Are the Promoters of the Caravan Willing to Sacrifice Human Life to Prove Donald Trump is a Villain?

I absolutely hope that I'm wrong but this is a prediction based on my axiom that "evil uses people as pawns for establishing its own ends".

I predict that the military will be used to prevent these "Central American Immigrants" from getting past our borders. They will resort to every non-lethal tactic at their disposal: water canons, tear gas, perhaps high pitched sound technology (if there is such a thing).

I see the masterminds behind this march on our borders as wanting to accomplish at least one of two things: 1. Penetrate the border. 2. Make Trump look bad and thus break down his populist appeal.

My prediction is that if they can't penetrate the border, someone's still going to get killed. If Trump isn't already a villain to some people now, he will be by the time this is over. Furthermore, in accomplishing this end, highlighted among the fatalities will be women and children, magnifying Trumps "villainy". As I said "evil uses people as pawns for establishing it's own end."

PRAY FERVENTLY WITH ME, IF YOU WILL, THAT MY PREDICTION WILL BE WRONG.

All lives are sacred.

Playing A Game Of Chicken With "Imigrants"

Well, boys and girls, it looks like it’s time to play “chicken.”

For those of you who are unfamiliar with the game, more often than not, it’s played by two idiots or teams of idiots driving cars at a billion miles per hour towards each other from opposite directions. The first car to get out of the way of the otherwise inevitable collision loses. Sometimes both drivers win by crashing into each other and, by so doing, killing each other. I suppose one might facetiously say, in that case, both parties lost by winning.

I do not speak from expertise, having never played the game myself, but it seems to me that it would be considerably easier to play chicken when the person playing the game has nothing to risk.

Seemingly that appears to be the case. A different game of chicken is playing out at the USA southern border with Mexico. However, it seems that the ones who stand most to gain or lose are alleged migrants from Central America. There is no doubt that someone paid for the transportation, food, and shelter for thousands of these people who are supposedly fleeing from hardship in their home countries. This writer also does not doubt that this crisis began as a purposely coordinated effort between planners, organizers, and financiers. This writer also does not doubt that this coordinated effort under discussion promotes a globalist agenda whereby international boundaries between nations can be destroyed and by so doing, establish a one world government.

And so, a game of chicken has been set up with Globalists on one side of the game and Nationalists on the other side of the “game.” And sadly, the ones most likely to lose are many hapless immigrant pawns at the hands of the Globalists.

EVIL EXPLOITS PEOPLE AS PAWNS BY WHICH IT CAN ACCOMPLISH ITS PURPOSES. To evil (the noun), human life is expendable. Hence, the “immigrants” coming to the USA southern border are pawns. Globalists are betting that the Nationalists will appear as the bad guys in this standoff. Hence, they’re assuming that the Nationalists will be the first to flinch in this game of chicken. In the meantime, many of the immigrants, who, although they might not meet the status of refugees, are nevertheless understandably seeking a better life for themselves. They were persuaded that a new and better life is available to them in the United States. The veracity of the lie they’ve been fed hinges upon whether or not the various elements among the globalists can badger the Nationalists, headed by President Trump into allowing these “immigrants” in.

As I see it, with perhaps some exceptions, there are three types of Americans engaged in this “game of chicken.” The Globalists are largely politicians and liberals who believe in globalism, have established it as their goal and don’t appreciate the uniqueness of the USA Constitution and history. The Nationalists do believe in the uniqueness of the United States and believe it as a force for good. They also believe that Globalism is dangerous. Those who specifically don’t have an agenda, the third group, will likely express grave concern for the well-being of these poor “immigrant” pawns held in limbo.

The strategy of the Globalists is to distract the populace from the main issue of Globalism vs. Nationalism and place attention on the plight of the “immigrants.” It is elements within their ranks that are responsible for persuading immigrants and paying for their travel. Furthermore, undoubtedly, corruption in their homelands contributed to these people wanting to migrate in the first place.

With their allies in the media, the Globalists can downplay the corruption in foreign countries and their complicity in facilitating the impetus for migration. They can continue their incessant droning that Trump, who stands at the vanguard of the Nationalist cause, is a “misogynist, homophobe and, above all, a racist who hates Hispanics and Muslims” and doesn’t want them in the country. Also with the help of the media, they can try to persuade their audience into believing that everyone who supports the Trump agenda is, likewise, a “misogynist, homophobe and, above all, racist who hates Hispanics and Muslims.”

I would argue that the effort of the Nationalists is to persuade people that Globalism is dangerous and will lead to a world-wide dictatorship will be detrimental to the well-being of everyone world-wide except for the elite dictators at the top of the political pecking order.

In the end, concerning this “game of chicken,” somebody’s got to flinch eventually, and even after then, evil will continue to exploit people as expendable pawns in its effort to implement Globalism.

The Democrat Party Needs to Change its Name to the Communist Party

Safely lounging in his lazy boy, far from the terrors taking place in a distant land, Barack Obama dispassionately gave orders for rules of engagement that left a chinook helicopter defenseless resulting in 38 deaths, 17 of which were from Sealteam 6, the team that infiltrated Pakistan and killed Osama BinLaden.

Presumably from that same lazy boy Obama refused reinforcements to help defend or rescue Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other victims in Benghazzi, Lybia.

Boy! It sure is easy to give these kinds of directives from a lazy boy thousands of miles away! Isn't it?

In 2008, before the November election, someone very close to me asked "so what do you think of Obama?" I replied "He's a Trojan Horse.".

That was the end of our discussion. History had to be played out to vindicate me and I doubt that that person is still willing to admit that I was right.

The Democrat party has morphed. They are very far from the party of JFK who said "Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country!"

They have become the party of the handouts: "What do you want? If elected I'll give it to you."

They are NOT the Democrat party. They are the Communist Party and they need to be recognized as such.

CNN = PRAVDA

President Trump has been attacked for himself, attacking the Media, calling it "Fake News".

He went so far as to call much of the "Main Stream Media" (MSM) the "enemy of the people".

Between his last acusation and the revoking of Jim Acosta's, an alleged reporter (I say "alleged" because he's more of a commentator than a reporter), press pass, Trump has become the recipient of the ire of even the "fair and balanced" Fox News.

I can't find his tweet (one of a bazillion) per se, but nevertheless, he argues that he has only challenged the veracity of the media and left it up for the people to decide. Furthermore, he pointed out that getting into the business of censorship can be very dangerous.

Allow me, if you will, to suggest that whenever lies are perpetrated by the media, the media is an enemy of the people and whenever truth is presented by the media, the media is a friend of the people.

At face value, Trumps denunciations of the media as "enemy of the people" appear to be totalitarian in nature. But may I suggest why this is not the case?

Back in the days when the Soviet Union (a blatantly repressive Communist regime) was in its hey day, it's chief source of information was a periodical called "PRAVDA". Pravda means "the Truth". Was it the truth? Many would say that such was absolutely not the case. I, for one, would say that it was the propaganda wing of the Communist party. In fact, it was indisputedly the case! Pravda reinforced the party line (agenda as it were). If a fact disagreed with the party's agenda, it was kept hidden. If a fact supported the party's agenda, it was placed on the front page.

The Communist government of the USSSR and PRAVDA worked hand-in-glove. One DID NOT criticiize the other.

Might I suggest "Be happy that Trump and the media are at odds".

When the government and the media are compliant with one another, that's when you should worry.

I dare say, the MSM tended to only praise Obama.

May I suggest to you that the MSM IS the American version of PRAVDA, and when the media agrees with the government and the government agrees with the media, THAT IS WHEN YOU SHOULD BE WORRYING.

I Want What Cory Booker Wants - Sorta

 · 

When I became a grandfather I realized that I was fundamentally a liar. And I lied to my children as well.

I sang sweet lullabys to them with words like:
"rock abye baby on the tree tops
When the wind blows the cradle will rock.
When the bow breaks the cradle will fall
and DOWN WILL COME BABY C R A D L E   A N D   A L L.

The first thing that I wanted my children to learn was that they had come into a world that was safe and secure... where they were surrounded by love.

SUCH IS NOT THE CASE!

This world is cruel and it leads in only one direction: 

D E A T H.

Do I want a world without walls? ABSOLUTELY!

But the population of this world is not prepared to have a world without walls.

That day will come. In Zechariah 14, after THE great and devastating battle, it says that:

"Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, and to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles."
(Zech. 14:16)

So let me ask: "How is the Festival of Tabernacles (Sukkoth) celebrated?" WITHOUT WALLS. Former enemies of Jerusalem are to come to the Holy City and camp out in booths made of nothing but sticks, to worship the King of Kings and learn from His Law about how people can live together in peace. Instead of walls, former enemies are left exposed and defenseless before one another and before God.

Believe it or not, I want exactly what Cory Booker wants. But I know that the world is not ready for what we want. I dare say that what Cory Booker wants at this present time will only lead us inevitably to that devastating war that Zechariah predicts. I also know that beyond that war is a glorious future in which the world government will "rest upon the shoulders" of the just, yet compassionate Messiah, Jesus.

In Light of the New Wave of Immigrants Coming Just In Time for the Mid-Term Elections

I'm posting this picture again. Several years ago, a friend, whom I respect, who's deeply involved in the foreign mission field, unequivocally said "we must let needy immigrants in." In one sense, I can understand her passion and sense of "Christian" charity. By the same token Jesus DID say, "be as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves."

I pondered the immigration problem in light of the present push towards globalism and realized that it could, very well, be a ploy, exploiting human misery as a battering ram for the purpose of destroying national borders. Hence, I came up with the attached "picture." I concede that it does reveal a strong element of synicism but I'm actually encouraged that Trump modified one of my points by, rather than "bombing the crap" out of those who make it difficult for those who seek asylum here, providing economic pressure on them instead. In the meantime, Congress has definitively refused to come up with a solution by law.

I post this because the subject is, once again, coming to the forefront in light of the fact that, just in time for the mid term elections, a swarm of Honduran "refugees" is coming to "knock on the national doors" and I believe that, in spite of the need for compassion, what I'm pointing out here needs to be entered into the equation as well.

Colin Kaepernicks "Taking a Knee" Misdiagnoses, and Exaserbates a Serious Problem

In 2017 457 white people were shot to death by police.

In 2017 223 black people were shot to death by police.¹

In 2010 the White population in the US was 196,817,552

In 2010 the Black Population in the US was 37,685,848.²

Assuming that comparatively little change has taken place in the population numbers between 2010 and 2016, the percentage of blacks killed by police amounted to 5.92 per 1 million people in 2017.

Given the same assumptions, 2.3 white people per 1 million people were killed by police in 2017.

5.92 people shot dead is tragic.  In a perfect world, no one would be shot dead, but in our fallen world, 5.92 people for every million people is quite miniscule. 

Nevertheless, put another way, in 2017 if you’re black, you would have been 3 times more likely to be killed by a policeman than if you were white.

Colin Kaepernick attributes this statistic to the assumption that cops hate black people.  By “taking the knee” during the Pledge of Allegiance at football games he sought to raise awareness of police brutality towards black people.

To bolster his assertion of police bias, he points to the disproportionate rate at which blacks as opposed to whites are arrested for committing violent crimes.³

These are unfortunate statistics but they are irrefutably true. 

Are these statistics true because, indeed, cops hate black people? As much as Colin Kaepernick would like to hold to this argument, I don’t think so.

Is it because black people are simply a more violent or inferior race?  Again, I don’t think so.  Blacks have turned out brilliant scientists, inventors, statesmen, jurists and people who excel in just about every other field. 

Is it because of a high level of poverty that blacks face in American urban areas?  Again, I don’t think so.  Other ethnic groups have endured similar levels of poverty without resorting to violence.

Allow me, if you will, to introduce another statistic.  In 2016 the percentage of black homes that consisted of only one parent was 62%.  In contrast, the percentage of white homes that consisted of only one parent was 24%.⁴ The ratio of black single parent homes to white single parent homes is approximately 3 to 1, the same ratio as black to white deaths by police and not unlikely a similar ratio of black arrests to white arrests.

The problem facing the black community in America is not police brutality or racism on the part of police.  That may have a part in it, but if so, it is miniscule. The majority of the problem is the scarcity of positive role models, fathers in particular.  One of the many benefits of positive role models, aside from love and acceptance, is respect for authority.  Police are, in American culture, designated to be authority figures.  If an authority figure gives an order, he Is to be obeyed.  A defiant response to a police order is only going to increase the likelihood that one is going to get himself killed. Furthermore, evidence supporting my suggestion is that arrest rate, whether black or white can be correlated to whether or not a child grew up in a home with one or two parents.⁵

Of late, I’ve been doing considerable studying of history and historical events.  I’ve established an axiom that whenever a problem arises, if presumptions are made concerning the root cause of the problem tragedy results.  This axiom, I would hold, applies to current events as well.  In 2014, as many of us recall, a young man named Michael Brown, was killed by a police officer by the name of Darren Wilson.  The circumstances that led up to his shooting were pretty much ignored in the black community and yet, calls were made to “tar and feather” officer Wilson, who, as it turned out, had acted in self-defense.  Rioting ensued. Young Mr. Brown’s death was attributed to a “white, racist cop” and a narrative generalizing the notion that “cops are racist” was broadcast across the country.  Of course, other anecdotal incidences of cops killing black youth were played up in the media, but, beginning with the tragic death of Michael Brown, consistent with my proposed axiom, tragedy ensued.  

Another statistic confirms my axiom.  In the year 2014, there was a sharp increase in urban violence.⁶ This, of course, was the same year that Michael Brown was killed, Black Lives Matter made its way onto the national scene, and massive demonization of the police was pushed.

Are there anecdotal incidences of police misuse of power?  Absolutely!  As I write this essay, the death of Botham Shem Jean, an upstanding citizen who happened to be black, and was murdered by a white policewoman who apparently had mistaken him for an intruder, is fresh in the minds of most Americans.  This incident is beyond tragic!  What were the circumstances that led up to this horrific event?  Did the policewoman have an innate hatred or fear of black men?  Why was it that she mistook the victim’s apartment for her own?  Was she on drugs, medication or was she drunk?  At this time, any assumption is merely speculation.  God willing, the truth will come out.  No doubt, such incidences need to be prevented, and hopefully more can be learned to stop such incidences in the future.

But Mr. Kaepernick does a disservice to the black community by, with a broad stroke, transferring blame for its woes upon the police.  It is a presumptive approach to problem solving and only, as I’ve stated, exacerbates the problem.

Although I’m not black, and my suggestions may, thus, go unheeded, allow me to, nevertheless, offer at least two solutions.

1.       Legislation has been passed which I believe has weakened the black family.  It would require further essays and further research to confirm it, but I’m of the opinion that this legislation dates back to LBJ and the “Great Society.” Such legislation ought to be reversed.

2.       Boys, in particular, need role models.  Mentoring, coaching, tutoring and other activities on the part of regular good ole’ fashioned American volunteers should be encouraged so that these children can have positive role models to look up to.  Young men with respect for authority won’t endanger themselves by defying authority.  Young men who have examples of people who show responsibility will learn responsibility.

In the meantime, yes, “taking the knee” may have grown out of genuine frustration, but blaming the black communities problems on the police is a dangerous misdiagnosis of the problem.