're on the subject, China voiced its opposition to Israel's incursion into Lebanon at the Security Council, demanding Israel be condemned for its actions against Hezbollah.

What if there were an island composed of ethnic Chinese that had NEVER been part of the People's Republic of China? What if that island declared itself an independent nation? What would China do if Tawan resisted forcible unification with the Red Chinese? According to Beijing, it would use all the weapons at its disposal to bring Taiwan back under its rule.

What if Chechnya were to declare it did not want to be part of the new Russian Federation after the Soviet Union collapsed? What would Moscow do? Would it grant Chechnya the independence its population demanded? Or would it conduct a decade-long war, killing thousands of civilians in the process, to force Chechnya into the Russian Federation against the will of the majority of Chechen citizens?

What would the French do if the Vietnamese, after decades of colonial rule, declared its independence? Would it wish the Vietnamese rebels 'bon chance' and give the country back to its people? Or would it fight a ten-year war to keep Vietnam inside the sphere of French colonial influence?

Of course, none of these are exactly in parallel with the Israeli-Arab war. The Irish Republican Army poses no existential threat to the continued viability of Great Britain. The IRA has not sworn to annihilate every living Englishman and then seize Britain's assets for itself.

The Taiwanese have not attacked Beijing, or threatened the annihilation of the Red Chinese state and every living Chinaman on the mainland.

The Chechens have not banded together with the express purpose of destroying Russia and setting up a Chechen state in its place.

And the Vietnamese defeated the French, after which, it left them alone.

What would the United Nations do if New Zealand attacked Australia with the express purpose of annihilating Australia as a nation and exterminating every Australian it could find, simply because they were Australians? Would they urge Australia to show 'restraint'?

We already know what the British would do. They would increase their troop presence in Northern Ireland, and capture or kill every Irishman that lifted a hand against them. And they would NOT call the IRA 'freedom fighters'. They'd call them terrorists.

China has threatened to launch an all-out invasion of Tawian and overthrow any Taiwanese government that dared to formally declare independence from the Red Chinese government Taiwan was never part of.

And Moscow has been conducting an all-out war against Chechen 'rebels' whom Moscow calls 'terrorists' and not 'freedom fighters'.

But Israel, a sovereign member state of the United Nations, has fought five wars for its existence against the combined forces of the Arab world. In each case, the provocation for the Arab attacks was the mere existence of a Jewish state called Israel.

In each case, Brits, Chinese, Russians and UN have demanded Israel withdraw to indefensible borders, insisted on a cease-fire in order to give Israel's enemies a chance to rest and regroup before launching a new war. And in each case, it blamed Israel for causing the war BY ITS EXISTENCE, demanding it surrender parts of itself to the aggressors in exchange for a 'peace' that never came.

History tells us what THEY would do. But, of course, their situation is different.

They aren't Jews.

Hal Lindsey