Thursday, December 29, 2016

A Response to Thomas Friedman's New York Times Op Ed Entitled "Bibi Netanyahu Makes Trump his Chump"

Thomas Friedman, you’ve covered the middle east your entire life but it seems that you lack one thing… the realization that the Palestinian issue is one of theology and not land.  The “land for peace” shtick has already been tried.  Two years after the Oslo Accords Yasser Arafat launched the second intifada.  Rocket and tunnel attacks from Gaza came out of Israel having given up land for peace.
You say that Netanyahu is a leader who is “forever dog paddling in the middle of the Rubicon, never ready to cross it”.  I find it interesting that you put the onus for this intransigence on Netanyahu.  What you don’t seem to understand is that the Muslim world is playing a game of “chicken” with Israel.  Netanyahu knows it but you don’t seem to.  In your desire for him to do something, whatever it might be, towards anything that resembles progress towards peace, what you and Obama and Kerry, et al, are really trying to do, whether you know it or not, is to force Netanyahu to flinch first.  Netanyahu knows that would be fatal.  I believe he knows, as do I, that the best that we can do is remain in this stalemate condition until either one side flinches or preferably the Arab world comes to the realization that Islam is at best, an entirely bankrupt world view.  You accuse Netanyahu of wanting to hold on to power.  I would say that Netanyahu’s primary concern is for the survival of the Jewish people.  I guess that’s a judgment call.
You complain that Israel can’t win any global support under Netanyahu.  Netanyahu has had his minions publicizing the good that Israel does in technological advancements, in benevolence towards Palestinians and wounded Arab Fighters in Syria.  He’s worked on making alliances in Africa and elsewhere.  The Palestinians also have a strong and phony propaganda network and, Thomas, give me a break… do editorial titles like “Bibi Netanyahu Makes Trump his Chump” sound like your helping his cause?  You’re being just a little hypocritical!
Yes… we are not only in an undesirable situation in the Middle East but we are, as you said, in a situation that “would keep Israel in a permanent conflict with Palestinians and the Muslim world as well as many Western democracies and their college campuses.”
You assume that Obama is a friend of Israel.  I assure you nothing is further from the truth.  He is reputed as a chronic liar.  He signed a treaty with Iran that supposedly kicks the nuclear can down the road 10 years.  Have you ever heard of the Islamic principle of Hudaybiyyah?  I suggest you read up on it. Ah but you say that he’s provided military support for Israel.  That’s true.  He’s obligated to maintain some political credibility.  In the meantime he got rid of Mubarak, a peace partner with Israel, and fought with congress to make good on US promises to Egypt in order to sell F-16s to the Muslim Brotherhood.  And now that he, apparently, seems to be leaving office, what you’ve interpreted as an act for good in forcing Netanyahu’s hand is really nothing more than his letting out all the stops because he doesn’t have to deal with the political consequences.
The very title of this Op Ed peace of yours not only undermines Netanyahu but Israel.  In the meantime, since it seems that you don’t understand what this Middle Eastern stalemate is all about, I suggest that you study up carefully on the doctrines and history of Islam which has killed over 270,000,000 people during its history.  

It has been sagaciously suggested that one should know ones enemies.  I’ll be honest with you.  It is Islam which is your enemy.  But your apparent lack of knowledge about Islam coupled with your potshots at Netanyahu seem to tell me that Islam is not your enemy but, in fact, Israel is.  I suggest that you start writing about sports or cooking or some other subject until you’ve well educated yourself on Islam and started acting like a Jew who loves his people and stopped acting like a shill for the Palestinians.

Good News for Palestinians - Bad News for Jews and Vice -Versa

I've got good news and bad news:
GOOD NEWS for Palestinians BAD NEWS for Jews and Israelis:
Palestinians preceded the Jews in the land (of what some of the world calls "Israel" today).
EXPLANATION: In Exodus 15 after the parting of the Red Sea, Israel took up what is called the Song of Moses. In it they reflect on the fact that what God did at the Red Sea would cause fear and trembling among the inhabitants of the land to which Israel was going. The text reads:
“The peoples have heard, they tremble;
Anguish has gripped the inhabitants of Philistia (Palestinians).
15 “Then the chiefs of Edom were dismayed;
The leaders of Moab, trembling grips them;
All the inhabitants of Canaan have melted away. (Ex 15:14-15)
The implication here is that the Philistines (Palestinians) had preceded Israel in the land.
BAD NEWS for Palestinians.
Palestinians can't claim to be who they say they are.
They claim to be Semites (Shemites). This is true. Arabs are descendants of Abraham through Ishmael (I believe also Esau and Abraham's other wife Keturah).
But if they claim to be Palestinians (Hamites) That's a completely different bloodline. Here's a reference...
(6 The sons of Ham were Cush and Mizraim and Put and Canaan. 7 The sons of Cush were Seba and Havilah and Sabtah and Raamah and Sabteca; and the sons of Raamah were Sheba and Dedan.... 13 Mizraim became the father of Ludim and Anamim and Lehabim and Naphtuhim 14 and Pathrusim and Casluhim (FROM WHICH CAME THE PHILISTINES) and Caphtorim.) (Emphasis added) Gen 10:67, 13-14.
1. You who live on this planet who call yourselves Palestinians,
You're either an Arab or a Palestinian... a Shemite (Semite) or a Hamite. It's genetically impossible to be both. So CHOOSE.
(come to think of it, maybe that's why the rest of the Arab world doesn't like you).
2. Perhaps if we can find the head, shield, sword and armor of Goliath we can donate it to the Palestinians to put in their presently empty museum.
LikeShow more reactions

Sunday, September 11, 2016

The History of September 11th and how it Relates to the Presidential Election

Today we remember the innocents murdered by Islamic extremists on 9/11. Do you really know the significance of 9/11? It didn't begin in 2001. The article below is by a man I greatly admire as a research journalist, Bill Federer. If truth matters to you, take the time to educate yourself about the true meaning of 9/11.
On September 11, 1565 Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent dominated the Mediterranean, with intentions of not only invading Sicily, Sardinia, Majorca, and southern Spain, but Rome itself. The only thing standing in his way was the small rocky Island of Malta just south of Sicily, defended by the Knights of Malta. In March of 1565, Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent sent Algerian Admiral Dragut to Malta with 200 ships and 40,000 Muslim soldiers, including 6,500 elite Janissary troops. Dragut stated: "Unless you have smoked out this nest of vipers, you can do no good anywhere."
Queen Elizabeth I of England is said to have remarked: "If the Turks should prevail against the Isle of Malta, it is uncertain what further peril might follow to the rest of Christendom."
The Knights of Malta were led by a 70 year old Frenchmen, Jean Parisot de la Valette. Pleas for reinforcements went out across Europe, but defense seemed futile. La Valette addressed his men: "A formidable army composed of audacious barbarians is descending on this island. These persons, my brothers, are the enemies of Jesus Christ... Today it is a question of the defense of our faith--as to whether the Gospels are to be superseded by the Koran. God on this occasion demands of us our lives, already vowed to his service. Happy will be those who first consummate this sacrifice."
The Turks attacked again and again, even reducing one of their fortresses to rubble, but the Knights kept fighting, resolved to save Western Civilization. Finally, Dragut was killed and the Muslims sailed away on SEPTEMBER 11, 1565.
July 17, 1683, Sultan Mehmed IV sent over 138,000 Muslim Ottoman Turks to surround Vienna, Austria, led by General Mustafa Pasha. For nearly two months they starved the 11,000 Hapsburg-Austrian defenders. Sultan Mehmed IV sent the message to Austrian King, Leopold I: "Await us in your we can decapitate you."
Polish King Jan Sobieski gathered 81,000 Polish, Austrian and German troops and led a surprise attack on SEPTEMBER 11, 1683. They made one of the largest charges in history, 38,350 cavalry and dragoons. Soldiers had made wings for their backs which made a thunderous noise when they charged, causing the Turks to flee in confusion.
Upon entering the abandoned Turkish tents, Sobieski found bags of beans…coffee beans, revealing how Turks could fight day and night. The beans came from Ethiopia, the one African country which stayed Christian, and the Muslims called the Christians infidels or "cafir," from which the word "coffee" was derived. Shortly after the victory of Vienna, Polish General Koltschizky opened Vienna's first coffeehouses and coffee quickly spread across Europe. The Pope and European leaders hailed Jan Sobieski as the "Savior of Western Civilization."
The humiliated Muslim army beheaded General Mustafa Pasha and sent his head back to Sultan Mehmed IV in a velvet bag.
Hilaire Belloc (1870-1953) wrote in The Great Heresies (1938):
"Less than 100 years before the American War of Independence a Mohammedan army was threatening to overrun and destroy Christian civilization...Vienna was almost taken and only saved by the Christian army under the command of the King of Poland on a date that ought to be among the most famous in history - SEPTEMBER 11, 1683."
SEPTEMBER 11, 1697:
Muslim Ottoman Turks dominated Belgrade, Serbia, since 1521. In 1691, Austria helped free Belgrade, but Muslim Ottoman Turks recaptured it and razed the city's buildings to the ground. The Serbian Orthodox Patriarch led thousands to flee to the Austrian Hapsburg Empire in the first "Great Serbian Migration." Habsburg Prince Eugene of Savoy led the Holy League to counter-attack. Losing 500 men, the Holy League killed 30,000 Turks in one of the Ottoman Empire's worst defeats in history - the Battle of Zenta, SEPTEMBER 11, 1697.
President Theodore Roosevelt wrote in his 1916 book, Fear God and Take Your Own Part: "From the hammer of Charles Martel to the sword of Jan Sobieski, Christianity owed its safety in Europe to the fact it...could and would fight as well as the Mohammedan aggressor."
SEPTEMBER 11, 2001:
Islamic terrorists hijacked passenger jets. Two were flown into New York's World Trade Center, one into the Pentagon and one crashed in Pennsylvania. President Bush stated: "Freedom itself was attacked this morning by a faceless coward, and freedom will be defended."
That evening, President Bush stated: "Thousands of lives were suddenly ended by evil, despicable acts of terror. Pictures of planes flying into buildings, fires burning, huge structures collapsing have filled us with disbelief, terrible sadness and a quiet, unyielding anger…America was targeted...because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world... I ask for your prayers for all those who grieve...I pray they will be comforted by a power greater than any of us spoken through the ages in Psalm 23: 'Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil for you are with me.'"
On September 13, 2001, President Bush stated: "In the face of all this evil, we remain strong and united, 'One Nation Under God.'"
SEPTEMBER 11, 2012:
The U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, written with the help of Eleanor Roosevelt, was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly, Dec. 8, 1948. Without referencing the "Creator" as the source of rights, like the U.S. Declaration of Independence, the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights includes articles such as Article 18: "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief."
This conflicted with Islamic Shariah law which imposes the death penalty for anyone leaving the Islamic religion. Many articles in the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights were rejected by the leaders of 57 Islamic countries, who formed their own group called the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, or OIC.
In 1990, OIC passed the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, affirming Shariah law as supreme, with:
-the death penalty for those leaving Islam;
-punishing women who are victims of rape;
-allowing men to be polygamous;
-permitting wife beating; and
-censoring speech insulting Islam.
On Dec. 12, 2011, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton began a 3 day closed door meeting with the OIC, promising to support their Istanbul Process to universally "criminalize" speech insulting Islam, effectively enforcing "dhimmi" status on non-Muslims worldwide. By definition, the Christian Gospel insults Islam. If someone in a Shariah controlled country proclaims Jesus Christ more than a prophet, but also the Son of God who died on the cross to pay for the sins of the world, it would mean the death penalty. In fact, all speech contrary to Islam insults Islam. At the end of the meeting, OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu stated: "The Istanbul Process initiated with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton...must be carried forward."
Clinton added: "We now need to move to implementation."
In the following months, Hillary Clinton's State Department ignored repeated requests for security by Ambassador Chris Stevens in Libya. He was killed with several others in the Benghazi attack on SEPTEMBER 11, 2012. The night of the attack, Secretary Clinton's State Department blamed a video, and the shortly after sent memos to YouTube and Google recommending they censor speech insulting Islam, consistent with promises made at the OIC Istanbul Process meeting.
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice added to this narrative, as did President Obama when he told the U.N. General Assembly, Sept. 25, 2012: "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."
The U.S. supported the Muslim Brotherhood's ousting of Egypt's President Mubarak. Then U.S. weapons were used to oust Libya's President Gaddafi. Requests made by Judicial Watch through the Freedom of Information Act revealed emails of weapons being moved from Benghazi in a "Fast and Furious" gun-running style program to arm Muslim fighters in ousting Syria's President Assad. This is part of a larger plan remove current leaders in order to reestablish an Islamic Caliphate. When Russia came to Assad's defense, the Muslims armed and trained by the U.S. attacked into Syria and Iraq, calling themselves ISIS, and proceeded to torture, rape, behead and displace hundreds of thousands.
The story is not yet over…the election is this November, for whom are you voting? It is the most important election of my lifetime and will possibly determine if there will be an America in the future!

Thursday, August 4, 2016

Palestinian Museum - Like the prophets of Baal.

I make mention of this on my blog because I want to draw your attention to a reality that is really quite comical.  

As I write this, three months have passed since the opening of the Palestinian Museum in Birzeit of the West Bank.  The museum was and is intended (according to this link) to "celebrate and redefine Palestinian History, Art and Culture"

The only problem was that this $24,000,000 structure opened with no exhibits!  Allow me, if you will, to repeat myself.  THE PALESTINIAN MUSEUM HAS NO EXHIBITS!

In contrast, Israel boasts of having the most museums per capita of anywhere in the world!  And it's exhibits range from contemporary art to myriad ancient artifacts which confirm the testimony of the Bible itself which declares that Jews lived thousands of years ago on this piece of real estate called Israel and claimed it as their home back then.

The Bible talks about the Prophet Elijah's confrontation with the prophets of the false god Baal.  In summary, Elijah had challenged the Prophets of Baal to display the veracity of their claim that Baal was an authentic god.  When they couldn't, Elijah mocked them.

I can't help but say that I feel a bit like Elijah.  The Palestinians claim that they were in the land of Israel thousands of years ago, and so much as deny that the Jews were their.

I say to the Palestinians "prove it".  I'm eager to see how quickly you fill up your displays with your historical artifacts so as to prove your point.

In the meantime, keep building your attack tunnels and using your propaganda machine to garner sympathy from uninformed lemmings for the purpose of perpetuating a lie by which you can make up an excuse for killing Jews.  

If the consequences of what you're doing to yourselves let alone the Jews, based upon your lies weren't so tragic, they would be laughable. 

Tuesday, August 2, 2016

Obama and Liberals

Of late I've had an understanding of a particular phenomena that's happening in the world these days, and supports for this understanding have converged from three sources... Biblical, A book I'm presently reading, and political rhetoric.
A friend challenged me that I was too hard on Obama. I don't listen to political speeches and I paid no attention to the political conventions as they occurred. Everyone tries to put on their best image and for the most part I regard what they have to say as "bovine feces". Nevertheless, I think I've "got my ear pretty close to the ground". For the sake of objectivity, though, I decided to listen to Obama's address to the Muslim world in Egypt back in '09. I started to listen to it a second time, taking notes so as to address certain points he'd made, thinking that I would write a critique. The task was somewhat laborious as I made it about half way through the speech the second time, and taking a bit of a break I ran across an interview which I'd posted on FB and I felt that the guy being interviewed had tremendous insight and had already covered the ground I'd observed in Obama's speech and so I've bought his book and have begun reading it.
There are certain axioms that I go by in life. One is fairly colloquial: "If you're not a liberal when you are young, you have no heart. If you're not conservative by the time you're 30, you have no brains". Another axiom was one which I'd come up with on my own after 9/11. "A chief key to 'fighting the war on terror' is to deny any credibility to Islam as a valid world view". Needless to say, Mr. Obama has been doing the exact opposite, much to my chagrin".
Having now, listened to Mr. Obama's speech in Egypt, if I were to give him the benefit of the doubt, and not go by the assumption that he's trying to be deceptive, I would categorize him as a man who thinks he is a Christian but is most certainly not because a genuine "Christian" at least according to my definition, would know that there is only one way to the Father and that is through Y'shua. Most conservatives would call Obama an "ideologue". That carries a negative connotation, so, again, giving him the benefit of the doubt, I'd call him an idealist. He longs for world peace and hopes that he can be instrumental in bringing that about.
Mr. Obama, however, if he is well intentioned, is naive, which I suppose is to be expected from a so-called "Christian" who does not know Christ. Rather than putting his trust in God, he believes that man is fundamentally good and that we can overcome our differences. He also (in his words) longs for the day when Jew, Muslim and Christian can each share Jerusalem in peace and harmony (my words). I have always held and will always hold that (I suppose another axiom), barring the return of Jesus, the only way that peace can be obtained in this world, is through DISPASSIONATE debate (or more appropriately discussion) over the nature of God, so that a rational consensus can be reached. I say this because I recall the refrains of the Oleynu in the synagogue, taken from Zechariah 14 "In that day (the day when the world is at peace), the LORD shall be one and His Name shall be one". Put another way, the world will be at peace when there is a universal consensus concerning God's identity, nature and His expectations. I concede, that that is not likely to happen prior to the LORD's return simply because such endeavors would be hobbled by the human tendency to suffer from cognitive dissonance. Hence, I relegate the possibility of this consensus occurring until after it is ultimately caused by Messiah's self-revelation in Zech. 12:10.
At least, from his speech, and again, giving him the benefit of the doubt, Obama assumes that all religions teach the same things... love of fellow man and a whole bunch of other really good stuff. If that's the case, than at best, Mr. Obama lives in a world of fantasy. But his appeal is to those who believe that we humans can create a Utopian world. His faith is in man. In essence, his followers want to get back to the Garden of Eden but without the help of God.
According to the book that I'm reading, "The Kindergarden of Eden" by Evan Sayet, liberals, such as those who would follow Obama, have shunned thought that would result in discernment. Passing judgments upon what the rational person would determine to be good or bad is, in fact, discriminating and, hence, evil in their minds. The conservative would call such liberals who can't distinguish between virtue and vice "idiots". On the other hand, the liberal will accuse the discerning conservative as "racist, homophobe, biggoted, etc." because, now, in their mind, the idea of right and wrong has been nullified (for the exception of the presumption that discernment is evil). The goal is "the return to the garden of Eden where everything was spelled out for Adam and Eve and they didn't have to think.
I've, again, been reading through Genesis. One particular text that's hit me in the face is that In chapter 3, after Adam and Eve are expelled from the garden, God placed a Charuv at the entrance to the garden with a flaming sword turning every which way to guard any possible reentry into the garden.
Allow that, if you will, to sink in. There is an intelligent, impregnable creature that dwells in a different dimension than the one with which we are familiar, that stands guard with a flaming sword which turns in a manner which is really beyond description, standing guard over the Garden of Eden so that no one can get back in!
But hey, no problem... These liberals don't believe in God and don't believe the Bible so it makes no difference. In spite of Mr. Obama's apparent altruism, his foreign policy has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of Christians Yazids and others in the Middle East and elsewhere and it is likely to result in tens if not hundreds of thousands more. This adds credibility to yet another axiom. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Monday, July 25, 2016


About a month ago I got into a conversation with the Pastor of a Church which is part of a liberal denomination.  I relayed to him my account of what made me aware of the perils of Islam1 and that I’d concluded that anyone who takes Islam seriously is fundamentally cruel.  He begged to differ with me.  He held up as his argument that he knows a lot of very nice Muslims.

I agree with him.  There are many nice Muslims.  However, I’m alarmed by his standard for evaluating Islam. 

There is, at the present time, a campaign to make the Muslim religion attractive and acceptable to the Western mind.  I saw a video in which smiling Muslims, from school girls, to medical doctors, to “out of the closet” homosexuals, claiming to be Muslims were happily declaring “we’re just like you”.  I do not know what their motivation is but I do know for a fact that if the “gay Muslim” were in Saudi Arabia, he’d be held by his ankles and dropped from a 20 story building.  The school girl certainly wouldn’t be able to drive a car and had better not be found without a hajib {head covering).  Only an environment where the Muslim population is comparatively miniscule to the rest of the population would allow people to make such a video with such claims.  When Muslim populations grow, they become Sharia (Islamic law) compliant and such people as were shown in that video would not exist.  As an attestation to this, when Achmadinajad, the former President of Iran spoke at Columbia University, he was asked about homosexuals in Iran.  He replied “We have no homosexuals in Iran”.2

Ro Waseem, who writes for the Huffington Post as well as other publications, describes himself as a “Liberal Muslim”.  Having read one article of his3, he presents a case defending Islam’s reputation, in this case, allegedly misunderstood as a religion of Jew Hatred. 

President Obama has also acted as a defense attorney on behalf of Islam.  He argues emphatically that ISIS, Al Qaida and the other terrorist organizations which seem to be running rampant throughout the globe are not really Islam.  Islam, the theologian in the White House argues, is a “religion of peace”.
Why is it, however, that Ro Waseem’s interpretations of Quranic and Hadith texts are contradicted by others who choose either different texts or different interpretations that seem to encourage violence?  If he’s a genuine Muslim and the “terrorists” are phonies then by that logic, the founder of Islam, Muhammad, was not a Muslim because MUHMMAD WAS A TERRORIST.  To quote Ali Sina...

“Muhammad did things that by today’s standard would be seen as acts of terrorism. He raided towns without any previous warning, killed unarmed men who had gone to the fields and markets after their daily business, captured their wives and children and distributed the younger women among his soldiers while always keeping the prettiest ones for himself and having sex with them in the same day he murdered their fathers, husbands and loved ones.4
These claims of Ali Sina’s are actually common knowledge.  He even points out that they are known in Islamic countries, however anyone who speaks out about them is afraid of losing his life.5  Hence, I hold emphatically that Islam survives essentially through violence and the defense of lies and deception.

In light of that, I point out that my dear liberal pastor friend is being deceived as is the case with most, if not much of America.  This also was a practice of the founder of Islam.  I quote another website:

“Though not called Taqiyya by name, Muhammad clearly used deception when he signed a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that allowed him access to their city while he secretly prepared his own forces for a takeover. The unsuspecting residents were conquered in easy fashion after he broke the treaty two years later. Some of the people in the city who had trusted him at his word were executed.”6 
This was one of many actual historical events attributed specifically to Muhammad… not subsequent Caliphs, but the actual founder of Islam himself.  He deceived the Meccans into trusting him and then conquered them when their guard was down.  This is precisely what is being carried on by his followers 1400 years later in the Western hemisphere.  Sadly, the public education systems in the West have overlooked this aspect of history!

There’s an old axiom attributed to George Santayana that just about everyone knows but few people practice.  I tend to whimsically put a twist on it, rephrasing it by saying that…

“Those who know history are doomed to watch those who don’t know history repeat history.”
It is not propaganda or imagery that tells the truth.  LOOK TO HISTORY!!!  AND LOOK TO THE SOURCE OF THAT HISTORY.  My Pastor friend seems to have forgotten that axiom.

I’m not telling you to hate Muslims.  They are people, just like everyone else and they need Jesus who is the only means by which one’s sins can be forgiven.  But I am saying “don’t judge their religion by the image that they present nor condone it's claim to veracity as a genuine religion”.  Go to the source of that religion… Muhammad.  Compare him, if you will, to the founder of the real “religion” of peace… Jesus.

Muhammad raped.                       
             Jesus forgave an adulterous woman contingent upon her repentance.

Muhammad murdered people.                
             Jesus died for people.

Muhammad is dead                      
             Jesus conquered death and is alive to this day!
Personally I don’t like the term, “Religion”.  Generally it denotes rules and regulations and traditions that aren’t necessarily ordained by God.  But if I had to use that term, I would say that it is Jesus who is the true and only source of any “religion” of peace.

5 Ibid

Friday, June 24, 2016

Two Faces of Globalisim - In aftermath of the British Referendum

The British just conducted a referendum which they affectionately called “Brexit”... should Britain or shouldn’t Britain “exit” the European Union and subsequently the Common Market?  The impetus to stay in the EU was becoming so weak that its proponents called for the “big gun” from the West, Barack Hussein Obama, to urge the people to vote to stay.

The “leader of the free world” had already become the recipient of much of the ire of the British people after returning their gift of the bust of Churchill, his weak leadership on Libya and the hopes that he would, unlike his predecessor, keep his butt out of British politics.  But now Mr. Obama was sticking his smelly butt deeply into British politics and rather than emphasizing the long and storied history of British-American friendship and alliance, Mr. Obama proceeded to threaten the British people.  He said that if they voted to get out of the European Union, they would “go to the back of the queue” for a trade deal with the United States. 


Mr. Obama is clearly not the friend of the British people any more than he is the friend of the American people.  His rhetoric has become louder and more distinct that if anyone is his ally it’s purveyors of Islam for whom he has become the great apologist.  Clearly he (and his presumptive replacement, Hillary Rodham Clinton) wants to accomplish for the United States what Angela Merkel has accomplished for Germany and subsequently the European Union.  Merkel “opened the German gates” to un-vetted Syrian refugees and by virtue of the fact that the nations of the European Union no longer have borders of any consequence, these “welcome” refugees have flooded all of Europe with their presence.  What has been skillfully hidden from the American people by the lap dog media is that these refugees have also flooded Europe with riots and looting and rapes and all forms of mayhem.  And Mr. Obama, who is either unaware of this reality or complicit wants to bring it, with all its glory, to the US.  My bet is that he’s complicit.


But what would be his motivation for flooding the United States with these refugees?  Some might argue that Mr. Obama is an Islamist who is interested in establishing a world-wide caliphate.  My bet is that he’s a globalist desirous of establishing a one-world government and that he’s working out a strategy in cahoots with others.  Both outlooks are universalistic. One is essentially religiously based.  One is secularly based. 


To accomplish the latter, national borders will have to become a thing of the past.  The EU, rather obviously, has a bit of a head start on the US and it looks as if Britain has, at least temporarily, thwarted this agenda.  England also has a more prominent natural barrier than the US.  However, I find it difficult to believe that this is anything other than the reason behind the Federal governments’ unwillingness to build a fence or enforce border control.


On paper it would seem that this universalism sounds good… one world government with everyone sharing resources and living happily ever after.   Antagonists to Socialism have rightfully pointed to its history of failure.  Socialism has always worked until the government has “run out of other people’s money”.  For the most part socialism has morphed into communism which has resulted in the deaths of 10s of millions of people… from China to Cambodia to the Soviet Union.


There may be any number of reasons for the lemming-like crowds of people falling for this politically elitist juggernaut which wants to take the world into this globalist direction.  Perhaps it’s lack of education or naiveté.  Socialism, has always been introduced incrementally as a solution to societal ills whether it be inequality between the sexes or the races, or environmental concerns most of which are trumped up such as is the case with global warming which, if it really were a problem, could only be solved if it were dealt with globally.  Hence, socialism is made to sound good, and in fact, utopian.  Furthermore, in spite of socialisms abysmal track record as a “gateway” to freedom, it seems that these elitists have an explanation… “Socialism has failed because it has never been implemented universally”.  At this time in history, this grand, out-of-the-laboratory experiment can finally be attempted.


There will be a price to pay for this which has already begun to be evidenced.  In order to implement this grand scheme the “elitists” have begun a mass migration which has resulted in the attempted mingling of fundamentally incompatible cultures.  The people of the west, especially Europe, have come face-to-face with basic barbarism which was paved the way by a vanguard made up of a façade of gentility.  The evil which the politicians and forerunners of Islam have left in their wake has been devastating on a personal basis to the lives of countless people of the west but as Stalin once said, “If one person dies it’s a tragedy.  If a million people die, it’s a statistic”.  The purveyors of this “One World Government” are on the verge of creating a million, if not millions of tragedies.  It seems that to these people, the end justifies the means.  “Utopia or bust people be damned”.  I dare say that the similarity between these elitists and Islamists who would sacrifice the lives of Palestinians for the cause of Allah is striking, but I digress.


If indeed, this globalist movement is secular, I predict the following.  Christians, Muslims and other practitioners of faiths which would resist this form of human governance will be either subject to brainwashing techniques or exterminated for the cause of “peace”.  A religion or religions which will form a compromise between the incompatible extremes of religions will be developed which will require global adherence.  We already see elements of this with respect to some of the rhetoric coming out of the Vatican.


Because of the intermingling of incompatible cultures, peace will have to be maintained via a police state whose technology is able to see into the private affairs of the citizenry and the use force if need be.  We already see this taking shape.  Laws will be written by the capricious whims of those who are “in charge” without regard for the objectivity of their ethics and without regard to their constitutionality.  We already see this in the form of Presidential Executive orders.


I wager that the vision of these political elitists is a global society made up of a synthesis between an Aldus Huxley and George Orwellian future where people will be denied the freedom to think for themselves, people will be mere puppets in the social order, life, for everyone will be without love or meaning and everyone will be expendable except for whoever might be at the top of the “food chain”.  As is the case with most of the world throughout history, it will remain without hope because, despite the so called utopian state of affairs, technology may or may not prolong life but death will forever remain the fate of everyone.  And at the top of the heap, the old adage “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” will finally, at least for a short while, be actualized.


These elitists gain their power through lies and deception.  Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton are both legends in their own time.  They’ve lied about “shovel ready jobs” that didn’t exist.  They’ve lied about a video being the cause of a terrorist attack which was evidence that they were losing the “war on terror” which, it seems, they’d not been fighting all along.  They lied that Mr. Obama had saved Detroit which went bankrupt only AFTER his reelection.  They lied by telling us that we “could keep our doctor”.  They told us that the “affordable care act” would be affordable and it wasn’t.  Hillary told us that she was named after a man who’d not achieved fame until well after she’d been born.  She lied that she’d exited an airplane while under sniper fire.


I jokingly like to say that “once upon a time I thought that ‘Fantasy Land’ was limited to an amusement park in California”.   Fantasy land has become this entire planet where people like the above mentioned clowns who assume themselves to be leaders have managed to get people to believe lies as though they were truth and get them to act in response.


As for me?  I would hold that if there is such a thing as a lie there’s also such a thing as truth and it behooves the wise individual to seek to pursue truth with undaunted vigilance because in the truth can be found reality. 


I believe that there are absolute standards of right and wrong that override capriciously determined laws.  I believe that adhering to those standards in spite of the consequences brings me more closely on the side of that which is real.  I don’t believe that liars have the right to act as elitist and rule over others.  Only a man of unquestionable integrity deserves that privilege and so I refuse to bow to the whims of these elitists.  I pledge my allegiance to a man who is integritous, just and yet compassionate, who would not use people as pawns but would, on the contrary, not ask anyone to do anything that He wouldn’t do Himself.  I pledge my allegiance to a man who stands by His Word, who fulfills absolutely every promise He makes and who’s concepts of right and wrong and of justice are entirely consistent with universal natural laws.  I pledge allegiance to a man who knows everything about me and yet chooses not to pass judgment.   I pledge allegiance to Jesus.


Although these elitists seem to be edging closer and closer to their personal goal of what they regard to be an ideal world-wide government under their corrupt dominion, I have total confidence that it will be crushed by a new world order which will be ushered in by Jesus Himself.  And because it will be based on truth and what is truly good as opposed to subjective opinions, it will last for a thousand years.  It’ll be a time when people won’t have to worry about my grandchildren getting involved with gangs or bad influences.  It’ll be a time when nature will be more hospitable towards life.  It’ll be a time of globalism but this time of globalism will be one of peace, love and mutual respect.  Mankind will have its beautiful and colorful tapestries of various cultures with their respective arts and cuisines but there will be a unifying force that brings all men together… the rule of Jesus, the Jewish Messiah of whom it was written “The government shall be upon His shoulders” (Isaiah 7:14)


Wednesday, March 16, 2016

A Quranic vs. Biblical Concept of Utopia

It seems to me that Muslims want to create Sharia law around the world, in which women go around in clothing designed to keep men from being tempted by them, and people must bow down prostrate at specific hours five times a day while facing Mecca, doing homage to Allah. It seems to be marked by universal peace via universal submission.
In order to obtain this "utopia", "non-believers" of the present age, need to be obliterated in order to have a "pure" Muslim society, and therefore the concept of Zionism needs to be obliterated as well.
However, the concept of Zionism, is also Utopian, but not man-made in nature. It's designated by universal peace as well but not through submission but through the love of God. As I recall, It will be marked by only one "religious" obligation... the mandated universal appearance of people in Jerusalem during Sukkoth (Zech 14). But this is to be regarded as a time of rejoicing (Lev. 23) not submission. Another feature of this "utopia" is that the things one does and the objects one possesses or uses will be marked as "holy". I take that as an intentional honoring to God through said objects (Zech 14). This "utopia" will also be marked by harmony between man and the various species in the animal kingdom with one another. In other words, the natural enemies of today will be at peace with one another (Isaiah 2, Micah 4). I dare universal implementation of Sharia or any ideology, for that matter, to accomplish that!
And it seems that in order for the former to succeed, it must attempt to destroy the latter who's vision for the future is infinitely superior and that's a gross understatement.
P.S. In that day our concerns about the next person to win the next political office will be relegated to the status of "irrelevance".