Straining the Facts Mightily

Straining the Facts Mightily
Vol: 132 Issue: 21 Friday, September 21, 2012

Pakistan declared Friday ‘A Day of Love’ for Mohammed, the founder of Islam, whom everyone from Osama bin Laden to Barack Hussein Obama refers to as a prophet.  Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama used that honorific as recently as yesterday, something I find intriguing.

Using the keywords, “Jesus” “Lord” and “Clinton” in Google, I tried to see how many times I could find Hillary Clinton’s use of the phrase, “The Lord Jesus” and I came up empty.  The same for President Obama.  

Running a similar search using “Prophet” and “Mohammed” one would almost think that “Prophet” was Mohammed’s first name.

In point of fact, acknowledging Mohammed as a Prophet is an element of the Shahada, or the Islamic creed, “there is no god but allah and Mohammed is his prophet.”

It’s kind of a big deal that the United States government, the US press corps, and pretty much every American refers to Mohammed as “the prophet” since a sincere recitation of the Shahada is all that is necessary to convert to Islam.

Once one acknowledges Mohammed as a prophet, one indirectly acknowledges allah as God, and in so doing, justifies the radical Islamic view that America is already subject to the penalties of sharia law. 

President Obama referred to the United States on the eve of his Cairo speech as the “world’s most Islamic country” a statement deemed so egregiously false that even the pro-Obama factcheck.org said at the time, “strained the facts mightily.” 

As many times as the US government, media and citizenry have effectively been reciting the shahada maybe we just weren’t deciphering the code properly.  

Maybe Obama was simply confirming America’s submission to Islam in a language indecipherable to ignorant infidels and aimed at the Muslim world?

Just in case the indirect recitation of the shahada wasn’t enough, the White House and State Department made a videotaped submission to Islamic law which was then distributed throughout Pakistan.

The video shows Obama speaking from the podium, as Hillary stood by his side;

“Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths.  We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.  But there is absolutely no justification for this type of senseless violence. None.”

The carefully parsed statement sounded reasonable and fair, and then it was Hillary’s turn.

 “Let me state very clearly, and I hope it is obvious, that the United States government had absolutely nothing to do with this video.  We absolutely reject its content and message. America’s commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation.”

Again, taken by itself, the statement sounded very diplomatic and reasonable.  But somehow, when packaged together into a public service advertisement to run on Pakistani TV at US taxpayer expense, it came across as a groveling, pathetic and embarrassing statement of submission, rather than one of tolerance. 

In any case, this is from the Reuters account of Pakistan’s Day of Love ceremonies:

Protesters took to the streets of the Pakistani city of Peshawar, an old frontier town on the main road to Afghanistan, and torched two cinemas and clashed with riot police who tried to disperse them with teargas.

At least five protesters were hurt, a doctor at the city’s main hospital said. The ARY television station said an employee had been killed.

Near the capital, Islamabad, protesters set fire to a motorway toll booth. The previous day, about 1,000 stone-throwing protesters clashed with police as they tried to force their way to the U.S. embassy.

The government shut down mobile phone services in more than a dozen cities as part of security arrangements ahead of protests expected on Friday.

The U.S. embassy in Pakistan has been running television advertisements, one featuring Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, saying the government had nothing to do with the film.

So, what was the rioting about, again?

Assessment:`

“Woe unto them! for they have fled from me: destruction unto them! because they have transgressed against me: though I have redeemed them, yet they have spoken lies against me.” (Hosea 7:13)

After a week of blaming some obscure movie that nobody would ever have heard about if the White House and State Department hadn’t mentioned it in every public statement at every level of government, the White House admitted that the whole uprising was pre-planned and that it had advance warning.

It was a pre-planned terrorist attack that occurred on the anniversary of September 11 for which the government was totally unprepared despite advance warning, and so to protect the image of the President as a strong foreign policy guy who courageously backed the Muslim Brotherhood and the Arab Spring, the White House made the movie the issue.

Which was fine with the Muslim Brotherhood, who were looking for something to rally the masses of demonstrators around. 

So after ten days of international publicity and countless condemnations of what was (until then) an obscure, unheard of Youtube video, we’ve got imams across the Muslim world preaching “death to America” because an Egyptian guy made a movie in California that they have been told offends Islam. 

Ummmm, who told them that?  Allow me to repeat the quote from the Reuters account:

“The U.S. embassy in Pakistan has been running television advertisements, one featuring Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, saying the government had nothing to do with the film.”

Here’s the problem.  The attacks weren’t sparked by this stupid movie.  But now that movie is what isModerate Muslims sustaining them, providing common ground for jihadists and so-called moderates to come together.  And as usual, when you bring extremists together with moderates, you end up with all extremists.

The rioting and mayhem and death and destruction across the Muslim world is sustained by our serial apologies for being who we are in the face of unjustifiable demands that we repudiate our own values and adopt those of another culture.

America isn’t a Muslim country and owes no greater respect to the dignity of Islam than it does to the dignity of Christianity.  Both Obama and Clinton made a big deal out of America’s religious tolerance as if it had somehow been violated.

American religious tolerance means tolerating those that disagree with a religion — it turns the idea of tolerance upside-down to interpret it as forcing others to accept your view, which is PRECISELY what is being demanded here.

Congress shall make no law establishing religion, says the First Amendment.  There is no exemption for Islam,  and neither can there be laws requiring Americans to respect one religion above another, or to respect any religion at all. 

That is what religious tolerance means — all religions are tolerated, as long as they tend to their own knitting. There is no guarantee that one’s religion will be respected or revered.  Only tolerated.

What IS guaranteed is the right of someone else NOT to respect or revere someone’s religion.  The Constitution makes absolutely no allowance for censorship and any restrictions on a person’s ability to speak out against religion in general or a specific religion violates both the Establishment Clause and the Free Speech clauses of the First Amendment.

Once again, when there were two possible responses, the administration picked the response that did the most damage. 

First, by covering up the terrorist attacks by fanning the flames of riot to protect Obama’s re-election chances.  And second, by apologizing for the First Amendment, instead of protecting it from violation by the demands of the intolerant in the name of tolerance.

It is so bizarre it doesn’t seem real.  Like a bad movie.  American free speech is responsible for rioting on the other side of the world because America is intolerant and we`re really, really sorry.

Where is America in Bible prophecy?  Heck, I’m not sure it’s still here now. 

The Forty-Seven Percent

The Forty-Seven Percent
Vol: 132 Issue: 20 Thursday, September 20, 2012

According to Occupy Wall Streeters and their Democrat supporters in the White House and Congress, America is divided economically into the ”one percent” and the ”ninety-nine percent” with the one percent as the bad guys who won’t give the ninety-nine percent their ”fair share”.

It reads like a page out of Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” except that “Atlas Shrugged” is fiction and truth is ALWAYS stranger than fiction.  As far out there as Rand’s novel about the “producers” getting fed up with the “moochers” goes, it doesn’t go nearly as far as reality.

Ayn Rand’s book was fiction when she wrote it in 1957, a “what-if” story set in a make-believe place.  In 2012 it almost reads like a book of history about what happened to a real place when the moochers took over America.

Just as we started to get used to the “new math” in which the 1% pays all the taxes while the 99% still demands the 1% pay their “fair” share, along comes somebody with some real  numbers — and everybody gets mad at him for saying them out loud.

By now, everybody has heard Mitt Romney’s comment about the forty-seven percent of people that pay no federal income taxes, will not be swayed by the promise of lower taxes and therefore will never vote for him anyway.

True, true and true.  But to listen to the full-throated roar from the Obama Press Corps that masquerades as legitimate news, one would assume Romney’s statement was as dishonest as Obama’s statement that Americans are better off now than they were four years ago.

By about the thirtieth time I heard the Obama Press Corps play the Romney clip about the forty-seven percent, something hit me.

It was one of those things that you already know in your head as part of a whole range of facts related to something else when it suddenly jumps out at you.

We even talked about it at some length in recent briefs when we were trying to figure out why in the world the government would be encouraging people to go on welfare, food stamps, or some other form of government assistance when logic dictates it should be doing the exact opposite.

But somehow, even though I actually talked about it, the enormity of it didn’t fully hit me. 

Forty-seven percent. 

For the past four years, everything Obama has done has been aimed at crippling, rather than accelerating the economic recovery.

For all his talk about elevating the status of the poor and strengthening the middle class, the facts tell the opposite story:

  • National Debt: 2009: 10.6 Trillion Now: 16 Trillion
  • Food Stamps 2009: 32.2 million people enrolled Now: 46.2 million people enrolled
  • Unemployment 2009: 7.8% Now: 8.3%
  • Median Household Income: 2009: $54,983 Now: $50,964
  • Gas Prices: 2009: $1.85 Now: $3.80

My job isn’t to simply report the news, but to record and observe and analyze and try and figure out why and how it fits with the overall Big Picture of unfolding Bible prophecy.  There is too much here to let it slide under the radar.

Much of what Obama and his party has been doing over the past four years has been a mystery — why demonize the rich for making America the economic powerhouse that it is?   

There is no logic to that.  The poor didn’t make America wealthy.  The poor don’t create jobs.  The poor don’t hire people.  The poor don’t produce, they consume.

That isn’t “picking on” the poor.  It is simply acknowledging what the word means.  If they created jobs, hired people and were productive, they wouldn’t be poor.

They’d be among the one percent, er, I mean, the fifty-three percent, er (I dunno, make up a percentage that justifies your position  — everybody else does).  

But everybody on both sides is sidestepping around what Mitt Romney nearly said.

Had Obama managed to impoverish another four percent of the population, the Democrat Party would never lose another election.

Assessment:

According to the Census Bureau, the ten poorest cities in America are: Detroit, with 32.5 percent of its residents at or below the poverty level; Buffalo at 29.9 percent; Cincinnati, 27.8 percent; Cleveland, 27 percent; Miami, 26.9 percent; St. Louis, 26.8 percent; El Paso, Texas, 26.4 percent; Milwaukee, 26.2 percent; Philadelphia, 25.1 percent; and Newark, 24.2 percent.

Every one of them has been under total Democrat control for at least the last quarter century.

The Democrat position is that these cities are poor because they are black.  And for some reason, most black Americans don’t seem to see that as either condescending or racist. 

These cities aren’t poor because they are black.  They are poor because keeping them poor gives Democrats the advantage.  So they craft their policies to keep them poor.  

(If they weren’t poor, it would be much harder to buy their votes with promises of free stuff).

They are kept poor because class warfare isn’t as effective with an affluent population.  If there were not a sharp economic divide between the inner city and the suburbs, then there would be nothing to exploit.

Could it be possible that Obama’s re-election strategy from the beginning was to impoverish enough Americans to put them in the electoral majority? 

Was Obama shooting for fifty-one percent and simply came up four short? 

It sounds nuts, but so does almost everything the guy has done so far.  Everything from Obamacare to his tax policies have served to weaken the economy, while Obama rails against the evil rich. 

But taxing the rich at the 100% level wouldn’t balance the budget or make a dent in the national debt.  And they already pay the majority of all taxes collected, so the “fair share” argument is a transparent falsehood.

The heroes of the Obama administration are the Occupy Wall Streeters (the “moochers”) and their worst enemies are the Tea Partiers (the “producers”).

There are a number of concurrent threads that tie into the tapestry of Bible prophecy for the last days.  In the first, the Bible identifies FOUR spheres of global power in the last days, all of which exist today.

The Bible makes no mention of a fifth economic and military superpower resembling the United States.  The United States plays no role in world affairs after the Rapture, (although I believe the America we now live in is pictured in 2 Timothy 3:1-6 and Revelation 3:14-18).

The Bible does forecast a total economic collapse during the Tribulation, which may help to explain America’s absence from the record.  In the event of a complete economic collapse the countries hit hardest will be those with the most to lose.

America plays no role in Israel’s defense in the last days, suggesting America’s military power is also broken. Revelation 6:4 reads like the logical result of Obama’s disastrous Middle East foreign policy.

“And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword.” (Revelation 6:4)

The images of America’s embassies going up in flames comes to mind . . .

“And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see. And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand. And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine.” (Revelation 6:5-6)

I don’t want to be misunderstood.  I am not saying that Obama is the antichrist or that we are witnessing the events of Revelation 6:4-6.   

What I am saying is that everything that can be measured or observed; politically, economically, militarily, morally or spiritually is all trending in just one direction and that direction comports EXACTLY with the outline of revealed Bible prophecy.

As students of Bible prophecy, we find ourselves operating on two levels;  the one in the here and now, and the one that is to come.  While we can see the one that is to come rapidly approaching, we still have to operate in the here and now.

I expect the Rapture could happen any day, but I plan as if it won’t occur during my lifetime.  It seems a dichotomy, but it is actually just what Jesus said it would be like.

“But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.” (Matthew 24:38-40)

We plant and we harvest and we prepare for winter, we eat and drink and marry and give our children in marriage, just as we have from the days of Noah until now.

“Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.” (Matthew 24:44)

So we plan like the world will last forever, but we live like the Lord is coming back tomorrow.  And we pray that things will hold together just a little longer . . . until He comes.

Maranatha!

Reader Asks: If God Ordains Rulers, Why Vote?

Reader Asks: If God Ordains Rulers, Why Vote?
Vol: 132 Issue: 19 Wednesday, September 19, 2012

America’s competitive edge has always been the benchmark standard against which all other nations were measured.  America’s position as the richest, most competitive nation on earth was unquestioned.  American economic supremacy was taken for granted like water or air; ”sound as a dollar” was an expression of supreme confidence.

America ranked seventh in overall competitiveness, according to the Global Competitiveness Index released annually by the World Economic Forum and based on an analysis of 12 “pillars” the report used to determine its rankings.

“But when it comes to the health of US finances, the report is gloomy indeed. Labelled “macroeconomic environment,” pillar three takes a look at a country’s budget deficit, its sovereign debt and the amount of money it costs to service that debt. Of the 144 countries on the list, the US is ranked 111th, behind notorious euro-zone problem children such as Spain and Italy and only a few spots ahead of bailout recipients Portugal and Cyprus. (Greece, not surprisingly, ranked dead last.)”

How did we slide so far so fast?  The very next line in the document provides a clue:

“In addition, the report cited Americans’ profound mistrust of their politicians as a negative factor.”

Gee!  How did that happen?  It’s all ancient history now, but a trip through our archives will reveal that we’ve systematically documented the efforts, as they occurred to make everything George Bush said sound like a lie, even when, as in the case of Saddam’s arsenal, Bush had no way of knowing any more than his intelligence services did.

Recall that the Bush administration followed that of the administration that legitimized certain types of lies; (“all people lie about sex”) which followed the developing narrative that “all politicians lie” — something we now take for granted.

America already knew Obama was a serial liar (“I was never there when Rev Wright said such things”) with much to hide (since much was and remains hidden) when they elected him, and after nearly four years of Barack Obama, Eric Holder and Joe Biden, we’ve even come to expect the alleged free press to lie.  

MSNBC does it all the time, shamelessly, while the “mainstream” is a bit less obvious about it.  But nobody EXPECTS to hear the actual truth from the media.  If you want to hear good things about Obama, and negative things about America, you turn to MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC or CNN. 

If you want to hear good things about Mitt Romney, and positive things about America, you tune in to Fox.  If you want to hear the truth . . . well, it is out there, but you have to do a lot of digging to find it.  Mostly we just tune in to our preferred propagandist . . . and that’s the truth.

One of the hallmarks of this year’s political campaign is the noteworthy departure from any expectation of truth in advertising. 

When Obama’s side gets caught in an actual, bald-faced, unmitigated lie, their apologists respond by pointing to some perceived lie by the other side and everybody agrees it’s a wash and now it’s time to move on.

“A wicked doer giveth heed to false lips; and a liar giveth ear to a naughty tongue.” (Proverbs 17:4)

Assessment:

I got an angry email from a reader taking a strip off me for my alleged support for Mitt Romney for President.  ”How can you support a Mormon for president and still call yourself a Christian?” the lady demanded. 

That’s two questions in one sentence.  Allow me to take them in order.

First, my alleged support for a Mormon for president.  It isn’t entirely accurate to say that I support Mitt Romney for president so much as I am convinced by observation, logical analysis and reasoned calculation that if re-elected, Barack Obama will be the last president of these United States as we know it. 

Everything he’s done so far supports that allegations made by those that have investigated his background that say it is his lifelong mission to see the United States lose its place of supremacy among the nations of the world.  And as we’ve already seen, across many measures, it already has.

Another reader emailed me about a column in which I cited Romans 13:1-3 that says that God puts rulers in place for His purpose, asking why we should bother voting in the first place? 

Although I believe we are in the last days and that the Lord is about to return, that doesn’t necessarily translate into my being eager to see the “wheels come off the bus” as a friend of mine is fond of saying.  Along with everybody else, I’m ON that bus. 

Call me carnal, or worldly, or whatever other name you like, but I don’t want to see the United States fall from grace and I don’t want to see her come under judgment.  Neither do I want to partake in that judgment when it falls. 

I know that it is due, but I am content to pray as Abraham did, that for the sake of a few righteous, He will forestall judgment a bit longer.  And I am content to vote the same way without fear that I am undoing God’s will.  Indeed, no matter how one votes, one is advancing God’s will. 

You see, when it comes to the next leader of the country, I don’t know what God’s will actually is.  For all I know, He will rapture us out of here the day after Christmas.  Or something.  

But God knows what God’s will is and He uses your vote to advance it.  

Why should we vote when God appoints rulers?  Why should we give to God’s ministries when God owns everything?  Why do we put money in the church collection plate?  

The answer is the same to all three questions.  Because that is how God works — through His people. 

Returning to the original two-part question, the answer to part one is that I am not supporting a Mormon for President, I am opposing a much more clear and evident danger, applying the same reasoning that I would apply if faced with the choice between hitting a mailbox or colliding head-on with a semi. 

I am not supporting a Mormon, I am supporting the alternative to Barack Hussein Obama. It just so happens the alternative to Obama is also a Mormon.  And not voting at all is tantamount to a vote for Obama.

And in any case, Romney’s credentials to be the nation’s CEO are superior to those of Obama’s by every possible standard of measurement.

“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.” (Romans 13:1)

Do I think Romney will be a better president?  I don’t know.  What about the whole Mormon, White Horse Prophecy thing?  I don’t know.  Here’s what I do know.

God has used Barack Obama according to His purpose, whatever that might be.  I am content to trust that God knows what He is doing.   But I’m equally ok with praying that God is finished with the Obama part of the plan.

But that’s how I can cheer on Romney and still call myself a Christian.

The de Tocqueville Prophecy

The de Tocqueville Prophecy
Vol: 132 Issue: 18 Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Alexis-Charles-Henri Clérel de Tocqueville was a French political philosopher and historian whose two-volume ”Democracy in America” was originally published to help the people of France as they made the political transition from aristocratic monarchy to the emerging democratic order following the Second French Revolution.

Writing in 1835, de Tocqueville made the following observation:

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”

I heard Lt. Col Alan West quote de Tocqueville this morning during a television interview in which West was defending what the propaganda press is calling the “Secret Romney Tapes.”  Evidently, somebody taped Romney saying out loud what everybody knows but few politicians ever dare to say, which is that de Tocqueville was right. 

“All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax.”

Watching the propaganda press doing all that it can to promote Romney’s comment as what he “secretly” thinks of Obama’s supporters brings to mind memories of the same propaganda press doing all that it could to bury Obama’s contemptuous “secret” dismissal of Middle America as “those that cling to God and guns and have animosity towards those not like them”.

Both statements revealed much about the men who made them.  Obama’s statement explains how he could be comfortable ramming Obamacare through Congress without a single vote from the representative members of the God and guns red states.

And Romney’s statement reveals that Romney is less likely to buy votes with taxpayer money and accelerate de Tocqueville’s prediction that eventually America will vote itself out of existence and go the way of the Roman Empire.

As de Tocqueville noted, “a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.”  He said that in 1835!   

Obama came to power without ever defining his actual agenda for “fundamentally transforming America” and he’s “governed” (if that is the right word) for almost four years without ever articulating it.  That doesn’t necessarily mean it is a secret. 

It is just harder to discern through the fog of propaganda.

Assessment:

Why is the Obama administration so adamant to blame the producers of that stupid movie for the rioting and mayhem in the Muslim world, downplaying the connection to the eleventh anniversary of September 11 and insisting it was “spontaneous” despite multiple advance warnings?  

The Libyan president says it was planned.  Not so, says the Obama camp.  The Egyptian president said it was planned.  Not so, says the Obama camp.  The Jerusalem Post reported the Egyptian warning that the US said it didn’t get on September 11 as the attacks were ongoing.  

There was no warning, says the administration.  It was a spontaneous reaction to a hateful, spiteful, mean, disgusting, awful, Islamophobic, terrible, cruel, yucky and poopy movie made by hateful, spiteful, mean, disgusting, awful, Islamophobic, terrible, cruel, yucky and poopy people. 

The riots were an “unjustifiable” but somehow, “natural and to be expected” response by the Islamic world to hateful, spiteful, mean, disgusting, awful, Islamophobic, terrible, cruel, yucky and blasphemous insults to Mohammed.  

History reveals how dictatorships are created.  First, the government takes away the right to bear arms.  This is almost always accomplished by use of the Hegelian Dialectic in three parts. 

First, having identified the goal as public disarmament, use the power of the government and media to create a “crisis” resulting from gun ownership.

Second, highlight every incidence in which guns are used to commit crimes while suppressing any in which private gun ownership was responsible for preventing gun crimes.

Through the use of propaganda, create a groundswell of support for some kind of government intervention to protect the people from the never-ending drumbeat of negative consequences of unrestricted gun ownership until, third, the public begins to clamor for the “solution” that was the original goal.

The next step is to restrict the right to free speech.  This is at the heart of the effort to blame Islamic behavior on the unfettered free speech of a previously unheard-of film-maker. 

THAT is why the administration refuses to acknowledge terrorism as the cause.  Instead of it being a consequence of Obama’s foreign policy, it becomes a part of the Hegelian political correctness campaign to regulate speech.

What Romney commented on in his allegedly “secret” speech (who gives speeches in the 21st century that they expect to stay secret?) was actually another of Obama’s dialectic efforts to increase the number of Americans dependent on the government. 

That is why the US government is spending borrowed money to buy commercials to extoll Americans to get on food stamps and welfare and other forms of government largesse despite the fact that we have to borrow money to pay for any of it!

It is like a person losing his job and so he calls the neighbors in to raid his cupboards as part of an effort to get himself back on his feet.

All that Romney did was point out the obvious, which is that those people who are dependent on government and pay no taxes are unlikely to be swayed by a promise of lower taxes and reduced spending.  So forty-seven percent of the population won’t vote for Romney.

Alexis de Tocqueville was right.  Once a republic slides into a democracy it continues the slide and ALWAYS becomes a dictatorship.  And history tells us that every dictatorship comes equipped with a propaganda machine.

So, we have a country in decline, an economy on the brink, a dishonest media, a government-dependent society and a corrupt administration — all hallmarks of an incipient dictatorship.

At the same time, the Arab Middle East is on the brink of war while Israel finds herself standing alone against the whole world over the question of who owns Jerusalem.

The revived Roman Empire is desperately seeking a messiah-figure that can save it from collapse.

“And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draweth nigh.” (Luke 21:28)  

The Second Coming (of Jimmy Carter?)

The Second Coming (of Jimmy Carter?)
Vol: 132 Issue: 17 Monday, September 17, 2012

The White House continues to insist that the attacks on US embassies across the Islamic world were sparked by a video produced by an Egyptian Coptic Christian and uploaded to Youtube in July.  Evidently, the administration intends to treat the attackers as the injured party.

Wave after wave of administration officialdom appeared on all the weekend talk shows to explain why American insensitivity to Islam is primarily responsible and that Americans have to learn, in the words of one Islamic apologist, “free speech is not unfettered speech.” 

Justice Hugo Black, writing in his dissent in Dennis v. the United States (1951) acknowledged the inherent dangers in unfettered speech, but concluded that the benefit outweighed the risks:

[A] governmental policy of unfettered communication of ideas does entail dangers.  To the Founders of this Nation, however, the benefits derived from free expression were worth the risk.  They embodied this philosophy in the First Amendment’s command that “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press….”

But Americans were treated to the spectacle of film maker Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, being “escorted” by a phalanx of federal officers to be “interviewed” about whether his movie, “Innocence of Muslims” might have constituted a “possible parole violation”. 

Nakoula was accused in 2010 of fraudulently opening bank and credit card accounts using Social Security numbers that did not match the names on the applications.  He pleaded no contest and was sentenced to 21 months in prison, to be followed by five years on supervised probation.

He was released in June 2011, and at least some production on the video was done later that summer.  But the terms of Nakoula’s prison release contain behavior stipulations that bar him from accessing the Internet or assuming aliases without the approval of his probation officer.

Clips of the film posted on the Internet since July have been attributed to a man by the name of Sam Bacile, which two people linked to the film have said was likely an alias.

So that gives the federal government an excuse to go after the guy for producing the film that allegedly inflamed the Arab world, sparked an allegedly “spontaneous” attack on the Libyan consulate that resulted in the murder of four American diplomats, etc., etc.

Nakoula has been vilified by the media and by the US government for producing the film, which expressed his opinion about Islam, and which the Islamic world was told it found offensive. 

(The film is in English and was on Youtube.  Somebody had to find it, translate it, and distribute it to the rioters, many of whom had probably never actually seen a computer, let alone been wired to the world-wide web.)

But the US administration has settled on the narrative that the video was responsible for the attacks, and the fact they occurred on the eleventh anniversary of the September 11 attacks was merely coincidental.

US Ambassador Susan Rice made the rounds of the talk shows to sell the administration’s position, telling ABC’s This Week;

“Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous – not a premeditated – response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated,” Rice said, referring to protests in Egypt Tuesday over a film that depicts the Prophet Muhammad as a fraud.
“We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to – or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo,” Rice said. “And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons… And it then evolved from there.”

That might be what the administration wants to believe, but it directly contradicts the locals who were there.  Some three days BEFORE the assault on the Libyan consulate, a local security official says he met with American diplomats in Benghazi to warn them that an attack was imminent.  

“Jamal Mabrouk, a member of the February 17th Brigade, told CNN that he and a battalion commander had a meeting about the economy and security.  He said they told the diplomats that the security situation wasn’t good for international business.  “The situation is frightening, it scares us,” Mabrouk said they told the U.S. officials. He did not say how they responded. . . .
“. . . According to one of the Libyan security guards who was stationed at one of the gates armed with only a radio, the assault began simultaneously from three directions.  Heavy machine guns and rocket -propelled grenades were used, according to the guard. He said masked men threatened to kill him at gunpoint for ‘protecting the infidels’.

The Libyan president, Mohamed Yousef El-Magariaf, announced that his country had made fifty arrests so far in connection with what El-Magariaf told CBS’ Face the Nation that he has “no doubt” that the attacks were pre-planned.

“The way these perpetrators acted and moved — I think we, and they’re choosing the specific date for this so-called demonstration, I think we have no, this leaves us with no doubt that this was pre-planned, determined.”
“And you believe that this was the work of Al Qaeda, and you believe that it was led by foreigners. Is that what you’re telling us?” CBS host Bob Schieffer asked.
“It was planned, definitely. It was planned by foreigners, by people who entered the country a few months ago. And they were planning this criminal act since their arrival,” Magariaf said.
“. . . The idea that this criminal and cowardly act was a spontaneous protest that just spun out of control is completely unfounded and preposterous.”

It’s like a Monty Python movie.  Only less funny. 

Assessment:

Why would the White House continue to insist that coordinated attacks against our embassies occurring on the eleventh anniversary of the September 11 attacks are typical Islamic acts of random violence instead of deliberate acts of terror?

Why is it so important to the White House that the public blame filmmaker Nakoula Basseley Nakoula and the pastor of the fifty-member Dove World Outreach Center who uploaded the video?

Disgusting and reprehensible.” said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. “Truly abhorrent,” an outraged White House official told an international conference.   

But neither was speaking of the attacks on our embassies or the perpetrators that dragged the body of a US Ambassador before the cheering, bloodthirsty mob.  Nope.  For the bloodthirsty mob, they used standard diplomatic boilerplate; “The United States strongly condemns the outrageous etc., etc.”

The truly abhorrent, really disgusting and reprehensible acts that has the US government so upset was the amateur video shot by an unknown Egyptian and uploaded by an obscure Florida pastor.

What was disgusting and reprehensible and truly abhorrent about the movie?  It was about Mohammed and it wasn’t from the Muslim perspective.

Sort of as if somebody, say, immersed a crucifix in a jar of urine and called it “art”.  Or as if somebody had painted Osama bin Laden as Jesus.  Or sculpted a statue of Jesus Christ with Mickey Mouse ears and a clown nose.

Or what about if somebody made a movie in which Jesus Christ was depicted as having had sex with Mary Magdalene?  Surely the administration would react with similar shock, horror and anger at such disrespect for a religion dedicated to peace, love and salvation for all who ask?

The death toll from angry Christian mobs?  Zero and holding steady. 

Condemnation from the US government?  Never!  It is protected free speech.  Besides, it isn’t the government’s job to involve itself in religious affairs.

For the government to object to Jesus in a jar of urine would be the equivalent to the government endorsing Jesus, which would be a clear violation of the 1st Amendment that forbids the government from endorsing any religion it isn’t afraid of.

Or at least, that appears to be how the Obama administration is reading it.  Because when it comes to Mohammed, suddenly the government has an opinion about religion and that opinion is that unlike Christianity or Judaism, Islam should be “respected”

“Team Obama’s unseemly groveling to violent extremists has been cloaked in a newfound concern on the left for respecting religious sensibilities.  Tuesday, a liberal professor argued in USA Today that the maker of the Mohammed film should be arrested.  
President Obama said in the Rose Garden: “We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others” and Clinton asserted that,  “The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.”  Deputy National Security Adviser Denis McDonough endorsed efforts to create “a world where the dignity of all people—and all faiths—is respected.”
Apparently our foreign policy is now being run by Dr. Phil.

Actually, THAT is why the administration is so desperate for the public to buy the narrative that the adherents to the religion of peace and love murdered our diplomats because an unknown guy made a lousy movie featuring Mohammed. 

To keep the public from discovering that our foreign policy is such a disaster.   

“Prior to 9/11, we had a policy of containment,” [Senator John] McCain said on CBS’ Face the Nation.  “Then after 9/11, it was a confrontation with the terrorists and Al Qaeda. Now it’s disengagement. We’re leaving Iraq. We’re leaving Afghanistan. We’re leaving the area. The people in the area are having to adjust. And they believe the United States is weak, and they are taking appropriate action.”

Team Obama has made Obama’s foreign policy the centerpiece of his re-election campaign.  Obama, the warrior-king whose use of drone aircraft has killed hundreds of terrorists, (plus anybody standing near them), the hero that killed Osama bin-Laden, the man who was elected on a promise to restore American standing in the Muslim world.

“After Obama’s success in killing Osama bin Laden, in killing Qaddafi and in not blowing up Iraq, I think Obama and his aides figured, ‘We’ve got this box pretty well taken care of,’ ” said Michael Rubin, a Middle East scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a former Bush administration official, referring to Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi of Libya.  “Now that gets thrown up into the air,” he said. “Instead of Obama being the successful guy that got Bin Laden, we’re talking about Obama as the second coming of Jimmy Carter. . .”

But sadly for America, there is no Ronald Reagan waiting in the wings.  Not this time.  

The Maunder Minimum

The Maunder Minimum
Vol: 132 Issue: 15 Saturday, September 15, 2012

The ”Maunder Minimum” is the name given to the period of solar inactivity that occurred between 1645 and 1710.  Some of the first telescopic observations of the sun had already been made by Galileo in 1611; by 1645 astronomers were well acquainted with the phenomenon they called ‘sunspots’.

Today we know that the number of sunspots rises and falls roughly every eleven years into “minimum” and “maximum” solar phases, but that wasn’t discovered until almost two hundred years after Galileo by a German astronomer, Henrich Schwabe in 1843.

Part of the reason for the lag is the “Maunder Minimum.”  For 70 years, sunspot activity was almost non-existent.  During one thirty-year period within the Maunder Minimum, astronomers observed roughly fifty sunspots, compared with 40,000 – 50,000 sunspots during a typical thirty year solar cycle.

In 1640 not a single sunspot was observed; in 1650, 3; 1670, 0; 1680, 1.  The coldest winter in 500 years occurred in 1709, right in the middle of the Maunder Minimum.

Anecdotal stories about the Winter of 1709 sound more like something lifted from the legend of Paul Bunyan than historical fact.  It was said to be so cold that year that sailors froze to death aboard ships.

Trees exploded from the cold.  Fish froze solid in rivers while major bodies of water like the Baltic Sea froze solid. Bread froze so hard it took an axe to cut it.

Words froze in mid-air; when the spring thaw came, people were deafened by all the noise. (Ok, that one really was lifted from the Legend of Paul Bunyan.)

The Maunder Minimum coincided with the coldest part of the Little Ice Age that began in the middle of the 15th century and lasted until well into the 19th.  NASA notes three particularly cold intervals; one beginning around 1650, a second around 1770 and the last around 1850.

The Year 1816 was known across Europe as the Year Without A Summer.  Science has long noted the relationship between solar activity and periods of warming or cooling.  During the 20th century the sun was unusually active, peaking in the 1950s and the late 1980s.

Dean Pensell of NASA, says that, “since the Space Age began in the 1950s, solar activity has been generally high.  Five of the ten most intense solar cycles on record have occurred in the last 50 years.”

Interestingly, the coldest winter on record occurred during the Maunder Minimum — in the middle of a “Little Ice Age” which also corresponded with a period of low solar activity.  And the warmest winter on record occurred during a period of intense solar activity.

When the sun comes out, it warms the earth.  When it hides behind a thick cloud cover, or when it is on the other side of the earth (here, we call that ‘night’) it gets colder. Sunspots

But global warming True Believers deny any relationship between an overheating climate and the sun.  Why do you think that is?

This photo shows a solar eruption – a sun spot – the earth is superimposed to give a sense proportion.  If global warming is the sun’s fault, then there isn’t much we can do here on earth to fix it.

That’s why the True Believers totally discount the sun as a cause of global warming – to them, it is an issue of faith.

Since the turn of the 20th century, sunspot activity had all but disappeared, together with evidence of global warming.

But Hillary Clinton said in June 2009: “The science is unambiguous, and the logic that flows from it is inescapable: climate change is a clear and present danger to our world that demands immediate attention.”

Global warming has morphed from a debate into a cause and from a cause into a kind of religion dividing ‘true believers’ from ‘heretics.’

Assessment:

“And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.” (Luke 21:25-26)

Solar activity dropped to zero in 2007, just about the same time that Al Gore learned just how inconvenient the truth can be.

When the sun is active, the solar system (including Earth) gets warmer.  When the sun is inactive, it gets cooler.  An inconvenient truth.

Although the preponderance of evidence suggests that the sun is responsible for global warming, the preponderance of evidence also suggests that marriage was intended for a man and a woman.

It might be obvious, but that won’t make any difference.  People will believe what they want to believe, not necessarily what is true.

According to a report dated June 14, 2011 at Space.com although we are now in an unusually active and powerful solar maximum period;

“unusual solar readings, including fading sunspots and weakening magnetic activity near the poles, could be indications that our sun is preparing to be less active in the coming years.

The results of three separate studies seem to show that even as the current sunspot cycle swells toward the solar maximum, the sun could be heading into a more-dormant period, with activity during the next 11-year sunspot cycle greatly reduced or even eliminated.”

Frank Hill, associate director of the National Solar Observatory’s Solar Synoptic Network told a news briefing yesterday that “the solar cycle may be going into a hiatius.”

“The studies looked at a missing jet stream in the solar interior, fading sunspots on the sun’s visible surface, and changes in the corona and near the poles.”

Right now, the sun is in the middle of Cycle 24, and is due to reach a maximum in 2013.  The next cycle would be expected to start in around 2020.  Instead, we may be heading into a ‘grand minimum’ similar to the Maunder period.

The National Solar Observatory (NSO) says that, based on 13 years of observations, sunspots are weakening.  There have been fewer during the present cycle – and, if the trend continues, there may be none at all in the next.

Meanwhile, NSO observations of the jet streams circling the sun, whose strength tends to correlate with solar activity, has shown that activity is near-non-existent.  Were the next solar cycle to proceed as usual, they would have appeared two or three years ago.

Finally, the sun’s corona, or upper atmosphere, is also failing to show changes associated with the usual solar cycles.  Normally, scientists would expect to see magnetic features in the corona moving north and south in a phenomenon known as ‘the rush to the poles’.

“This is highly unusual and unexpected,” Hill said. “But the fact that three completely different views of the sun point in the same direction is a powerful indicator that the sunspot cycle may be going into hibernation.”

According to NASA’s astro-forecasts, the current solar maximum is likely to unleash a series of massive solar storms, peaking sometime in late 2012 or early 2013, after which, solar inactivity is expected to collapse completely, bringing on another period of global cooling.

A storm (June 7, 2011) was so powerful that had it hit earth head on, it could well have fried the global electrical grid.  A powerful enough solar flare hitting the earth head-on would mimic the effect of an EMP pulse on our electrical grid.

Forecasters say that the worst is yet to come.  In a worst-case scenario, the world would be instantly plunged into technological darkness that could cause a global blackout that could take years to repair.

In summary, then, the earth is due for a massive strike from a solar flare sometime in the next two years, followed by a collapse of solar activity that portends a period of intense global cooling.  So just about the time we’ll need heat the most, we’ll be back to burning whatever we can find to heat our homes.

Until we run out of things to burn.

Isn’t the timing of all this interesting? First, we’re not really sure global warming was either global, or actually warmer. (Warmer than what?)

Second, the cooling trend corresponded with the last solar minimum, is now about to expire.

Third, NASA predicts that the current solar maximum will peak sometime around 2012 with what could be a massive burst of solar radiation that could plunge us into darkness, just in time for us to enter a little Ice Age.

The world’s scientists are so confused that the consensus opinion on global warming and solar activity that there is no consensus opinion, but they are so alarmed that they insist on doing something, even if we don’t know what effect that “something” might have.

All they know for sure is that things are getting pretty scary out there in outer space– and that it is coming our way.

“Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken,” the Lord said.

These are exactly the conditions forecast 2000 years ago for a single generation, somewhere in time.  The generation of whom the Lord was speaking when He said;

“And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. . . .This generation shall not pass until all these things be fulfilled.” (Luke 21:28,32)

Meanwhile I’d keep some sunblock stored away in the pocket of your parka.  Just in case.

Angel Baby

Angel Baby
Vol: 132 Issue: 14 Friday, September 14, 2012

According to the Bible, there are four different classes of created, sentient (self-aware) spiritual beings; Gentiles, Jews, Christians and angels.

Mankind was created in God’s image and God’s likeness but that doesn’t mean that we look like God physically.  (We might, but no man hath seen God at any time, who knows?)  But spiritually, we are all created with an eternal element — like God, Who is also eternal.

While a man’s body dies, his spirit cannot.  The Bible refers to spiritual death, and to the death of the soul, and to the Great White Throne judgment of the Lake of Fire as the “second death” but that doesn’t refer to the end of a soul’s existence.

It refers to the permanent loss of fellowship with the Lord and the permanent loss of heaven.  In the sense that salvation means eternal life, dying in one’s sins results in eternal death.  Not eternal annihilation, but a death that continues forever – and without end.

“Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.” (Mark 9:44, 46,48)

When the Lord repeats Himself in Scripture, it is because He wants to be sure that we “get” it.  Hell is real – He says so three times in a row.  Those in hell don’t die – He says so three times.

And hell is a place of fiery torment – He says so. . . three times!

So, mankind is created in God’s image in that man is an eternal creation.  The first man was created a Gentile.  Adam didn’t KNOW he was a gentile, because at that time, there were only angels and Gentiles.

Adam fell, and with him, the entire race.  Out of Adam’s seed God chose Abraham as the father of two peoples.  The descendants of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob He selected as his Chosen People through whom He would reveal Himself to the nations.

If the Jews could have known in advance what they were chosen for, they may well have echoed the old joke about Abe Moskowitz who goes to heaven to meet God.

He asks God, “Is it true that the Jews are the Chosen People?” God answers, “Yes, you are the Chosen People.” Abe retorts, “Then could You please choose someone else for a change?”

Spiritually, a Jew is different creation than is a Gentile.  The Jew is not a Gentile, neither can a Jew become a Gentile.  A Gentile can choose to become a Jew, but not the other way around.

Being a Jew is a choice; one is either chosen, or one chooses, but it involves a choice.  But it is a one-way choice.  A Jew that lives like a Gentile is a ‘lapsed Jew’, or a ‘secular Jew’, or an ‘unbelieving Jew’– but he cannot become a Gentile – he is a Jew.

The fourth spiritual creation of God is the Christian.  The Bible identifies a Christian as a “new creature” — one that is distinct and separate from either a Jew or a Gentile.

A Christian is not a Jew, neither is he a Gentile, but is a new creation of God.  A Gentile can be born again, but it is a one-way transformation.  Once a born-again Christian, he cannot revert back to being a Gentile – at worst, he is a lapsed Christian.

An ethnic Jew that becomes a Buddhist or a Muslim or a Zoroastrian or a Marxist or an atheist is still a Jew. He is a secular Jew, or a Meshumadim (a heretic) but he remains a Jew, nonetheless.

There is no such thing as a Christian Jew.  There are Messianic Jews – that is to say, born-again Jews that have accepted Jesus as Messiah, but they are no longer Jews as far as other Jews are concerned.

From the perspective of Orthodox Judaism, they are worse than heretics.

Assessment:

Angels and angel stories pre-date the oldest Hebrew texts of the Bible.  The Sumerians, who pre-date ancient Egyptian society, was the most ancient civilization to depict winged humans in their carvings and statues.

The Sumerians tell the oldest known angel stories of “messengers of the gods” who would intervene between the “gods” and men.  Angel stories permeate most ancient primitive cultures.  Winged, angelic-like beings can be found within most all of their artwork and lore.

There is a reason why most Gentile cultures also have some form of angelic tradition – they predate Christians and Jews – angels were the first sentient creation of God.

The fact that all cultures have some form of angelic tradition doesn’t cast doubt on the Bible – it enhances the Bible’s credibility.  Only the Bible explains where they came from and who they are.

Angels are as real as we are.  Angels were interacting with man long before the Bible explained who they were.  If angels were an invention of Jews or Christians, then there would be no Gentile angelic tradition.

There are stories of angels in the ancient literature of Babylon, Persia, Greece, as well as references to angel-like spirit-beings within Eastern mystical religions like Buddhism and Hinduism.

Historically speaking, angels exist independently from Christianity or Judaism.  Every major religion has its own, unique form of angelic being.  What makes them unique, however, is the role they play — all religions tend to describe them the same way.

  1. They are more or less universally described as winged creatures of indeterminate sex and of indescribable beauty.
  2. They are capable of appearing both as a spirit and in corporeal form.
  3. Depending on the religious tradition, they range from being the gentle and benign to that of malignant creatures possessing great powers.

The Bible tasks angels with serving mankind in this life, and then tasks mankind with judging angels in the next:

“Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of My Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 18:10)

“Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?” (1st Corinthians 6:3)

The Bible says that fallen mankind serves a secondary purpose in the instruction of angels;

“Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us.” (Hebrews 12:1)

“Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into. ” (1st Peter 1:12)

In some religious traditions, angels are viewed as gods in their own right — the Romans and Greeks had a pantheon of lesser gods; Mercury, (or Hermes) is depicted by the Greeks as Romans as the ‘winged messenger’ of Jupiter (or Zeus).

But where angels have really hit their stride is within the New Age. People are invited to get in touch with their ‘inner angel’ or their ‘angelic spirit guide’.  Some teach we are all angels-in-waiting and that after we die, we become angels.

One hears that all the time, particularly from parents grieving the loss of a child; “She’s God’s little angel, now.”

Nope.  Angels are messengers and warriors, but they aren’t former people.  People don’t become angels.  People are either Gentiles or Christians or Jews, but they never become angels.

Almost all religious traditions have some form of angel.  They almost all describe the same being.  But the Bible is unique in that it explains who and what angels are.

The Bible demonstrates how the angels harmonize with the rest of creation.  Angels serve as messengers of God.  Our relationship with angels is symbiotic and in harmony with creation.

This tells us three things right off the bat.

  1. Angels are real.
  2. Angels are not religious.
  3. The Bible is true.

So angels are unique.  They are what they are and they can’t be anything else because that is the way that God made them.

And that is the one thing that angels have in common with Christians.

*My parents have ran off to celebrate their anniversary this weekend, some place so secluded that they have no internet.  Pray for rest and lots of fun for them.  Please enjoy this Omega Letter from last September. -Kari