It is as that old saying goes…

 

The wicked never rest.

 

 

 

Awaken from your slumber, open your eyes to the abominations around you each day…

In the photograph above those are not fathers with their daughters going to a fancy party somewhere. They are not older brothers taking their little sisters to their first dance, or some holiday affair. No, in the above photograph what you see is a small segment of the 450 “grooms” escorting their soon to be brides – all under the age of 10 – to a massive wedding ceremony in Gaza.

 

 

 

October  7, 2011

Making Afghanistan Safe for Sharia – Child Brides Division

Andrew G. Bostom

American Thinker

An 11 year old “bride” in Yemen

 

 

As reported by the London Evening Standard, (hat tip Religion of Peace) to its own self-described “shock” (despite the commonality of the practice — i.e., notwithstanding the civil law against child brides, more than half of all Afghan girls are married before they reach age fifteen),  a decade after British troops entered this chronically war-torn Muslim backwater, the publication (emphasis added):

… has uncovered shocking evidence of an eight-year-old girl who was married off to a policeman for cash. She was sold to the officer, in his twenties, in clear breach of laws introduced two years ago to protect women. She was then the subject of a remarkable battle that symbolises the plight of girls in Afghanistan. Her story vividly highlights the failure to bring about social reforms in the stricken nation, despite the long presence of British forces. It is revealed ahead of tomorrow’s 10th anniversary of the first air strikes on Afghanistan and is a grim reminder of how once-high hopes for democracy, modern justice and social progress there have been dashed.

The child was sold to a member of the Afghan border police, a state employee, within the past year by her father in the southern Helmand district of Garmsir. A price was agreed with the father and the marriage was duly solemnized in a ceremony with a mullah. This was against Afghan state law on marriage but the ceremony gave legitimacy and status in the eyes of the communities and the families.

That’s because Muhammad married Aisha at age 6 or 7 (which is consistent with her playing with dolls during the “marriage”) and “consummated” the marriage when she was nine, according to Islam’s two most trusted and “canonical” hadith collections.  The practice thus becoming “sacralized” as per Islam’s totalitarian, cloacal system of religio-political “law,” the sharia.

Here is the hard Islamic evidence of Muhammad’s “sacralized” behavior towards Aisha (emphasis added):

Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3311: Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88: Narrated Ursa: “The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with ‘Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

 

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151: Narrated Aisha: “I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me.” (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for ‘Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, wo had not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)

 

Sahih Muslim, Book 031, Number 5981: Aisha reported that she used to play with dolls in the presence of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and when her playmates came to her they left (the house) because they felt shy of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), whereas Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent them to her[.]

 

The awful plight of this 8-year-old Afghan child was then compounded by an almost fittingly tragic and bizarre (to Westerners, or anyone of modern sensibilities) “custody battle” — resolved, of course, with the appropriate Islamic remedy, imposed by Muslim arbiters.  Robert Fox, defense correspondent for London Evening Standard provides these further unsettling details (emphasis added):

 

It was agreed in the deal that the groom would not have sex with the bride until she had passed puberty. Under current law, the legal lower age for marriage is 16.

After a few months, the father returned to the bridegroom’s family to complain. In breach of the contract, the husband had attempted sex with the child bride.

This was referred, with the help of international advisers and counselors, to the legal authorities.

The public prosecutor and the Haquq, the local arbitrator and a key figure in community justice in Afghanistan, were requested to consider a prosecution against the abusive husband.

“The child was taken into custody,” said my source, a governance adviser from the international community. ”

“She was examined by a US Marine doctor and was found to have been interfered with.” [Note: A rather transparent euphemism for sexual abuse] At this point, the authorities decided this was a matter not for the law of Afghanistan but community and tribal custom.

Unsurprisingly (again, emphasis added):

 

The village elders decided that the husband had breached the agreement and so should pay the bigger bride price demanded by the father. They also ruled the child should return to her husband, whatever the risk to her health, happiness and even life.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

After a 13 year old girl died agonisingly in childbirth last week, more Islamic depravity in Yemen – the world’s worst country in which to be female:

An 11-year-old Yemeni girl who was was married to a man in country’s Hajja province was hospitalized today with genital injuries, said a human rights group in Sanaa.

It was the second incident involving a child bride in the last week. A 13-year-old girl died after being sexually assaulted by her adult husband. Both girls were married in the country’s rural Hajja province.

The 11-year-old girl was married last year only under the condition that the adult husband would wait until she reached puberty to consummate the marriage. He did not wait, nor do many of the men who marry young brides, says Amal Basha, director of the Arabic Sisters Forum.

An estimated 50 percent of women in Yemen are married before age 18, some as young as 8. Less than a week ago the Sana’a-based human rights group reported the death of a 13-year-old bride in the same rural area. The Associated Press reported the girl was allegedly raped, and that her 23-year-old husband is now in police custody.

“She looked like she was butchered,” said the girl’s mother, Nijma Ahmed. The AP also cited police a report saying the husband forced himself on his young bride, feeling under pressure to prove his manhood.

An average of eight women die each day in Yemen due to child marriage, many of them in childbirth, according to the Arabic Sisters Forum. The group runs a hotline for victims of domestic violence and has been lobbying in support of a minimum marriage age now under consideration by the Yemeni parliament.

Pushing against the proposed law is the strong hand of Islamic conservatives in Yemen. Clerics have declared women like Amal Basha apostates from Islam for opposing child marriage, which they see as divinely ordained. The government, she says, is intimidated by the religious and tribal customs.

“They say this is Islamic.. they declared jihad against… the UN treaty on women’s rights,” she said.

“They say my campaign is a Western agenda, that it will lead to sex out of wedlock and prostitution,” Basha said.

International Pressure to Protect Child Brides

International groups like UNICEF and Oxfam have also lobbied for the rights of child brides, but tread carefully around what has become a explosive political issue.

“It’s a deeply embedded social habit,” said Naseem Rehman, a UNICEF spokesman told ABC News last year from in Sana’a. “For every one child marriage we can stop there are five more.”

When ‘they say this was Islamic’, ‘they’ aren’t kidding. Underage sex and the taking of child brides is not only culturally endemic in Muslim societies, it is sanctioned by Islam. Islam’s prophet, Mohammed, married his child bride, Aisha bint Abu Bakr, when she was only six years old – and consummated the marriage when she was nine; thereby setting the example for pious Muslims everywhere.


Of course we’re not saying that every Muslim indulges in this disgusting and abhorrent practice – but it is widespread in Islamic states.

 

As we mentioned earlier, Yemen was declared by the World Economic Forum last year to be the worst place on the planet to be a girl or a woman. But
it’s worth taking a closer, contextual look at the table below, where we’ve extracted data from the WEF report detailing the worst 20 places on the planet in which to be female – and seeing whether you, too, detect a pattern
(click to enlarge):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Great Palestinian Authority Lie

 

 

 

 

US Muslim Sues Security Agency Alleging ‘Bias’

 

With friends like these...

 

More and victimhood Lawfare in the US, no doubt backed up by CAIR:

 

A former employee is suing one of the government’s most secretive security agencies, alleging he lost his security clearance because his wife attended an Islamic school and worked for a Muslim charity.

Mahmoud Hegab filed the discrimination lawsuit this week in federal court in Virginia against the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency at Fort Belvoir.

The Alexandria resident worked at NGA as a budget analyst with a top-secret security clearance. But his clearance was revoked in November after he got married. NGA officials told him they were concerned about his wife’s schooling at the Islamic Saudi Academy, a private school in northern Virginia.

Officials also cited her employment with an Islamic relief agency as a reason for revoking the clearance.

NGA officials did not respond to an email seeking comment.

Saudi Arabia is the cash machine for world Islamic terror. It not only funds terror directly by bankrolling groups such as al-Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Taliban, but also through the financing of hard-line mosques and ‘Islamic Cultural Centres’ in the West.

Regular readers will also be fully aware as to what is taught in overseas-based Saudi-backed schools; and the tendency for a large number of Muslim charities to be
involved in financing the Jihad.

Frankly, we’d have been surprised if the NGA hadn’t removed his clearance after they discovered this information.

Make no mistake – despite the West’s addiction to their oil and the picture often painted by the media of them as ‘our friends in the Middle East’ – Saudi Arabia is a de-facto enemy of the state to all developed, secular nations – actively working against our interests and spreading the Wahhabi Muslim philosophy of Jihad, Sharia and Jew-Hatred.

We’d have been more surprised if he hadn’t had his clearance revoked after this discovery.

Read the full story from AP via ABC

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

October  7, 2011

IMF advisor: ‘In The Absence Of A Credible Plan We Will Have A Global

Financial Meltdown In Two To Three Weeks’

Rick Moran
American Thinker

If this statement had come from some hedge fund flunkie or cable business news jock, it could safely be dismissed as an attempt to get attention and ratings.

Instead, it comes from bail out expert Robert Shapiro who works as an advisor to the International Monetary Fund. Shapiro, according to Business Insider, is no financial gadfly:

Aside from being an advisor to the IMF, Shapiro is the co-founder and chairman of Sonecon, LLC, and was formerly the U.S. Undersecretary of Commerce. He has a Ph.D. from Harvard, among other degrees, oversaw the Census Bureau, and has been a Fellow at Harvard, Brookings, and the National Bureau of Economic Research.

If you’ve been reading a lot of business news from Europe lately, you have probably learned to read between the lines of what officials the European Central Bank, principles in government, and other experts have been hinting at. And that is, we are heading for a major league meltdown unless the euro states can come up with a plan to settle the Greek default situation, recapitalize big banks who are hanging by a thread at this point, and find a way to refinance the debt of Italy, and Spain.

Zero Hedge blog:

A week after the BBC exploded Alessio Rastani to the stage, it has just done it all over again. In an interview with IMF advisor Robert Shapiro, the bailout expert has pretty much said what, once again, is on everyone’s mind: “If they can not address [the financial crisis] in a credible way I believe within perhaps 2 to 3 weeks we will have a meltdown in sovereign debt which will produce a meltdown across the European banking system. We are not just talking about a relatively small Belgian bank, we are talking about the largest banks in the world, the largest banks in Germany, the largest banks in France, that will spread to the United Kingdom, it will spread everywhere because the global financial system is so interconnected. All those banks are counterparties to every significant bank in the United States, and in Britain, and in Japan, and around the world. This would be a crisis that would be in my view more serrious than the crisis in 2008…. What we don’t know the state of credit default swaps held by banks against sovereign debt and against European banks, nor do we know the state of CDS held by British banks, nor are we certain of how certain the exposure of British banks is to the Ireland sovereign debt problems.”

But no, Morgan Stanley does, or so they swear an unlimited number of times each day. And they say not to worry about anything because, you see, it is not like they have any upside in telling anyone the truth. Which is why for everyone hung up on the latest rumor of a plan about a plan about a plan spread by a newspaper whose very viability is tied in with that of the banks that pay for its advertising revenue, we have one thing to ask: “show us the actual plan please.” Because it is easy to say “recapitalize” this, and “bad bank” that. In practice, it is next to impossible. So yes, ladies and gentlemen, enjoy this brief relief rally driven by the fact that China is offline for the week and that the persistent source of overnight selling on Chinese “hard/crash landing” concerns has been gone simply due to an extended national holiday. Well, that holiday is coming to an end.

Bottom line: Governments are scared. A whiff of panic is seeping into markets which is preventing banks from lending to each other — exactly what happened after the Lehman Brothers fall in the US in 2008. The ECB has taken to giving out short term loans to the big banks so that they can stay afloat because they are scared to carry on the normal inter-bank lending due to uncertainty about whether those loans would ever be paid back. This is exactly what the Fed did in 2008.

The Washington Post explains that there is now a high stakes game of chicken going on between the European Central Bank and member nations:

Although everyone acknowledges it would be preferable for democratically elected leaders to make the moves toward economic unity that are the most promising solution for the crisis, it would be much more politically convenient for politicians if the unelected technocrats at the ECB would take those steps and become the channel through which Europe’s losses are realized.

Somebody is going to have to blink.

The ECB’s efforts to hold the line were evident Thursday as it declined to cut interest rates to try to address a weakening European economy. By contrast, the Bank of England expanded a program of buying bonds to try to push money into the British economy, a move known as quantitative easing. The bank on Thursday announced 75 billion pounds in new purchases. (Two weeks ago the Federal Reserve also eased monetary policy in the United States, further illustrating the deep concern within the U.S. and European central banks about the economy.)

“The economic outlook remains subject to particularly high uncertainty and intensified downside risks,” ECB President Jean-Claude Trichet said Thursday, raising the possibility that the ECB will ease monetary policy sometime in the near future.

My colleague at PJ Media, David Goldman (aka Spengler) thinks that any meltdown in Europe won’t affect us in America that much:

That is what keeps the market in a state of near-panic. There is no way to align the players for a solution except by pushing the situation to, and perhaps over, the brink. To put the Italian (let alone the Greek) political class into receivership, it may require actual, national receivership: banks shut their doors, pension checks aren’t mailed, oil refiners close, tankers are turned back at the ports for lack of cash. I do not think any such thing will occur. Nor do I think that an Italian national bankruptcy will mean much for the world economy.

Remember that two thirds of the world’s population (China, India, peripheral Asia, Latin America) is still enjoying strong economic growth. The U.S. economy is weak but not crashing. Europe is a big chunk of the world’s GDP, and it is crashing, but its importance is diminishing by the year. It’s not the end of the world; it’s just the end of the Europeans.

I sincerely hope he’s right. Greece will not be able to pay its government workers in 2 weeks and will need another slice of the bail out money already agreed to. To get it, they have to pass inspection from the IMF and their euro creditors. The chances of Greece not getting that money, regardless of their adherence to the bail out plan, are slim and none so it would appear that we are probably safe – for the moment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

October  7, 2011

How Obama Got Around Congress Withholding $200 M In Aid To The

‘Palestinians’

Rob Miller
American Thinker

 

A story in the UK Independent says that the US Congress showed its displeasure with the ‘Palestinians’ going unilaterally to the UN by withholding $200 million in aid that was supposed to be disbursed to Mahmoud Abbas’ little fiefdom by the end of this fiscal year, which ended October 1st.

Being part of the British press and sharing their well known attitude towards Israel, the article is sympathetic to Abbas, referring to him as being ‘punished’ and inferring that the US Congress is under the thumb of those Evil Zionists, rather than being upset with the ‘Palestinians’ for allying with Hamas or for abrogating their agreements under two treaties the US is signatory to, the Road Map and The Oslo Accords.

However, there are indications that this was a set up and if my source is correct, both the Obama Administration and the ‘Palestinians’ were privy to it.

One of my notorious Little Birdies works directly in the ‘Palestinian Authority’ and we’ve been correspondents for some time, sort of frenemies, if you get my meaning.

My source had a good laugh at Congresses’ action. According to this person, the Obama Administration was aware for some time that the final $200 million might be withheld by Congress and informed the ‘Palestinians’ in advance. The Obama Administration promised the ‘Palestinians’ that they would do their best to head this off, but when they couldn’t, an arrangement was made with the Saudis to make up the missing $200 million in advance.

That rang a bell…and showed me that as usual, my source was almost certainly correct.

A scant ten days ago, the Saudis gifted Mahmoud Abbas and the ‘Palestinians’ with the exact sum the US Congress was withholding from them…$200 million.

My source didn’t speculate, but knowing how these things work it’s almost guaranteed that the Saudis either received the money from the Obama Administration directly to give to the ‘Palestinians’ or more likely, that the Saudis supplied the cash in exchange for an American quid pro quo somewhere else down the line.

President Obama is going to see to it that the ‘Palestinians’ receive their jizya no matter what..and a little thing like Congress certainly isn’t going to stop him if he can help it.

 


Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His work has appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Andrew Breitbart’s Big Peace and other publications.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

October  8, 2011

Marxism versus the Middle Class

By Jeremy Meister

American Thinker

 

Wreckless driving is partly defined as going twice the posted speed limit.  At first blush, this might not sound so bad — 150 mph on the interstate is a hard limit to break.  Most people don’t go that fast.  With the law, however, it’s not the upper end one should look at, but the lower side.  Doing 25 mph in a 10 mph school zone is a very easy mistake to make.

 

It’s the same way with taxes.  Obama’s out there waving around one of the richest men in the world (Warren Buffet) in his attempt to sell average Americans on his “millionaire’s tax.”  So now all intellectual talking heads are discussing the goodness and virtue of making those who make seven figures pay more.

 

But the real focus should be how it is going to affect those at the bottom.  Obama and his surrogates have been floating the idea of 250K or 200K as the possible cutoff.  Now, it should be pointed out that there is nothing stopping them from making the cutoff as low as 150K or 100K — we’re still in the idea phase, after all.

 

Let’s assume that the threshold is 200K and that, at that point, the government takes 50%.  Up to this point, the government takes 35%.  This would mean that someone who makes 200K is actually bringing home 100K.  And someone making 199K is bringing home 129,350K a year.  In other words, someone would have to make 260K a year to bring home the same amount as someone making 199K.  This would create a bubble in the system where individuals would be doing more work for less pay.

 

The bottom line is that the middle class will be hurt by this tax scheme more than any other group will.  The lower class won’t be hammered by these rates.  The upper class has armies of accountants to protect their assets.  (This is one of the aggravating things about Warren Buffet, Steve King, and Doug Edwards — if they really wanted to pay more in taxes, they could fire their accountants and fill their taxes out themselves.)

 

And this is how Marx wanted it.

 

Karl Marx codified a collective society.  He dubbed it “Communism.”  Socialism would be a transition phase, where the government slowly takes property from the private sector “for the common good.”

 

Marx’s idea has often been called a “classless society,” but this characterization constitutes one of the biggest myths in modern history.  What Marx wanted was a return to the “natural order” — a medieval society where there is a ruling upper class that owns all the property and makes all the decisions while the lower peasant class does all the menial labor.

 

Guess which class Buffet, Obama, King, and Edwards are going to be in and which class the rest of us will be pushed into.

 

This is why you’ll never meet a follower of Communism.  It’s a movement comprising only leaders.  It’s also why some of Communism’s biggest champions are wealthy and upper-class — they don’t stand to lose anything.  This is also why libs who walk around complaining about the “plutocracy” of our system — of a tiny handful of millionaires making the decisions in smoky backrooms — see no irony if that group is pushing a Marxist utopia.

 

The problem is the middle class.  There is no place in the neo-medieval society for such people — so enter the “progressive” tax code.  Obama’s new tax ideas will do little change the taxes of his supporters at the top or the bottom.  It’s highly likely that Buffet’s accountants will help draft any such legislation (and they will put in clauses to protect their wealthy clients).

 

But the middle class will have no such safeguards.  They can’t afford these accountants.  They can’t buy the political clout to protect themselves from the system.  And they will be crushed by this tax, which will suck ambition and ingenuity out of the most productive among us.

 

Unfortunately, the Marxists have been spoon-feeding the public these ideas for decades.  They have populated our schools and the media.

 

The efforts are paying off.  The biggest, nastiest arguments over the tax code are middle-class vs. middle-class.  Laying out an argument such as above is hard to follow and hard to sum up in a nice ten- to thirty-second sound bite.  It requires some thought and consideration.  It’s harder to understand than are the vapid buzzwords and feel-good rhetoric of the Marxists.

 

Marxism’s bad history will also be ignored.  Why is it that despite fifty years of gentle Communist guidance, most people in Cuba dwell in horrid conditions?  Why is it that after ten years of feel-good fanfare and hype, there is still an impoverished population in Venezuela?  Hollywood types love to tell us everything is great in these nations.  Everything probably does look great from the five-star hotels in ritzy tourist areas or from the sections where the government-appointed tour guide decides to escort such people.

 

The beauty of the American system is that there is mobility among the financial classes.  A rich person in the United States can go broke.  A beggar can also work his way up the ladder.  The determining factor to one’s success is not set by birth.  This is the “American Dream”: to start with a company in the mail room and, after years of loyal service, become a vice president.  This is what used to draw so many immigrants to our shores.  In the “old country,” peasants were peasants, and nobles were nobles.  One can still see these today in controversies such as Dominique Strauss-Kahn, where the French were outraged that a member of the ruling elite could be held to peasant laws.

 

What the left in this nation is now doing is trying to sever the link between the classes and return us to the “good old days” when everyone knew his or her proper place.  This is why the Marxists hate the Tea Party — it comprises uppity peasants.  Without class mobility, the Warren Buffetts and Nancy Pelosis of the world never have to fear being questioned or criticized.  With a middle class, there is always a danger of some upstart causing trouble.  And that’s why Marxists love illegal immigration from Latin America — it’s a whole group of people who already know their place.

 

Marx was at least correct when he said that those of wealth and privilege would do anything to keep it.  And that’s what’s going on right now.

 

Jeremy Meister works in talk radio in the Midwest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Christian Post > Opinion|Fri, Oct. 07 2011 11:15 AM EDT

TV in a Culture of Sloth

By Chuck Colson | Christian Post Guest Columnist

May I ask you a question? Why do you watch that junk they put on television?colson

 

I don’t mean to imply that all television shows are junk. And I think that a certain amount of entertainment is good for us. But the deluge of TV trash is astounding. To increase audience share, TV happily produces increasingly provocative content and well-intentioned people – including well-intentioned Christians – tune in.

“Dancing with the Stars” for example, has been a success in part because of the dancers. Former House Majority Leader Tom Delay danced. Professional athletes, journalists, actors, and singers have also danced gathering enthusiastic audiences for thirteen seasons.

But by nature, entertainment is governed by the law of diminishing returns. If the stunt rider jumps his motorcycle over one school bus today and we all cheer, tomorrow he’ll have to jump over two school buses to even get our attention.

And “Dancing with the Stars” is no different. Its producers need to take the audience to the next level. So, as I mention today on my “Two-Minute Warning,” which I urge you to watch at ColsonCenter.org, this season the show features Chaz Bono, the transgendered child of Sonny and Cher. Why? Merely to draw the curious – like the old-fashioned side-shows at carnivals.

But many of us will watch “Dancing with the Stars” and other such drivel. After all, we’ll tell ourselves, we just need a little distraction.

 

Media critic and Columbia University professor Todd Gitlin in his book Media Unlimited looks at our need for distraction. “Distraction is one of those terms,” he wrote, “…that requires an object to make sense. The question is, distraction from what? Morality? God? Pain? Subjugation? Changing the world? More than one of the above? …Your answer to the question Distraction from what? reveals what you value.”

It’s true that life today is complicated, exhausting, and often heartbreaking. But ducking life through distractions like hours of mind-numbing and morally questionable TV is not the solution.

We need to deal with the root problem, which is the insidious sin of sloth. We shrug our shoulders and mindlessly say “whatever.” Caring about nothing, we slide through life. Our culture of distractions is the market’s response to a culture of couch potatoes.

Sloth causes us to ignore the opportunities God gives us for growth, service, and sacrifice – and even true rest. Rather than interact with spouse or kids, we watch “The Biggest Loser” or “Monday Night Football.”

Rather than making time for reading and prayer, we see what’s happening on Facebook. Instead of helping with the dishes, we check our email. After all, what could be more important than email? Instead of interactions we choose distractions.

Which brings me back to my opening question: Why do you watch that junk they put on television? Is it really just an innocent distraction or is it a convenient way to duck out of the demands of life, including God’s call upon you for growth, service, and sacrifice, for loving Him and caring about others?

Enough honest answers to that question could change the way we approach our family, our faith, and our culture. And who knows, it could change the culture itself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kincaid: Van Jones Media Mouthpiece Gets Russian Cash

By Cliff Kincaid October 7, 2011 6:20 am

 

 

Progressive TV and radio star Thom Hartmann took time off from covering Van Jones and his “Rebuild the Dream” movement on Wednesday to briefly talk to this columnist about his relationship with the Vladimir Putin regime of Russia. The conversation quickly went sour when Hartmann objected to questions about how much he is being paid by Moscow. He grabbed my video camera, covering the lens briefly in the process, and stomped away, objecting to “gotcha” questions.

The entire spectacle was captured on camera and posted on YouTube.

During another embarrassing incident, Van Jones refused to sign a copy of his Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM) manifesto when asked to autograph it. “No thank you,” he sternly said before asking, “Who are you?,” looking at my name badge, and walking away to the next adoring crowd of Van Jones groupies. Jones, a “former” communist, is the new face of the progressive movement that is backing the “Occupation Wall Street” protests and is trying to guarantee President Obama a second term. He was fired as Obama’s “green jobs czar” when the truth about his extremist background and statements started to emerge in reports originally by blogger Trevor Loudon and then Glenn Beck on Fox News.

While Jones made remarks in his own conference speech about losing his White House job, he also mocked Beck, noting that he had lost his program on the Fox News Channel. Progressives demanded Beck’s ouster after he began exposing billionaire hedge fund operator George Soros, a major funder of the liberal-left.

Soros, who operates an off-shore hedge fund with mysterious sources of cash, has just failed in his effort to have the European Court of Human Rights lift his conviction in an insider trading case in France.

The STORM document is about the history of a communist group that Jones led and whose members traveled to Cuba. He has, however, tried to leave his communist past behind as he reinvents himself as an American patriot trying to “rebuild the American dream.” At almost every stage of his career, he has been supported by money from Soros.

During an extended interview, Joelle Fishman of the Communist Party USA talked about Jones’s leadership in this new phase of the progressive movement and how the conference welcomed socialists and communists. She said the Communist Party, which usually fields a presidential candidate, will not run anyone against Obama in 2012. Communist literature was openly displayed at the conference and the Democratic Socialists of America, a group which backed Obama’s political career from the start, had an information table.

Judith LeBlanc, who runs a group called Peace Action and is one of the vice-chairs of the Communist Party, was introduced on stage as one of Van Jones’s “partners” in the “rebuild the American dream” movement.

Hartmann, a leader of Progressive Democrats of America, has a show distributed nationwide by Russia Today (RT) television and Free Speech TV. He apparently didn’t grasp the irony of trying to silence a recording device while touting the virtues of the First Amendment.

Hartmann spoke to me after participating in a “Taking Back the Media” panel discussion during the Take Back the American Dream Conference sponsored by the Campaign for America’s Future. Hartmann was hailed in an official press release as a key part of Free Speech TV’s exclusive live coverage of the conference, which was held in Washington, D.C. October 3-5. An affiliate of the Campaign for America’s Future, the Institute for America’s Future, is heavily subsidized by Soros.

The head of Free Speech TV is Don Rojas, former press secretary to communist Maurice Bishop, the leader of the Caribbean island of Grenada before President Reagan ordered its liberation by American troops in 1983.

Rojas, in a taped interview, spoke fondly of the days when he worked for Grenada’s revolutionary government, even signing a copy of an address Bishop had made to the sixth summit of the non-aligned movement in Havana, Cuba, in 1979. Rojas said he helped to write the speech and was in Havana at the time. He signed it, “Forward Ever, Backward Never,” an inspirational quotation from Bishop which was supposed to capture the essence of the revolutionary process.

Rojas was captured, arrested, and then deported from Grenada by U.S. forces. Today, however, his channel is called the “anti-Fox” network and claims carriage on 200 cable affiliates, Dish Network and DirecTV, reaching 35 million homes. Free Speech TV has been promoting the “Occupation of Wall Street” protests and also distributes Al-Jazeera. Rojas says he has applied for cash from the Soros-funded Open Society Institute (OSI). “We are knocking on the OSI’s door as we speak,” he said.

In the speech, Bishop had talked about the “revolutionary process” which “has seen the emergence of successful and progressive revolutions in countries like Angola, Mozambique, Guinea-Bissau, Ethiopia, Vietnam, Laos, and Kampuchea and, most recently Nicaragua and Iran, has had a vital impact on the balance of forces in today’s world.”

Kampuchea, the communist word for the country of Cambodia, saw a takeover by the communist Khmer Rouge, after America’s defeat in Vietnam, that took the lives of about two million people in a bloody genocide. Iran was taken over by radical Islamists, who remain in charge and are working to obtain nuclear weapons in order to destroy the state of Israel and threaten the U.S.

“Long live the Cuban revolution!” was one of the concluding phrases in the Bishop speech.

While Rojas talked openly about his service to Bishop and Castro, AFL-CIO official Karen Nussbaum was close-mouthed in regard to her trip to Cuba in 1970 as a member of the Venceremos Brigades to the communist-controlled island. “No,” she curtly replied, when asked to talk about a trip that reportedly included a meeting with Castro himself. Asked why she wouldn’t talk about it, she said it was “not relevant.” Nussbaum was on a panel discussing feminism that was organized by the Rockefeller Fund.

This was the second time I had tried to talk to Nussbaum. She appeared at a previous Campaign for America’s Future conference and turned and walked away when I raised similar questions.  This time she had a press representative intervene to say that he would try to get answers to my questions. I am not holding my breath.

A published report about Nussbaum’s trip to Cuba said she “was impressed with Castro and with Cuban socialism.” In an oral history of her days as a young radical, Nussbaum talked about the large number of Weathermen in the brigades to Cuba. The Weathermen became a terrorist group, the Weather Underground, after being brainwashed and trained in guerrilla warfare in Cuba by Castro’s intelligence operatives.

Nussbaum heads the AFL-CIO’s three-million-strong Working America affiliate. Her boss, AFL-CIO chief Richard Trumka, was a featured speaker at the Take Back the American Dream Conference and referred to the protests on Wall Street, saying that “It’s our time” and calling Van Jones “my friend.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Obama defends loan to Solyndra, head of loan program resigns

By Matthew Daly October 7, 2011 6:26 am

WASHINGTON (AP) – President Barack Obama said Thursday the U.S. must not surrender development of clean energy to China and other countries, despite the spectacular failure of a solar-panel manufacturer that filed for bankruptcy after taking a half-billion dollar government loan.

Obama said the government should continue to give loan guarantees to help green energy companies compete with other countries that spend billions to subsidize solar panels and other renewable energy manufacturing. Solyndra, the California company that collapsed last month, blamed its demise partly on Chinese imports.

Fighting back against GOP criticism of a $528 million loan to Solyndra, Obama said he strongly disagreed with a Republican congressman who said the U.S. “can’t compete with China” to make solar panels or wind turbines.

“Well, you know what? I don’t buy that,’ Obama said at a White House news conference. “I’m not going to surrender to other countries technological leads that could end up determining whether or not we’re building a strong middle class in this country. And so … we’re going to have to keep on pushing hard to make sure that manufacturing’s located here, new businesses are located here and new technologies are developed here.”

Hours after Obama’s upbeat remarks, the head of the Energy Department’s embattled clean energy loan program announced he is leaving in what officials called a planned departure.

Jonathan Silver, who has headed the loan program since November 2009, said he is leaving to join a nonpartisan think tank.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu said in a statement that Silver informed him in July he was leaving, after it became clear Congress was not likely to extend a key section of the loan program that offered guarantees to renewable energy companies. The program, funded under the 2009 economic stimulus law, expired on Friday.

Chu called Silver an outstanding leader who had “demonstrated considerable success” in helping U.S. companies compete in the global clean energy market.

But Republicans called Silver the first casualty of the Solyndra debacle.

“Mr. Silver’s resignation does not solve the problem,” said Reps. Fred Upton and Cliff Stearns. “We are in the midst of the Solyndra investigation and just days removed from Mr. Silver’s mad rush to finalize the last $4.7 billion in loans before the statutory deadline” on Friday.

Upton, of Michigan, chairs the Energy and Commerce Committee while Stearns, of Florida, leads a subcommittee on oversight and investigations.

Obama acknowledged that the loan program carries risk, and said officials always knew some companies were not going to succeed. But he said the process used to award a loan to failed solar panel maker Solyndra LLC was straight-forward and based on the merits. Solyndra declared bankruptcy last month and laid off its 1,100 workers.

Despite its collapse, Obama said the loan guarantee program has been successful and has created jobs, adding that members of both parties have supported such deals in the past.

“The nature of these programs are going to be ones in which, you know, for every success there may be one that does not work out as well,” he said.

Obama singled out Stearns at the White House news conference. Stearns said in an NPR interview this week that he doesn’t like the idea of putting taxpayers on the line for solar panels or other renewable energy.

“We can’t compete with China to make solar panels and wind turbines,” Stearns said.

Obama called that approach defeatist.

“Look, I have confidence in American businesses, in American technology, in American scientists and entrepreneurs being able to win that competition,” he said. “We are not going to be duplicating the kind of system that they have in China where they are basically state-run banks giving money to state-run companies and ignoring losses.”

Still, he said the U.S. government can play an important role to make sure U.S. companies “can at least have a fighting shot.”

Obama’s comments represent his strongest defense yet as his administration faces increasing criticism of the Solyndra loan and the clean-energy loan program, which has awarded nearly $36 billion in loan guarantees since 2009, including 28 loans worth more than $16 billion under a stimulus-law program for renewable energy.

Much of the spending has come in recent weeks, including more than $6 billion last week for seven separate projects.

The heightened pace of the loans has led Stearns and other Republicans to question whether the administration, in its haste to award loans may have stumbled into another Solyndra-like debacle. Republicans have increasingly directed their criticism toward Chu, who approved the Solyndra loan and a restructuring last year that resulted in private investors moving ahead of taxpayers for repayment in case of a default. One of the investors was a major Obama fundraiser.

Administration officials have defended the loan restructuring, saying that without an infusion of cash earlier this year, Solyndra would have faced bankruptcy months earlier.

Obama’s defense of the loan program echoes remarks made by Chu in a weekend speech in which he blasted those who “are ready to wave the white flag and declare defeat.”

Chu said the United States faces a choice: to sit on the sidelines or try to win the “clean energy race” with China, Germany and other countries.

Obama said the competition is fierce, “and it’s going to be an uphill climb for some,” especially in a down economy.

But he said that was the purpose of the loan program Congress created in 2005: “to take bets on these areas where we need to make sure that we’re maintaining our lead.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Marie Antoinette’s World Tour

By Kay Daly October 6, 2011 10:28 am

 

 

Would you like to take a half million dollar vacation?  Michelle Obama did, with your tax dollars.  And that was just for the flights for her African vacation this summer.  She spent a cool thousand bucks on snacks for the plane ride over.  Must have been macadamia nuts or cashews — save the pretzels and peanuts for the serfs.

To the great embarrassment of the White House, the Marie Antoinette of Pennsylvania Avenue decided that her darling daughters needed a grand safari tour of the sweeping plains of Africa.  So she tasked a few staffers to throw a few speeches on a schedule, got Nelson Mandela on the phone for good measure for a meeting, called it a “Good Will Tour” and didn’t give it another thought.

Of course, there was a great deal of thought put into how her children were to travel.  For some unknown reason, Obama’s daughter’s were listed as “Senior Staff.”    Someone please explain that one to me.

It should be noted that this isn’t the First Lady’s first trip to the rodeo, or anywhere else, according to Judicial Watch.  Thanks to their hard work, and Freedom of Information Act filings they have tirelessly filed, it would appear that she really likes to travel.  A lot.  In style.   And it has come with a rather large price tag:

This follows in the wake of  claims this August from sources inside the White House itself that the First Lady may have spent “$10 million of taxpayers’ money on vacations alone in the past year.” Without all the figures available, it is impossible to establish the total cost to the public purse of Michelle Obama’s 42 days of holiday during that period, which included her trip to Spain last year (though not the Obamas’ recent sojourn in Martha’s Vineyard).

This reminds me of the kid who gets his first real paycheck and instead of paying the bills or the rent (or heaven forbid, saving a dime or two), plunks down every dime on a  big screen television or a new stereo system, claiming that he is entitled to it for his hard work for the first two weeks of his “career.”  Complete impracticality is the sign of selfish impulsiveness.   You see it in kids as described and in the newly wealthy.

Mrs. Obama is actually the worst sort of noveau riche — the First Lady is nouveau riche with someone else’s money.   Ours.

So tell me again, Mrs. Obama, about how you shop at Target in your Old Navy clothes with your assistant in tow behind you?  And meanwhile, back on Sesame Street, a new muppet named Lily is poor and hungry and probably wishing she could go to Africa on a safari or even to DisneyWorld to the Animal Kingdom to experience the Safari ride  or even to a restaurant for a meal.  But Lily can’t do any of that because her muppet Mommy and muppet Daddy are unemployed in ObamaLand…..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Limbaugh: Obama’s Behavior Is Getting Worse

By David Limbaugh October 7, 2011 6:25 am

 

 

Obama’s Thursday news conference was a sober reminder of the nature of the man in the Oval Office. I infer that even many of his supporters in the liberal media are finally catching on to the magnitude of his personality disorders.

How could a man in his important position continue to act so childishly, accepting no responsibility for his policies and behavior and demonizing everyone who dares to disagree with or oppose him? It’s worse than embarrassing; it’s unsettling.

From the conference we are reminded that Obama believes that:

–Only “big and bold” intervention by the government can get an economy moving; so long as he cites a few “expert economists” who agree with him, there can be no other legitimate opinion.

–Anyone who disagrees with or opposes him is engaging in partisan politics rather than acting in good faith, on principle and in the best interests of the country. Republicans have blocked him for partisan reasons for not just the past six months, but the past 2 1/2 years. He has “gone out of (his) way in every instance to find common ground” with Republicans. You know, as with “I won, John” and “I don’t want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talkin'” and “stay in the back seat.”

–If Republicans continue to oppose his jobs bill, it will be because they don’t want laid-off policemen, firefighters and teachers working again.

–The failure, waste and corruption in his $868 billion stimulus package are irrelevant when considering whether to embark on another such reckless venture. He doesn’t need to explain away the damning empirical data on his stimulus bill, because economists told him it would work and therefore it did work. If he hadn’t spent all that borrowed money, we would have experienced another great depression. Anyone who disputes this is either a rube or improperly motivated.

–It doesn’t matter that he famously breached his promise that unemployment would not exceed 8 percent if Congress passed his stimulus bill or that studies show that only 7 percent of the stimulus money went toward infrastructure despite his commitments to the contrary. Nor does it matter that he cavalierly joked about having lied about the existence of a plethora of “shovel-ready jobs.” He is a well-meaning liberal, after all.

–His good intentions also exempt him from accountability on the Solyndra scandal, because his ideology inclines him toward a blind faith in the existence of cataclysmic man-made global warming, which in turn requires him to mandate government subsidization of “green technologies.” Those allegedly noble intentions further entitle him to a pass for ignoring those who warned the government not to proceed with the project. His intentions relieve him from responsibility for Solyndra’s abject failure to meet the projections of the same kind of geniuses he is berating us for not following on his jobs bill.

–He still isn’t the slightest bit concerned about our national path toward bankruptcy, addressing it only with a few throwaway lines about how this bill would pay for itself, even though no bill of his has paid for itself.

–He is going to stick to his lies that a) his bill is a “jobs bill,” b) it would implement the “Buffett Rule” when Warren Buffett himself said he is only for raising taxes on the super-rich, c) the “rich” aren’t paying their fair share of taxes, and d) Republicans have not put forward an economic plan.

–He is going to continue to pretend or fool himself into believing that the American people still back his socialist approach to economic problems, his class warfare approach to influencing public opinion, his demagogic approach to entitlement reform and his hyper-partisan approach to problem-solving.

–He has complete confidence in Eric Holder, so he doesn’t need to worry about the facts on “Fast and Furious,” either; Holder’s dubious testimony is of no concern to Obama, and he doesn’t have to answer for it, because he trusts Holder, and therefore, so should we. Besides, even if it should turn out that Holder did something wrong, Holder is the attorney general and Obama’s not responsible for him.

–He is never going to stop blaming everyone and everything but himself for the problems he has caused. Thursday, he told us yet again that our economic mess was created by George W. Bush, the Japanese tsunami, the two wars, the Republicans’ gamesmanship over the debt ceiling, and Europe’s financial instability. Oh, yes, and many of our problems even “predate the financial crisis.”

Our chief executive either is a mastermind at Machiavellian manipulation or has deep psychological and emotional problems. I’ve never seen an adult in an important leadership position — especially not the president of the United States — show such frightening immaturity and self-absorption.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Holder may have had fingers in ‘Fast and Furious’ for years

One member of Congress has started using the word “accessory” in talking about members of the Obama administration who had their fingers on the pulse of the Operation Gunrunner Fast and Furious stunt under which the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives ordered gun dealers to sell weapons to unqualified buyers, who then dumped them into the Mexican drug cartel civil war.

And that may include Attorney General Eric Holder.

After all, despite his sworn assurance to Congress in a May appearance on the Hill that it was only within the “last few weeks” that he even heard of the project, a stack of memos reveals that if he paid attention to his office work, he knew about the situation a year earlier.

And now a video has been uncovered showing that a full two years earlier, one of Holder’s associates is on camera talking about the project and what the department was doing to intercept weapons trafficking along the Mexican border through Fast and Furious.

Could Holder possibly have not been listening to what his own aide was explaining to the American public?

Read More at WND By Bob Unruh, WorldNetDaily

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Obama Wants to Determine Who Can Be a “Minister”

 

The Obama administration is arguing for the Supreme Court to violate a Christian church’s doctrine and subject a vast array of churches and ministries to the law of Mammon.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The case revolves around a teacher in the K-8 parochial school in Redford, Michigan, a hard-hit suburb of Detroit. (The school has since merged with another parochial school in Farmington Hills to become Concordia Lutheran School.) Cheryl Perich had been diagnosed with narcolepsy and given temporary leave. The school attempted to hold her job by combining three grades in one classroom for a semester, but when it became obvious she would be unable to return for an indeterminate period of time, the school moved to replace her. Adding to her problems, Perich did not file the required forms for her lengthy leave. In time, the school moved to end their relationship. The church laws of its sponsoring denomination — the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS) — require the case to be handled by church tribunal, but Perich balked, suing the church in secular court under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

The Obama administration’s EEOC joined the case against the church. It is joined by such legal and cultural left-wing stalwarts as the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, People for the American Way, the Anti-Defamation League, and, unsurprisingly, the National Employment Lawyers Association, which sees this as a possible source of new clients (from ambulance chasers to processional chasers).

At the heart of the matter is whether the school is subject to the ADA. The church school contends Perich was a “commissioned minister,” and lower courts have allowed for a “ministerial exception” to federal anti-discrimination laws. The courts agree churches, in accordance with the First Amendment, should appoint their own clergy without the federal intervention, and many have extended this same right to employees the church considers part of its ministerial team. The Obama administration would like to change that.

The Obama administration’s brief states that the school was a “commercial” entity, because it charged tuition (although the school was subsidized by the church). Since the school “required all teachers — called or contract, Lutheran or not — to perform the same job duties,” it did not matter whether she was a lay teacher or a ministerial teacher. Perich “taught secular subjects,” the administration argues. She read “secular textbooks commonly used in public schools,” and can only remember injecting Christian teaching into her subject matter in “two instances.”

Read More at Floyd Reports By Ben Johnson, The White House Watch

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supreme Court Offers Victory to World Vision in Religious Discrimination Lawsuit

October 5, 2011 at 10:59am by

The Blaze

 

 

On Tuesday, we reported on “Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,” the church and state case that many are calling one of the most important of its kind in recent years.

While this legal battle is far from over, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a separate but related instance, has offered up a major victory to the faith community.

The Court let stand a 9th Circuit ruling that affirmed World Vision, a Christian aid organization’s, right to fire employees who don‘t share the humanitarian group’s religious beliefs. This, much like the Hosanna-Tabor case, involves the “ministerial exception,” which is a legal doctrine that provides protection to churches and religious institutions, alike, from government intervention in employment decisions.

In describing how faith plays into the organization’s hiring process, World Vision’s U.S. president, Richard Stearns, said in a statement on Monday that it is “…vital to the integrity of our mission to serve the poor as followers of Jesus Christ.”

In this particular case, the former employees who were suing the organization had initially signed a statement of faith (a document that reaffirms that they believe in Jesus Christ and the elements embraced by the organization). But when they could no longer claim that they adhered to these values, they were terminated.

The argument here, as in the Hosanna-Tabor case is that the organization, which involves itself in economic development and disaster relief activities, isn’t entirely a religious organization. Thus, in the eyes of the terminated employees and their legal team, the organization wouldn’t be exempt from Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (which forbids religious discrimination). By not hearing the case, though, the Supreme Court offered up a victory to World Vision.

 

First Things’ Joseph Knippenberg covers the significance of the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case. He writes, ”For my money, this is an important tea leaf to read before the Court takes up the Hosanna-Tabor case.”

Typically, courts side with the religious institutions in employment cases. Thus, Knippenberg highlights analysis conducted by Christianity Today, which explains the issues surrounding this case:

The majority opinion refused to address certain thorny questions, such as whether or not World Vision’s humanitarian work is an inherently religious activity. Judge O’Scannlain’s opinion said that it would be “constitutionally troublesome” for the court to attempt to decide what sort of activity is religious and what is not. When the employees alleged that World Vision is not a religious group because it offers aid to people regardless of their own religion, O’Scannalin chose to accept World Vision’s own assertion that “providing humanitarian aid to all in need, regardless of religious belief, is a tenet of its faith.”

By declining to hear the case, the Court avoided delving into the faith business. Stearns had the following to say about the decision not to hear the case:

“I am pleased, relieved and gratified with the court’s action. After four years of litigation, we at World Vision U.S. may now put this matter behind us, and continue our policy of hiring only Christians.”

While this case certainly mirrors Hosanna-Tabor, there are some differences. The individuals who were let go in the World Vision case purportedly had conflicting religious view. In the Hosanna-Tabor case, though, the woman who was terminated was cut loose after an illness. The similarity between the two, though, is the aforementioned ministerial exception.

In the Hosanna case, it seems the court will need to determine if the woman’s role fit the parameters presented within the exception. This, it seems, was what the court was attempting to avoid by hearing World Vision in the first place.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

40 Signs That America Is Rotting From The Inside Out

The American Dream
06 Oct 2011 08:24 PM PDT

 

 

It would be easy to know how to defend America if enemy forces were invading our shores.  But how do you defend a nation that is rotting from the inside out?  How do you eradicate the internal decay that is eating away at the heart and soul of this nation a little bit more every single day?  Just like we saw happen with the Roman Empire, the internal rot that is eating its way to the surface threatens to bring us down as a nation.  Greed, corruption, gluttony, lust and pride have become national pastimes.  We are
addicted to debt, food, entertainment and pleasure.  We have been taught to hate those that look different from us or that believe different things than we do.  Society is literally coming apart at the seams and the federal government is increasingly implementing “Big Brother” security measures in an attempt to maintain control and keep us “safe”.  We have far more people in prison than any other nation on the planet and yet things just keep getting worse and worse.  So how can we fix America?  How do we rescue a nation that is rotting from the inside?

It is absolutely crucial that we acknowledge just how bad things have gotten.  Simply getting the right political party into power will not save America.  Neither will implementing a new political system or a new economic system.  America’s problems are deeper than that.  The very core of America is deeply sick, and once we admit that, then perhaps we will start focusing on some real solutions.

The following are 40 signs that America is rotting from the inside out….

#1 A secret panel of government officials can now put American citizens on a “kill list”.  A recent Reuters article explained that no law established this secret panel and that there are no laws which govern it….

There is no public record of the operations or decisions of the panel, which is a subset of the White House’s National Security Council, several
current and former officials said. Neither is there any law establishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.

#2 It is on record that the federal government facilitated the sale of thousands upon thousands of very powerful guns to Mexican drug cartels.  The Mexican government was never told about this operation.  U.S. border agents have been shot with these guns, and these guns have been involved in dozens of murders already in Mexico.  Mexican drug cartels will continue to kill people with these guns for many years to come.  The Obama administration is working incredibly hard to cover up this scandal and the mainstream media is mostly ignoring the story.

#3 The other day, CBS News reporter Sharyl Attkisson shared with radio show host Laura Ingraham that Obama administration officials have yelled at her and cussed at her for aggressively investigating Operation Fast and Furious.  This must have created a lot of waves, because now CBS News has now put her on lockdown and has made her unavailable for interviews.

#4 A host of other recent examples show that if you are associated with the mainstream media in any way and you make a “politically incorrect” comment, you will be given the boot so fast that it will make your head swim.  For example, Hank Williams Jr. was recently booted off Monday Night Football simply because he compared Barack Obama to Hitler.

#5 At the current protests in New York City, police are beating people with clubs and shooting pepper spray in their faces.  As the economic crisis gets even worse and protests spread and become more intense in future years, will all of America soon look like this?

#6 The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world and the largest total prison population on the entire globe.

#7 The other day, a group of thieves stole a 50 foot long bridge in Pennsylvania.  Yes, you read that correctly.  They stole the entire bridge.

#8 Criminals seem willing to steal just about anything that is not bolted down these days.  For example, a group of thieves has stolen more than 1,000 pigs from farms in Minnesota and Iowa in recent months.

#9 Class warfare is certainly rising to a new level in this nation.  Recently, Roseanne Barr said that it would be a good idea for some bankers to “go to the reeducation camps“.

#10 Michael Moore is warning that the economic riots that we are starting to see around the country could potentially become violent in the future….

“The smart rich know they can only build the gate so high. And, and, sooner or later history proves that people when they’ve had enough aren’t going
to take it anymore. And much better to deal with it nonviolently now, through the political system, than what could possibly happen in the future, which
nobody wants to see”

#11 Have we become a socialist nation?  At this point, nearly half of all Americans live in a household that receives some form of government benefits.

#12 From the time George Washington became president until January 1993, the United States government accumulated a national debt of $4.16 trillion.  Since Barack Obama entered the White House, more than $4.2 trillion has been added to the national debt.

#13 Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke recently warned Congress not to cut “too much” from the federal budget right now.

#14 According to one recent report, the EPA wants to hire 230,000 more bureaucrats that will help enforce all of the new greenhouse gas regulations that the EPA plans to implement.

#15 There are more than 3 million reports of child abuse in the United States every single year.

#16 Horrifying brawls involving groups of young people are breaking out all over the nation.  For example, check out this disturbing footage of a brawl that recently broke out
during a football game in California.

#17 All over the nation, little children are being publicly arrested by police in their own classrooms and are being marched out of their schools in handcuffs.

#18 In some areas of the country, law enforcement officials are now using “extraction devices” to download data from the cellphones of motorists that they pull over.

#19 In the United States today, it is estimated that one out of every four girls is sexually abused before they become adults.

#20 Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson recently declared that it if your spouse develops Alzheimer’s disease, it is okay to divorce them.

#21 The United States has the highest divorce rate on the globe by a wide margin.

#22 Children in the United States are three times more likely to be prescribed antidepressants as children in Europe are.

#23 Former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld recently stated that “extremism in Christianity” is a significant danger to the United States.

#24 More pornography is created in the United States than anywhere else on the entire globe.  89 percent is made in the U.S.A. and only 11 percent is made in the rest of the world.

#25 Vanderbilt University has ruled that five on-campus Christian groups have violated Vanderbilt’s non-discrimination policy because they will not allow people that do not believe in Christianity to become leaders in the groups.

#26 Globally, the United States is tied with the U.K. for the most hours of television watched per person each week.

#27 According to NationMaster.com, the United States has the highest percentage of obese people in the world.

#28 The federal government recently sued a company down in Texas for firing a 600 pound worker.

#29 Are American students getting dumber?  This year, the average score on the verbal portion of the SAT was the lowest ever recorded.

#30 The United States has more people on pharmaceutical drugs than any other country on the planet.

#31 The percentage of women taking antidepressants in America is higher than in any other country in the world.

#32 One out of every four teen girls in the United States now has an STD.

#33 Law enforcement officials estimate that about 600,000 Americans and about 65,000 Canadians are trading dirty child pictures online.

#34 There are more reported rapes in the United States each year than anywhere else in the world.

#35 Totalitarian police states used to be ridiculed in this country, but now that has all changed.  In fact, the “If You See Something, Say Something” campaign looks like it
could have been pulled right out of an East German security handbook.

#36 According to a shocking FBI document obtained by Oath Keepers, the FBI definition of “suspicious activity” now includes making “extreme religious statements” and believing in “radical theology“.

#37 It is estimated that 500,000 babies that will be born this year will be sexually abused before they turn 18.

#38 In airports all over the country, the federal government is forcing large numbers of women and children to endure very offensive “enhanced pat-downs” during which their private parts are touched before they are allowed to get on to their flights.

#39 It was bad enough when the TSA was just abusing our families at the airports.  Now, TSA “VIPR teams” are conducting approximately 8,000 “unannounced security screenings” a year at subway stations, bus terminals, ports and highway rest stops.

#40 Since 1973, approximately 50 million babies have been slaughtered in the United States before they were even born.

Some of the examples above may seem unrelated at first glance, but they really are not.  The truth is that all of those examples illustrate the deep decay that has taken hold in this nation.

Sadly, hundreds more examples could easily be listed.  This country is deeply sick, and “tweaking” a couple of things or electing the right politician is not going to cure us.

America is dying and time is running out.

So what do all of you think?  Do you believe that America is rotting from the inside out?  Please feel free to leave your thoughts below….

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Christian Post > Church & Ministries|Fri, Oct. 07 2011 05:50 PM EDT

Presbyterian Church USA to Ordain First Homosexual Minister

By Allison Summers | Christian Post Contributor

Scott Anderson, an official with the Wisconsin Council of Churches, is set to be the first openly homosexual man to be ordained a pastor in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) on Saturday.

“The decision to remove sexual conduct from PC(USA) ordination vows is symptomatic of a deeper, ongoing struggle within the church over the authority of holy scripture,” said Presbyterian Action Committee Chairman Gary Green. “This action stands in contradiction to the PCUSAUSA confessions of faith, which continue to teach that faithful Christians have the choice either to be faithful in marriage or chaste in singleness.”

The ordination comes after a majority of presbyteries in the PC(USA) voted to remove the “fidelity/chastity” standard from the church constitution earlier this year. In July, the standard was changed from one that required either a single man to remain chaste or a married man to remain faithful to his wife, but the new requirement does not address guidance for sexual behavior, nor does it include a biblical reason for why non-marital sexual relationships are now acceptable for ordained ministers.

While the denomination‘s Book of Confessions still professes that sexual relations should be reserved for marriage between a man and a woman, its ambiguity is flexible enough so that those wishing to do so may ordain church leaders in same-sex or opposite-sex relationships outside of marriage.

The issue of homosexuality has always been a hot-button issue in the Christian community and has many divided on the notion that it is an abomination or a sin to live a homosexual lifestyle.

In response to a blog post on the topic of Anderson’s ordination titled “Meet Scott Anderson” by John Shore, user Christocentric posted:

 

“A huge mistake many churches are ignoring in having Gay pastors or accepting homosexuality is ignoring God’s description of love: “. . .does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth.;”… (1 Corinthians 13:6).True love rejoices in TRUTH and not INIQUITY (immorality).”

Another user, Mindy stated, “The fact that God would damn his own creations for simply being honest about who they are and who they love goes against everything Jesus taught about love.”

However, not all members of the PCUSA agree with the move to ordain open homosexual ministers, and some feel the ordination goes against biblical teachings that homosexuality should be condemned. A conservative group within the Presbyterian denomination, Presbyterians for Renewal, stated the possibility of disassociating with the PC(USA) over conflicting beliefs.

Additionally, the Westboro Baptist Church, a faction infamous for picketing the funerals of soldiers and homosexuals, posted on their website that they plan to make an appearance at the ordination.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes