Category: Politics

The War Against Christianity: Sublimating Christianity For The “Will Of The State”

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics3 Comments

American Christianity 2What is Fascism? Per merriam-webster.com, it is a

political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

Remember this definition as you read the following…

Christianpost.com reports that

Three California churches have filed a complaint against the state over a recently implemented health insurance provision mandating the coverage of elective abortions.

Foothill Church of Glendora, Calvary Chapel in Chino, and Shepherd of the Hills Church in Porter Ranch filed the complaint last Friday in U.S. District Court. The suit, filed against the director of the California Department of Managed Health Care, seeks injunctive relief from the abortion mandate.

“Plaintiffs believe, as a matter of religious conviction, that it would be sinful and immoral for them intentionally to pay for, participate in, facilitate, or otherwise support abortion, which they believe destroys innocent human life,” reads the complaint.

(Photo: Reuters/Robert Galbraith)California Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown speaks at a news conference following his debate with his Republican opponent Meg Whitman at Dominican University in San Rafael, California, October 12, 2010.
“Because federal law requires plaintiffs to offer health insurance to their employees, the mandate illegally and unconstitutionally coerces plaintiffs to violate their religious beliefs under threat of heavy fines and penalties.”

In August 2014, the DMHC sent an official letter to Anthem Blue Cross and Kaiser Permanente stating that insurance companies in California could not restrict abortion coverage.In their letter, DMHC stated that “it erroneously approved or did not object to such discriminatory language in some evidence of coverage filings.”

“The purpose of this letter is to remind plans that the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975 (Knox Keene Act) requires the provision of basic healthcare services,” read the DMHC letter.

“… [T]he California Constitution prohibits health plans from discriminating against women who choose to terminate a pregnancy. Thus, all health plans must treat maternity services and legal abortion neutrally.”

DMHC’s declaration that abortion coverage cannot be limited came in response to two Catholic academic institutions, Loyola Marymount University and Santa Clara University, seeking a reprieve for their insurance coverage regarding abortion.

In response to the announcement, the Life Legal Defense Foundation and the Alliance Defending Freedom sent the DMHC a letter of protest to the change.

“DMHC cannot deny approval to or otherwise penalize a health insurance plan for failing to provide coverage of some or all abortions and remain in compliance with the Weldon Amendment,” read the letter.

“In its failed lawsuit against the amendment, California admitted that all of its departments are subject to the amendment due to some of those departments receiving over $40 billion in federal funds for programs in the areas of education, health, and employment.”

The ADF is representing the three churches in their complaint. ADF Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley said in a statement last week that congregations “should not be forced to pay for the killing of innocent human life.”

“The government has no right to demand that church health insurance plans contain coverage for abortion – something that violates these churches’ most sincerely held religious beliefs. California is violating the Constitution by strong-arming churches into having this coverage in their plans,” Stanley said.

There continues to be a lot of debate on Facebook Political Pages concerning whether Christians must sublimate our faith to the “Will of the State”.

The Kim Davis Case in Kentucky, in which two lesbians from Ohio, came into the County Clerk Office of Kim Davis, a known Evangelical Christian, elected by Christians, and demanded that she issue a Marriage License to them. Even though, there was another county clerk office a scant 15 minutes away from that location. Ms. Davis refused to issue one, on the grounds that it violates the tenets of her faith and God’s Holy Word. Cameras and lawyers swiftly following, as the “Gay Mafia” did its thing, attempting to bully Ms. Davis into sublimating her faith for the “Will of the State” and the appeasement of the god of popular culture.

Eventually, it was settled that the license would be issued, but, Ms. David would not and could not be forced to personally issue a Marriage License to a homosexual couple.

Others in the office would do it, instead.

On January 1, 2014, in a post titled, “The Hobby Lobby Decision: The First Amendment Holds. Religious Freedom Stands.”, I reported the following…

The Supreme Court, in a in a 5-4 ruling, found that “closely held” businesses do not have to provide contraception to their employees, if the ownership of said company opposes birth control on the grounds that it conflicts with the Religious Beliefs.

In other words, if you want to behave like Sandra Fluke, and if I am a business owner of a “closely held” business, I cannot be forced by the Obama Administration to provide your “protection”, either before or after that “special moment”.

The Supreme Court, in a in a 5-4 ruling, found that “closely held” businesses do not have to provide contraception to their employees, if the ownership of said company opposes birth control on the grounds that it conflicts with the Religious Beliefs.

In other words, if you want to behave like Sandra Fluke, and if I am a business owner of a “closely held” business, I cannot be forced by the Obama Administration to provide your “protection”, either before or after that “special moment”.

Rush Limbaugh, per usual made an excellent point on his nationally-syndicated radio program, yesterday:

…the thinking everywhere on the left, is either Obama’s gonna pay for it from his stash like they think exists in Detroit, or the insurance company will be forced to pay for it. But they won’t pay for it, they’ll just bill it back to Hobby Lobby. (interruption) No, the principle stands, that’s the point. When all this is said and done, the Supreme Court still ruled that the federal government cannot make a “closely held” corporation violate its own personal religious beliefs. I’m gonna have to double-check this, but I really do think that in that sense we’ve not had a ruling this direct in that regard before, whatever the issue was. I think I saw that somewhere this morning in the mounds of show prep that I was going through.

Look, it means here that Obama cannot unilaterally dictate how religion is to be practiced via laws or regulations or executive orders. It means that the First Amendment is not a casual plaything for cavalier statists whether in the executive branch or whether in Congress. There also was another ruling on the union’s and whether or not parents and nannies taking care of their own loved ones at home can be forced to pay union dues, and that was rejected, too. The headline says: “Sweeping Loss for Unions.” Oh, horrible, the Supreme Court just dealt a devastating blow to public unions. But this one really is kind of narrow. But the principle still stands.

What is really important, yet really small in this case, is that even after the Hobby Lobby decision, women can still go to Target or Walmart and buy a month’s worth of conception for nine dollars. What’s kind of being overlooked here in all this — and we did look at it in great detail on the previous occasion on this program — is that somehow we’ve gotten to the point where women should not have to pay for their own birth control. Somebody else is gonna pay for it, no matter how much they want, no matter how often they want it, no matter for what reason, somebody else is going to pay for it. That’s the root of all this. The employer should pay it, the insurance company will pay it, but in no way in 2014 America are women going to being pay for it, even though you can go to Target or Walmart and get a month’s supply for nine bucks.

So the ruling does not apply to, say, an Exxon or a General Motors. That’s not a “closely held” corporation. But the Christian owners of Hobby Lobby cannot be forced to fund the contraception mandate. Their liberty was defended here, no matter how narrow the left wants to say the ruling was, no matter what the practical application is, when it’s all over the First Amendment was enforced, or maybe reinforced today.

What applies to a closely held organization, most certainly applies to a Faith-sponsored Organization.

On March 8, 1983, President Ronald Wilson Reagan gave a speech to the National Association of Evangelicals, which came to be know as the “Evil Empire Speech”. Here is an excerpt:

Well, I’m pleased to be here today with you who are keeping America great by keeping her good. Only through your work and prayers and those of millions of others can we hope to survive this perilous century and keep alive this experiment in liberty, this last, best hope of man.

I want you to know that this administration is motivated by a political philosophy that sees the greatness of America in you, her people, and in your families, churches, neighborhoods, communities–the institutions that foster and nourish values like concern for others and respect for the rule of law under God.

 Now, I don’t have to tell you that this puts us in opposition to, or at least out of step with, a–a prevailing attitude of many who have turned to a modern-day secularism, discarding the tried and time-tested values upon which our very civilization is based. No matter how well intentioned, their value system is radically different from that of most Americans. And while they proclaim that they’re freeing us from superstitions of the past, they’ve taken upon themselves the job of superintending us by government rule and regulation. Sometimes their voices are louder than ours, but they are not yet a majority. [Applause]

An example of that vocal superiority is evident in a controversy now going on in Washington. And since I’m involved, I’ve been waiting to hear from the parents of young America. How far are they willing to go in giving to government their prerogatives as parents?

Let me state the case as briefly and simply as I can. An organization of citizens, sincerely motivated, deeply concerned about the increase in illegitimate births and abortions involving girls well below the age of consent, some time ago established a nationwide network of clinics to offer help to these girls and, hopefully, alleviate this situation. Now, again, let me say, I do not fault their intent. However, in their well-intentioned effort, these clinics decided to provide advice and birth control drugs and devices to underage girls without the knowledge of their parents.

For some years now, the federal government has helped with funds to subsidize these clinics. In providing for this, the Congress decreed that every effort would be made to maximize parental participation. Nevertheless, the drugs and devices are prescribed without getting parental consent or giving notification after they’ve done so. Girls termed “sexually active”–and that has replaced the word “promiscuous”–are given this help in order to prevent illegitimate worth/birth (quickly corrects himself) eh or abortion.

Well, we have ordered clinics receiving federal funds to notify the parents such help has been given. [Applause] One of the nation’s leading newspapers has created the term “squeal rule” in editorializing against us for doing this, and we’re being criticized for violating the privacy of young people. A judge has recently granted an injunction against an enforcement of our rule. I’ve watched TV panel shows discuss this issue, seen columnists pontificating on our error, but no one seems to mention morality as playing a part in the subject of sex. [Applause]

Is all of Judeo-Christian tradition wrong? Are we to believe that something so sacred can be looked upon as a purely physical thing with no potential for emotional and psychological harm? And isn’t it the parents’ right to give counsel and advice to keep their children from making mistakes that may affect their entire lives? [Slight crescendo of voice and emphasis–Long Applause]

Many of us in government would like to know what parents think about this intrusion in their family by government. We’re going to fight in the courts. The right of parents and the rights of family take precedence over those of Washington-based bureaucrats and social engineers. [Applause]

But the fight against parental notification is really only one example of many attempts to water down traditional values and even abrogate the original terms of American democracy. Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged. [Applause] When our founding fathers passed the First Amendment, they sought to protect churches from government interference. They never intended to construct a wall of hostility between government and the concept of religious belief itself.

Truth is still truth.

Regardless of the recent law-making by the United States Supreme Court (whose job is to interpret the laws, not make them) Americans’ First Amendment Rights still stand.

If you try to talk to a Liberal about this New Fascism, they will deny that there is any Fascism going on at all. In fact, they will tell you that this is “the will of the people” and they will site Democratically-stacked push polls in order to back their opinion up.

When you ask Liberals if , for example, “homosexual marriage” is the “will of the people”, why did voters in the overwhelming majority of states, including California, vote against it? And, if there is “no Fascism”, what do you call the fact that 2% of the population is having activist judges overturn the actual will of the people in order to get their way, in their attempt to redefine a word that has meant the same thing since time immemorial?

In response, you will usually see their eyes glaze over, like a deer in the headlights, or experience a dramatic pause in posting, if you are on the Internet.

Liberals can not legitimately defend the suppression of the First Amendment Rights of Christian Americans.

During Hitler’s rise to power, the German Press demonized European Jews, betraying them as evil and money grubbing…painting them as being different from normal German citizens. It was this classification of the European Jews as the enemy that almost led to the extinction of them in that horrible attempted genocide, known as the Holocaust.

Now, in the early 21st century, the Far Left, the Democratic Party, and the Obama Administration (but, I repeat myself) are using propaganda to isolate and demonize average Americans, who through hard work, have risen to a high station in life or through their strong Christian faith and love of their country refuse to follow a popular culture- worshiping Administration, when it issues Executive Orders or has its Democratic Congress pass legislation which clearly contradicts the Word of God and the Judeo-Christian Belief System upon which America was built.

Considering what is happening in the world around us, thanks in a large part to Obama’s failed Foreign Policy, if America keeps on the path we seem to be headed on, we will find out why America is not mentioned in the Book of Revelation.

Claiming to be wise, they became fools. – Romans 1 : 22

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Benghazi Hearings: American Families Still Wait For The Truth About Their Sons’ Sacrifice

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

benghaziwhitehouseIt’s been a little over three years since you lost your child. Yes, you know that they were an adult, but they were still your child…and you loved them very much.

Yes, it’s been a little over three years, but in some ways it seems like yesterday that you received that call. That call that no parent should have to hear. A call telling you that your child had been murdered…in the service of his country. Murdered by Radical Muslims, on the other side of the world.

When you asked those who are supposed to know, what happened to your child, they hemmed and hawed, saying that it had something to do with a video on the Internet, that you had never even heard of, much less seen.

Your beloved child, murdered because of some stupid video? That doesn’t even seen possible.

As time went on, you came under siege by reporters and government officials alike. The reporters wanted to interview you, so that their ratings would go up. The authorities, while not overtly threatening you, or anything like that, basically gave you the cold shoulder, keeping their little game of hide and seek with the facts of your child’s death going on, as if you were not entitled to a clear picture of what actually happened.

Don’t they understand what you’re still going through? You lost your child…your son. A son you nursed through all the ups and downs of growing up, who you proudly watched as he decided that he wanted to be of service to his country.

And still, nobody will tell you the truth of what happened to him.

After what seemed like an eternity, a congressman named Darrel Issa reached out to you. He told you that he was holding Congressional Hearings to get to the bottom of this whole disgraceful business. So, you make the trip to Washington, DC, and patiently wait your turn to testify before Issa and the Congressional Committee.

Finally, after all those months, there you were. You took the stand after they called your name. As you were about to tell your story, all the Democratic Representatives in the room, except for two, excused themselves from the meeting, imperiously above listening to a commoner, an American Parent, still grieving over the loss of their child, so savagely murdered, tell their story.

You watched them as they walked out…

Carolyn Maloney

Danny Davis

Eleanor Holmes Norton

Gerald E. Connolly

Jim Cooper

John Tierney

Mark Pocan

Matt Cartwright

Michelle Lujan Grisham

Peter Welch

Stephen Lynch

Steven Horsford

Tammy Duckworth

Tony Cardenas

William Lacy Clay

Two of them actually stayed to hear your story, Ranking Member Elijah Cummings and Rep. Jackie Speier.

And, now, after watching the one in charge of the Benghazi Embassy, Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, imperiously lie to the latest House Committee, under Trey Gowdy, you’re wondering if this reliving of your grief and anguish, was all worth it.

…as your grief becomes unbearable…again.

Foxnews.com has the story…

Michael Ingmire watched as Hillary Clinton was grilled for 11 hours Thursday about the 2012 attack in Benghazi that left his nephew and three other Americans dead and saw not a future president, but a “serial liar.”

As a congressional panel pressed the former Secretary of State over the attack on the consulate facility in the Libyan city, Ingmire, uncle of Sean Smith, and relatives of former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty watched from their homes, hoping Clinton’s testimony would yield answers about why additional security was not granted and why she initially blamed the attack on a YouTube video instead of a coordinated act of terrorism.

“The thing that was shocking – one of the pinnacle moments – was the revelation she told her family there was a terrorist attack while she told America something else,” Smith’s uncle, Michael Ingmire, told FoxNews.com. “Mrs. Clinton is a serial liar.”

Smith, an information officer, and Woods, a former Navy SEAL, died along with Doherty and U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens when Islamic militants stormed the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi and set it ablaze before attacking a nearby CIA compound with machine guns and rockets.

Stevens, the first U.S. Ambassador killed in the line of duty since 1979, had repeatedly asked the State Department for increased security at the consulate prior to the attack but his requests were not granted. 

In the hours following the attacks, the Obama administration learned they were carefully planned assaults by Al Qaeda-related militants but Clinton and others would go on to tell a different tale: an anti-Muslim YouTube video caused spontaneous protests and angry mobs were to blame for the attacks.

“So if there’s no evidence for a video-inspired protest, then where did the false narrative start?” Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan asked Clinton during the hearing Thursday.

“It started with you, Madam Secretary,” he said. “You could live with a protest about a video, that won’t hurt you, but a terror attack would.”

Clinton rejected Jordan’s claim, describing the situation in the hours after the attack as “fluid” and the details unclear.

“I am sorry that it doesn’t fit your narrative congressman, I can only tell you what the facts are,” Clinton said.

During the marathon hours of questioning — which Democrats claim was a partisan attack on the Democratic presidential frontrunner — Clinton said Stevens understood the risks involved and that his requests for additional security never crossed her desk.

“Those requests for security were rightly reviewed by the security professionals,” Clinton told the committee. “I did not see them. I did not approve them. I did not deny them.”

Clinton also described Stevens as a friend, saying the 52-year-old ambassador “understood that most people in Libya or anywhere reject the extremists’ argument that violence can ever be a path to dignity or justice.”

“I knew and admired Chris Stevens,” she said in her opening remarks Thursday. “He was one of our nation’s most accomplished diplomats. Chris’ mother liked to say he had ‘sand in his shoes,’ because he was always moving, always working, especially in the Middle East that he came to know so well.”

But Clinton’s closeness to Stevens was called into question by Rep Susan Brooks, R-Ill., who asked: “Did you ever personally speak to him after you swore him in in May? Yes or no please.”

“Yes, I believe I did,” Clinton replied. “I don’t recall.”

Ingmire described Clinton’s choice of words about Stevens as jarring. 

“How could she say ‘Chris thought this’ and ‘Chris felt that’ when she basically had nothing to do with him?” Ingmire said. 

Tyrone Woods’ father, Charles, recalled meeting Clinton when his son’s body arrived at Andrews Air Force Base two days after the attacks. 

“I gave Hillary a hug and shook her hand and she said, ‘We are going to have the filmmaker arrested who was responsible for the death of your son,” Woods said, reading the account from his journal. 

“That was a complete bald-faced lie,” he told FoxNews.com Friday. “The day after the attack, she was talking to the Prime Minister of Egypt and she said the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the video.” 

Smith’s mother, Patricia, gave a similar account, saying she was told by the administration “it was a video when they knew it was not a video.”

“They told me lies,” she said Friday. “My son told me the night before that he has been asking for security and he hasn’t heard anything.” 

Over three years later, the truth as to why the Obama Administration sacrificed the lives of those four Brave Americans, for the sake of political expediency, on that horrible night in Benghazi, is still not known. Americans have their suspicions. Suspicions that were not allayed any by the Cackling hen appearing before, thanks to her fellow Democrats, what turned into a Dog and Pony Showb, last Thursday on Capitol Hill.

Remember the oft-quoted speech by President Obama at the UN General Assembly, in which he proclaimed that

…The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam?

Since that night in Benghazi, the Radical Muslim-fueled violence know as “Arab Spring” has proceeded “right on schedule”, with SRussia and America now on the brink of a war, with Syrian’s Muslim President Assad now in its cross-hairs. 

President Obama has made speeches in support of and sent advanced weaponry to the “Syrian Rebels”, whose majority are card-carrying members of the Muslim Terrorist Group, al Qaeda, perpetrators of the largest Terrorist Attack ever on American Soil, on 9/11/01, and the attack on the Benghazi Compound.

Fortunately, Americans refused to support Obama’s mission to aid these Terrorists.

Our memories of those two faithful days, 11 years apart, and average Americans’ wish for justice for those 3,000 and 4 Americans, savagely murdered by the “followers of the prophet”, take precedence over any trumped-up concern over any slander of his name.

…and, Hillary Clinton’s Political Future.

There are American Families who deserve the truth.

Until Christ Comes,

KJ

The Benghazi Hearings: E-mails Prove Clinton LIED As To How Four Brave Americans DIED.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

Laughing-H-600-LIYesterday, Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, appeared before the House Select Committee on Benghazi, chaired by the inestimable Trey Gowdy.

Yesterday morning, Hillary’s duplicitous nature was clearly revealed, for all the world to see.

Liar, liar. Pants suit on fire.

Breitbart.com reports that

Hillary Clinton sent an email to her daughter, Chelsea, on Sept. 11, 2012 in which she asserted that an al-Qaida-like group was responsible for the terrorist attacks in Benghazi, it was revealed on Thursday during the former secretary of state’s testimony to the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

The email, which was revealed by Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, indicates that Clinton knew early on that the attacks which left four Americans dead was carried out by terrorists. But as Jordan pointed out, Clinton and others in the Obama administration had already begun crafting the narrative that the attack was spontaneous and that the attackers were motivated by a YouTube video many Muslims found offensive.

In the email cited by Jordan, Clinton responded to daughter Chelsea, who emailed under the pseudonym Diane Reynolds.

“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like [sic] group,” Clinton wrote.

But shortly before the email, after it was revealed that Ambassador Chris Stevens had been murdered in the onslaught, Clinton implied that the YouTube video had served as a motive.

“Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted to the Internet,” Clinton said in a statement shortly after Stevens’ death.

The Obama administration continued for days after the attack to claim that the YouTube video — entitled “Innocence of Muslims” — had sparked protests which turned violent. Critics of the administration’s handling of the response to the attack assert that the YouTube video was used as political cover to protect Obama ahead of his re-election bid. Obama had been on the campaign trail insisting that he had destroyed al-Qaida.

Jordan compared Clinton’s disparate positions, asserting that she “knew the truth” but insisted on casting some blame on the video.

“You tell the American people one thing, you tell your family an entirely different story,” Jordan said.

He also cited a call Clinton made the night of the attack to Mohammed Magariaf, who was then the president of Libya. According to a transcript of the call, Clinton acknowledged that the al-Qaida affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia was “claiming responsibility” for the attack.

And in a phone call with Egyptian Prime Minister Hisham Kandil the next day, Clinton said “we know the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack, not a protest.”

The administration’s claim that the YouTube video played a part in the Benghazi attack reached its pinnacle on Sept. 16, 2012, when then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice asserted as much on several Sunday morning talk shows.

And emails show that Clinton’s aides at the State Department showed no disagreement with Rice’s statements, in which she called the video “very offensive.”

Clinton’s State Department aide, Jake Sullivan, sent his boss an email that same day indicating that Rice’s comments were in line with Clinton’s views.

“She did make clear our view that this started spontaneously and then evolved,” Sullivan wrote.

He backtracked off of that position the next week, however. In a Sept. 24, 2012 email, he assured Clinton: “You never said spontaneous or characterized the motives.”

“State Department experts knew the truth, you knew the truth, but that’s not what the American people got,” Jordan said Thursday, during his tense exchange with Clinton.

“There was a lot of conflicting information that we were trying to make sense of,” Clinton said, defending her conflicting positions.

That did not stop the lie from growing…exponentially.

On September 25, 2012, United States President, Barack Hussein Obama , spoke before the United Nations General Assembly, blaming that same un-watched youtube.com video, for the massacre of 4 brave Americans, on the night of September 11, 2012, at the Benghazi , Libya, U.S. Embassy Compound,

…In every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask themselves how much they’re willing to tolerate freedom for others. And that is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, where a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well.

For as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion, we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe.

We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them. I know there are some who ask why don’t we just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws. Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.

Let’s spring forward a little bit to the 2012 Vice-Presidential Debate, where the folllowing statements were made by the one, the only Jar Jar Biden:

MS. RADDATZ: What were you first told about the attack? Why were people talking about protests? When people in the consulate first saw armed men attacking with guns, there were no protesters. Why did that go on for weeks?

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Because that’s exactly what we were told —

MS. RADDATZ: By who?

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: — by the intelligence community. The intelligence community told us that. As they learned more facts about exactly what happened, they changed their assessment. That’s why there’s also an investigation headed by Tom Pickering, a leading diplomat in the — from the Reagan years, who is doing an investigation as to whether or not there were any lapses, what the lapses were, so that they will never happen again. But —

MS. RADDATZ: And they wanted more security there.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, we weren’t told they wanted more security again. We did not know they wanted more security again. And by the way, at the time we were told exactly — we said exactly what the intelligence community told us that they knew. That was the assessment. And as the intelligence community changed their view, we made it clear they changed their view. That’s why I said, we will get to the bottom of this.

Biden lied, too.

What the Benghazi Hearings showed yesterday, was a pathological predilection for dishonesty, insincerity, and inappropriateness, not only on the part of Former Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton,  but the whole Obama Administration, as well, from the top on down.

They all knew that the cause of the attacks was not some stupid Youtube Video, but a full-blown Muslim Terrorist Attack.

However, for the sake of Political Expediency…and the re-election of President Barack Hussein Obama and the legacy of his rapidly-failing Foreign Policy, known as Smart Power!, they had to quickly come up with an excuse for their liability in the deaths of those four brave Americans.

And now, Hillary Rodham Clinton, with her Oscar-worthy Performance in front of the House Committee yesterday, which including circuitous answers to Yes or No Questions and inappropriate smirks, accompanied by cackling laughter, has proven completely true and accurate as to what I and my fellow Conservative Americans have said about her all along:

She is a sociopath, who envisions herself to be smarter than everybody else, above the law, and White House-bound, because, “it’s her turn”.

The only place that she should be bound, at least in this life, is jail.

Her final destination promises to be a more Southern Locale…and infinitely hotter.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Uncle Joe Announces That He Will Not Run…Or, Is He Just “Biden” His Time?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

thG0DEG5PPThe Vice-President of the United States of America, Joe Biden, made what was billed, beforehand, as a historic announcement , yesterday, live from the Rose Garden.

Foxnews.com reports that

Vice President Biden announced Wednesday he will not run for president, ending months of feverish speculation over his 2016 plans and likely settling the Democratic field. 

Speaking in the Rose Garden alongside his wife Jill and President Obama, Biden said the window of opportunity to mount a viable campaign “has closed.” He has been weighing a decision since summer, but cautioned all along that he and his family were grieving over the loss of his son Beau Biden — and said Wednesday he knew that process could outlast the window for making a decision.  

“Unfortunately, I believe we’re out of time, the time necessary to mount a winning campaign for the nomination,” Biden said. 

He added, “While I will not be a candidate, I will not be silent.” Biden went on to urge Democrats to run on Obama’s record, while decrying the current partisanship in Washington. 

The decision would appear to bolster front-runner Hillary Clinton — whom Biden had been urged by supporters to challenge as she grappled with slipping poll numbers and a widening scandal over her email use in her capacity as secretary of state. 

After Biden’s remarks, Clinton tweeted: 

“@VP is a good friend and a great man. Today and always, inspired by his optimism and commitment to change the world for the better. -H”

Biden, though, seemed to take a parting shot Wednesday at her and other Democratic candidates, after some suggested Republicans are their enemy at last week’s debate. 

“I don’t think we should look at Republicans as our enemy. They’re the opposition,” Biden said, urging lawmakers to find “consensus.” 

“Four more years of this kind of pitched battle may be more than this country can take,” he said. “We have to change it.” 

According to a senior administration official, the vice president made his decision Tuesday night. 

His choice is a blow to former staffers and others who were building a virtual campaign in waiting, ready to go if he decided to enter. Draft Biden, the most vocal organization urging the VP to run, put out a brief statement after his announcement: “We are so grateful for the gigantic outpouring of support from hundreds of thousands of Americans around the country in our effort to encourage the Vice President to run. While the Vice President has decided not to run, we know that over the next year he will stand up for all Americans and articulate a vision for America’s future that will leave no one behind.” 

Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement that Biden’s decision will hurt Democrats. 

“The Vice President’s decision not to enter the 2016 race is a major blow for Democrats, who now will almost certainly be saddled with their unpopular and scandal plagued front-runner Hillary Clinton,” he said. 

Democratic National Committee leader Debbie Wasserman Schultz, meanwhile, said she appreciates Biden’s “thoughtful consideration,” adding “his unwavering commitment to America’s working families is a legacy each of our candidates will proudly carry forward.”

How…sweet.

There was something that just did not ring true about Crazy Uncle Joe’s announcement, yesterday.

Rush Limbaugh made the following observation during his program, yesterday on Wednesday…

He makes this announcement, this big announcement in the Rose Garden with Obama standing next to him, his wife standing on the other side, the day before Hillary testifies on the Benghazi hearing, clears the way for her. He did not endorse her, did not mention her, did not throw his support to her, but this set of remarks that we got would have been — the media would proclaim this is one of the greatest coming-out speeches ever for a candidate announcing his intentions to run for president.  It went on.  In fact, I’ll tell you something, folks. 

He kept talking and kept talking, and I was worried that he was gonna change his mind in the middle of this and talk himself into running after all.  And I think Obama was a little worried about that, too.  This did not sound like somebody that was announcing he wasn’t gonna do something.  You know, we all like to peek behind the curtain.  We all like to get into the room where we’re not permitted and wonder what really went on in there.  And this was so odd that it makes me think he really wanted to do it and powerful forces warned him not to. I couldn’t answer the question, “Well, why? Why would that happen?” But this was just so incongruent. And then you add to it this litany of defects that he cited in the country, as though these people haven’t been in power.  It’s just confusing.  It’s classic of leftists, in that sense.  But this speech — I want to reiterate this point.  This speech was an “I’m running for president” speech.  I’m convinced he wanted to do it.  Well, not “convinced.”  But this is so much like a speech by somebody that’s going to do something, and it would have been said to be one of the best ever such speeches.  And yet it’s to announce he wasn’t gonna do this. 

I think he really probably wanted to and somebody leaned on him and said, “Nope, nope, nope.”  And the deal was, “Okay, well, I get to go out and say what I wanted to say anyway.” And he did, and that’s why Obama went out there with him, ’cause, believe me, folks, old Joe is old Joe, and he’s a walking gaffe machine.  And I think they had Obama out there as a living guardrail if you will, a living restraint. 

Okay, boys and girls. Please allow me to do some supposin’ (as we say in Dixie).

Now, suppose that word got out to the Clinton Campaign that Uncle Joe had decided to throw his hair plugs into the ring.

Upon hearing of this, Hil calls up Scooter (Obama) and threatens to spill the beans, concerning the president’s knowledge about what went on that fateful night of September 11, 2012 at the U.S. Embassy Compound in Benghazi, Libya, if Biden enters the Democratic Primary.

In fact, it didn’t have to be about Benghazi. Hil knows where all of “the bodies are buried” at the Obama White House.

…And, Arkansas, too.

But, I digress…

If Joe was truly resigned to the fact that he waited too late to enter the race, would he still be making catty little comments about Hil and what he would have done, if it would have been up to him, at the time?

I don’t think so.

A second scenario occurred to me, and probably to all of you, as well.

What if Biden is “bidin'” his time, to see if Hillary gets damaged during Trey Gowdy’s Benghazi Hearings?

Hillary gets nailed and, then Uncle Joe will swoop in like Superman to save the day for the Democratic Party, who by then would be left with the crazy, dried-up old Socialist from Vermont as the leading Candidate for their Party’s Nomination.

Yikes.

Stay alert over the next several days.

I have this feeling that Crazy Uncle Joe isn’t going anywhere.

This is too big a F_____ deal, as he would say.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Establishment Republicans Pushing Ryan For Speaker. Want Conservatives to be “Reasonable”.

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

Whats-First-NRD-600The Establishment Republicans are pushing hard to make Paul Ryan the next Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Yesterday, the 2012 Republican Vice-Presidential Candidate received an unsolicited endorsement.

Politico.com reports that

Harry Reid just gave Paul Ryan an unwelcome endorsement for speaker.

The Democratic leader offered his surprise backing for Ryan (R-Wis.) to assume the House speakership, saying he hopes Ryan runs and wins the job because he’s a “Paul Ryan fan.”

“He appears to me to be one of the people over there that would be reasonable. I mean look at some of the other people,” Reid said. “I don’t agree with him on much of what he does. I think what he’s done with Medicare and Medicaid, what he’s wanted to do I disagree with. But generally speaking we’ve been able to work with him.”

Indeed, Ryan’s work with Reid lieutenant Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) on a two-year budget deal in 2013 remains a bipartisan highlight for a Congress otherwise beset by gridlock. But did Reid hurt Ryan by praising him?

The Nevada Democrat shrugged when asked if he was giving Ryan a kiss of death as the Wisconsin lawmaker weighs a speakers bid amid ever-growing criticism from the right for his policy positions.

“I just speak the truth,” Reid said.

“If it helps him fine, if it doesn’t that’s too bad.”

Okay, so the Senate Minority Leader approves of Paul Ryan becoming the Speaker of the House.

Big whoop.

It would seem to me that Dinghy Harry’s is one endorsement that a Republican Leader, who actually wishes to rally the Conservative Base, would not want to have.

Later yesterday, Paul Ryan started his “exploratory campaign” for the position of the Speaker of the House.

The Washington Post  reports that

Rep. Paul D. Ryan (Wis.) moved closer to the House speakership Tuesday, telling fellow Republicans that he would consider taking the job if he could be assured that the caucus would stand behind him.

Ryan faced his colleagues — and his political future — at a private evening meeting of House Republicans in the Capitol basement. He said he would be willing to step up and meet the calls to serve, ending weeks of GOP leadership turmoil, as long as disparate factions moved in the coming days to unite around him.

“I hope it doesn’t sound conditional, but it is,” he said, according to members inside the room. He paused after saying the word “conditional,” they said, for effect.

Ryan, the 45-year-old chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and a 2012 vice presidential nominee, has long resisted pressure to assume a higher-profile role in party leadership. And he signaled Tuesday that his decision to serve was far from assured.

Much depends on what assurances of support he can win from Republican hard-liners. Before entering the evening meeting, Ryan met privately with leaders of the House Freedom Caucus, an influential group that helped push Speaker John A. Boehner out of his post and derailed Majority Leader Kevin O. McCarthy’s bid to succeed him.

That meeting ended without firm commitments, and at the subsequent GOP conference meeting, Ryan made clear he would need a formal endorsement from the Freedom Caucus before moving forward.

In remarks to reporters, Ryan laid out his vision for moving the House GOP from “being an opposition party to being a proposition party” and set terms under which he would assume the speaker’s post. Those terms effectively put the onus on his colleagues to coalesce behind him rather than forcing Ryan to campaign for the job.

“This is not a job I ever sought; this is not a job I ever wanted,” he said. “I came to the conclusion that this was a dire moment.”

Should he agree to assume the speaker’s post, Ryan would once again emerge as a leading force in national politics, three years after serving as his party’s vice presidential nominee and amid mass unrest in GOP ranks.

“If Paul Ryan can’t unite us, no one can. Who else is out there?” said Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.), a moderate. “That’d be a sign of utter dysfunction, total madness.”

Ryan’s demands reflect a desire to lead the House GOP as its spokesman and agenda setter without the threat of revolt from the right, halting a dynamic that has dominated the tumultuous speakership of Boehner (R-Ohio), who announced last month that he would leave Congress at the end of October. Another aim would be to delegate some of the job’s travel and fundraising demands so that Ryan could spend enough time with his wife and school-age children.

“My only caution is that he should go very slow and make sure that the whole conference is coming to him,” said former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R). “Don’t underestimate the degree of getting chewed up. We are not like the Democrats right now. They are relatively cohesive. . . . We are a movement in enormous ferment, with enormous anger and enormous impatience.”

Looming over Ryan’s deliberations is a churning frustration among Republicans nationally about the party’s ability to oppose President Obama and a presidential primary field led by anti-establishment outsiders who have made common cause with the House GOP’s right flank.

Those conservative House members have pushed for a suite of rules changes, ranging from an overhaul of the party’s internal steering committee to a more open process for considering legislation. Ryan, they say, would not be exempt from those demands, which, if adopted, could give the new speaker less control.

Ryan’s allies say his conditions for becoming speaker are likely to include an understanding that he would have a free hand to lead without a constant fear of mutinous reprisals.

Peter Wehner, a former adviser to President George W. Bush, said Ryan wants House conservatives to make clear that they would not seek to “cripple him” from the start.

“He doesn’t have a moral obligation to get Republicans out of the rubble they’ve created for themselves,” Wehner said. “Asking for their goodwill is completely reasonable.”

“Reasonable”.

There’s that word…again.

Why is it always us Conservatives, who are called upon to be “reasonable”, i.e., whether in dealings with the Democrats or the Establishment Republicans, to compromise the Traditional American Values which we hold dear, for the sake of Political Expediency?

Why can’t the Vichy Republicans be “reasonable” and actually start representing the wishes of the Conservative Base, which gave them their phony-baloney jobs?

In 1975, Ronald Wilson Reagan gave a speech which sums up our present situation and how we, the Conservative Base of the Republican Party, need to handle the Republican Party leadership, quite well.

Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness.

I don ‘t know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, “We must broaden the base of our party” — when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.

It was a feeling that there was not a sufficient difference now between the parties that kept a majority of the voters away from the polls. When have we ever advocated a closed-door policy? Who has ever been barred from participating?

Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?

Let us show that we stand for fiscal integrity and sound money and above all for an end to deficit spending, with ultimate retirement of the national debt.

Let us also include a permanent limit on the percentage of the people’s earnings government can take without their consent.

Let our banner proclaim a genuine tax reform that will begin by simplifying the income tax so that workers can compute their obligation without having to employ legal help.

And let it provide indexing — adjusting the brackets to the cost of living — so that an increase in salary merely to keep pace with inflation does not move the taxpayer into a surtax bracket. Failure to provide this means an increase in government’s share and would make the worker worse off than he was before he got the raise.

Let our banner proclaim our belief in a free market as the greatest provider for the people. Let us also call for an end to the nit-picking, the harassment and over-regulation of business and industry which restricts expansion and our ability to compete in world markets.

Let us explore ways to ward off socialism, not by increasing government’s coercive power, but by increasing participation by the people in the ownership of our industrial machine.

Our banner must recognize the responsibility of government to protect the law-abiding, holding those who commit misdeeds personally accountable.

And we must make it plain to international adventurers that our love of peace stops short of “peace at any price.”

We will maintain whatever level of strength is necessary to preserve our free way of life.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.

I believe that the Republican Party is stuck in a cycle in which their desire to protect their own hindquarters and cushy “jobs” have lead to a self-imposed isolation from the very American Citizens who were responsible for their having those cushy “jobs” in the first place.

I believe that average Americans, like you and me, have the power to relieve them of the burden of such a stressful job, and send others to Washington, who will listen to their “bosses”.

Just as Ronaldus Magnus said those 39 years ago, it is time to “let them go their way”.

Cryin’ John Boehner’s “resignation” was a good start.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Something Wicked This Way Comes? Syrian Refugees Tearing Up Europe

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

thLTI1PZZBDo you remember when Fox News recently reported that

… (Secretary of State John) Kerry said the United States will take in more refugees worldwide in the next two years, including 10,000 Syrian asylum seekers in 2016.

“We will now go up to 85,000 with at least 10,000 over the next year in Syria specifically. And in the next fiscal year we will target 100,000,” Kerry said.

In the fiscal year ending September 2015, the world’s biggest economy took in 70,000 refugees?

Things aren’t going so well, in regards to the Syrian Refugees still arriving in Europe, later to be arriving here.

News.Yahoo.com reports that

Germany’s PEGIDA movement holds an anti-migrant rally Monday a year on from its formation, highlighting a European backlash towards a massive influx that has heaped pressure on Chancellor

The demonstration comes a day after Swiss voters returned a historically strong result for a populist party known for its virulent campaigns against immigrants and Islam, and following a knife attack on a German mayoral candidate who championed refugee issues.

Monday’s rally, due to start at 1600 GMT in PEGIDA’s stronghold of Dresden, marks a contrast to efforts by Merkel who over the weekend made a crucial one-day trip to Turkey, where she hailed progress in helping Ankara deal with the migrant crisis and vowed to push forward its long-stalled EU membership bid.

The European Union wants Turkey to do more to tighten its border security and help contain the historic influx of Syrians and others escaping conflict, persecution and poverty.

In return, Ankara wants greater recognition for its role in hosting more than two million Syrian refugees, an increase in financial help and an acceleration of its stuttering drive for EU membership.

Merkel and the Turkish leadership indicated officials were making progress towards a deal on cooperation, although neither suggested a final agreement had been reached.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel (L) shakes hand with Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu after th …
She said Berlin was prepared to support opening EU accession talks on economic and monetary affairs, and would also consider opening more of the 35 total so-called “policy chapters”.

– ‘Dynamising accession’ –

Speaking after her talks with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Merkel said the EU and Turkey were in agreement to work closer “on dynamising the accession process” towards Turkey’s EU membership and also visa liberalisation for Turks wanting to travel to the EU’s Schengen zone.

“The talks in that direction are very promising and will be continued,” said Merkel.

Erdogan, who for months has bitterly criticised the EU’s attitude towards Turkey, also called for more accession chapters to be opened, while Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu praised a “better approach” from the 28-nation bloc.

Germany has been Europe’s top destination for refugees, most of whom travel through Turkey and the Balkans, and is expecting to register up to a million asylum requests this year.

While many Germans have welcomed the refugees, there has also been a backlash with Merkel’s party losing support while the long-dormant anti-Islamic PEGIDA protest movement has again drawn thousands of followers.

Simmering tensions ended in violence in the western city of Cologne on Saturday when a man with a knife attacked independent mayoral candidate Henriette Reker, who is active in helping refugees, leaving her with serious neck wounds and injuring four others.

Reker won Sunday’s election with an absolute majority.

The attacker, a 44-year-old unemployed man arrested at the scene, had “a racist motivation” according to police, and was said to have been close to the extreme right in the 1990s.

View gallery

Migrants and refugees cross the Slovenian-Austrian border in Sentilj onto Spielfeld on October 18, 2 …
– ‘Migration pressure’ –

In another sign of increasing anti-migrant sentiment in Europe, a Swiss populist party known for its virulent campaigns against immigration, the European Union and Islam won a record number of seats in the Alpine nation’s parliamentary elections on Sunday.

Merkel said that the fact Turkey had accomplished the immense task of looking after more than two million Syrian refugees on relatively little funding had led to “migration pressure” which resulted in the current unprecedented influx of migrants into Europe.

“We will engage ourselves more strongly financially as the European Union. Germany will play its part,” she promised.

More than 630,000 people fleeing war and misery have landed on Europe’s shores so far this year, many making risky sea crossings from Turkey to Greece.

Another 12 people drowned off the Turkish coast on Saturday, and on Sunday the Greek coastguard said five migrants including a baby and two boys had died trying to cross the Aegean Sea.

Separately, 20 Afghan would-be migrants bound for Europe were killed in Iran on Sunday when the mini-bus they were travelling in collided with a truck.

As the influx continued, Hungary closed its border with Croatia, forcing thousands of migrants to find a new route to northern Europe through Slovenia and into Austria.

But with numbers growing, Slovenia on Sunday said it would handle no more than 2,500 arrivals a day to ease pressure on both its own and Austria’s borders.

Meanwhile, in France…

Breitbart.com reports that

A mass intrusion by hundreds of migrants forced Eurotunnel cross-Channel rail services to be suspended in both directions last night after they stormed the terminal and platforms in France. The human tide led the Channel Tunnel operator to halt services from Folkestone, Kent and Coquelles in northern France.Passenger services are experiencing long delays today and the sale of tickets to travellers without reservations has been suspended, The Guardian reports.

A Eurotunnel spokesman said refugees were using diversionary tactics in order to occupy police to allow others to try to cross the Channel in the ensuing confusion. He said:

“They are coming in waves to occupy the police, then another wave comes, then another, until there is no more police. One group is then able to get through.

“Then we have to take over and sweep through the terminal and clear them all from the tracks and the platform.”

Eurotunnel is warning of ongoing delays at Folkestone, with trains operating “with some timetable disruption”. Passengers services from France are operating to schedule but delays can be expected, the Eurotunnel website says.

It emerged at the weekend that the number of migrants living in makeshift camps outside Calais has now reached 6,000.

At least 15 migrants have died in or near the tunnel since the start of the cross-Channel migrant crisis at the beginning of the summer.

One person died overnight on October 15-16 after being hit by a freight train at the Channel Tunnel’s Coquelles terminal. It followed the death on Thursday of a migrant, believed to be Syrian, who was hit by a car on a motorway close to the tunnel.

The increase in migrants attempting to cross the Channel prompted a string of measures to increase security at the terminal, including extra fencing and the deployment of more border force search and dog teams.

Recently, Ben Shapiro, writing for Breitbart News, asked and answered the following question…

Who Are These Refugees? That competition to accept refugees would be fine if we knew that the refugees plan on assimilating into Western notions of civilized society, and if we knew that they were indeed victims of radical Muslim atrocities. Unfortunately, we know neither. It is deeply suspicious that major Muslim countries that do not border Syria refuse to take in large numbers of refugees, except for Algeria and Egypt.

Turkey has taken in nearly two million refugees, according to the United Nations, and keeps the vast majority in refugee camps — a typical practice in a region that has kept Arab refugees from the 1948 war of Israeli independence in Arab-run camps for seven decades. Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq have taken in hundreds of thousands of refugees as well, but all border the chaotic, collapsing Syria, and thus have limited choice in the matter. Iran has taken in no refugees. Neither have Pakistan, Indonesia, or any of the other dozens of member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain all refused to take any refugees, and explicitly cited the risk of terrorists among the refugees, according to The Guardian (UK).

These fears are not without merit, as even Obama administration officials have acknowledged: back in February, director of the National Counterterrorism Center Nicholas Rasmussen called Syrian refugees “clearly a population of concern.” FBI Assistant Director Michael Steinbach explained, “Databases don’t [have] the information on those individuals, and that’s the concern. On Tuesday, State Department spokesman John Kirby told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer that terrorist infiltration was “a possibility. I mean, you can’t, you can’t dismiss that out of hand.” He then added, “Obviously, if you look at those images though, it’s pretty clear that the great majority of these people are innocent families.”

Actually, images show a disproportionate number of young males in crowds of refugees. And those images reflect statistical reality: according to the United Nations Human Rights Commission, Mediterranean Sea refugees are overwhelmingly male: just 13 percent are women, and just 15 percent are children. The other 72 percent are men. Compare that population to the refugees in the Middle East from the same conflicts: 49.5 percent male, and 50.5 percent female, with 38.5 percent under the age of 12. Those are wildly different populations.

It is also being reported that these “refugees” are leaving a trail of waste, human and otherwise, in their wake.

In other words, these guys believe that hygiene is a girl that they used to “date” back home.

Classy, huh?

It appears that we have a lot to look forward to.

Here’s a Million Drachma Question for ya: Why are the other Middle Eastern Countries not taking them in?

What do they know that we and the Europeans don’t?

I can answer those questions in three little words: “hijrah” and “taqujiyya”.

“Hijrah” refers to the undertaking of a pilgrimage to spread Islam to the World, such as undertaken by Mohammed between Mecca and Medina in 62 A.D., which is referred to as “The Start of the Muslim Era”.

“Taquiyya” is the Muslim Practice of purposeful lying to us “Infidels” in order to further the cause of Islam.

So, in case you are wondering, that, in a nutshell, is why informed Americans do not want 200,000 un-vetted Syrian “Refugees” brought here.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Signs “Deal” With Iran Before Congress Has the Chance to Approve It

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

Missing-Piece-600-LIPresident Barack Hussein Obama spat in the face of Congress and the American People, yesterday.

Foxnews.com reports that

President Obama on Sunday signed the Iran nuclear deal, officially putting the international agreement into effect.

The president’s signature opens the way for Iran to make major changes to an underground nuclear facility, a heavy water reactor and a site for enriching uranium.

However, the rogue nation will need months to meet those goals and get relief from the crippling economic sanction that will be lifted as part of deal, despite the pact going into effect Sunday.  

The seven-nation deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, was reached on July 14, after roughly two years of negotiations.

The so-called “Adoption Day” on Sunday also requires the United States and other participating countries to make the necessary arrangements and preparations for implementation” of the deal, the president said.

“Today marks an important milestone toward preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and ensuring its nuclear program is exclusively peaceful going forward,” Obama said. “I welcome this important step forward. And we, together with our partners, must now focus on the critical work of fully implementing this comprehensive resolution that addresses our concerns over Iran’s nuclear program.” 

Senior administration officials said Saturday they understand it’s in Iran’s best interest to work quickly, but they are only concerned that the work is done correctly.

They insisted that no relief from the penalties will occur until the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency has verified Iran’s compliance with the terms of the agreement. They said Iran’s work will almost certainly take more than the two months Iran has projected.

The administration officials spoke on a conference call with reporters, but under the condition that they not be identified by name.

As part of the nuclear agreement, Obama on Sunday also issued provisional waivers and a memorandum instructing U.S. agencies to lay the groundwork for relieving sanctions on Iran.

In Iran, Ali Akbar Velayati, a top adviser to supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told state TV: “On implementation, all should be watchful that Westerners, particularly Americans, to keep their promises.”

Velayati said Iran expects that the United States and other Western countries that negotiated the deal will show their “good will” through lifting sanctions.

Iran’s atomic energy chief, Ali Akbar Salehi, told state TV that Tehran was ready to begin taking steps to comply, and awaited an order from President Hassan Rouhani. “We are hopeful to begin in the current or next week,” he said.

The IAEA said Sunday that Iran has agreed to allow greater monitoring of its commitment to the deal, going beyond basic oversight provided by the safeguards agreement that IAEA member nations have with the agency. For instance, it allows short-notice inspections of sites the IAEA may suspect of undeclared nuclear activities.

Even as the terms of the deal begin taking effect, recent developments have shown the wide gulf between the U.S. and Iran on other issues.

Fighters from Iran have been working in concert with Russia in Syria, and a Revolutionary Court convicted a Washington Post reporter who has been held more than a year on charges including espionage. The court has not provided details on the verdict or sentence. Further, two other Americans are being detained, and the U.S. has asked for the Iranian government’s assistance in finding a former FBI agent who disappeared in 2007 while working for the CIA on an unapproved intelligence mission.

Also, Iran successfully test-fired a guided long-range ballistic surface-to-surface missile.

But the U.S. officials asserted that those actions would be worse if they were backed up by a nation with a nuclear weapon. The officials emphasized that the seven-nation pact is focused solely on resolving the nuclear issue.

The steps being taken by the U.S. come 90 days after the U.N. Security Council endorsed the deal.

So, Obama went around our System of Checks and Balances, and spit in the face of public opinion , running to the UN, in order to cement his Presidential Legacy, by reaching a “deal” with a country that hates our ever-lovin’ guts.

Per politico.com,

Ted Cruz’s worst fear about the nuclear deal with Iran? That “millions of Americans will be murdered by radical theocratic zealots.”

Speaking to reporters in the Capitol on Tuesday afternoon, the Texas senator and conservative presidential aspirant laid out several doomsday scenarios of what would happen if Iran acquires a nuclear weapon, which Cruz and many GOP critics charge is more likely under the agreement negotiated by Tehran’s leaders and the international community.

President Barack Obama and his administration argue that under the deal Iran’s ability to quickly make a bomb will be hamstrung, and that doing nothing would actually accelerate Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

But Cruz said if Iran were to acquire a bomb, he fears the detonation of a nuclear weapon over Tel Aviv, Israel’s second-largest city, that would “murder vast numbers of Palestinians” and Israeli Jews.

“The odds are unacceptably high that they would view the murder of those Palestinians is perfectly acceptable collateral damage to annihilating millions of Jews,” Cruz said.

The second scenario that Cruz said is a “really real risk” is Iran loading a nuclear bomb onto a ship, guiding it to the Atlantic Ocean and detonating it in the atmosphere to “shut down the entire electrical grid on the Eastern Seaboard.”

“It could take down our stock market, our financial systems, but even more importantly, could take down food delivery, water delivery, heat, air conditioning, transportation. The projections are that one nuclear warhead in the atmosphere over the Eastern Seaboard could result in tens of millions Americans dying,” Cruz said, responding to a question of what is the biggest risk under Obama’s nuclear deal. “The greatest risk to this Iranian deal, it is that millions of Americans will be murdered by radical theocratic zealots.” 

Cruz also weighed in on Secretary of State John Kerry’s reaction to remarks by Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei that he will “trample” the United States. Kerry said the comments were “disturbing” but wasn’t sure how to interpret them.

“John Kerry said something to the effect of: I don’t know what to make of Khamenei’s comment,” Cruz said. “There’s not a great deal of ambiguity in death to America. He’s not hiding his desired outcome and only a fool would desire to see radical theocratic zealots who are pledging to murder Americans to have nuclear weapons and the capability to murder millions of Americans in one flash of light.”

The Senate will vote on the Iran nuclear agreement in September.

So, just who did Obama feel was more important than the Legislative Branch of OUR Government?

The United Nations Security Council is composed of 15 Members:

There are five permanent members: China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United States,
and ten non-permanent members elected for two-year terms by the General Assembly (with end of term date): Angola (2016), Chad (2015), Chile (2015), Jordan (2015), Lithuania (2015), Malaysia (2016), New Zealand (2016), Nigeria (2015), Spain (2016), and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) (2016)

There are several times, during my musings, that I have described our blessed country as a Sovereign Nation. What does that mean?

On June 5, 2009, Professor Jeremy Rabin of George Mason University, author of “The Case for Sovereignty”, delivered a lecture sponsored by Hillsdale College in Washington, DC. What he said certainly applies to this situation…

The Constitution provides for treaties, and even specifies that treaties will be “the supreme Law of the Land”; that is, that they will be binding on the states. But from 1787 on, it has been recognized that for a treaty to be valid, it must be consistent with the Constitution—that the Constitution is a higher authority than treaties. And what is it that allows us to judge whether a treaty is consistent with the Constitution? Alexander Hamilton explained this in a pamphlet early on: “A treaty cannot change the frame of the government.” And he gave a very logical reason: It is the Constitution that authorizes us to make treaties. If a treaty violates the Constitution, it would be like an agent betraying his principal or authority. And as I said, there has been a consensus on this in the past that few ever questioned.

…At the end of The Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton writes: “A nation, without a national government, is, in my view, an awful spectacle.” His point was that if you do not have a national government, you can’t expect to remain a nation. If we are really open to the idea of allowing more and more of our policy to be made for us at international gatherings, the U.S. government not only has less capacity, it has less moral authority. And if it has less moral authority, it has more difficulty saying to immigrants and the children of immigrants that we’re all Americans. What is left, really, to being an American if we are all simply part of some abstract humanity? People who expect to retain the benefits of sovereignty—benefits like defense and protection of rights—without constitutional discipline, or without retaining responsibility for their own legal system, are really putting all their faith in words or in the idea that as long as we say nice things about humanity, everyone will feel better and we’ll all be safe. You could even say they are hanging a lot on incantations or on some kind of witchcraft. And as I mentioned earlier, the first theorist to write about sovereignty understood witchcraft as a fundamental threat to lawful authority and so finally to liberty and property and all the other rights of individuals.

Let me inform any idiotic individuals who might support Obama’s going to the United Nations first, instead of the Congress of the United States of America, with this simplistic work of naiveté, which Obama and Kerry are trying to pass of as a “treaty”, the way I feel about “answering” to the United Nations.

The United States of America is a Sovereign Nation, created by the blood, sweat, and tears of men and women, who rise above you in stature, honor, integrity, and courage to the point where you are not even fit enough to tie their boots.

To summarize, we are an “independent state”, completely independent and self-governing. We bow to no other country on God’s green Earth. We are beholden to no other nation. America stands on its own, with our own set of laws , The Constitution of the United States.

America is still the Greatest Nation on the Face of the Earth, despite all of President Barack Hussein’s efforts to make us “just another country”.

Congress needs to tell Obama to roll up that document of his capitulation, disguised as a treaty, and place it between him and the camel he rode in on.

Until He Comes,

KJ

An American Genocide: It’s Time for Christians to Speak Out From the Pulpit and On the Street

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics1 Comment

Abortion punishment 1052014But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.  – Matthew 19:14 (KJV)

The Christian Post reports that

Christian ethicist Russell Moore has said that congregations too afraid of being political to speak out against acts of immorality, like abortion, are similar to churches in the 1800s that remained silent on the issue of slavery.

As the featured speaker at the Institute on Religion and Democracy’s fifth annual Diane Knippers memorial lecture, Moore, the president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, criticized mainstream Christian congregations that have relaxed their teachings on key issues of sexual morality and other social issues in order to blend in with the “ambient culture” and appeal to today’s society. 
 
Moore explained that religious conservatives need to “preserve” the biblical truth for future generations. Although secular society likes to claim that Christian conservatives are on the “wrong side of history,” Moore told the audience that Christian conservatives should not be afraid to have their biblical convictions conflict with mainstream society and that they should really embrace the distinctive Christian message.

“This is something that Diane Knippers saw Mainline denominations losing as they believed that the best way to connect with the generations around them was to assimilate into the sameness of the ambient culture. That is a recipe for death,” Moore argued.

“It’s a recipe for death, precisely for the same reasons that Jesus is speaking to Pilate about a Kingdom that does not originate from the world. Christianity always thrives the best when we have a distinctive word and a distinctive word that is rooted in a specific view of authority. Jesus said, ‘I have come to bear witness for the truth.'”

“The arguments that we see happening right now over issues of human sexuality are not really about human sexuality,” Moore continued. “These are debates of apostolic authority.”

Despite the fact that religious conservative views on issues like gay marriage and abortion directly conflict with the views of a secular world, Moore assured that the historic Christian message has always conflicted with the world’s understanding.

Although many congregations in the last 50 years have altered their views and teachings to accommodate the modern worldviews, Moore warned that churches that have historically distanced themselves from the biblical truth eventually failed to exist.

“The miraculous was startling in the first century and in every other century, so the churches who discarded it no longer had anything distinctive to say and withered and died into obscurity,” Moore stated. “The churches who were willing to speak with a voice of authority about resurrection, the coming of Christ, supernatural regeneration by the Holy Spirit are the churches who had a witness to be able to bring forward.”

Moore further argued that secularism is not the world’s final “stopping point.”

“Secularism is just a stop along the path,” Moore said. “We must have a distinctive word in terms of claim to authority, and we must be willing to bear witness. We must be a conversionist people, which means that if we truly believe that the spirit of God is able to transform someone from sinner to saint, we will be the people who will not hesitate to speak the truth and to speak what often will be unpopular truths.”

Churches have long been responsible for speaking the unpopular truths on social issues, not just in today’s world where abortion and gay marriage are the hotly contested subjects, Moore said.

“The churches in 1845 Georgia that did not speak to slavery, were speaking to slavery,” Moore said. “If you stand in the pulpit and call people to repentance for drunkenness and sexual immorality, but you do not call them to repentance for man-stealing and kidnapping and pretending to own another human being, you have spoken to that issue by saying that it will not be something for which one must give an account at the judgement.”

“The churches in 1925 Mississippi that spoke about drunkenness and adultery, but did not speak about lynching, were speaking to lynching,” Moore continued. “They were baptizing the status quo by not calling people to repentance for a grave sin against God and against a neighbor.”

“The churches in 21st century America that do not speak to the personhood of the unborn are speaking to the personhood of the unborn by baptising the status quo and leaving consciences that are wounded and in need of Gospel liberation exactly where they are under accusation, rather than freeing them with a witness that is thought to be political.”

Russell Moore makes a good point.

However, I wish to take it a step further.

Christian Americans are not in a struggle against just Christianity vs. Secularism.

We are involved in a struggle of Good vs. Evil.

In 2003, Illinois State Senator Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm), spoke in front of his colleagues in defense of the infanticide known as Late-Term Abortion…

I just want to be clear because I think this was the source of the objections of the Medical Society. As I understand it, this puts the burden on the attending physician who has determined, since they were performing this procedure, that, in fact, this is a nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child – however way you want to describe it – is now outside the mother’s womb and the doctor continues to think that its nonviable but there’s, lets say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just out limp and dead, they would then have to call a second physician to monitor and check off and make sure that this is not a live child that could be saved. Is that correct?

While The Lightbringer was in the Illinois State Senate, he opposed a state version of the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, a bill which would make sure that babies who survive abortions are given proper medical care.

This measure also protected babies who were “aborted” through a purposeful premature birth and left to die afterwards.

During Obama’s U.S. Senatorial Campaign in 2004, his opponent attacked him for supporting infanticide by voting against the above-mentioned bill. Obama responded by claiming that he had opposed the state bill because it lacked the neutrality clause found in the federal version.

The Chicago Tribune reported on October 4, 2004,

Obama said that had he been in the U.S. Senate two years ago, he would have voted for the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, even though he voted against a state version of the proposal.

During Obama’s 2008 run for President, he stood by those claims.

In March, 2008, during a Townhall Meeting in Western Pennsylvania, Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) said,

Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.

Of course, Barack Hussein Obama was elected President of the United States. When he was “radically changing” everything about our sacred land, blood was being spilled across the fruited plains. Especially, in that same state of Pennsylvania:

On February 18, 2010, the FBI raided the “Women’s Medical Society,” run by Dr. Kermit Gosnell, a butcher, euphemistically killing babies under the title of “Abortion Doctor”.

The FBI entered the office about 8:30 p.m. expecting to find to find evidence that it was illegally selling prescription drugs. What they found was America’s Auschwitz:

There was blood on the floor. A stench of urine filled the air. A flea-infested cat was wandering through the facility, and there were cat feces on the stairs. Semi-conscious women scheduled for abortions were moaning in the waiting room or the recovery room, where they sat on dirty recliners covered with blood-stained blankets. All the women had been sedated by unlicensed staff. They also found out that a patient had died there several months earlier.

Until 2009, Gosnell reportedly performed mostly first and second trimester abortions. But his clinic had come to develop a bad reputation, and could attract only women who couldn’t get an abortion elsewhere, former employees have said. “Steven Massof estimated that in 40 percent of the second-trimester abortions performed by Gosnell, the fetuses were beyond 24 weeks gestational age,” the grand jury states. “Latosha Lewis testified that Gosnell performed procedures over 24 weeks ‘too much to count,’ and ones up to 26 weeks ‘very often.’ …in the last few years, she testified, Gosnell increasingly saw out-of-state referrals, which were all second-trimester, or beyond. By these estimates, Gosnell performed at least four or five illegal abortions every week.”

On January 22, 2013, Obama said,

On the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we reaffirm its historic commitment to protect the health and reproductive freedom of women across this country and stand by its guiding principle: that government should not intrude on our most private family matters, and women should be able to make their own choices about their bodies and their health care.

The Liberal mind is fascinating.  Sick and twisted…but, fascinating. On the one hand, Obama is saying that children are to be cherished and protected. I agree.

At, the same time, he stands by a woman’s right to kill her baby. I can hear the Liberals screeching right now.

That’s not a baby. It’s a fetus! It’s not the same thing! You chauvinist pig!

(Fetus is Latin for BABY)

If cherishing God’s gift of life makes me a “chauvinist pig”, you’re darned skippy I am! Yay, pigs! Sooey! That’s not a puppy growing in there, y’all.

The blatant hypocrisy shown by Obama, his loyal minions in Congress, and the MSM, the Liberal pundits on TV and Radio, and ignorant “seminar” callers and posters on Conservative websites, in defense of  “their rights “not to be punished with a baby” and their silence regarding the American Auschwitz know as the Gosnell Case, is reminiscent of Germany in the 1930s…and positively chilling.

Remember a while back, when MSNBC Host, and resident Communist, Melissa Harris-Perry proclaimed, 

…we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities. Once it’s everybody’s responsibility, and not just the household’s, then we start making better investments.

Evidently, for Obama and the rest of the Liberals, that only applies when the child is no longer a “punishment”.

And, if Christian Americans do not speak out against this American Genocide…WHO WILL?

God help us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s Moral Equivalency: Israel’s Right to Defense = Palestinian Terrorism

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, PoliticsLeave a comment

AFBrancoObamaCarterAward1092014The New York Times reports that

UNITED NATIONS — Israel’s new ambassador to the United Nations plunged into his first public diplomatic engagement here on Friday, ruling out any international protection force for a disputed holy site in Jerusalem, as the Palestinians demand.

In an appearance outside the Security Council chambers, the new ambassador, Danny Danon, a former deputy defense minister in Israel known for hawkish views, also condemned the Palestinian leadership for what he called its instigation of violence against Jews.

Mr. Danon portrayed the series of stabbings and other attacks on Israelis in recent weeks, coupled with an arson attack at the holy site known as Joseph’s Tomb in the West Bank city of Nablus on Friday, as the direct result of what he described as hate-filled incitement of Palestinian children.

“I wish my first time speaking to you was on happier terms,” Mr. Danon, 44, told reporters as the Security Council convened a meeting on the latest Palestinian-Israeli violence.

An underlying cause of the mayhem has been tensions surrounding the holy site in Jerusalem known as the Temple Mount to Jews and the Noble Sanctuary to Muslims.

Palestinians have said they fear Israelis are planning to take over the site, which under a longstanding arrangement is administered by a religious council under Jordanian custodianship. Israel has repeatedly called such fears false, unfounded and inflammatory.

Mr. Danon dismissed a request by the Palestinian delegation for an international protection force to provide security at the site.

“We don’t think any intervention will help,” Mr. Danon told reporters. “Keeping the status quo is right thing to bring stability and to keep stability in the region.”

France said it intends to advance a draft statement calling for “restraint” and “maintaining the status quo.” The Security Council has not discussed any text. A statement is not legally binding and has little effect.

The Palestinian ambassador, Riyad H. Mansour, told the Council that the need for international protection at the site had become “more urgent than ever before.”

The United Nations legal office has prepared a confidential memorandum listing examples of how a protection force could be deployed. But to make it public and bring it up for discussion would require consensus among all 15 Security Council members. That has proved elusive.

Seven Israelis and more than 30 Palestinians have been killed in recent weeks, the United Nations assistant secretary-general, Tayé-Brook Zerihoun, told the Council.

He said the loss of hope in prospects for a Palestinian state had contributed to what he called the “anger and frustration” that fuels the violence. He welcomed Israel’s commitment to maintaining the status quo.

What has been the reaction of the Obama Administration to this outbreak of Palestinian violence within the borders of one of traditionally closest allies?

Amateurish moral equivalency and a lack of spine, all too common in this Administration, has put us on the outs with our friend, Israel.

The Jerusalem Post reports that

US Secretary of State John Kerry will meet Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Germany next week to discuss the recent spate of violence between Israel and Palestinians in which 39 people have been killed, the Israeli ambassador to Washington said on Friday.

Kerry, who has said he planned to go to the Middle East soon to try to calm the violence, was traveling to Europe on Friday. Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer, confirmed the planned meeting in Germany during an interview with CNN.

“That discussion will be, ‘OK, how do we get back to where we were in order to calm things down’,” Dermer said.

A spokesman for German Chancellor Angela Merkel said earlier on Friday that Netanyahu will travel to Germany on Wednesday for talks with Merkel on the security situation in Israel and the wider Middle East.

According to Israel’s Channel 10, the premier will seek an explicit statement from Washington supporting Israel’s position that it is preserving the status quo on Temple Mount and throughout Jerusalem’s Old City.

Thus far, the Obama administration has been reluctant to issue such a declaration.

Jerusalem reacted furiously on Thursday to State Department spokesman John Kirby’s statement that Israel is not maintaining the status quo on the Temple Mount and accusing it of using “disproportionate force” to stop the wave of stabbing attacks.

“The comments by the US State Department spokesman are so crazy, deceitful and baseless, that I expect President [Barack] Obama and Kerry to distance themselves from them, and to clarify the US position,” Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan said.

Kirby ignited a maelstrom of anger when, during the State Department’s daily press briefing on Wednesday, he was asked numerous questions about the situation in Israel.

Asked about the placement of roadblocks at the entrance to some east Jerusalem neighborhoods that day, Kirby said that Israel has a “right and responsibility to protect its citizens.”

Then he continued, “We’ve certainly seen some reports of what many would consider excessive use of force. Obviously we don’t like to see that,” adding shortly afterward, “We’re concerned about that.”

Erdan told Israel Radio that it was the “height of hypocrisy” for Kirby, who just last week needed to explain the US’s accidental bombing of a hospital in Afghanistan leading to the deaths of 22 people, to “preach” to Israel.

Erdan, in a Twitter message, wrote that “every reasonable person knows very well how the police in the United States would act if terrorists armed with axes and knives would come to kill citizens in New York and Washington.”

Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon said in an Israel Radio interview that Jerusalem heard in the last few days from the US and the UN that it was using disproportionate force. “If someone wields a knife and they kill him, is that excessive force? What are we talking about?” he asked.

And Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked referred to the remarks as well, telling Israel Radio that “if people with knives were roaming the streets of New York and started stabbing people, they would not be asked to present their IDs, and the NYPD would draw their weapons.”

The US administration “can say whatever it wants, and we will do what is needed,” Shaked said.

While Kirby did not walk back these comments, he did take to Twitter to clarify remarks he made at the press briefing that the status quo on the Temple Mount was not being maintained.

“Clarification from today’s briefing: I did not intend to suggest that status quo at Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif has been broken,” he posted in a message early on Thursday morning.

An hour later he added, “We welcome both Israel’s & Jordan’s commitment to continued maintenance of status quo at Temple Mount/Haram Al-Sharif.”

Asked during the press briefing whether the administration believes the status quo on the Temple Mount has been broken, he replied: “Well, certainly, the status quo has not been observed, which has led to a lot of the violence.”

That the status quo was not being observed, he asserted, is “indisputable. That’s not a belief; that’s a fact.”

Netanyahu has said repeatedly over the past few weeks that Israel has not changed the status quo on the Temple Mount, nor has it any intention of doing so, characterizing Arab charges to the contrary as “lies” and “deceit.”

Kirby’s comments came shortly after he tried to clarify comments Kerry made on Tuesday night that also irked Jerusalem, implying that Israel’s settlement construction caused the current outbreak of terrorism.

“What’s happening is that, unless we get going, a two-state solution could conceivably be stolen from everybody,” Kerry said during a speech at Harvard University. “And there’s been a massive increase in settlements over the course of the last years, and now you have this violence, because there’s a frustration that is growing.”

Kirby attempted to clarify the secretary’s comments.

“The secretary wasn’t saying, well now you have the settlement activity as the cause for the effect we’re seeing,” Kirby told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday.

“Is it a source of frustration for Palestinians? You bet it is, and the secretary observed that. But this isn’t about affixing blame on either side here for the violence. What we want to see is the violence cease.”

He said that the US position against Israel’s settlement construction is “crystal clear” and remains unchanged.

Even though Israel is now a basically secular nation, the Temple Mount remains of utmost importance to both the Jewish and Christian Faiths. While Jewish pressures for prayer on the Mount or the building of a Third Temple, represent a minority point of view,  practicing Jews around the world have considered the eventual building of a third temple an obligation, or at least something that would be accomplished when the Messiah comes.

Even though Israel is “secular”, on the Day of Atonement the majority of the people still fast the whole day and go to a synagogue. Other religious holidays are observed to an increasing degree. Interest in the Bible and its claims is increasing. Because of this, national Jewish consciousness and media attention concerning the Temple Mount is rising.

These events have caused fear in the minds of the Muslims and has led in recent years to poor treatment of both Jewish and Christian visitors to the Temple Mount and to arbitrary restrictions of access as well as several incidents of harassment by Arab guards. This situation has been exacerbated by Muslim Terrorist attempts to shoot up or blow up the Dome of the Rock and El-Aqsa.

Obama and his State Department’s amateurish “So what?” reaction to the Palestinian Terror Campaign has Americans and the rest of the world, who are paying attention and support Israel’s right to self-defense, flummoxed.

To equate the actions of a sovereign nation, in defense of their citizenry, with the barbaric destruction of Palestinian Terrorists is disingenuous at best and dangerously naïve, at worst.

As I have documented previously, with Obama’s ill-conceived “Iranian Agreement” and his disastrous Foreign Policy of “Smart Power” which led to the bonfire know as “Arab Spring”, Obama has set the Mid-East ablaze.

The question now is, can the next President fix this mess, or, are we seeing, slowly and execrably, Biblical Prophecy being played out before our very eyes?

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

The War Against Christianity: Trying to Quantify the Unquantifiable

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics1 Comment

American ChristianityI am a Christian American Conservative. I make no apologies for that fact.

Depending on which poll you read, Christians comprise 70-75% of America’s Population.

During the Obama Administration, there has been a concerted and very visible effort to limit the role which Christianity plays in the day-to-day lives of average Americans.

This was already done, decades ago, in Europe, and now, they are suffering the consequences of their actions.

The Christian Post reports that

The Church of England is reportedly considering plans to keep some historic village churches across the country opened only on holy days such as Christmas and Easter due to population shifts and the ever-growing decline in attendance and church membership.

A major 66-page report by the CofE’s Church Buildings Review Group noted that many churches are no longer sustainable, and that about one in four parishes have fewer than 10 regular worshipers.

The report proposes turning some parishes into “festival churches” in order to ease the financial burden, suggesting that they will only be used for key dates on the religious calendar, or occasions such as marriage and funerals.

Festival churches are only one of the widespread changes proposed by the review group, which says it is focused on “securing spiritual and numerical growth and serving the common good.”

“We believe that — apart from growing the church — there is no single solution to the challenges posed by our extensive responsibility for part of the nation’s historic heritage,” the group added.

The CofE has had to deal with sharp decline over the past 30 years, as reported in May by NatCen Social Research.

The group’s Social Attitudes survey found that 40 percent of the British population identified as Anglicans in 1983, but that number is down to only 17 percent in 2014. Presently only 8.5 million Britons identify as Anglicans, the survey said.

People of no religious faith now make up close to half of the population in Britain, or 49 percent, which is up from their 31 percent count in 1983.

With the steady rise of immigration, the rise of non-Christian faiths has also been well documented, with Islam making up close to 5 percent of all Britons in 2014, up from 0.5 percent in 1983.

Could this happen in America?

It is a fact that a significant number of Americans have left Organized Religion, frankly, because by embracing Popular Culture, instead of God’s Holy Word, the church they attended LEFT THEM.

For example…

The Episcopal Church continues to experience losses in both church attendance and membership, according to recently released numbers from the denomination’s Office of the General Convention.

From 2013 to 2014, active baptized members in domestic dioceses went from 1.866 million to 1.817 million, representing a loss of nearly 50,000 members. 

The statistics reveal that in 2014 that average Sunday attendance was a little over 600,000 in domestic dioceses, down from approximately 623,000 in 2013.

2014’s numbers are even more telling when compared with 2009, when the theologically liberal Episcopal Church had about 200,000 more members and over 80,000 more Sunday worship attendees.

Jeff Walton, Anglican program director at the theologically conservative Institute on Religion & Democracy, noted in a blog entry last week other aspects of decline for the Church.

“Other measures of Episcopal Church vitality also saw decline: the denomination reported the shuttering of 69 parishes and missions, down from 6,622 in 2013 to 6,553 in 2014,” wrote Walton.

“Children’s baptisms declined 4.8 percent from 25,822 to 24,594 and adult baptisms declined during the same time-frame from 3,675 to 3,530, a decline of nearly 4 percent.”

The losses experienced between 2013 and 2014 are nearly double the roughly 27,000 fewer members between 2012 and 2013.

Why do churches who allow the world’s “Popular Culture” to influence their worship of God, tend to have to eventually close their doors?

Perhaps, it is because, instead of concentrating on the “Divine Mystery” of the Triune God, Liberal Churches are “trying to quantify the unquantifiable”.

Stream.org has posted an article on-line, in which scientists claim that they can change someone’s opinion about the existence of God and illegal immigrants, through the use of magnets.

In Brainwashed: The Seductive Appeal of Mindless Neuroscience Sally Satel (psychiatrist) and Scott Lilienfeld (psychologist) say “the half-life of facts can be especially brief” in this field. New results disprove older ones continuously.After the zapping, all participants were re-asked the same questions. Turns out participants “reported an average of 32.8% less conviction in positive religious beliefs” than those who weren’t zapped. That’s 32.8% and not 32.7%, mind you. In science we demand precision! A wee p-value confirmed that this change was “statistically significant.” There isn’t space here to explain the horror of this statistical approach, but interested readers can learn more here.

This is where it gets interesting. There was, as we have just seen, a small change in the answers to pseudo-quantified questions about positive religious beliefs, but there weren’t any “significant” changes in the answers to pseudo-quantified questions about negative religious beliefs. The same sort of thing happened in the questions about immigrants: Some had wee p-values and some did not. And there were no changes in any of the other questions asked. Yet which “findings” got the headlines?

We still haven’t answered the big question: why. Why did the authors design a study about belief in God and attitudes about immigrants? From their conclusion, written in the impenetrable prose typical of such “studies”:

“History teaches that investment in cherished group and religious values can bring forth acts of both heroic valor and horrific injustice. Understanding the psychological and biological determinants of increases in ideological commitment may ultimately help us to identify the situational triggers of, and individuals most susceptible to, this phenomenon, and thereby gain some leverage over the zealous acts that follow. …The results provide evidence that relatively abstract personal and social attitudes are susceptible to targeted neuromodulation, opening the way for researchers to not only describe the biological mechanisms undergirding high-level attitudes and beliefs, but also to establish causality via experimental intervention.”

Did you catch that? These scientists hope that in the future belief in God, or in some other politically incorrect question that might — only might — lead to “zealous acts,” can be treated, maybe even cured, by magnet zappings. And there you have the real danger that follows from believing you can quantify the unquantifiable.

Popular Culture, under the guise of “making the individual feel better about themselves”, actually constrains individual achievement.

These “millennials”, by believing that they are “their own god”, are limiting themselves.

History has shown us, time and again, what happens to a society, when man starts worshiping himself.

As Proverbs 16:18 tells us

Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

Right now, you’re probably saying to yourself,

Hold on, KJ, you just said that the individual CAN achieve.

Yes, I did.

Those who have gone before us, such as our Founding Fathers, our military leaders, our civic leaders, and our spiritual and familial leaders, all had one thing in common:

They all possessed a spirit of self-sacrifice.

Not sacrificing their will to achieve for the “good of the State”, but, rather, unselfishly sacrificing their time and talents for the betterment of those around them.

And, that is where the “Progressives” (i.e., Liberals), get it wrong.

It is not “the State”, nor the community-at-large, that drives, or allows, Individual Americans to succeed.

Anytime that man tries to limit God, he sets himself up for failure.

It is that “still, small voice” that resides within each one of us that has endowed us with our “certain inalienable rights” as Americans, of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness”, that gives us the strength and discernment to succeed.

For without God, nothing is possible.

Until He Comes,

KJ