The Dangers of Extreme Calvinism
One of the issues that the Christian Church has had to face over the years is the debate between Calvinism and Arminianism. One side says that Gods election (choosing) is the ultimate path to salvation, while the other side says that man has free-will [concerning] salvation.
This debate is quickly spilling over into our New Testament assemblies. Assemblies have usually taken a middle of the road position on this issue. We see the truths of God choosing (Romans 11:7) and man choosing (Matthew 23:37 and Luke 18:22,23) both taught in Scripture. And if we dont completely understand how these two concepts fit together, we still accept all that the Bible has to say about this issue.
Yet there are some within our assemblies who are pushing us to take a more Calvinistic view. Some are graduates of the schools we have supported, and some have simply fallen under the sway of well meaning but extremely zealous Calvinists. I write this article because I am afraid that extreme Calvinism has serious consequences, and is going to damage many assemblies over the next few years, and will cause much disunity and many splits.
Perhaps the greatest danger of extreme Calvinism is its obsessive nature. While some who hold this view possess fine Christian character, many can talk about little else. They will push the doctrine of election when they preach, when they pray and when they worship. Some will even push for the adoption of this doctrine to become a test of fellowship. Some assemblies, having fallen under the influence of strong Calvinists, now declare that a man cannot be an elder until he has understood Gods sovereign grace (which is a euphemism for adopting a strongly Calvinist position). It is probable that these people will feel that other Christians have a defective view of Gods sovereignty.
Another danger concerns how extreme Calvinists deal with Scripture. Any verse that seems to imply human decision must be explained away or made to fit into some sophisticated theory. Some verses are radically reinterpreted. For example, an extreme Calvinist would say that the gift in Ephesians 2:8,9 is faith, not salvation. They will tell us that references to world, as in John 3:16, do not actually refer to all men, but only the elect.
A third danger concerns how the Gospel is preached. We are thankful for every Calvinist who sees the need to preach the Gospel (and most do see this need), but we might be surprised at some of what they say. Instead of calling out for sinners to repent and make their decision today, they will pray that God would give them grace. It is likely that a sinner would be confused at what the Calvinist is saying. An extreme Calvinist can never tell a sinner that God loves them and wants to save them, because in their system of theology, God only loves some. The extreme Calvinist will never tell sinners that Christ died to save them, because under their system of theology, Christs atonement is limited, and He only died for some.
The final danger of extreme Calvinism is that it presents an unbiblical viewpoint of the character of God. Some in the Calvinist camp, including Arthur W. Pink, and even John Calvin himself believed that God creates people for the purpose of damning them. If this was the teaching of Scripture, we would be forced to accept it, but it is not. Such views are the speculations of theological extremists.
The relationship between Gods election and mans choosing is a deep one. There are no easy answers. But both truths are taught in Scripture. Calvinists are not [necessarily] cultists, but brothers and sisters who have taken a Biblical truth to an unbiblical extreme. Calvinism, in its extreme form has very serious consequences, and those who shepherd the believers, as well as all Christians who love the Word of God and the Gospel, must guard against those who would push us into a dangerously one-sided position.
Retrieved from:
http://www.brethrenonline.org/articles/EXCALVIN.HTM
Sunday, December 26, 2010
HOSTAGE TO THE LAW
By Sheriff Jim R. Schwiesow, Ret.
December 22, 2010
NewsWithViews.com
"If the law supposes that,’ the law is an ass, an idiot.' Thus, the law is stupid.” -Mr. Bumble of the Charles Dickens' novel Oliver Twist
“And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers” -Luke 11.46
It is important to understand that the U.S. Code contains many thousands - a multitude - of statutory laws. Arguably one cannot get through a day without violating one or more of these statutes; they are all inclusive, intrusive, and invasive to every segment of our day to day existence. They are a virtual web of entrapment and they have been specifically drafted to that purpose. These statutes are a practical catch-all that enables the control of the people by the federal government through its increasingly oppressive and tyrannical enforcement agencies. The U.S. Code as it exists is an enemy of justice and it separates the people from their God-given and inherent liberties.
Those who insist that statutory law is not binding because it was enacted without the consent of the people are barking up the wrong tree. In the secular subjective minds of the federal judiciary and the federal government the statutes of the U.S. Code are binding and enforceable. Some people are hard learners and those who shun the spiritual path just do not understand that they will never of their own ability bring about a return of Constitutional government, common law, or any of the other tenants or personal freedoms of a Constitutional Republic.
I am actually weary of the writing of articles; they do little good other than to provide some entertainment. Every day I get up and realize that I am living in a nation overrun with idiots; my Dad would have said should he have lived in these days, that these haven't enough sense to pour pee out of a boot.
Those who think that these laws, many of them blatantly unconstitutional, are not binding upon them and that they are not subject to a totalitarian state are full of it, baloney that is...the federal prisons contain many who thought likewise and they will languish in those prisons until the sentences expire on their transgressions of certain capricious and arbitrary statutory laws that were imposed by a system that now has complete autonomy over the people. Who will risk the wrath of the agents of a totalistic system to come to their aid or defense? The answer is no one. To put it bluntly we are screwed, and the only consolation and comfort I have is the fact that these abominable degenerates will stand in the blinding presence of the Lord one day and there will be a great wailing and gnashing of teeth in the face of His judgment.
TOO LITTLE TOO LATE
I do admire and respect those who have fought an almost continual battle to bring this nation back to its roots as a Constitutional Republic. I am afraid that those so disposed are few and the few are hostage to the will of the majority - a now completely deceived, ignorant, and indolent people - that have eschewed personal liberty in exchange for federal and state entitlements (unearned government handouts).
We once were, but are no more, a spiritual people. The Apostle Paul predicted that we would be in these days a people having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof. Indeed we are a nation of counterfeit Christians. Satan and his legions of demonic angels have been released from God's bounds and given the agency to work their will upon a morally filthy people.
When I entered the law enforcement profession we, in my state, were functioning under the last vestiges of Common Law. Embedded in our laws were props for upholding the moral principles of God's Commandments. The lower courts were still occupied by individuals that were selected by the people. Our cases were most often initiated by a petition - or filing - with an elected Justice of the Peace, and the Sheriffs' were sovereign and endowed with the authority to summon the power of the county and, through the Governor, the power of the state. The all-encompassing and all-corrupting bureaucracies had not come to the full realization that they have achieved today.
PROGRESSIVE REFORM BRINGS ALL GOOD THINGS TO AN END
“Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.” -Luke 11.52
In 1977 the state legislature of my state - without rational reason and at the instigation of the state bar association - undertook a massive revision of the state code, including the criminal statutes. The elective offices of the Justice of the Peace and the Township Constable were eliminated without a slightest protestation by the people. The Justices of the Peace were replaced by politically appointed judicial magistrates and it was mandated that these be lawyers.
This new codification of laws became, as a whole, a net of secularly enforced controlling statutes that regulated every minute aspect of the lives of the people, just as the U.S. Code assures a federal corporate ascendancy over the exclusive personal rights of the peoples of the nation. All laws that affirmed the moral principles embodied in God's Commandments were removed and made void. The people rejoiced they could now commit immoral acts, revel in degrading and base behavior, and flaunt their vices before God. Indeed the people of this nation jubilate for the license to sin without condemnation that has been granted them by an irreverent system.
To solidify this seizure of a body of law of and by the people the legislature further reorganized the judicial system. At the constant and insistently aggressive demands of the Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court the legislature caved in to his continual carping and badgering and removed the Office of the Clerk of Court from the county elective process and established state authority over the office. The erasure of the principles of common law was now complete.
The courts of all levels of government now either refuse or dismiss petitions submitted under Common Law. Some lawyers (there are yet some whom I respect) privately complain that the steady and ever-increasing creation of new statutes and the continual appending of revisions and additions to these have seriously disrupted an accrual of case law that has greatly impeded justice.
My state was not alone in its surrender to the progressives as it was joined in the departure from common law and the institution of arbitrary statutes and decrees by the other states. The laws in the entirety of this nation are now employed to enforce corporate government control over the people rather than to administer true justice. Laws are piled upon laws; even un-elected bureaucrats are given the authority to write administrative decrees that have the force of law. We are completely under the rule of a corporate system, and subject to the whims and caprices of those in the judiciary and beyond of no accountability to the people.
The displacement of state power by federal power, in regard to criminal law and the regulation of morals, is essentially complete. The individual states have allocated the powers that accrue to the tenth amendment to central governmental authority. Much of this I believe was that they could abrogate the responsibility for the welfare of their people and pass it unto the feds. They were most happy to line up at the trough - along with their indolent subjects - for federal handouts. In doing so they were bound to servitude to a central government by the prerequisites that were attached to these grants and so-called endowments.
Attempts to stem the tide in regard to this bastardization of the laws were sporadic, weak, and futile. Weak-minded citizens and an ignorance of fundamental Constitutional law aided and abetted the dedicated and ever agitating enemies of government by the people.
BIG DADDY RULES ALL
The story of Corporate Federalism has been written in this nation, and the writing began in 1861 with the onset of the civil war. There are those who contend that the civil war was God’s judgment as punishment for the pursuance of slavery, in point of fact this hypothesis is both fictitious and spurious. The war was fought to roll back or nullify the tenth amendment and to establish corporate federal control over the states. Nowhere in the Constitution is Congress given authority to regulate local matters concerning the health, safety, and morality of state residents these police powers are reserved - by the tenth amendment - to the individual states.
Until the last quarter of the twentieth century, this allocation of governmental power was viewed with grave concern by constitutionalists and by those explicating the superiority of a true Constitutional Republic over all other forms of governance. We have now come to a complete voluntary capitulation to federal corporate control and are on a short road to world governance.
The usurpation of state-rights and the allocation of power to corporate federalism could not have been accomplished without the complicity of an ill-educated people. I believe that the people are not truly intrinsically ignorant, but that they have been brought to such cognitive deficiency and falsity of thought by a patient, dedicated, and socially pervasive program by progressives to debase and replace righteous thought with degraded ideology, this to enable that one-world socialist government that these disciples of the devil pursue.
MEN WILL FAIL YOU – GOD NEVER WILL
To the cadence of unrighteous men this nation marches methodically and steadily upon the road to perdition. The present void apropos a moral foundation has accelerated a descent into the smoky chambers of the dark domain and doomed the souls of the millions that are being piped down this road by those that are corrupt of heart. Venal men are the undoing of this nation, who else is there to blame, but those who follow them.
Prepare your hearts for the coming of the Son; confess your sins and abjure your attraction to a Godless world, and He will be faithful to hear your prayer. And all God’s people say, Amen!
Full article:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Schwiesow/jim173.htm
December 22, 2010
NewsWithViews.com
"If the law supposes that,’ the law is an ass, an idiot.' Thus, the law is stupid.” -Mr. Bumble of the Charles Dickens' novel Oliver Twist
“And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers” -Luke 11.46
It is important to understand that the U.S. Code contains many thousands - a multitude - of statutory laws. Arguably one cannot get through a day without violating one or more of these statutes; they are all inclusive, intrusive, and invasive to every segment of our day to day existence. They are a virtual web of entrapment and they have been specifically drafted to that purpose. These statutes are a practical catch-all that enables the control of the people by the federal government through its increasingly oppressive and tyrannical enforcement agencies. The U.S. Code as it exists is an enemy of justice and it separates the people from their God-given and inherent liberties.
Those who insist that statutory law is not binding because it was enacted without the consent of the people are barking up the wrong tree. In the secular subjective minds of the federal judiciary and the federal government the statutes of the U.S. Code are binding and enforceable. Some people are hard learners and those who shun the spiritual path just do not understand that they will never of their own ability bring about a return of Constitutional government, common law, or any of the other tenants or personal freedoms of a Constitutional Republic.
I am actually weary of the writing of articles; they do little good other than to provide some entertainment. Every day I get up and realize that I am living in a nation overrun with idiots; my Dad would have said should he have lived in these days, that these haven't enough sense to pour pee out of a boot.
Those who think that these laws, many of them blatantly unconstitutional, are not binding upon them and that they are not subject to a totalitarian state are full of it, baloney that is...the federal prisons contain many who thought likewise and they will languish in those prisons until the sentences expire on their transgressions of certain capricious and arbitrary statutory laws that were imposed by a system that now has complete autonomy over the people. Who will risk the wrath of the agents of a totalistic system to come to their aid or defense? The answer is no one. To put it bluntly we are screwed, and the only consolation and comfort I have is the fact that these abominable degenerates will stand in the blinding presence of the Lord one day and there will be a great wailing and gnashing of teeth in the face of His judgment.
TOO LITTLE TOO LATE
I do admire and respect those who have fought an almost continual battle to bring this nation back to its roots as a Constitutional Republic. I am afraid that those so disposed are few and the few are hostage to the will of the majority - a now completely deceived, ignorant, and indolent people - that have eschewed personal liberty in exchange for federal and state entitlements (unearned government handouts).
We once were, but are no more, a spiritual people. The Apostle Paul predicted that we would be in these days a people having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof. Indeed we are a nation of counterfeit Christians. Satan and his legions of demonic angels have been released from God's bounds and given the agency to work their will upon a morally filthy people.
When I entered the law enforcement profession we, in my state, were functioning under the last vestiges of Common Law. Embedded in our laws were props for upholding the moral principles of God's Commandments. The lower courts were still occupied by individuals that were selected by the people. Our cases were most often initiated by a petition - or filing - with an elected Justice of the Peace, and the Sheriffs' were sovereign and endowed with the authority to summon the power of the county and, through the Governor, the power of the state. The all-encompassing and all-corrupting bureaucracies had not come to the full realization that they have achieved today.
PROGRESSIVE REFORM BRINGS ALL GOOD THINGS TO AN END
“Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.” -Luke 11.52
In 1977 the state legislature of my state - without rational reason and at the instigation of the state bar association - undertook a massive revision of the state code, including the criminal statutes. The elective offices of the Justice of the Peace and the Township Constable were eliminated without a slightest protestation by the people. The Justices of the Peace were replaced by politically appointed judicial magistrates and it was mandated that these be lawyers.
This new codification of laws became, as a whole, a net of secularly enforced controlling statutes that regulated every minute aspect of the lives of the people, just as the U.S. Code assures a federal corporate ascendancy over the exclusive personal rights of the peoples of the nation. All laws that affirmed the moral principles embodied in God's Commandments were removed and made void. The people rejoiced they could now commit immoral acts, revel in degrading and base behavior, and flaunt their vices before God. Indeed the people of this nation jubilate for the license to sin without condemnation that has been granted them by an irreverent system.
To solidify this seizure of a body of law of and by the people the legislature further reorganized the judicial system. At the constant and insistently aggressive demands of the Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court the legislature caved in to his continual carping and badgering and removed the Office of the Clerk of Court from the county elective process and established state authority over the office. The erasure of the principles of common law was now complete.
The courts of all levels of government now either refuse or dismiss petitions submitted under Common Law. Some lawyers (there are yet some whom I respect) privately complain that the steady and ever-increasing creation of new statutes and the continual appending of revisions and additions to these have seriously disrupted an accrual of case law that has greatly impeded justice.
My state was not alone in its surrender to the progressives as it was joined in the departure from common law and the institution of arbitrary statutes and decrees by the other states. The laws in the entirety of this nation are now employed to enforce corporate government control over the people rather than to administer true justice. Laws are piled upon laws; even un-elected bureaucrats are given the authority to write administrative decrees that have the force of law. We are completely under the rule of a corporate system, and subject to the whims and caprices of those in the judiciary and beyond of no accountability to the people.
The displacement of state power by federal power, in regard to criminal law and the regulation of morals, is essentially complete. The individual states have allocated the powers that accrue to the tenth amendment to central governmental authority. Much of this I believe was that they could abrogate the responsibility for the welfare of their people and pass it unto the feds. They were most happy to line up at the trough - along with their indolent subjects - for federal handouts. In doing so they were bound to servitude to a central government by the prerequisites that were attached to these grants and so-called endowments.
Attempts to stem the tide in regard to this bastardization of the laws were sporadic, weak, and futile. Weak-minded citizens and an ignorance of fundamental Constitutional law aided and abetted the dedicated and ever agitating enemies of government by the people.
BIG DADDY RULES ALL
The story of Corporate Federalism has been written in this nation, and the writing began in 1861 with the onset of the civil war. There are those who contend that the civil war was God’s judgment as punishment for the pursuance of slavery, in point of fact this hypothesis is both fictitious and spurious. The war was fought to roll back or nullify the tenth amendment and to establish corporate federal control over the states. Nowhere in the Constitution is Congress given authority to regulate local matters concerning the health, safety, and morality of state residents these police powers are reserved - by the tenth amendment - to the individual states.
Until the last quarter of the twentieth century, this allocation of governmental power was viewed with grave concern by constitutionalists and by those explicating the superiority of a true Constitutional Republic over all other forms of governance. We have now come to a complete voluntary capitulation to federal corporate control and are on a short road to world governance.
The usurpation of state-rights and the allocation of power to corporate federalism could not have been accomplished without the complicity of an ill-educated people. I believe that the people are not truly intrinsically ignorant, but that they have been brought to such cognitive deficiency and falsity of thought by a patient, dedicated, and socially pervasive program by progressives to debase and replace righteous thought with degraded ideology, this to enable that one-world socialist government that these disciples of the devil pursue.
MEN WILL FAIL YOU – GOD NEVER WILL
To the cadence of unrighteous men this nation marches methodically and steadily upon the road to perdition. The present void apropos a moral foundation has accelerated a descent into the smoky chambers of the dark domain and doomed the souls of the millions that are being piped down this road by those that are corrupt of heart. Venal men are the undoing of this nation, who else is there to blame, but those who follow them.
Prepare your hearts for the coming of the Son; confess your sins and abjure your attraction to a Godless world, and He will be faithful to hear your prayer. And all God’s people say, Amen!
Full article:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Schwiesow/jim173.htm
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Officer won't sign order for troop indoctrination
Asks to be relieved of command over repeal of 'gay' ban in military
Posted: December 24, 2010
By Brian Fitzpatrick
WorldNetDaily
President Obama's repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is already damaging the U.S. military.
An Army lieutenant colonel has asked to be relieved of command rather than order his troops to go through pro-homosexual indoctrination following the repeal of the policy, which required homosexuals to keep silent about their sexual preference.
Currently the commander of a battalion-sized unit in the Army National Guard, the officer also has threatened to resign his commission rather than undergo "behavior modification" training intended to counter his religious convictions about homosexuality.
Discover what's causing modern America to disintegrate. Read "HOW EVIL WORKS: Understanding and Overcoming the Destructive Forces That Are Transforming America"
The soldier sent the following letter to his commanding officer:
Subject: Request for Relief from Command due to Personal Moral Conflict with New Homosexual Policy
1. I respectfully request to be relieved of Command of XXX Squadron, XXX Cavalry prior to new policy implementation subsequent to the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." My personal religious beliefs and moral convictions do not permit me to treat homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle, compatible with military service, any more than adultery, illicit drug use, or criminal activity. I believe this lifestyle runs counter to good order and discipline in military units, and I refuse to sacrifice my belief system, protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, in order to fall in line with the command policy that will logically follow. This new policy will undoubtedly include mandatory sensitivity training as well as same-sex partner inclusion in Family Readiness Group activities and integration into the full spectrum of other military benefits, as well as a whole new category of discrimination standards and investigative procedures. I will not, as a commander, put my signature on a training schedule or other document recognizing or legitimizing any of these things that contradict my personal beliefs.
2. I would like to remain in the XXX Army National Guard until I am eligible for retirement (at 20 years and 0 days), which would be in the late summer of 2012, but on grounds of my religious beliefs, I will not attend sensitivity or behavior modification training consequential to this policy change, even if it means disciplinary action. I regret that I cannot continue to serve in the military further, but feel that my efforts would be insincere because my heart will no longer be in it."
"I will not be the person who forces this training on my soldiers," the officer, whose identity was being protected, told WND. He plans to go on the record as soon as he discusses his request with his chain of command.
The officer said he's aware of other officers who intend to resign their commissions.
"These people want to serve. I want to serve. I love my job, but I can't do this job once they begin to implement this policy," he told WND.
Under the terms of the DADT repeal, the armed forces will not be permitted to allow open homosexuality in the service until the president, secretary of defense and head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff can certify that terminating DADT will not impair military readiness. During the transition period that will precede certification, the military plans to require servicemen to attend mandatory training sessions intended to change their attitudes toward homosexuality.
"Very few soldiers are fine with open homosexuals in the service," said the officer. "I cannot believe the numbers jibe with what was published in the previous survey," referring to a study commissioned by the Pentagon to assess whether the military could safely repeal DADT.
"I did not give up my constitutional rights and freedom of religion when I joined the military. I don't believe in subjecting myself to all of the behavior modification and sensitivity training. They're going to try to push the position that this is an acceptable lifestyle."
Beyond concerns about violating his own conscience and the beliefs of his soldiers, the officer predicts several additional adverse consequences to repealing the military's ban on open homosexuality.
"I don't believe the steps they're taking allow a commander to maintain good order and discipline in a military unit," the officer told WND. "DADT was a compromise to allow homosexuals to serve as long as they kept it to themselves. Now they'll be able to throw their lifestyle in everybody's face and commanders won't be able to do anything about it."
The officer also predicted problems with retention and recruitment:
"I think it might not have an immediate, huge impact, but as enlistments expire you'll get people who vote with their feet and leave the service, and I don't believe the recruiting effort is going to offset the amount of people that leave. The military historically attracts a more conservative group of people who have certain principles and beliefs and swear an oath to the Constitution."
As previously reported by WND, some experts predict as many as a quarter of Americans in military service will resign or leave earlier than planned because of the advent of open homosexuality. Nearly half of the Marine Corps respondents to the Pentagon survey said they would consider leaving the service earlier than planned.
The officer also predicted growing security problems as homosexuals become more prevalent in the service.
"One of the Army values is selfless service. Placing the good of the nation above personal desires is an essential trait of a good soldier, who may be called upon to give his or her life in the nation's defense. When you start trying to attract people who are so self-centered that they put living their lifestyle out in the open above the needs of their country and national defense, then you have a really dangerous combination. That's when you get instances like PFC Bradley Manning, who is a homosexual. Because of his personal beliefs and bitterness toward the military he decided to leak 150,000 sensitive wires that have done irreparable damage to our nation."
Manning, an openly gay soldier, reportedly sent many thousands of sensitive documents to the Wikileaks website out of anger over the military's ban on open homosexuality.
Retrieved from:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=243213
Posted: December 24, 2010
By Brian Fitzpatrick
WorldNetDaily
President Obama's repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is already damaging the U.S. military.
An Army lieutenant colonel has asked to be relieved of command rather than order his troops to go through pro-homosexual indoctrination following the repeal of the policy, which required homosexuals to keep silent about their sexual preference.
Currently the commander of a battalion-sized unit in the Army National Guard, the officer also has threatened to resign his commission rather than undergo "behavior modification" training intended to counter his religious convictions about homosexuality.
Discover what's causing modern America to disintegrate. Read "HOW EVIL WORKS: Understanding and Overcoming the Destructive Forces That Are Transforming America"
The soldier sent the following letter to his commanding officer:
Subject: Request for Relief from Command due to Personal Moral Conflict with New Homosexual Policy
1. I respectfully request to be relieved of Command of XXX Squadron, XXX Cavalry prior to new policy implementation subsequent to the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." My personal religious beliefs and moral convictions do not permit me to treat homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle, compatible with military service, any more than adultery, illicit drug use, or criminal activity. I believe this lifestyle runs counter to good order and discipline in military units, and I refuse to sacrifice my belief system, protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, in order to fall in line with the command policy that will logically follow. This new policy will undoubtedly include mandatory sensitivity training as well as same-sex partner inclusion in Family Readiness Group activities and integration into the full spectrum of other military benefits, as well as a whole new category of discrimination standards and investigative procedures. I will not, as a commander, put my signature on a training schedule or other document recognizing or legitimizing any of these things that contradict my personal beliefs.
2. I would like to remain in the XXX Army National Guard until I am eligible for retirement (at 20 years and 0 days), which would be in the late summer of 2012, but on grounds of my religious beliefs, I will not attend sensitivity or behavior modification training consequential to this policy change, even if it means disciplinary action. I regret that I cannot continue to serve in the military further, but feel that my efforts would be insincere because my heart will no longer be in it."
"I will not be the person who forces this training on my soldiers," the officer, whose identity was being protected, told WND. He plans to go on the record as soon as he discusses his request with his chain of command.
The officer said he's aware of other officers who intend to resign their commissions.
"These people want to serve. I want to serve. I love my job, but I can't do this job once they begin to implement this policy," he told WND.
Under the terms of the DADT repeal, the armed forces will not be permitted to allow open homosexuality in the service until the president, secretary of defense and head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff can certify that terminating DADT will not impair military readiness. During the transition period that will precede certification, the military plans to require servicemen to attend mandatory training sessions intended to change their attitudes toward homosexuality.
"Very few soldiers are fine with open homosexuals in the service," said the officer. "I cannot believe the numbers jibe with what was published in the previous survey," referring to a study commissioned by the Pentagon to assess whether the military could safely repeal DADT.
"I did not give up my constitutional rights and freedom of religion when I joined the military. I don't believe in subjecting myself to all of the behavior modification and sensitivity training. They're going to try to push the position that this is an acceptable lifestyle."
Beyond concerns about violating his own conscience and the beliefs of his soldiers, the officer predicts several additional adverse consequences to repealing the military's ban on open homosexuality.
"I don't believe the steps they're taking allow a commander to maintain good order and discipline in a military unit," the officer told WND. "DADT was a compromise to allow homosexuals to serve as long as they kept it to themselves. Now they'll be able to throw their lifestyle in everybody's face and commanders won't be able to do anything about it."
The officer also predicted problems with retention and recruitment:
"I think it might not have an immediate, huge impact, but as enlistments expire you'll get people who vote with their feet and leave the service, and I don't believe the recruiting effort is going to offset the amount of people that leave. The military historically attracts a more conservative group of people who have certain principles and beliefs and swear an oath to the Constitution."
As previously reported by WND, some experts predict as many as a quarter of Americans in military service will resign or leave earlier than planned because of the advent of open homosexuality. Nearly half of the Marine Corps respondents to the Pentagon survey said they would consider leaving the service earlier than planned.
The officer also predicted growing security problems as homosexuals become more prevalent in the service.
"One of the Army values is selfless service. Placing the good of the nation above personal desires is an essential trait of a good soldier, who may be called upon to give his or her life in the nation's defense. When you start trying to attract people who are so self-centered that they put living their lifestyle out in the open above the needs of their country and national defense, then you have a really dangerous combination. That's when you get instances like PFC Bradley Manning, who is a homosexual. Because of his personal beliefs and bitterness toward the military he decided to leak 150,000 sensitive wires that have done irreparable damage to our nation."
Manning, an openly gay soldier, reportedly sent many thousands of sensitive documents to the Wikileaks website out of anger over the military's ban on open homosexuality.
Retrieved from:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=243213
Friday, December 24, 2010
Obama is Creating Jobs…in Iran, Venezuela, and Russia
President Obama is now promising to focus on job creation and says that what he wants to do is create high-paying employment opportunities for Americans.
But Obama has already proven to be a job creator–overseas. Because of his continued anti-oil policies, he is pushing American producers away from expanding exploration and production here in the United States. By blocking offshore oil drilling and issuing fewer permits in those areas where drilling is already allowed, oil companies increasingly look overseas for production opportunities. And countries like Iran, Venezuela, and Russia, couldn’t be happier. Why not? Oil prices are pushed higher and they are energy exporters. For energy importers like the United States, this is like an extra tax on consumers. Obama’s approach to energy is tantamount to rationing our petroleum resources.
Oil production creates high-paying jobs, both entry-level and those with experience. At the same time, greater domestic production would mean that we are sending fewer dollar overseas. As WikiLeaks revealed, many of the oil producing gulf states that we buy our oil from are heavily funding terrorism. So President Obama’s misguided energy policies are a trifecta: they damage our economy, enrich our adversaries, and indirectly fund terrorists.
So why is Obama clinging to this dangerous policy? One can only conclude that for him, ideology trumps realty. It is really more important for him to be “green” and punish oil companies than to create jobs for ordinary Americans. So the next time you hear that Obama has failed to create any jobs, please correct them. Just ask oil workers in Tehran or Caracas. They’ll tell you he’s created them there.
Retrieved from:
http://bigpeace.com/pschweizer/2010/12/23/obama-is-creating-jobs-in-iran-venezuela-and-russia/
But Obama has already proven to be a job creator–overseas. Because of his continued anti-oil policies, he is pushing American producers away from expanding exploration and production here in the United States. By blocking offshore oil drilling and issuing fewer permits in those areas where drilling is already allowed, oil companies increasingly look overseas for production opportunities. And countries like Iran, Venezuela, and Russia, couldn’t be happier. Why not? Oil prices are pushed higher and they are energy exporters. For energy importers like the United States, this is like an extra tax on consumers. Obama’s approach to energy is tantamount to rationing our petroleum resources.
Oil production creates high-paying jobs, both entry-level and those with experience. At the same time, greater domestic production would mean that we are sending fewer dollar overseas. As WikiLeaks revealed, many of the oil producing gulf states that we buy our oil from are heavily funding terrorism. So President Obama’s misguided energy policies are a trifecta: they damage our economy, enrich our adversaries, and indirectly fund terrorists.
So why is Obama clinging to this dangerous policy? One can only conclude that for him, ideology trumps realty. It is really more important for him to be “green” and punish oil companies than to create jobs for ordinary Americans. So the next time you hear that Obama has failed to create any jobs, please correct them. Just ask oil workers in Tehran or Caracas. They’ll tell you he’s created them there.
Retrieved from:
http://bigpeace.com/pschweizer/2010/12/23/obama-is-creating-jobs-in-iran-venezuela-and-russia/
Thursday, December 23, 2010
PROFANE PULPITS
By Coach Dave Daubenmire
December 23, 2010
NewsWithViews.com
Profane -- to treat (something sacred) with abuse, irreverence, or contempt.
“Her prophets are light and treacherous persons: her priests have polluted the sanctuary, they have done violence to the law.” -Zephaniah 3:4
“The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof?" -Jeremiah 5:31
For over six thousand years homosexuality was a crime. In 2003 the Supreme Court made it a civil right. This week, our “elected officials” opened the Pandora’s Box of sexual deviancy into the military.
If you haven’t read this spot-on analysis by Devvy Kidd on “The Queering of our Military” make time to do it now.
If you want an historical perspective on America’s treatment of sodomites over the years, this powerful lecture by Pastor Mark Trewhella is a must listen.
I urge you to forward both to all of your friends, and especially to your pastors!!!
Not one pastor in a hundred will dare to take this subject on. "Her prophets are light and treacherous persons: her priests have polluted the sanctuary. THEY HAVE DONE VIOLENCE TO THE LAW."
Who has done violence to the law? Her priests and her prophets…that sissy standing before you Sunday after Sunday…preaching “God’s love” void of God’s judgment.
“The prophets prophesy falsely; and the priests bear rule by their means…and my people love to have it so.”
Look folks, I don’t care what your pastor preaches to you, God abhors homosexuality. He does not “hate the sin and love the sinner” as the prissy pastors love to puke at us. It is the sinner He casts into the fire, not the sin.
"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."
Most pastors are loving sinners straight into hell, forgetting that the lake of fire was God’s idea!
God’s law is protective in nature. Although there are those who love to harp on the “negative rights” of the Ten Commandments…THOU SHALL NOT…the truth is that the Law of God is loving.
What is the purpose of a mother telling a young child not to run into the street? Is it because Mom doesn’t want the child to have fun, or is it because Mom wants the child to live? Mom’s rules, like God’s rules, have the child’s best interests at heart.
When a father teaches a child not to engage in pre-marital sex is it because he doesn’t want the child to have fun, or is it because he doesn’t want to see anyone harmed? Why did God forbid fornication? Why did he abhor homosexuality? Sin has “collateral” damage.
Ask yourself this. How many people have died as a result of the “if it feels good do it” attitude that permeates society? “Bowel movement sex,” as Devvy so accurately calls it, is responsible for millions of deaths worldwide. Can we even imagine the medical costs associated with STD’s and AIDS in the military? Who will pay for this? Pardon the pun, but, bend over.
(You do know, don’t you, that AIDS began in the sodomite community. GRIDS… Gay Related Immune Deficiency Syndrome was the original name before the diseases became infected with political correctness.) I wonder how many innocent people would be alive today if the truth had been told about sodomites and their “bowel movement sex?”
Pandora’s Sexual Box has now been opened. There will be no putting of the genie back into the bottle. Sexual anarchy has been loosed on America. If right and wrong become a matter of public opinion, based on what standard can any law be enforced?
Look, all men love sex. We were “born that way.” Why can’t I have sex with my daughter? Why can’t I have sex with children? Why can’t I have both a husband and a wife? How about multiples of both? Most men were born with a propensity for sexual promiscuity. Only the restraints of a common standard of right and wrong have prevented men from screwing like rabbits. Without that standard, “bowel-movement sex” becomes a civil right. Being “born that way” does not grant one the right to violate the “laws of nature.”
Unlike the other “sexual preferences” listed above “Bowel movement sex” is against the “laws of nature.” Sex with children is not against the “laws of nature”…we see it all the time in the animal world…but it is against the moral code of our culture. “Bowel movement sex” is not something a normal animal would do. In today’s military, however, this perversion is now normal.
“Gay pride.” We have lost our way in America. We are ashamed of what we should be proud of, and proud of that of which we should be ashamed.
And where are the pulpits in all of this? Instead of condemning the behavior, our pulpits want to “accept” them, “marry” them, “ordain” them, and compare their “struggle” to blacks. “Jesus loves blacks so he must love gays too!” Being black is not immoral. Inserting a penis into another man’s rectum is.
I get tired of defending myself when I take a position that aligns with God’s standard. I’ve been called everything but a white man…hatemonger...bigot…homophobe…intolerant…and I am sure that this commentary will unleash a new bevy of incoming hate-missiles from the tolerance crowd. So permit me to give the necessary disclaimer, I do not hate homosexuals.
But perhaps that is the wrong question to be asking. This issue is not what Coach Dave thinks…but what does God think. Does God love homosexuality? Is He proud of sodomites?
I always find it interesting when I read Revelation 21:8 that the first people the Scripture mentions as slated for the fire are the “fearful, and unbelieving,” along with “all liars.” Our pulpits are filled with such men.
They are too “fearful” to declare the Truth of God’s Word, too “unbelieving” to take Him at his Word, and to content to “lie” to themselves and others that God takes a live and let live approach to sin. A reading of Romans 1 shows it to be more along the lines of live and let die.
Being a pastor is a high calling…”to whom much is given, much is required”...but most have “polluted the sanctuary, they have done violence to the law.”
Sin, like a virus, spreads quickly if left unchecked. It is a silent killer more deadly than AIDS. The Gospel is the vaccine, designed by God to inoculate the world from its ravaging appetite. But sin has a new name. It is called “orientation”…a direction of thought…or interest…or inclination. “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.”
I guess we were all “born that way.” That’s why we all need to be “born again.”
The pimps in today’s pulpits have profaned the Law of God. They bow to government and its Godless-judges. They preach a lawless-gospel that aligns with the anti-Christ church of tolerance and diversity. They are promoters of the non-offensive gospel mandated by Caesar and his underlings.
Their profane Gospel finds favor with Caesar, while the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God bend to man-pleasing magistrates mandating man-pleasing morality. Admit it, calling a sodomite a sodomite makes you uneasy. God would never do anything so harsh…
So Pastor, as you stand in your pulpit, clinging to your retirement and your reputation, does the government fear you or do you fear the government?
How much more authority of Scripture are you willing to cede to Caesar?
“Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins” -Isaiah 58.
Homosexuality is sin. The Bible calls those who practice it sodomites. They are not “gay,” they are perverted. Do you have the courage to say it publicly? I just did.
You will serve the one you fear.
Retrieved from:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Daubenmire/dave219.htm
December 23, 2010
NewsWithViews.com
Profane -- to treat (something sacred) with abuse, irreverence, or contempt.
“Her prophets are light and treacherous persons: her priests have polluted the sanctuary, they have done violence to the law.” -Zephaniah 3:4
“The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof?" -Jeremiah 5:31
For over six thousand years homosexuality was a crime. In 2003 the Supreme Court made it a civil right. This week, our “elected officials” opened the Pandora’s Box of sexual deviancy into the military.
If you haven’t read this spot-on analysis by Devvy Kidd on “The Queering of our Military” make time to do it now.
If you want an historical perspective on America’s treatment of sodomites over the years, this powerful lecture by Pastor Mark Trewhella is a must listen.
I urge you to forward both to all of your friends, and especially to your pastors!!!
Not one pastor in a hundred will dare to take this subject on. "Her prophets are light and treacherous persons: her priests have polluted the sanctuary. THEY HAVE DONE VIOLENCE TO THE LAW."
Who has done violence to the law? Her priests and her prophets…that sissy standing before you Sunday after Sunday…preaching “God’s love” void of God’s judgment.
“The prophets prophesy falsely; and the priests bear rule by their means…and my people love to have it so.”
Look folks, I don’t care what your pastor preaches to you, God abhors homosexuality. He does not “hate the sin and love the sinner” as the prissy pastors love to puke at us. It is the sinner He casts into the fire, not the sin.
"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."
Most pastors are loving sinners straight into hell, forgetting that the lake of fire was God’s idea!
God’s law is protective in nature. Although there are those who love to harp on the “negative rights” of the Ten Commandments…THOU SHALL NOT…the truth is that the Law of God is loving.
What is the purpose of a mother telling a young child not to run into the street? Is it because Mom doesn’t want the child to have fun, or is it because Mom wants the child to live? Mom’s rules, like God’s rules, have the child’s best interests at heart.
When a father teaches a child not to engage in pre-marital sex is it because he doesn’t want the child to have fun, or is it because he doesn’t want to see anyone harmed? Why did God forbid fornication? Why did he abhor homosexuality? Sin has “collateral” damage.
Ask yourself this. How many people have died as a result of the “if it feels good do it” attitude that permeates society? “Bowel movement sex,” as Devvy so accurately calls it, is responsible for millions of deaths worldwide. Can we even imagine the medical costs associated with STD’s and AIDS in the military? Who will pay for this? Pardon the pun, but, bend over.
(You do know, don’t you, that AIDS began in the sodomite community. GRIDS… Gay Related Immune Deficiency Syndrome was the original name before the diseases became infected with political correctness.) I wonder how many innocent people would be alive today if the truth had been told about sodomites and their “bowel movement sex?”
Pandora’s Sexual Box has now been opened. There will be no putting of the genie back into the bottle. Sexual anarchy has been loosed on America. If right and wrong become a matter of public opinion, based on what standard can any law be enforced?
Look, all men love sex. We were “born that way.” Why can’t I have sex with my daughter? Why can’t I have sex with children? Why can’t I have both a husband and a wife? How about multiples of both? Most men were born with a propensity for sexual promiscuity. Only the restraints of a common standard of right and wrong have prevented men from screwing like rabbits. Without that standard, “bowel-movement sex” becomes a civil right. Being “born that way” does not grant one the right to violate the “laws of nature.”
Unlike the other “sexual preferences” listed above “Bowel movement sex” is against the “laws of nature.” Sex with children is not against the “laws of nature”…we see it all the time in the animal world…but it is against the moral code of our culture. “Bowel movement sex” is not something a normal animal would do. In today’s military, however, this perversion is now normal.
“Gay pride.” We have lost our way in America. We are ashamed of what we should be proud of, and proud of that of which we should be ashamed.
And where are the pulpits in all of this? Instead of condemning the behavior, our pulpits want to “accept” them, “marry” them, “ordain” them, and compare their “struggle” to blacks. “Jesus loves blacks so he must love gays too!” Being black is not immoral. Inserting a penis into another man’s rectum is.
I get tired of defending myself when I take a position that aligns with God’s standard. I’ve been called everything but a white man…hatemonger...bigot…homophobe…intolerant…and I am sure that this commentary will unleash a new bevy of incoming hate-missiles from the tolerance crowd. So permit me to give the necessary disclaimer, I do not hate homosexuals.
But perhaps that is the wrong question to be asking. This issue is not what Coach Dave thinks…but what does God think. Does God love homosexuality? Is He proud of sodomites?
I always find it interesting when I read Revelation 21:8 that the first people the Scripture mentions as slated for the fire are the “fearful, and unbelieving,” along with “all liars.” Our pulpits are filled with such men.
They are too “fearful” to declare the Truth of God’s Word, too “unbelieving” to take Him at his Word, and to content to “lie” to themselves and others that God takes a live and let live approach to sin. A reading of Romans 1 shows it to be more along the lines of live and let die.
Being a pastor is a high calling…”to whom much is given, much is required”...but most have “polluted the sanctuary, they have done violence to the law.”
Sin, like a virus, spreads quickly if left unchecked. It is a silent killer more deadly than AIDS. The Gospel is the vaccine, designed by God to inoculate the world from its ravaging appetite. But sin has a new name. It is called “orientation”…a direction of thought…or interest…or inclination. “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.”
I guess we were all “born that way.” That’s why we all need to be “born again.”
The pimps in today’s pulpits have profaned the Law of God. They bow to government and its Godless-judges. They preach a lawless-gospel that aligns with the anti-Christ church of tolerance and diversity. They are promoters of the non-offensive gospel mandated by Caesar and his underlings.
Their profane Gospel finds favor with Caesar, while the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God bend to man-pleasing magistrates mandating man-pleasing morality. Admit it, calling a sodomite a sodomite makes you uneasy. God would never do anything so harsh…
So Pastor, as you stand in your pulpit, clinging to your retirement and your reputation, does the government fear you or do you fear the government?
How much more authority of Scripture are you willing to cede to Caesar?
“Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins” -Isaiah 58.
Homosexuality is sin. The Bible calls those who practice it sodomites. They are not “gay,” they are perverted. Do you have the courage to say it publicly? I just did.
You will serve the one you fear.
Retrieved from:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Daubenmire/dave219.htm
THE QUEERING OF OUR MILITARY AND GOD'S WRATH
[The U.S. Military has now been turned into a global force for the promotion of homosexuality (perversity)]
THE QUEERING OF OUR MILITARY AND GOD'S WRATH
By: Devvy
December 21, 2010
© 2010 - NewsWithViews.com
WARNING - GRAPHIC LANGUAGE
December 18, 2010, another black day for a once moral country. The unlawfully seated U.S. Senate, led by degenerates, Joe Libermann and Hooter Harry Reid, voted to sanction bowel movement sex between men by repealing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy put in place by morally bankrupt, Bill Clinton. Are you offended by my use of bowel movement sex? Just what is it people think "gay" men do? [edited]
Politically correct excuses were parroted by so called conservative Republicans, i.e., adulterer, Sen. John Ensign [R-NV]: "Ensign said in a statement that he opposed the procedural vote earlier because Democrats would not allow consideration of amendments.
"[I]t is my firm belief that any American wishing to fight and potentially die for this great country ought to be able to do so regardless of sexual orientation," the Nevada Republican said. "These fine individuals should not have to hide who they are." Conservatives in Massachusetts tried to warn their fellow Republicans about Scott Brown, but voters didn't listen. I wasn't surprised to find out Libertarian - Republican, Ron Paul voted for it in the house along with 14 other Republicans like sodomite David Drier.
No surprise Susan Collins (Maine, Olympia Snowe (Maine), Lisa Murkowski, retiring George Voinovich (Ohio) and freshman Sen. Mark Kirk (Ill.) voted to promote and condone filth. Their past voting records reflect wallowing in the sewer of political correctness for years.
Outright lies were used in selling out our military: 'The REAL Pentagon Poll: 91% reject open homosexual service
Let me point out a few things I used when calling the outlaws who "serve" me in Congress:
1. Serving in the military is NOT a constitutional right.
We have an all voluntary military force. No one is forced to enlist. Sexual deviants knew DOD policy when they signed up. If they don't like the policy, don't enlist or get out. You don't destroy the entire military to satisfy a small group of sexual deviants with big mouths who buy the favors of the prostitutes in Congress with campaign donations.
2. My husband is a retired Army Colonel. Military bases are family oriented. Do we want children of families to see queers kissing, holding hands or worse? A large number of military bases have child care centers. Those children will now see sin their little innocent lives should not be exposed to; yeah, it will happen "by accident."
3. The military is the ideal place for sodomites and lesbians to recruit. All that young meat to gaze upon in the showers and living quarters. Think enlisted or officers who are queer won't use their rank to get what they want? Just you wait.
With a dead economy and no jobs, it's likely a lot of Christian men and women will remain in service because they need a job or are a year or two away from full retirement with benefits. The evil doers know this and don't care. We know what the agenda is: destroy the moral fabric of this country. Destroy the traditional family: a heterosexual mother and father. Force acceptance of sin and filth by Christians in our military or face the consequences.
4. Because I do a lot of research, our military has increasing problems with suicide, females in the military and domestic violence. A new set of problems has just been added. Our soldiers will now be forced to undergo indoctrination to flush their value system to accept queers as normal or there will be no promotions.
Yes, I use the word queer. (We're queer, we're here) I refuse to call them "gays." Using the word 'gay' to describe those who engage in sodomy is nothing more than clever marketing to distract people from what a homosexual does with another man. The word 'gay' is used to present an uplifting feeling instead of picturing what sodomites and lesbians do between the sheets and openly on the streets. "Alternative lifestyles" is more clever word smithing to take people's attention away from the act of sodomy and lesbian sex. Here, go take a look at "they're just like us" --- sodomites and lesbians.
The same applies to the clever marketing term: sexual orientation. There isn't a scintilla of scientific evidence to support humans are born queer. Many years ago in the State of Colorado, courageous Americans decided to do something about all the special privileges and status being given to sexual deviants who had the gall to compare "homosexual rights" to the plight of black Americans during the civil rights era. In 1992, Colorado voters approved Amendment 2 to their state constitution. This Amendment (later overturned by the 'gods' who sit on the U.S. Supreme Court), was to ensure that no one received preferential treatment, that all are equal under the law. The voice of the people was once again tossed into the ocean of political correctness and the homosexual, lesbian, bisexual and transsexual, et al, community rejoiced.
An interesting thing happened while this battle was raging on in Colorado. I lived there during this time and watched first hand how words are used to deceive and manipulate. Up until the time of the vote, the homosexual, et al, community referred to their perversions as "sexual preference." It was the constant mantra that we heard on the stupid tube and read in leftist newspapers throughout the state for almost a year during the Amendment 2 battle.
Those seeking to stop this onslaught by the homosexual crowd continually reminded everyone that these people preferred their deviant sexual practices. The key word here being preferred. When the pro homosexual bunch suddenly realized they were losing the battle in the court of public opinion, America was introduced to a new label, "sexual orientation."
The homosexual crowd figured they could hoodwink most people into believing that all of a sudden, their sexual appetites were no longer a matter of preference, but rather "orientation." How clever and what nonsense. "...former Supreme Court Justice, Sandra Day O'Connor did not deny that homosexuality is a voluntarily chosen lifestyle..." in Lawrence v Texas. Source: How to Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary, pg 26. What the degenerate animals in the U.S. Senate unleashed on us is just the first step. Next will be bi-sexuals, transgenders and those who practice bestiality claiming it's their right to openly serve in the military.
Gay and lesbian vs. other opposite-sex intimate partner relationships
"Surveys conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice confirm that homosexual and lesbian relationships had a far greater incidence of domestic partner violence than opposite-sex relationships including cohabitation or marriage.
"The National Violence against Women Survey, sponsored by the National Institute of Justice, found that "same-sex cohabitants reported significantly more intimate partner violence than did opposite-sex cohabitants. Thirty-nine percent of the same-sex cohabitants reported being raped, physically assaulted, and/or stalked by a marital/cohabitating partner at some time in their lifetimes, compared to 21.7 percent of the opposite-sex cohabitants. Among men, the comparable figures are 23.1 percent and 7.4 percent."[50]
Male Homosexuals
"Research indicates that the average male homosexual has hundreds of sex partners in his lifetime:
"The Dutch study of partnered homosexuals, which was published in the journal AIDS, found that men with a steady partner had an average of eight sexual partners per year.[12]
"Bell and Weinberg, in their classic study of male and female homosexuality, found that 43 percent of white male homosexuals had sex with 500 or more partners, with 28 percent having one thousand or more sex partners.[13]
"In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in the Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101-500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1,000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than one thousand lifetime sexual partners.[14]
"A survey conducted by the homosexual magazine Genre found that 24 percent of the respondents said they had had more than one hundred sexual partners in their lifetime. The magazine noted that several respondents suggested including a category of those who had more than one thousand sexual partners.[15]
5. For large numbers of Christian men and women serving in the military, not only do they find it abhorrent to serve with sexual deviants, I've received a lot of email from active duty who are terrified of being injured because of blood tainted with AIDS. They should be very worried if they are deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan fighting in those illegal, grotesque invasions. We know AIDS has an incubation period of up to ten years. Getting a blood transfusion can now mean a death sentence.
6. Bowel movement sex between men is neither natural nor healthy. Let me be frank and graphic here because you and I will now pay for such filth with our tax dollars. Sodomites will continue to enlist and down the line, their medical bills from engaging in sodomy will skyrocket. Those who contract AIDS/HIV will get those enormously expensive cocktail drugs paid for by Christians because those soldiers chose to have dangerous sex.
[edited] We the taxpayers will end up paying for all their lavender diseases. For those who have been influenced by "superstars" such as Cher and Elton John to "accept those of the gay lifestyle," [edited] For further information, see: The Health Risks of Gay Sex and Sexually transmitted disease among homosexuals.
Do you suppose their diapers will fit under uniforms?
How about lesbians? "Compared to heterosexual women, lesbians appear to have higher rates of smoking, obesity and alcohol use." [edited]
When God created man and woman, do you really think he would have intentionally programmed humans to engage in behavior that brings such pain, misery and death?
God's wrath
Last, but more important than all the facts above, God calls sodomy an abomination. A sin.
"If a man lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination and they shall surely be put to death." -- Leviticus 20:13:
"For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions: for their women exchanged the natural use for that which is against nature. And in the same way also the men abandoned the natural use of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error."-- Romans 1:26-27:
"The unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God. So do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revelers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the realm of God." -- I Corinthians 6:9:
"Law is not made for a righteous person but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and fornicators and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound (healthy) teaching." -- I Timothy 1:9-10:
According to sexual deviants and their supporters, the words above, God's word as written in the King James Bible, really means it's okay for men to have sex with each and the same for women!
Romans 1:26-32. "Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Think about that as you support "gays".
83% of the American people identify themselves as Christians, yet they continue to vote morally dead incumbents back into office who vote to glorify and sanction the filth of sodomy. They vote to slap God in the face. How do those Christians justify their actions while they profess to believe the Bible is the word of God? Because they want to be tolerant of politically correct behavior? I'm sure God will be real understanding on judgment day.
Blame the churches
Where are the churches in this country? Well, many of them have become folk singing Sunday events. Lots of boogie-woogie and "Christian music" every Sunday at those social meetings, er, church. Mega churches run by millionaires like Joel Osteen are nothing more than feel good sessions. Yes, I've taken the time to watch Osteen on Sunday via the tv. Even fifteen minutes made me want to take a hot shower. Net worth: $40 million bux, pass the plate! I find Rick Warren even slimier. His net worth is a paltry $14 million bux, so pass the plate twice. Some Christian denominations have told God to buzz off and openly accept sodomites and lesbians into their churches as individuals to be respected, tolerated. Their pastors or reverends are also sexual deviants. Slap God in the face.
The majority of America's churches who are shackled by the IRS as tax exempt entities have remained silent on this issue and sin. Shame on them for their cowardice. Do they think God won't notice? Do preachers, reverends and other clergy really believe God will forgive their sin of leading their flocks astray by condoning moral depravity and remaining silent while political animals run our country into Hell? Shame on them for spending time in front of the pulpit cowering as they duck their duty and obligation to remind those who sit before them that actions have consequences and that sin in God's eyes is to be taken seriously.
A master of eloquent writing and a vocabulary beyond my ability, Jim Schwiesow, wrote in one of his columns:
"At the risk of offending the true believers who sit among the nominal Christians in the denominational churches I submit that a predominant number of these churches today abet the heathen in the suppression of the teachings of Christ. When the preachers of these congregations avoid the hard lessons of scripture and displace, avoid, or eliminate the Gospel and replace it with humanism and the secular doctrines of social justice they fall to the desires of the powers and principalities in high places. "
Do the people of this country really believe God will continue to reward this nation with his blessings when the people have become as debased and filthy as whores on a street corner? Absolutely not.
"The Bible was given to mankind for his instruction and we ignore it at our peril. Men can laugh at it, scoff at and denigrate the words thereof and denounce it as myth and superstitious nonsense, but that will not erase any of God's works, it will not circumvent His control over all of nature and current events nor will it prevent every last prophetic word of the Bible from being carried out. God holds the wisdom of men in derision; man's every prideful worldly self-centered work is as foolishness to Him..
Jim Schwiesow, Beyond a Fiery Gate Lies Our Destiny:
"God's wrath is poised to be poured out upon this world with a fullness of fury and the United States will be the first to fall, while its English speaking allies will either fall simultaneously or succumb to similar judgment in quick succession. This nation has fallen into a depth of depravity unparalleled in our history. It is not necessary to enumerate our sins they are well known. The perverseness of the minds of the people sickens the soul. Government supported vice is rampant, and the people are of a corrupt mind and their hearts are continually fixed on evil. The killing of millions of babies is sanctioned and protected by government decree, as is sexual perversion and various other vices."
Personally, I have been around sodomites. They are nice people, but I will not shake their hand because I know where its been. If I suspect a waiter at a restaurant is queer, I quietly ask to be seated someplace else in the restaurant. If that request isn't granted, I simply leave. I will not give my consumer dollars to companies like Campbell's because they financially support sin. I certainly don't hate sexual deviants. I pity them because they have bought into the propaganda they're "born that way." I sincerely pray they will stop their destructive behavior and ask for God's forgiveness. Otherwise, in my personal belief system based on the word of God, they condemn their soul to Hell for eternity and eternity is a long, long time.
Now, it's not too late to stop this abomination according to Cliff Kincaid: The “procedural steps” that are part of the bill give the new conservative-controlled House an opportunity to derail the repeal policy." We shall see what this "new" conservative Outlaw Congress does next month. You can still make your voice heard.
Links and recommended reading:
1 The Gay Gene Hoax
2 Marines Don't Want to Bunk With Gays - General
3 3 military chiefs oppose 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal
4 How supporters of bowel movement sex voted - roll call
5 This is a profoundly radical experiment with the military'
6 Marine Corps chief: 'Gays' could be deadly 'distraction'
List of corporations who condone and support bowel movement sex
The feminization of our military was the first step in destroying it. Highly recommend you read this book: Women in the Military: Flirting with Disaster by Brian Mitchell
Sexual abuse is the primary causes of post-traumatic stress disorder among female service members
Highly recommend you read this short book to understand how international law played a part in Lawrence v Texas, furthering the "acceptance" of sodomy:
How to Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary by Dr. Edwin Vieira
My Genes Made Me Do It
Roll call vote in the House for sexual deviants
Nothing but lies about active duty military being "okay" serving with sexual deviants:
"Twelve-point-six percent is just the people who said they would leave," Maginnis told WND. "If you add in the number who said they 'might' leave, you get 23.7 percent. That would be 528,000, when you count both active duty and reserves."
Retrieved from:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd490.htm
THE QUEERING OF OUR MILITARY AND GOD'S WRATH
By: Devvy
December 21, 2010
© 2010 - NewsWithViews.com
WARNING - GRAPHIC LANGUAGE
December 18, 2010, another black day for a once moral country. The unlawfully seated U.S. Senate, led by degenerates, Joe Libermann and Hooter Harry Reid, voted to sanction bowel movement sex between men by repealing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy put in place by morally bankrupt, Bill Clinton. Are you offended by my use of bowel movement sex? Just what is it people think "gay" men do? [edited]
Politically correct excuses were parroted by so called conservative Republicans, i.e., adulterer, Sen. John Ensign [R-NV]: "Ensign said in a statement that he opposed the procedural vote earlier because Democrats would not allow consideration of amendments.
"[I]t is my firm belief that any American wishing to fight and potentially die for this great country ought to be able to do so regardless of sexual orientation," the Nevada Republican said. "These fine individuals should not have to hide who they are." Conservatives in Massachusetts tried to warn their fellow Republicans about Scott Brown, but voters didn't listen. I wasn't surprised to find out Libertarian - Republican, Ron Paul voted for it in the house along with 14 other Republicans like sodomite David Drier.
No surprise Susan Collins (Maine, Olympia Snowe (Maine), Lisa Murkowski, retiring George Voinovich (Ohio) and freshman Sen. Mark Kirk (Ill.) voted to promote and condone filth. Their past voting records reflect wallowing in the sewer of political correctness for years.
Outright lies were used in selling out our military: 'The REAL Pentagon Poll: 91% reject open homosexual service
Let me point out a few things I used when calling the outlaws who "serve" me in Congress:
1. Serving in the military is NOT a constitutional right.
We have an all voluntary military force. No one is forced to enlist. Sexual deviants knew DOD policy when they signed up. If they don't like the policy, don't enlist or get out. You don't destroy the entire military to satisfy a small group of sexual deviants with big mouths who buy the favors of the prostitutes in Congress with campaign donations.
2. My husband is a retired Army Colonel. Military bases are family oriented. Do we want children of families to see queers kissing, holding hands or worse? A large number of military bases have child care centers. Those children will now see sin their little innocent lives should not be exposed to; yeah, it will happen "by accident."
3. The military is the ideal place for sodomites and lesbians to recruit. All that young meat to gaze upon in the showers and living quarters. Think enlisted or officers who are queer won't use their rank to get what they want? Just you wait.
With a dead economy and no jobs, it's likely a lot of Christian men and women will remain in service because they need a job or are a year or two away from full retirement with benefits. The evil doers know this and don't care. We know what the agenda is: destroy the moral fabric of this country. Destroy the traditional family: a heterosexual mother and father. Force acceptance of sin and filth by Christians in our military or face the consequences.
4. Because I do a lot of research, our military has increasing problems with suicide, females in the military and domestic violence. A new set of problems has just been added. Our soldiers will now be forced to undergo indoctrination to flush their value system to accept queers as normal or there will be no promotions.
Yes, I use the word queer. (We're queer, we're here) I refuse to call them "gays." Using the word 'gay' to describe those who engage in sodomy is nothing more than clever marketing to distract people from what a homosexual does with another man. The word 'gay' is used to present an uplifting feeling instead of picturing what sodomites and lesbians do between the sheets and openly on the streets. "Alternative lifestyles" is more clever word smithing to take people's attention away from the act of sodomy and lesbian sex. Here, go take a look at "they're just like us" --- sodomites and lesbians.
The same applies to the clever marketing term: sexual orientation. There isn't a scintilla of scientific evidence to support humans are born queer. Many years ago in the State of Colorado, courageous Americans decided to do something about all the special privileges and status being given to sexual deviants who had the gall to compare "homosexual rights" to the plight of black Americans during the civil rights era. In 1992, Colorado voters approved Amendment 2 to their state constitution. This Amendment (later overturned by the 'gods' who sit on the U.S. Supreme Court), was to ensure that no one received preferential treatment, that all are equal under the law. The voice of the people was once again tossed into the ocean of political correctness and the homosexual, lesbian, bisexual and transsexual, et al, community rejoiced.
An interesting thing happened while this battle was raging on in Colorado. I lived there during this time and watched first hand how words are used to deceive and manipulate. Up until the time of the vote, the homosexual, et al, community referred to their perversions as "sexual preference." It was the constant mantra that we heard on the stupid tube and read in leftist newspapers throughout the state for almost a year during the Amendment 2 battle.
Those seeking to stop this onslaught by the homosexual crowd continually reminded everyone that these people preferred their deviant sexual practices. The key word here being preferred. When the pro homosexual bunch suddenly realized they were losing the battle in the court of public opinion, America was introduced to a new label, "sexual orientation."
The homosexual crowd figured they could hoodwink most people into believing that all of a sudden, their sexual appetites were no longer a matter of preference, but rather "orientation." How clever and what nonsense. "...former Supreme Court Justice, Sandra Day O'Connor did not deny that homosexuality is a voluntarily chosen lifestyle..." in Lawrence v Texas. Source: How to Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary, pg 26. What the degenerate animals in the U.S. Senate unleashed on us is just the first step. Next will be bi-sexuals, transgenders and those who practice bestiality claiming it's their right to openly serve in the military.
Gay and lesbian vs. other opposite-sex intimate partner relationships
"Surveys conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice confirm that homosexual and lesbian relationships had a far greater incidence of domestic partner violence than opposite-sex relationships including cohabitation or marriage.
"The National Violence against Women Survey, sponsored by the National Institute of Justice, found that "same-sex cohabitants reported significantly more intimate partner violence than did opposite-sex cohabitants. Thirty-nine percent of the same-sex cohabitants reported being raped, physically assaulted, and/or stalked by a marital/cohabitating partner at some time in their lifetimes, compared to 21.7 percent of the opposite-sex cohabitants. Among men, the comparable figures are 23.1 percent and 7.4 percent."[50]
Male Homosexuals
"Research indicates that the average male homosexual has hundreds of sex partners in his lifetime:
"The Dutch study of partnered homosexuals, which was published in the journal AIDS, found that men with a steady partner had an average of eight sexual partners per year.[12]
"Bell and Weinberg, in their classic study of male and female homosexuality, found that 43 percent of white male homosexuals had sex with 500 or more partners, with 28 percent having one thousand or more sex partners.[13]
"In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in the Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101-500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1,000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than one thousand lifetime sexual partners.[14]
"A survey conducted by the homosexual magazine Genre found that 24 percent of the respondents said they had had more than one hundred sexual partners in their lifetime. The magazine noted that several respondents suggested including a category of those who had more than one thousand sexual partners.[15]
5. For large numbers of Christian men and women serving in the military, not only do they find it abhorrent to serve with sexual deviants, I've received a lot of email from active duty who are terrified of being injured because of blood tainted with AIDS. They should be very worried if they are deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan fighting in those illegal, grotesque invasions. We know AIDS has an incubation period of up to ten years. Getting a blood transfusion can now mean a death sentence.
6. Bowel movement sex between men is neither natural nor healthy. Let me be frank and graphic here because you and I will now pay for such filth with our tax dollars. Sodomites will continue to enlist and down the line, their medical bills from engaging in sodomy will skyrocket. Those who contract AIDS/HIV will get those enormously expensive cocktail drugs paid for by Christians because those soldiers chose to have dangerous sex.
[edited] We the taxpayers will end up paying for all their lavender diseases. For those who have been influenced by "superstars" such as Cher and Elton John to "accept those of the gay lifestyle," [edited] For further information, see: The Health Risks of Gay Sex and Sexually transmitted disease among homosexuals.
Do you suppose their diapers will fit under uniforms?
How about lesbians? "Compared to heterosexual women, lesbians appear to have higher rates of smoking, obesity and alcohol use." [edited]
When God created man and woman, do you really think he would have intentionally programmed humans to engage in behavior that brings such pain, misery and death?
God's wrath
Last, but more important than all the facts above, God calls sodomy an abomination. A sin.
"If a man lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination and they shall surely be put to death." -- Leviticus 20:13:
"For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions: for their women exchanged the natural use for that which is against nature. And in the same way also the men abandoned the natural use of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error."-- Romans 1:26-27:
"The unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God. So do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revelers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the realm of God." -- I Corinthians 6:9:
"Law is not made for a righteous person but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and fornicators and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound (healthy) teaching." -- I Timothy 1:9-10:
According to sexual deviants and their supporters, the words above, God's word as written in the King James Bible, really means it's okay for men to have sex with each and the same for women!
Romans 1:26-32. "Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Think about that as you support "gays".
83% of the American people identify themselves as Christians, yet they continue to vote morally dead incumbents back into office who vote to glorify and sanction the filth of sodomy. They vote to slap God in the face. How do those Christians justify their actions while they profess to believe the Bible is the word of God? Because they want to be tolerant of politically correct behavior? I'm sure God will be real understanding on judgment day.
Blame the churches
Where are the churches in this country? Well, many of them have become folk singing Sunday events. Lots of boogie-woogie and "Christian music" every Sunday at those social meetings, er, church. Mega churches run by millionaires like Joel Osteen are nothing more than feel good sessions. Yes, I've taken the time to watch Osteen on Sunday via the tv. Even fifteen minutes made me want to take a hot shower. Net worth: $40 million bux, pass the plate! I find Rick Warren even slimier. His net worth is a paltry $14 million bux, so pass the plate twice. Some Christian denominations have told God to buzz off and openly accept sodomites and lesbians into their churches as individuals to be respected, tolerated. Their pastors or reverends are also sexual deviants. Slap God in the face.
The majority of America's churches who are shackled by the IRS as tax exempt entities have remained silent on this issue and sin. Shame on them for their cowardice. Do they think God won't notice? Do preachers, reverends and other clergy really believe God will forgive their sin of leading their flocks astray by condoning moral depravity and remaining silent while political animals run our country into Hell? Shame on them for spending time in front of the pulpit cowering as they duck their duty and obligation to remind those who sit before them that actions have consequences and that sin in God's eyes is to be taken seriously.
A master of eloquent writing and a vocabulary beyond my ability, Jim Schwiesow, wrote in one of his columns:
"At the risk of offending the true believers who sit among the nominal Christians in the denominational churches I submit that a predominant number of these churches today abet the heathen in the suppression of the teachings of Christ. When the preachers of these congregations avoid the hard lessons of scripture and displace, avoid, or eliminate the Gospel and replace it with humanism and the secular doctrines of social justice they fall to the desires of the powers and principalities in high places. "
Do the people of this country really believe God will continue to reward this nation with his blessings when the people have become as debased and filthy as whores on a street corner? Absolutely not.
"The Bible was given to mankind for his instruction and we ignore it at our peril. Men can laugh at it, scoff at and denigrate the words thereof and denounce it as myth and superstitious nonsense, but that will not erase any of God's works, it will not circumvent His control over all of nature and current events nor will it prevent every last prophetic word of the Bible from being carried out. God holds the wisdom of men in derision; man's every prideful worldly self-centered work is as foolishness to Him..
Jim Schwiesow, Beyond a Fiery Gate Lies Our Destiny:
"God's wrath is poised to be poured out upon this world with a fullness of fury and the United States will be the first to fall, while its English speaking allies will either fall simultaneously or succumb to similar judgment in quick succession. This nation has fallen into a depth of depravity unparalleled in our history. It is not necessary to enumerate our sins they are well known. The perverseness of the minds of the people sickens the soul. Government supported vice is rampant, and the people are of a corrupt mind and their hearts are continually fixed on evil. The killing of millions of babies is sanctioned and protected by government decree, as is sexual perversion and various other vices."
Personally, I have been around sodomites. They are nice people, but I will not shake their hand because I know where its been. If I suspect a waiter at a restaurant is queer, I quietly ask to be seated someplace else in the restaurant. If that request isn't granted, I simply leave. I will not give my consumer dollars to companies like Campbell's because they financially support sin. I certainly don't hate sexual deviants. I pity them because they have bought into the propaganda they're "born that way." I sincerely pray they will stop their destructive behavior and ask for God's forgiveness. Otherwise, in my personal belief system based on the word of God, they condemn their soul to Hell for eternity and eternity is a long, long time.
Now, it's not too late to stop this abomination according to Cliff Kincaid: The “procedural steps” that are part of the bill give the new conservative-controlled House an opportunity to derail the repeal policy." We shall see what this "new" conservative Outlaw Congress does next month. You can still make your voice heard.
Links and recommended reading:
1 The Gay Gene Hoax
2 Marines Don't Want to Bunk With Gays - General
3 3 military chiefs oppose 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal
4 How supporters of bowel movement sex voted - roll call
5 This is a profoundly radical experiment with the military'
6 Marine Corps chief: 'Gays' could be deadly 'distraction'
List of corporations who condone and support bowel movement sex
The feminization of our military was the first step in destroying it. Highly recommend you read this book: Women in the Military: Flirting with Disaster by Brian Mitchell
Sexual abuse is the primary causes of post-traumatic stress disorder among female service members
Highly recommend you read this short book to understand how international law played a part in Lawrence v Texas, furthering the "acceptance" of sodomy:
How to Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary by Dr. Edwin Vieira
My Genes Made Me Do It
Roll call vote in the House for sexual deviants
Nothing but lies about active duty military being "okay" serving with sexual deviants:
"Twelve-point-six percent is just the people who said they would leave," Maginnis told WND. "If you add in the number who said they 'might' leave, you get 23.7 percent. That would be 528,000, when you count both active duty and reserves."
Retrieved from:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd490.htm
91% reject open homosexual service
The REAL Pentagon Poll: 91% reject open homosexual service
Former Navy Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt just read the full Pentagon report on repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and here's his analysis:
"Don't believe the phony liberal media reports that 70% of troops support open homosexual service, because that statistic included 'mixed' feelings. A closer reading of the fine print in the newly released Pentagon survey shows our troops answered as follows:
Q45. If you had a leader whom you believed was gay or lesbian, 9% positive, 91% negative or mixed effect on unit's performance.
Q68c. 85% of Marine Combat Arms, 75% of Army Combat Arms, 64% overall say Negative, Very Negative, or Mixed impact on unit trust.
Q90. 29% would take no action if assigned open showers. 71% would shower at other times, complain to leadership or chaplains, don't know or do "something else" [including violence.]
Q81. 24% will leave the military or think about leaving sooner than planned. [One half million troops will QUIT early, destroying national security.]
Q80. 6% will positively recommend service to others after repeal. 94% feel negative, mixed, no effect, or don't know about recommending military service to others. [Destroying recruiting efforts.]
Q66. If open homosexuality impacts combat performance, is the impact....9% positive, 91% negative or mixed impact.
Q71. 11% feel positive or very positive about open homosexuality in field environment or out at sea. 70% negative or mixed. 19% no effect.
Q73. 5% say repeal would positively boost morale. 41% say negative or mixed impact morale. Rest no effect or don't know.
"In summary, the real stats prove our nation faces a NATIONAL SECURITY DISASTER if Don't Ask, Don't Tell is repealed, and open homosexual aggression is forced upon our troops against their will."
Retiring Marine Commandant General James Conway just told Fox News that "90 to 95 percent of the Marines" are against repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, citing impromptu surveys he had conducted by a "show of hands" at town hall meetings.
Sen. John McCain told CNN the troop poll was biased for homosexuals: "it should have asked whether a policy change was the right thing to do, rather than how it should be implemented...I want to know the effect on battle effectiveness and morale, not on how best to implement a change in policy...I don't think that's a lot to ask when we have our young men and women out there serving and fighting, and tragically some of them dying."
The homosexual newspaper Washington Blade is boasting of a claim by Sen. Joseph Liberman (I-CT) who said "I am confident that we have more than 60 votes prepared to take up the defense authorization bill with the repeal of 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell' if only there will be a guarantee of a fair and open amendment process." Lieberman revealed some private conversations he's had with Republican Senators Susan Collins (RINO-ME) and Richard Lugar (RINO-IN), and unnamed "other" Republicans [we list them below] whom he quoted as saying they "would be open to moving forward with...repeal provided there’s an 'open amendment process' in bringing the bill to the floor." [In other words, they'll sell out their principles for homosexual pork money.] I count 57, he counts 60, we're in a dogfight.
The new Commandant of the Marine Corps, 4-star General James F. Amos, effectively asked YOU to help his Marines last week, when he advised Senators to support Senator McCain's filibuster of the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and to keep open homosexual aggression out of our military.
"There is nothing more intimate than young men and young women — and when you talk of infantry, we're talking our young men — laying out, sleeping alongside of one another and sharing death, fear and loss of brothers," said General Amos. "I don't know what the effect of that will be on cohesion. I mean, that’s what we’re looking at. It's unit cohesion, it's combat effectiveness." In other words, repealing Don't Ask will cost lives in battle.
Meanwhile the New York Times revealed Senator Harry Reid's (D-NV) new strategy to force the homosexual agenda through this lame-duck Senate: "Mr. Reid could try to bring the defense bill to the floor under an open amendment process, a move that Republicans presumably would not block but that would mean committing a large block of time to debate. In that case, opponents of repeal would not be able to pass an amendment stripping it out of the bill." In other words, don't believe the liberal press reports that Reid can't get this done....they are closer than you think, so we must continue this fight.
More than 60 retired military chaplains have written President Obama, requesting he not repeal the 1993 Don't Ask, Don't Tell law that forbids open homosexuality in the military, because allowing open homosexuality will cause anti-Christian persecution of chaplains.
The letter was signed by retired military chaplains from various denominational backgrounds, including Southern Baptists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians and Lutherans.
After Don't Ask is repealed, "if chaplains answer such questions [during counseling sessions] according to the tenets of their faith, stating that homosexual relationships are sinful and harmful, then they run the risk of career-ending accusations of insubordination and discrimination," the letter said.
"By raising homosexual behavior to the same protected status as innate, innocuous characteristics like race and gender, the armed forces will cast the sincerely held religious beliefs of many chaplains and Service members as rank bigotry comparable to racism," the letter said.
"Put most simply, if the government normalizes homosexual behavior in the armed forces, many (if not most) chaplains will confront a profoundly difficult moral choice: whether they are to obey God or to obey men," the letter said. "This forced choice must be faced, since orthodox Christianity -- which represents a significant percentage of religious belief in the armed forces -- does not affirm homosexual behavior.
Four Top Generals were ignored by Democrats who betrayed our troops. They said:
"This is not the time to perturb the force that is, at the moment, stretched by demands in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere without careful deliberation." Gen. Norton Schwartz, Air Force Chief of Staff
"Serious concerns about the impact of repeal of the law on a force that's fully engaged in two wars and has been at war for eight-and-a-half years." Gen. George Casey, Army Chief of Staff
"I think the current policy works... At this point...my best military advice to this Committee, to the [Defense] Secretary, and to the President would be to keep the law such as it is." Gen. James Conway, Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps
"There has never really been an assessment of the force that serves....Equally important are the feelings of the families that support that force." Adm. Gary Roughead, Chief of Naval Operations
WHY KEEP OPEN HOMOSEXUALITY OUT OF THE MILITARY?
Four reasons:
1) Allowing open homosexuality especially hurts unit cohesion and would cost American lives in war, damaging the trust shared in close proximity, common sleeping quarters and showering facilities that are unavoidable in close combat.
2) Men and women do not share the same showers for obvious reasons, so why force men to share showers with openly homosexual men? This fact alone would hurt recruiting.
3) The rampant spread of the HIV-AIDS virus contaminates the blood often shared by necessity on the battlefield. Soldiers requiring blood-transfusions and medics would be immediately endangered.
4) "Gay promotion quotas" would soon be forced upon presently impartial promotion boards, causing a burdensome rise in sexually-charged "equal opportunity" complaints against commanders, especially those who offend gays by inadvertently speaking of their traditional Judeo-Christian faith.
Retrieved from:
http://www.prayinjesusname.org/
Former Navy Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt just read the full Pentagon report on repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and here's his analysis:
"Don't believe the phony liberal media reports that 70% of troops support open homosexual service, because that statistic included 'mixed' feelings. A closer reading of the fine print in the newly released Pentagon survey shows our troops answered as follows:
Q45. If you had a leader whom you believed was gay or lesbian, 9% positive, 91% negative or mixed effect on unit's performance.
Q68c. 85% of Marine Combat Arms, 75% of Army Combat Arms, 64% overall say Negative, Very Negative, or Mixed impact on unit trust.
Q90. 29% would take no action if assigned open showers. 71% would shower at other times, complain to leadership or chaplains, don't know or do "something else" [including violence.]
Q81. 24% will leave the military or think about leaving sooner than planned. [One half million troops will QUIT early, destroying national security.]
Q80. 6% will positively recommend service to others after repeal. 94% feel negative, mixed, no effect, or don't know about recommending military service to others. [Destroying recruiting efforts.]
Q66. If open homosexuality impacts combat performance, is the impact....9% positive, 91% negative or mixed impact.
Q71. 11% feel positive or very positive about open homosexuality in field environment or out at sea. 70% negative or mixed. 19% no effect.
Q73. 5% say repeal would positively boost morale. 41% say negative or mixed impact morale. Rest no effect or don't know.
"In summary, the real stats prove our nation faces a NATIONAL SECURITY DISASTER if Don't Ask, Don't Tell is repealed, and open homosexual aggression is forced upon our troops against their will."
Retiring Marine Commandant General James Conway just told Fox News that "90 to 95 percent of the Marines" are against repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, citing impromptu surveys he had conducted by a "show of hands" at town hall meetings.
Sen. John McCain told CNN the troop poll was biased for homosexuals: "it should have asked whether a policy change was the right thing to do, rather than how it should be implemented...I want to know the effect on battle effectiveness and morale, not on how best to implement a change in policy...I don't think that's a lot to ask when we have our young men and women out there serving and fighting, and tragically some of them dying."
The homosexual newspaper Washington Blade is boasting of a claim by Sen. Joseph Liberman (I-CT) who said "I am confident that we have more than 60 votes prepared to take up the defense authorization bill with the repeal of 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell' if only there will be a guarantee of a fair and open amendment process." Lieberman revealed some private conversations he's had with Republican Senators Susan Collins (RINO-ME) and Richard Lugar (RINO-IN), and unnamed "other" Republicans [we list them below] whom he quoted as saying they "would be open to moving forward with...repeal provided there’s an 'open amendment process' in bringing the bill to the floor." [In other words, they'll sell out their principles for homosexual pork money.] I count 57, he counts 60, we're in a dogfight.
The new Commandant of the Marine Corps, 4-star General James F. Amos, effectively asked YOU to help his Marines last week, when he advised Senators to support Senator McCain's filibuster of the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and to keep open homosexual aggression out of our military.
"There is nothing more intimate than young men and young women — and when you talk of infantry, we're talking our young men — laying out, sleeping alongside of one another and sharing death, fear and loss of brothers," said General Amos. "I don't know what the effect of that will be on cohesion. I mean, that’s what we’re looking at. It's unit cohesion, it's combat effectiveness." In other words, repealing Don't Ask will cost lives in battle.
Meanwhile the New York Times revealed Senator Harry Reid's (D-NV) new strategy to force the homosexual agenda through this lame-duck Senate: "Mr. Reid could try to bring the defense bill to the floor under an open amendment process, a move that Republicans presumably would not block but that would mean committing a large block of time to debate. In that case, opponents of repeal would not be able to pass an amendment stripping it out of the bill." In other words, don't believe the liberal press reports that Reid can't get this done....they are closer than you think, so we must continue this fight.
More than 60 retired military chaplains have written President Obama, requesting he not repeal the 1993 Don't Ask, Don't Tell law that forbids open homosexuality in the military, because allowing open homosexuality will cause anti-Christian persecution of chaplains.
The letter was signed by retired military chaplains from various denominational backgrounds, including Southern Baptists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians and Lutherans.
After Don't Ask is repealed, "if chaplains answer such questions [during counseling sessions] according to the tenets of their faith, stating that homosexual relationships are sinful and harmful, then they run the risk of career-ending accusations of insubordination and discrimination," the letter said.
"By raising homosexual behavior to the same protected status as innate, innocuous characteristics like race and gender, the armed forces will cast the sincerely held religious beliefs of many chaplains and Service members as rank bigotry comparable to racism," the letter said.
"Put most simply, if the government normalizes homosexual behavior in the armed forces, many (if not most) chaplains will confront a profoundly difficult moral choice: whether they are to obey God or to obey men," the letter said. "This forced choice must be faced, since orthodox Christianity -- which represents a significant percentage of religious belief in the armed forces -- does not affirm homosexual behavior.
Four Top Generals were ignored by Democrats who betrayed our troops. They said:
"This is not the time to perturb the force that is, at the moment, stretched by demands in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere without careful deliberation." Gen. Norton Schwartz, Air Force Chief of Staff
"Serious concerns about the impact of repeal of the law on a force that's fully engaged in two wars and has been at war for eight-and-a-half years." Gen. George Casey, Army Chief of Staff
"I think the current policy works... At this point...my best military advice to this Committee, to the [Defense] Secretary, and to the President would be to keep the law such as it is." Gen. James Conway, Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps
"There has never really been an assessment of the force that serves....Equally important are the feelings of the families that support that force." Adm. Gary Roughead, Chief of Naval Operations
WHY KEEP OPEN HOMOSEXUALITY OUT OF THE MILITARY?
Four reasons:
1) Allowing open homosexuality especially hurts unit cohesion and would cost American lives in war, damaging the trust shared in close proximity, common sleeping quarters and showering facilities that are unavoidable in close combat.
2) Men and women do not share the same showers for obvious reasons, so why force men to share showers with openly homosexual men? This fact alone would hurt recruiting.
3) The rampant spread of the HIV-AIDS virus contaminates the blood often shared by necessity on the battlefield. Soldiers requiring blood-transfusions and medics would be immediately endangered.
4) "Gay promotion quotas" would soon be forced upon presently impartial promotion boards, causing a burdensome rise in sexually-charged "equal opportunity" complaints against commanders, especially those who offend gays by inadvertently speaking of their traditional Judeo-Christian faith.
Retrieved from:
http://www.prayinjesusname.org/
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Tolerance Indoctrination: Round 2
Fellow Airmen,
Yesterday, the Senate passed HR 2965, a bill designed to repeal Section 654 of Title 10 of the United States Code, known as the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law. Once the President signs the bill into law, the Department of Defense will proceed to implement the change in a responsible, deliberate, and careful manner.
It is important to understand that the President’s signing of the new bill into law does not mean the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law will be repealed immediately. Instead, the Congressional language stipulates that repeal occurs 60 days after certification by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense, and the President that the necessary policies and regulations have been prepared to implement repeal and that repeal is consistent with standards of military readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces. To repeat, the implementation and certification process will not happen immediately; it will take time. Meanwhile, the current law remains in effect. All Air Force members should conduct themselves accordingly.
In the coming days and weeks as we prepare for the repeal, we will provide [re-] education and training material to help all Airmen understand what is expected in a post-repeal environment.
Effective leadership, however, is key to implementing this change and success will rest on the shoulders of senior leaders like me, commanders, chiefs, first sergeants, and supervisors. The standards of conduct we expect of all Airmen will not change. Moreover, we will continue to treat each other, as members of the Air Force family, with dignity and respect.
I know each of you will approach this issue professionally and that you will continue to adhere faithfully to our core values of Integrity, Service before Self, and Excellence in all we do. By following our core values, we will successfully implement this change with the same unparalleled professionalism we have demonstrated with every transformation we have undertaken in peace and war.
NORTON A SCHWARTZ
Chief of Staff
Yesterday, the Senate passed HR 2965, a bill designed to repeal Section 654 of Title 10 of the United States Code, known as the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law. Once the President signs the bill into law, the Department of Defense will proceed to implement the change in a responsible, deliberate, and careful manner.
It is important to understand that the President’s signing of the new bill into law does not mean the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law will be repealed immediately. Instead, the Congressional language stipulates that repeal occurs 60 days after certification by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense, and the President that the necessary policies and regulations have been prepared to implement repeal and that repeal is consistent with standards of military readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces. To repeat, the implementation and certification process will not happen immediately; it will take time. Meanwhile, the current law remains in effect. All Air Force members should conduct themselves accordingly.
In the coming days and weeks as we prepare for the repeal, we will provide [re-] education and training material to help all Airmen understand what is expected in a post-repeal environment.
Effective leadership, however, is key to implementing this change and success will rest on the shoulders of senior leaders like me, commanders, chiefs, first sergeants, and supervisors. The standards of conduct we expect of all Airmen will not change. Moreover, we will continue to treat each other, as members of the Air Force family, with dignity and respect.
I know each of you will approach this issue professionally and that you will continue to adhere faithfully to our core values of Integrity, Service before Self, and Excellence in all we do. By following our core values, we will successfully implement this change with the same unparalleled professionalism we have demonstrated with every transformation we have undertaken in peace and war.
NORTON A SCHWARTZ
Chief of Staff
Friday, December 17, 2010
Problems with the DoD report
“People view the military as the last bastion of morals and what is good. If we
break that down here, what does it boil down to? What’s left?”
Here are some findings of and problems with the DoD report:
23.7 % of surveyed Service members (38.1 % of Marines) said repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would cause them to “leave [the military] sooner than I planned” or “think about leaving sooner than I had planned”;
44.3% of combat veterans (59.4% of Marines) said that having an open homosexual in their immediate unit in a field environment or out at sea would “Negatively” or “Very Negatively” affect their “unit’s effectiveness at completing its mission”; other survey data shows significant opposition within the ranks to the idea of homosexuals serving openly;
A major flaw of the Working Group report is the analogy it draws between Service members currently serving with men and women they know or suspect to be homosexuals (under DADT) — with being able to serve alongside “gays and lesbians” under a new regime in which homosexuality is out of the closet. Obviously, in the current situation, homosexual Service members are forced to be discrete. A new military culture tolerant of ”open and proud” homosexuality – including pro-homosexual “diversity” teachings, etc. — is simply not analogous to military life under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”;
The report punts on the question of military benefits for same-sex couples, but recognizes that this will be a future issue — and even notes that one of the big problems it will cause is that unmarried heterosexual soldiers will be upset if coupled “gay” soldiers get partner benefits while they are not allowed to get benefits for their hetero boyfriend or girlfriend. Thus, repealing the ban jars open a Pandora’s Box: surely gay activists will DEMAND partner benefits — using lawsuits if necessary — in the name of respect, equality, and “fairness”;
The report discusses respecting Service members’ “dignity” but rules out separate shower facilities and barracks for homosexuals – saying that doing so would “stigmatize gay and lesbian Service members in a manner reminiscent of ’separate but equal’ for blacks prior to the 1960s” (p. 12). In other words, the Armed Forces is more concerned about offending ’gay and lesbian” members’ sensitivities than defending the privacy rights and dignity of normal, hetero Service men and women;
The above shows that in the name of paving the way for homosexuals’ alleged “civil rights,” the DoD is willing to abridge the civil rights of the normal majority of Service Members;
The above is also just one example of the DoD’s unfortunate penchant for linking the laudable and noble civil rights achievement of racially integrating black soldiers into the Armed Forces with the crusade to allow open homosexuals in the military — with their attendant sexual desires and behaviors. Racism is bigotry, and wrong. Moral opposition to homosexuality (widely and historically regarded as sinful) — and common-sense privacy concerns based on the self-described sexual desires of homosexual men and lesbians – are natural and acceptable. Applying the DoD report’s logic, men should be able to shower with women as long as they recognize that they cannot ogle them or make sexual advances on them in the shower (see p. 13: “to fit in, co-exist, and conform to social norms, gay men have learned to avoid making heterosexuals feel uncomfortable or threatened in these situations”);
The Working Group report admits that factoring in the sentiments it received in its review process (separate from its online survey) — through large “informational exchange forums” held on bases, smaller focus groups, online confidential communications, etc. — “our sense is that the majority of views expressed were against the repeal of the current policy” (p. 49). Perhaps this helps explain why President Obama and Defense Sec. Gates did not task the Working Group with studying whether the troops wanted this pro-homosexual change, but rather how a Repeal would be implemented;
There are some excellent comments from Service members opposing Repeal in the DoD report, including this by a woman: “I do not have to shower or sleep with men so I do not want to shower or sleep in the same room as a woman who is homosexual. I would feel uncomfortable” changing and sleeping as I would if it wa a man in the room. i should not have to accept this.” (p. 50);
On DADT: “You don’t ask and you don’t tell, you come to work and do your job. It is not broke so don’t fix it.” (p. 52);
On using the military to promote immorality: “People view the military as the last bastion of morals and what is good. If we break that down here, what does it boil down to? What’s left?” (p. 55)
In defending the right of religious and moral-minded Service members (and chaplains) to voice their opposition to homosexuality, the DoD report authors seem oblivious to the escalating legal and cultural conflict in the civilian world between homosexual activists’ demanding same-sex “rights” – and the freedom of Christians and other moral critics to live out their opposition to that behavior.
Surely this “values contest” will be transferred to a post-Repeal military — as many homosexual activists will put their “right” to be accepted above the freedom of Service members to disagree with homosexuality.
The report offers no coherent plan for how it will manage and balance that inherent conflict — and how it will avoid trampling over the rights of moral-minded Service-members in its zeal to enforce homosexual tolerance through (presumably mandatory) post-Repeal education and training programs.
Full Article:
http://americansfortruth.com/news/congress-christmas-lump-of-coal-for-troops-open-homosexuality.html#more-8356
Full Report:
http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2010/0610_gatesdadt/DADTReport_FINAL_20101130(secure-hires).pdf
break that down here, what does it boil down to? What’s left?”
Here are some findings of and problems with the DoD report:
23.7 % of surveyed Service members (38.1 % of Marines) said repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would cause them to “leave [the military] sooner than I planned” or “think about leaving sooner than I had planned”;
44.3% of combat veterans (59.4% of Marines) said that having an open homosexual in their immediate unit in a field environment or out at sea would “Negatively” or “Very Negatively” affect their “unit’s effectiveness at completing its mission”; other survey data shows significant opposition within the ranks to the idea of homosexuals serving openly;
A major flaw of the Working Group report is the analogy it draws between Service members currently serving with men and women they know or suspect to be homosexuals (under DADT) — with being able to serve alongside “gays and lesbians” under a new regime in which homosexuality is out of the closet. Obviously, in the current situation, homosexual Service members are forced to be discrete. A new military culture tolerant of ”open and proud” homosexuality – including pro-homosexual “diversity” teachings, etc. — is simply not analogous to military life under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”;
The report punts on the question of military benefits for same-sex couples, but recognizes that this will be a future issue — and even notes that one of the big problems it will cause is that unmarried heterosexual soldiers will be upset if coupled “gay” soldiers get partner benefits while they are not allowed to get benefits for their hetero boyfriend or girlfriend. Thus, repealing the ban jars open a Pandora’s Box: surely gay activists will DEMAND partner benefits — using lawsuits if necessary — in the name of respect, equality, and “fairness”;
The report discusses respecting Service members’ “dignity” but rules out separate shower facilities and barracks for homosexuals – saying that doing so would “stigmatize gay and lesbian Service members in a manner reminiscent of ’separate but equal’ for blacks prior to the 1960s” (p. 12). In other words, the Armed Forces is more concerned about offending ’gay and lesbian” members’ sensitivities than defending the privacy rights and dignity of normal, hetero Service men and women;
The above shows that in the name of paving the way for homosexuals’ alleged “civil rights,” the DoD is willing to abridge the civil rights of the normal majority of Service Members;
The above is also just one example of the DoD’s unfortunate penchant for linking the laudable and noble civil rights achievement of racially integrating black soldiers into the Armed Forces with the crusade to allow open homosexuals in the military — with their attendant sexual desires and behaviors. Racism is bigotry, and wrong. Moral opposition to homosexuality (widely and historically regarded as sinful) — and common-sense privacy concerns based on the self-described sexual desires of homosexual men and lesbians – are natural and acceptable. Applying the DoD report’s logic, men should be able to shower with women as long as they recognize that they cannot ogle them or make sexual advances on them in the shower (see p. 13: “to fit in, co-exist, and conform to social norms, gay men have learned to avoid making heterosexuals feel uncomfortable or threatened in these situations”);
The Working Group report admits that factoring in the sentiments it received in its review process (separate from its online survey) — through large “informational exchange forums” held on bases, smaller focus groups, online confidential communications, etc. — “our sense is that the majority of views expressed were against the repeal of the current policy” (p. 49). Perhaps this helps explain why President Obama and Defense Sec. Gates did not task the Working Group with studying whether the troops wanted this pro-homosexual change, but rather how a Repeal would be implemented;
There are some excellent comments from Service members opposing Repeal in the DoD report, including this by a woman: “I do not have to shower or sleep with men so I do not want to shower or sleep in the same room as a woman who is homosexual. I would feel uncomfortable” changing and sleeping as I would if it wa a man in the room. i should not have to accept this.” (p. 50);
On DADT: “You don’t ask and you don’t tell, you come to work and do your job. It is not broke so don’t fix it.” (p. 52);
On using the military to promote immorality: “People view the military as the last bastion of morals and what is good. If we break that down here, what does it boil down to? What’s left?” (p. 55)
In defending the right of religious and moral-minded Service members (and chaplains) to voice their opposition to homosexuality, the DoD report authors seem oblivious to the escalating legal and cultural conflict in the civilian world between homosexual activists’ demanding same-sex “rights” – and the freedom of Christians and other moral critics to live out their opposition to that behavior.
Surely this “values contest” will be transferred to a post-Repeal military — as many homosexual activists will put their “right” to be accepted above the freedom of Service members to disagree with homosexuality.
The report offers no coherent plan for how it will manage and balance that inherent conflict — and how it will avoid trampling over the rights of moral-minded Service-members in its zeal to enforce homosexual tolerance through (presumably mandatory) post-Repeal education and training programs.
Full Article:
http://americansfortruth.com/news/congress-christmas-lump-of-coal-for-troops-open-homosexuality.html#more-8356
Full Report:
http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2010/0610_gatesdadt/DADTReport_FINAL_20101130(secure-hires).pdf
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Green Invasion of Churches
by Tom DeWeese
When Communism "fell" in the late 1980's, those who were busy scheming to impose global governance on the sovereign nations had a problem. Suddenly, the only super power in the world was the United States - the only nation on Earth based on the ideals of limited government, individual liberty and free enterprise. If American bedrock ideals of freedom took hold in the emerging nations of the old Soviet Empire, global governance was impossible.
What to do? The answer was obvious. Change America. Get her to join the community of nations with a proper attitude. Force her to learn her proper place. Target: America's attitudes, values and beliefs. And to force us to quickly question those American ideals, elements of guilt and fear would be essential.
Two specific targets were identified: the American public school system and America's Christian churches. These were the breeding grounds for the out of step American ideas. The schools taught us of the Founding Fathers and their courageous battle to recognize that we are all born with our rights as free individuals. And they taught us that it's government's job to protect those rights. Moreover, the very source of those ideals, as stated by the Founders over and over again, came from Christian teachings. In short, Christianity is the root of American culture.
Throughout American history parents took on the role of teaching children boundaries, without which a free society cannot function. Children were taught at a young age to respect the rights of others; they were taught the rules of games, without which they could not be played; they were taught to not go into a neighbor's yard without permission; they were taught modesty and loyalty and pride in their school, town, and nation. They were taught to be independent and take care of their own, without expecting someone else to do it for them. And they were taught that their property, ideas and dreams are their own, to control and pursue. These are attitudes, values and beliefs that make a free society possible. To get America to fall in line and accept the concept of global governance, these things needed to be changed - and fast.
Today, in the classroom, rather than basic academics, the children are fed a steady stream of pictures and stories of environmental destruction, supposedly caused by man. The text books speak of the earth only as a fragile victim of man's development. The students are taught that the earth is their "mother" for which all good derives.
A fourth grade math book called Quest 2000 contains "math" questions like this one: Mindy read that a typical goldfish lives for 6 years. Mindy has a goldfish six years old. Should Mindy continue to buy goldfish? Explain your thinking.
Representatives of groups like the Sierra Club and People for the ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) are brought into the classroom for days on end to talk to the children and indoctrinate them in the "green" message.There are no opposing views introduced (because that would interrupt the behavior modification process). Some children have been forced to watch Al Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth" as many as four times during their school days.
http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom183.htm
When Communism "fell" in the late 1980's, those who were busy scheming to impose global governance on the sovereign nations had a problem. Suddenly, the only super power in the world was the United States - the only nation on Earth based on the ideals of limited government, individual liberty and free enterprise. If American bedrock ideals of freedom took hold in the emerging nations of the old Soviet Empire, global governance was impossible.
What to do? The answer was obvious. Change America. Get her to join the community of nations with a proper attitude. Force her to learn her proper place. Target: America's attitudes, values and beliefs. And to force us to quickly question those American ideals, elements of guilt and fear would be essential.
Two specific targets were identified: the American public school system and America's Christian churches. These were the breeding grounds for the out of step American ideas. The schools taught us of the Founding Fathers and their courageous battle to recognize that we are all born with our rights as free individuals. And they taught us that it's government's job to protect those rights. Moreover, the very source of those ideals, as stated by the Founders over and over again, came from Christian teachings. In short, Christianity is the root of American culture.
Throughout American history parents took on the role of teaching children boundaries, without which a free society cannot function. Children were taught at a young age to respect the rights of others; they were taught the rules of games, without which they could not be played; they were taught to not go into a neighbor's yard without permission; they were taught modesty and loyalty and pride in their school, town, and nation. They were taught to be independent and take care of their own, without expecting someone else to do it for them. And they were taught that their property, ideas and dreams are their own, to control and pursue. These are attitudes, values and beliefs that make a free society possible. To get America to fall in line and accept the concept of global governance, these things needed to be changed - and fast.
Today, in the classroom, rather than basic academics, the children are fed a steady stream of pictures and stories of environmental destruction, supposedly caused by man. The text books speak of the earth only as a fragile victim of man's development. The students are taught that the earth is their "mother" for which all good derives.
A fourth grade math book called Quest 2000 contains "math" questions like this one: Mindy read that a typical goldfish lives for 6 years. Mindy has a goldfish six years old. Should Mindy continue to buy goldfish? Explain your thinking.
Representatives of groups like the Sierra Club and People for the ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) are brought into the classroom for days on end to talk to the children and indoctrinate them in the "green" message.There are no opposing views introduced (because that would interrupt the behavior modification process). Some children have been forced to watch Al Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth" as many as four times during their school days.
http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom183.htm
iPhone snitch network launched
Jason Douglass
Infowars.com
December 13, 2010
A new iPhone App with the misleading name ‘PatriotApp’ attempts to draw on the power of the patriot movement, turning smartphone users into a gigantic snitch network.
You might think an app with such a patriotic name might have useful functions like a pocket constitution or quotes from our forefathers. But contrary to the services one might expect, this app allows users to report any ‘suspicious’ behavior directly linking them with top government agencies.
Much like the new DHS program ‘If you see something, say something’ this app is meant to turn average citizens into a network of spies feeding information back to the federal government.
Citizen Concepts, a company formed by insiders from DHS, defines the use of such an app on their homepage:
Citizen Concepts announces the launch of PatriotAppTM, the world’s first iPhone application that empowers citizens to assist government agencies in creating safer, cleaner, and more efficient communities via social networking and mobile technology. This app was founded on the belief that citizens can provide the most sophisticated and broad network of eyes and ears necessary to prevent terrorism, crime, environmental negligence, or other malicious behavior.
Simply download, report (including pictures) and submit information to relevant government agencies, employers, or publish incident data to social network tools.
Key Features:
Integrated into Federal Agencies points of contacts
FBI
EPA
GAO
CDC
Custom integration with user employers
Fully integrated with Social Media (Facebook, Twitter)
Multiple menus and data fields
View FBI Most Wanted
Simple graphical user interface
Uses:
Enable citizens to record and communicate:
National Security, Suspicious activities, Crime
Government Waste
Environmental Crime or possible violations
White collar crime
Workplace harassment, discrimination, or other violations
Public Health concerns
PatriotApp encourages active citizen participation in the War on Terror and in protecting their families and surrounding communities.
An app like this is meant to solidify the climate of fear in which our leaders want us to exist. The threat of terrorism must be palpable in order for the ‘War on Terror’ to be justified and to validate all the extreme measures instituted in its name.
Retrieved from:
http://www.infowars.com/iphone-snitch-network-launched/print/
Infowars.com
December 13, 2010
A new iPhone App with the misleading name ‘PatriotApp’ attempts to draw on the power of the patriot movement, turning smartphone users into a gigantic snitch network.
You might think an app with such a patriotic name might have useful functions like a pocket constitution or quotes from our forefathers. But contrary to the services one might expect, this app allows users to report any ‘suspicious’ behavior directly linking them with top government agencies.
Much like the new DHS program ‘If you see something, say something’ this app is meant to turn average citizens into a network of spies feeding information back to the federal government.
Citizen Concepts, a company formed by insiders from DHS, defines the use of such an app on their homepage:
Citizen Concepts announces the launch of PatriotAppTM, the world’s first iPhone application that empowers citizens to assist government agencies in creating safer, cleaner, and more efficient communities via social networking and mobile technology. This app was founded on the belief that citizens can provide the most sophisticated and broad network of eyes and ears necessary to prevent terrorism, crime, environmental negligence, or other malicious behavior.
Simply download, report (including pictures) and submit information to relevant government agencies, employers, or publish incident data to social network tools.
Key Features:
Integrated into Federal Agencies points of contacts
FBI
EPA
GAO
CDC
Custom integration with user employers
Fully integrated with Social Media (Facebook, Twitter)
Multiple menus and data fields
View FBI Most Wanted
Simple graphical user interface
Uses:
Enable citizens to record and communicate:
National Security, Suspicious activities, Crime
Government Waste
Environmental Crime or possible violations
White collar crime
Workplace harassment, discrimination, or other violations
Public Health concerns
PatriotApp encourages active citizen participation in the War on Terror and in protecting their families and surrounding communities.
An app like this is meant to solidify the climate of fear in which our leaders want us to exist. The threat of terrorism must be palpable in order for the ‘War on Terror’ to be justified and to validate all the extreme measures instituted in its name.
Retrieved from:
http://www.infowars.com/iphone-snitch-network-launched/print/
If You See Something, Say Something
Homeland Security teams up with Walmart for safety
CNN Wires Staff
December 6, 2010
- DHS expands "If You See Something, Say Something" campaign
- "Homeland security starts with hometown security," said DHS chief Janet Napolitano
- 320 Walmarts stores joined Monday, DHS said statement
- Program started by New York City's Metropolitan Transportation Authority
(CNN) -- Walmart will join the Department of Homeland Security in a program called "If You See Something, Say Something" which encourages the American public to take an active role in ensuring the safety and security of the nation, DHS said Monday.
"Homeland security starts with hometown security, and each of us plays a critical role in keeping our country and communities safe," Secretary Janet Napolitano said as she thanked Walmart and the more than 320 stores who joined the national campaign Monday.
Participating stores, eventually including 588 from 27 states, will play a short video message at select checkout locations to remind shoppers to contact local law enforcement to report suspicious activity, said a DHS statement.
"This partnership will help millions of shoppers across the nation identify and report indicators of terrorism, crime and other threats to law enforcement authorities," Napolitano said.
The "If You See Something, Say Something" campaign was originally implemented by New York City's Metropolitan Transportation Authority as a simple and effective program that engages the public and key front-line employees to report indicators of terrorism, crime and other threats to authorities, according to the DHS statement.
The program has already partnered with the Mall of America, the American Hotel & Lodging Association, Amtrak, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, sports and general aviation industries, and other organizations across the country, DHS said.
Retrieved from:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/06/washington.dhs.walmart/index.html
CNN Wires Staff
December 6, 2010
- DHS expands "If You See Something, Say Something" campaign
- "Homeland security starts with hometown security," said DHS chief Janet Napolitano
- 320 Walmarts stores joined Monday, DHS said statement
- Program started by New York City's Metropolitan Transportation Authority
(CNN) -- Walmart will join the Department of Homeland Security in a program called "If You See Something, Say Something" which encourages the American public to take an active role in ensuring the safety and security of the nation, DHS said Monday.
"Homeland security starts with hometown security, and each of us plays a critical role in keeping our country and communities safe," Secretary Janet Napolitano said as she thanked Walmart and the more than 320 stores who joined the national campaign Monday.
Participating stores, eventually including 588 from 27 states, will play a short video message at select checkout locations to remind shoppers to contact local law enforcement to report suspicious activity, said a DHS statement.
"This partnership will help millions of shoppers across the nation identify and report indicators of terrorism, crime and other threats to law enforcement authorities," Napolitano said.
The "If You See Something, Say Something" campaign was originally implemented by New York City's Metropolitan Transportation Authority as a simple and effective program that engages the public and key front-line employees to report indicators of terrorism, crime and other threats to authorities, according to the DHS statement.
The program has already partnered with the Mall of America, the American Hotel & Lodging Association, Amtrak, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, sports and general aviation industries, and other organizations across the country, DHS said.
Retrieved from:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/06/washington.dhs.walmart/index.html
Tolerance Indoctrination: Round 1
Air Force Core Values guide us
The Air Force Core Values guide us in all of our decisions as we rise to meet any challenge presented. These enduring values anchor and bind Airmen together each and every day. Any compromise diminishes the character of our service.
With input from each of the military services, Congress is now considering changes to the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. As military men and women, the American people count on us to adhere to the laws of the land, and we now stand ready and able to follow any decisions made. The success of implementing any changes in policy rests on the shoulders of our Air Force senior leaders, commanders and the NCO corps. We're confident that as professional Airmen, we will let our Core Values guide us in meeting challenges resulting from any changes.
Integrity First
Airmen must serve with the utmost integrity. We need to be honest in all things and have respect for ourselves and each other. It is necessary that we act with integrity both in our professional lives as well as our personal lives because our word is our bond.
Service Before Self
All of us volunteered to serve our nation and put the needs of the Air Force before our own. No matter the issue or task, you have always overcome challenges with conviction, confidence and professionalism. This time is no different. Serving in our Air Force is a higher calling. We commit to following our leaders and protect our wingmen every day.
Excellence in All We Do
Excellence means respect for each other and value of individual contributions. We need to understand that people depend on and trust us to give our very best. As others value our contributions, we must recognize the worth of fellow Airmen.
The Air Force Core Values are what we live by, and they will continue to guide our standards. I'm proud to serve alongside you in the world's finest Air Force. I know we can handle any challenge we are faced with.
JAMES A. ROY
Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force
Retrieved from:
http://www.af.mil/information/viewpoints/cmsaf.asp?id=631
The Air Force Core Values guide us in all of our decisions as we rise to meet any challenge presented. These enduring values anchor and bind Airmen together each and every day. Any compromise diminishes the character of our service.
With input from each of the military services, Congress is now considering changes to the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. As military men and women, the American people count on us to adhere to the laws of the land, and we now stand ready and able to follow any decisions made. The success of implementing any changes in policy rests on the shoulders of our Air Force senior leaders, commanders and the NCO corps. We're confident that as professional Airmen, we will let our Core Values guide us in meeting challenges resulting from any changes.
Integrity First
Airmen must serve with the utmost integrity. We need to be honest in all things and have respect for ourselves and each other. It is necessary that we act with integrity both in our professional lives as well as our personal lives because our word is our bond.
Service Before Self
All of us volunteered to serve our nation and put the needs of the Air Force before our own. No matter the issue or task, you have always overcome challenges with conviction, confidence and professionalism. This time is no different. Serving in our Air Force is a higher calling. We commit to following our leaders and protect our wingmen every day.
Excellence in All We Do
Excellence means respect for each other and value of individual contributions. We need to understand that people depend on and trust us to give our very best. As others value our contributions, we must recognize the worth of fellow Airmen.
The Air Force Core Values are what we live by, and they will continue to guide our standards. I'm proud to serve alongside you in the world's finest Air Force. I know we can handle any challenge we are faced with.
JAMES A. ROY
Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force
Retrieved from:
http://www.af.mil/information/viewpoints/cmsaf.asp?id=631
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Experts: Mystery contrail was from Chinese missile
Experts: Mystery contrail was from Chinese missile
'Muted response' was decision 'made by the president himself'
Posted: November 19, 2010
8:00 pm Eastern
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
Although the U.S. Defense Department and North American Aerospace Defense Command have speculated publicly that the unidentified contrail of a projectile soaring into the skies off the California coast – and recorded by a KCBS television crew – came from a jet and posed no security threat to the U.S., several experts are raising provocative and disturbing questions about the government's official response, reports Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
Two governmental military experts with extensive experience working with missiles and computer security systems have examined the television video and conclude the mysterious contrail originating some 30 miles off the coast near Los Angeles did not come from a jet – but rather, they say the exhaust and the billowing plume emanated from a single source nozzle of a missile, probably made in China.
They further suggest the missile was fired from a submerged Chinese nuclear submarine off America's coast, and point out that the timing of the alleged Chinese missile shot coincided with an increasing confrontation between the U.S. and China, and was likely meant to send a message to Washington.
Indeed, the Federal Aviation Administration documents that there were no aircraft flying in the area at that time, the night of Nov. 8.
"The question that still must be answered is why NORAD's muted response was simply that North America was not threatened, and later our government approved the lame excuse that the picture recorded was simply an aircraft leaving a contrail," said retired U.S. Air Force Brig. Gen. Jim Cash.
A former U.S. Air Force fighter pilot and commander of an F-15 squadron and an F-16 wing, Cash was assigned to NORAD as an assistant director of operations at the Cheyenne Mountain complex near Colorado Springs, Colo., and is fully knowledgeable of NORAD procedures.
"There is absolutely no doubt that what was captured on video off the coast of California was a missile launch, was clearly observed by NORAD, assessed by a four-star general in minutes, and passed to the president immediately," he said.
Even more ominously, cautioned Cash: "We must question the timing of this shot across our bow. The president was abroad being diplomatic, which means trying to placate China which is becoming overly concerned with our handling a totally out-of-control deficit in spending."
Wayne Madsen, a former naval officer who has worked at the National Security Agency and the Naval Data Automation Command, said the inability to pick up what he described as a Chinese Jin-class submarine-launched ballistic missile isn't the first time U.S. Navy anti-submarine warfare sensors have failed.
Madsen, who today is an investigative journalist, said the Pentagon is working "overtime with the media and on the Internet to cover up the latest debacle. However, even some reporters who cover the Pentagon full-time are beginning to question the Pentagon's version of events ... over the skies west of Los Angeles."
Dr. Lyle J. Rapacki of Sentinel Intelligence Services, LLC, said the contrail incident off the Los Angeles coast is "fraught with peril" due to the defense systems and protocols in place that should have detected the alleged submarine.
"The decision to officially announce that North America was not threatened," he said, "and all the excitement was due to an aircraft leaving a contrail is a decision that reaches beyond the four-star general level and goes directly to a decision made by the commander-in-chief."
G2 Bulletin calls to the Pentagon and NORAD for comment beyond previous official statements were not returned.
Retrieved From:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=230425
'Muted response' was decision 'made by the president himself'
Posted: November 19, 2010
8:00 pm Eastern
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
Although the U.S. Defense Department and North American Aerospace Defense Command have speculated publicly that the unidentified contrail of a projectile soaring into the skies off the California coast – and recorded by a KCBS television crew – came from a jet and posed no security threat to the U.S., several experts are raising provocative and disturbing questions about the government's official response, reports Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
Two governmental military experts with extensive experience working with missiles and computer security systems have examined the television video and conclude the mysterious contrail originating some 30 miles off the coast near Los Angeles did not come from a jet – but rather, they say the exhaust and the billowing plume emanated from a single source nozzle of a missile, probably made in China.
They further suggest the missile was fired from a submerged Chinese nuclear submarine off America's coast, and point out that the timing of the alleged Chinese missile shot coincided with an increasing confrontation between the U.S. and China, and was likely meant to send a message to Washington.
Indeed, the Federal Aviation Administration documents that there were no aircraft flying in the area at that time, the night of Nov. 8.
"The question that still must be answered is why NORAD's muted response was simply that North America was not threatened, and later our government approved the lame excuse that the picture recorded was simply an aircraft leaving a contrail," said retired U.S. Air Force Brig. Gen. Jim Cash.
A former U.S. Air Force fighter pilot and commander of an F-15 squadron and an F-16 wing, Cash was assigned to NORAD as an assistant director of operations at the Cheyenne Mountain complex near Colorado Springs, Colo., and is fully knowledgeable of NORAD procedures.
"There is absolutely no doubt that what was captured on video off the coast of California was a missile launch, was clearly observed by NORAD, assessed by a four-star general in minutes, and passed to the president immediately," he said.
Even more ominously, cautioned Cash: "We must question the timing of this shot across our bow. The president was abroad being diplomatic, which means trying to placate China which is becoming overly concerned with our handling a totally out-of-control deficit in spending."
Wayne Madsen, a former naval officer who has worked at the National Security Agency and the Naval Data Automation Command, said the inability to pick up what he described as a Chinese Jin-class submarine-launched ballistic missile isn't the first time U.S. Navy anti-submarine warfare sensors have failed.
Madsen, who today is an investigative journalist, said the Pentagon is working "overtime with the media and on the Internet to cover up the latest debacle. However, even some reporters who cover the Pentagon full-time are beginning to question the Pentagon's version of events ... over the skies west of Los Angeles."
Dr. Lyle J. Rapacki of Sentinel Intelligence Services, LLC, said the contrail incident off the Los Angeles coast is "fraught with peril" due to the defense systems and protocols in place that should have detected the alleged submarine.
"The decision to officially announce that North America was not threatened," he said, "and all the excitement was due to an aircraft leaving a contrail is a decision that reaches beyond the four-star general level and goes directly to a decision made by the commander-in-chief."
G2 Bulletin calls to the Pentagon and NORAD for comment beyond previous official statements were not returned.
Retrieved From:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=230425
Thursday, December 09, 2010
U.N. Climate Change Convention Starts with Pagan Goddess Invocation
By Juliet Eilperin
December 9, 2010
With United Nations climate negotiators facing an uphill battle to advance their goal of reducing emissions linked to global warming, it's no surprise that the woman steering the talks appealed to a Mayan goddess Monday.
Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, invoked the ancient jaguar goddess Ixchel in her opening statement to delegates gathered in Cancun, Mexico, noting that Ixchel was not only goddess of the moon, but also "the goddess of reason, creativity and weaving. May she inspire you -- because today, you are gathered in Cancun to weave together the elements of a solid response to climate change, using both reason and creativity as your tools."
She called for "a balanced outcome" which would marry financial and emissions commitments from industrialized countries aimed at combating climate change with "the understanding of fairness that will guide long-term mitigation efforts."
"Excellencies, the goddess Ixchel would probably tell you that a tapestry is the result of the skilful interlacing of many threads," said Figueres, who hails from Costa Rica and started her greetings in Spanish before switching to English. "I am convinced that 20years from now, we will admire the policy tapestry that you have woven together and think back fondly to Cancun and the inspiration of Ixchel." Delegates from 193 countries are gathered in Cancun for the two-week meeting, which kicked off today at 10:20 a.m. local time, or 11:20 a.m. Eastern. Mexican President Felipe Calderon, a major proponent of action on climate change, attended the opening.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/post-carbon/2010/11/cancun_talks_start_with_a_call.html
December 9, 2010
With United Nations climate negotiators facing an uphill battle to advance their goal of reducing emissions linked to global warming, it's no surprise that the woman steering the talks appealed to a Mayan goddess Monday.
Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, invoked the ancient jaguar goddess Ixchel in her opening statement to delegates gathered in Cancun, Mexico, noting that Ixchel was not only goddess of the moon, but also "the goddess of reason, creativity and weaving. May she inspire you -- because today, you are gathered in Cancun to weave together the elements of a solid response to climate change, using both reason and creativity as your tools."
She called for "a balanced outcome" which would marry financial and emissions commitments from industrialized countries aimed at combating climate change with "the understanding of fairness that will guide long-term mitigation efforts."
"Excellencies, the goddess Ixchel would probably tell you that a tapestry is the result of the skilful interlacing of many threads," said Figueres, who hails from Costa Rica and started her greetings in Spanish before switching to English. "I am convinced that 20years from now, we will admire the policy tapestry that you have woven together and think back fondly to Cancun and the inspiration of Ixchel." Delegates from 193 countries are gathered in Cancun for the two-week meeting, which kicked off today at 10:20 a.m. local time, or 11:20 a.m. Eastern. Mexican President Felipe Calderon, a major proponent of action on climate change, attended the opening.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/post-carbon/2010/11/cancun_talks_start_with_a_call.html
Pa. town removes Nativity scene from borough building
December 06, 2010
CANONSBURG (AP) — A Pennsylvania town has removed a Nativity scene from the borough building after a resident complained.
Canonsburg Borough Manager Terry Hazlett tells the Observer-Reporter of Washington that he received a written complaint last week from resident Megan Hartley. She wrote that the creche was disrespectful to citizens who aren't Christian and that it shouldn't be displayed at a government building.
The borough asked the local Knights of Columbus chapter to remove the Nativity scene. The group owns the creche and has been putting it at the borough building for 57 years. The group has since moved it to a nearby business.
Many residents aren't happy about the change. Knights of Columbus member Robert Clark says people need to show tolerance to each other and he feels removing the scene is disrespectful to his rights.
http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101206/NEWS/101209875
CANONSBURG (AP) — A Pennsylvania town has removed a Nativity scene from the borough building after a resident complained.
Canonsburg Borough Manager Terry Hazlett tells the Observer-Reporter of Washington that he received a written complaint last week from resident Megan Hartley. She wrote that the creche was disrespectful to citizens who aren't Christian and that it shouldn't be displayed at a government building.
The borough asked the local Knights of Columbus chapter to remove the Nativity scene. The group owns the creche and has been putting it at the borough building for 57 years. The group has since moved it to a nearby business.
Many residents aren't happy about the change. Knights of Columbus member Robert Clark says people need to show tolerance to each other and he feels removing the scene is disrespectful to his rights.
http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101206/NEWS/101209875
Jim Morrison wouldn't have wanted a pardon
Widow: Jim Morrison wouldn't have wanted a pardon
Dec 9 01:17 PM US/Eastern
MIAMI (AP) - The widow of The Doors singer Jim Morrison says Florida's intention to pardon him for a 1969 indecent exposure conviction is a cheap political ploy.
Patricia Kennealy Morrison told The Associated Press Thursday that she's not pleased with the pardon and doesn't think the late singer would be either because he didn't expose himself on stage as some claim.
She says the conviction should be expunged or the verdict overturned as fraud rather than just pardoned.
She says the two were married in a pagan ceremony by a Presbyterian minister about a year before he was found dead in a Paris bathtub in 1971.
Jim Morrison was appealing the conviction when he died. Gov. Charlie Crist planned to ask the Clemency Board for the pardon Thursday and it is expected to pass.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP)—The Doors singer Jim Morrison will get a posthumous pardon for an indecent exposure conviction in Florida after Gov. Charlie Crist got a commitment for enough votes from other members of the state's Board of Executive Clemency to approve it.
Morrison was appealing the conviction when he was found dead in a Paris bathtub in 1971. The meeting Thursday comes a day after the singer would have turned 67.
Crist can't issue a pardon on his own. He and the three-member Cabinet serve as the Clemency Board. Approval is required by the governor and at least two other members.
The did-he-or-didn't-he debate over what happened at the Miami concert was revived by Crist's interest in the case. The surviving band members say a drunken Morrison teased the crowd, but never exposed himself.
"It never actually happened. It was mass hypnosis," said Ray Manzarek, The Doors' keyboard player.
Manzarek and guitarist Robby Krieger said Morrison's behavior was influenced by an acting troupe that disrobed during plays.
"He was just doing a mind trip—as they would say—a mind trip on the audience and they totally fell for it," Manzarek said.
Manzarek said Morrison was far drunker than usual, to the point where they questioned whether he should go on stage.
Gov. Crist began considering a pardon for Morrison in 2007 at the at the urging of a fan. He says he has doubts about whether Morrison actually exposed himself during the rowdy concert March 1, 1969. Morrison was convicted of public profanity and indecent exposure and sentenced to six months in jail and a $500 fine.
The case has become murkier with the passage of years. Morrison's defense attorney said recently that the singer received a fair trial with credible witnesses on both sides, and fans who were at the show have differing recollections.
Here's what most people agree on: The Doors went on stage late, the Dinner Key Auditorium was oversold and wasn't air conditioned. Morrison was drunk and stopped in the middle of songs with an anti-authority, profanity-riddled rant.
A live lamb was brought on stage at one point, and Morrison also grabbed a police officer's hat and threw it in the crowd. The singer took off his shirt and fiddled with his belt, and fans poured onto the stage.
"There were 100 photos offered in evidence at the trial, photos of everything—Jim with the lamb, Jim with the hat, on the stage collapsing, riot in the audience. Not one photo of Jim's magnificent member," said Manzarek.
A pardon won't change Morrison's image, but it will right a wrong, Manzarek and Krieger said.
"Jim's legacy is one of Dionysian madness and frenzy and of a chaotic American poet. I don't think that the Miami episode has altered his image one iota," Manzarek said.
Krieger added: "Nobody would like to have that charge hanging over their head even if they are dead. I'm sure his family would be happy to see that go, especially since it never happened."
There are fans who still swear Morrison exposed himself.
"He actually unzipped and pulled his pants down a little bit, enough where you can see everything. I do remember being shocked when that happened, and definitely it happened," said Lee Winer, 56, who now lives north of San Francisco. "I can still picture it like it was yesterday."
Others disagree. Helene Davis of Miami said she was an 18-year-old in the front row of the concert with a friend. She said Morrison teased the crowd by pretending he was going to unzip his pants, but never actually exposed himself.
"We were watching and waiting because it was obvious that's where he was going with it," Davis said. "I just remembered thinking, 'Yes, it's going to happen! It's going happen! It's going to happen!' And it never did."
Dec 9 01:17 PM US/Eastern
MIAMI (AP) - The widow of The Doors singer Jim Morrison says Florida's intention to pardon him for a 1969 indecent exposure conviction is a cheap political ploy.
Patricia Kennealy Morrison told The Associated Press Thursday that she's not pleased with the pardon and doesn't think the late singer would be either because he didn't expose himself on stage as some claim.
She says the conviction should be expunged or the verdict overturned as fraud rather than just pardoned.
She says the two were married in a pagan ceremony by a Presbyterian minister about a year before he was found dead in a Paris bathtub in 1971.
Jim Morrison was appealing the conviction when he died. Gov. Charlie Crist planned to ask the Clemency Board for the pardon Thursday and it is expected to pass.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP)—The Doors singer Jim Morrison will get a posthumous pardon for an indecent exposure conviction in Florida after Gov. Charlie Crist got a commitment for enough votes from other members of the state's Board of Executive Clemency to approve it.
Morrison was appealing the conviction when he was found dead in a Paris bathtub in 1971. The meeting Thursday comes a day after the singer would have turned 67.
Crist can't issue a pardon on his own. He and the three-member Cabinet serve as the Clemency Board. Approval is required by the governor and at least two other members.
The did-he-or-didn't-he debate over what happened at the Miami concert was revived by Crist's interest in the case. The surviving band members say a drunken Morrison teased the crowd, but never exposed himself.
"It never actually happened. It was mass hypnosis," said Ray Manzarek, The Doors' keyboard player.
Manzarek and guitarist Robby Krieger said Morrison's behavior was influenced by an acting troupe that disrobed during plays.
"He was just doing a mind trip—as they would say—a mind trip on the audience and they totally fell for it," Manzarek said.
Manzarek said Morrison was far drunker than usual, to the point where they questioned whether he should go on stage.
Gov. Crist began considering a pardon for Morrison in 2007 at the at the urging of a fan. He says he has doubts about whether Morrison actually exposed himself during the rowdy concert March 1, 1969. Morrison was convicted of public profanity and indecent exposure and sentenced to six months in jail and a $500 fine.
The case has become murkier with the passage of years. Morrison's defense attorney said recently that the singer received a fair trial with credible witnesses on both sides, and fans who were at the show have differing recollections.
Here's what most people agree on: The Doors went on stage late, the Dinner Key Auditorium was oversold and wasn't air conditioned. Morrison was drunk and stopped in the middle of songs with an anti-authority, profanity-riddled rant.
A live lamb was brought on stage at one point, and Morrison also grabbed a police officer's hat and threw it in the crowd. The singer took off his shirt and fiddled with his belt, and fans poured onto the stage.
"There were 100 photos offered in evidence at the trial, photos of everything—Jim with the lamb, Jim with the hat, on the stage collapsing, riot in the audience. Not one photo of Jim's magnificent member," said Manzarek.
A pardon won't change Morrison's image, but it will right a wrong, Manzarek and Krieger said.
"Jim's legacy is one of Dionysian madness and frenzy and of a chaotic American poet. I don't think that the Miami episode has altered his image one iota," Manzarek said.
Krieger added: "Nobody would like to have that charge hanging over their head even if they are dead. I'm sure his family would be happy to see that go, especially since it never happened."
There are fans who still swear Morrison exposed himself.
"He actually unzipped and pulled his pants down a little bit, enough where you can see everything. I do remember being shocked when that happened, and definitely it happened," said Lee Winer, 56, who now lives north of San Francisco. "I can still picture it like it was yesterday."
Others disagree. Helene Davis of Miami said she was an 18-year-old in the front row of the concert with a friend. She said Morrison teased the crowd by pretending he was going to unzip his pants, but never actually exposed himself.
"We were watching and waiting because it was obvious that's where he was going with it," Davis said. "I just remembered thinking, 'Yes, it's going to happen! It's going happen! It's going to happen!' And it never did."
Friday, December 03, 2010
Alarming: 265,000 may leave military if DADT reversed
Dec 2, 2010 | by Michael Foust
WASHINGTON (BP)--More than 250,000 U.S. troops may leave the military earlier than they had planned if the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy is reversed, Sen. John McCain said Thursday, basing his data on a new Pentagon report.
"The numbers are alarming," he said.
The Pentagon report on the issue, released Nov. 30, found that 12.6 percent of military members who were surveyed said they would leave sooner than they had planned if Congress overturns the policy and homosexuals are allowed to serve openly. An additional 11.1 percent said they would consider leaving sooner.
McCain, R.-Ariz., made his comments during a Dec. 2 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing where Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Michael Mullen testified.
"If 12.6 percent of the military left earlier, that translates into 264,600 men and women who would leave the military earlier than they had planned," McCain said before asking Gates, "Do you think that's a good idea to replace 265,000 troops across the force in a time of war, that we should be undertaking that challenge at this time?"
[Comment: This is exactly what they want to do, weed out any military members who have any moral fortitude--that way there will be nobody left to stand against their globalist agenda]
McCain supports Don't Ask, Don't Tell, while Gates opposes it.
"The experience of the British, the Canadians and some of the other [countries]," Gates said, "has been that in their surveys ... there were substantial numbers who said they would leave" if homosexuals were to serve openly, but far fewer ended up doing so. He later told another GOP senator, "If I believed that a quarter of a million would leave the military immediately if given the opportunity, I would certainly have second thoughts about this, but I don't believe that."
Supporters of Don't Ask, Don't Tell warn that its reversal would harm unit cohesion, effectiveness, privacy and religious liberty.
The hearing saw Democrats and Republicans pointing to data in the report each said supported their case. Gates and Mullen told senators the policy should be reversed, although senators likely will get a different view Friday when the four service chiefs testify. General Carter F. Ham, co-chair of the group who wrote the report, acknowledged that the report "is not reflective of the chiefs' views."
Instead of supporting a repeal, the report actually opposes one, McCain said.
"Of those surveyed, 30 percent of the total, 43 percent of the Marines, 48 percent of Army combat units and 58 percent of Marine combat units believe that a repeal of the law would have a negative or very negative impact on their units' ability to work together to get the job done," McCain said. "Furthermore, 67 percent of Marines and nearly 58 percent of Army soldiers in combat units believe that repeal of the law would have negative consequences on unit cohesion in a field environment or out at sea."
McCain added, "I remain concerned ... as demonstrated in this study that the closer we get to service members in combat, the more we encounter concerns about whether Don't Ask, Don't Tell should be repealed and what impact that would have on the ability of these units to perform their mission."
Gates said the report raises concerns, although he said he believes such problems can be overcome.
"I ... frankly share the view of the chiefs that the report's evaluation of risk -- and particularly in the combat arms -- is perhaps too sanguine," Gates said. "What I believe is that with proper time for preparation, for training ... I believe that those concerns can be mitigated."
[Translated: Indoctrination in homosexuality]
McCain responded, "I couldn't disagree more. We send these young people into combat. We think they're mature enough to fight and die. I think they're mature enough to make a judgment on who they want to serve with and the impact on their battle effectiveness."
The report did not ask whether military personnel actually supported or opposed the policy, but it did acknowledge that among those who were interviewed in focus groups, on the Internet and at discussion groups, "the majority of views expressed were against repeal of the current policy."
More than 60 chaplains, including Southern Baptist chaplains, signed a letter to Obama and Gates earlier this year expressing concern that overturning Don't Ask, Don't Tell would result in the marginalizing of "deeply held" religious beliefs and could harm religious liberty. They warned that changing the policy could influence everything from what a chaplain can say in a sermon to what he can say in a counseling session. The fear is that chaplains who speak against homosexuality will have a discrimination complaint filed against them. Chaplains who preach through entire books of the Bible, the letter said, would "inevitably present religious teachings that identify homosexual behavior as immoral."
"Thus, while chaplains fulfill their duty to God to preach the doctrines of their faith, they would find themselves speaking words that are in unequivocal conflict with official policies," the letter said.
Retrieved from:
http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=34186
WASHINGTON (BP)--More than 250,000 U.S. troops may leave the military earlier than they had planned if the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy is reversed, Sen. John McCain said Thursday, basing his data on a new Pentagon report.
"The numbers are alarming," he said.
The Pentagon report on the issue, released Nov. 30, found that 12.6 percent of military members who were surveyed said they would leave sooner than they had planned if Congress overturns the policy and homosexuals are allowed to serve openly. An additional 11.1 percent said they would consider leaving sooner.
McCain, R.-Ariz., made his comments during a Dec. 2 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing where Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Michael Mullen testified.
"If 12.6 percent of the military left earlier, that translates into 264,600 men and women who would leave the military earlier than they had planned," McCain said before asking Gates, "Do you think that's a good idea to replace 265,000 troops across the force in a time of war, that we should be undertaking that challenge at this time?"
[Comment: This is exactly what they want to do, weed out any military members who have any moral fortitude--that way there will be nobody left to stand against their globalist agenda]
McCain supports Don't Ask, Don't Tell, while Gates opposes it.
"The experience of the British, the Canadians and some of the other [countries]," Gates said, "has been that in their surveys ... there were substantial numbers who said they would leave" if homosexuals were to serve openly, but far fewer ended up doing so. He later told another GOP senator, "If I believed that a quarter of a million would leave the military immediately if given the opportunity, I would certainly have second thoughts about this, but I don't believe that."
Supporters of Don't Ask, Don't Tell warn that its reversal would harm unit cohesion, effectiveness, privacy and religious liberty.
The hearing saw Democrats and Republicans pointing to data in the report each said supported their case. Gates and Mullen told senators the policy should be reversed, although senators likely will get a different view Friday when the four service chiefs testify. General Carter F. Ham, co-chair of the group who wrote the report, acknowledged that the report "is not reflective of the chiefs' views."
Instead of supporting a repeal, the report actually opposes one, McCain said.
"Of those surveyed, 30 percent of the total, 43 percent of the Marines, 48 percent of Army combat units and 58 percent of Marine combat units believe that a repeal of the law would have a negative or very negative impact on their units' ability to work together to get the job done," McCain said. "Furthermore, 67 percent of Marines and nearly 58 percent of Army soldiers in combat units believe that repeal of the law would have negative consequences on unit cohesion in a field environment or out at sea."
McCain added, "I remain concerned ... as demonstrated in this study that the closer we get to service members in combat, the more we encounter concerns about whether Don't Ask, Don't Tell should be repealed and what impact that would have on the ability of these units to perform their mission."
Gates said the report raises concerns, although he said he believes such problems can be overcome.
"I ... frankly share the view of the chiefs that the report's evaluation of risk -- and particularly in the combat arms -- is perhaps too sanguine," Gates said. "What I believe is that with proper time for preparation, for training ... I believe that those concerns can be mitigated."
[Translated: Indoctrination in homosexuality]
McCain responded, "I couldn't disagree more. We send these young people into combat. We think they're mature enough to fight and die. I think they're mature enough to make a judgment on who they want to serve with and the impact on their battle effectiveness."
The report did not ask whether military personnel actually supported or opposed the policy, but it did acknowledge that among those who were interviewed in focus groups, on the Internet and at discussion groups, "the majority of views expressed were against repeal of the current policy."
More than 60 chaplains, including Southern Baptist chaplains, signed a letter to Obama and Gates earlier this year expressing concern that overturning Don't Ask, Don't Tell would result in the marginalizing of "deeply held" religious beliefs and could harm religious liberty. They warned that changing the policy could influence everything from what a chaplain can say in a sermon to what he can say in a counseling session. The fear is that chaplains who speak against homosexuality will have a discrimination complaint filed against them. Chaplains who preach through entire books of the Bible, the letter said, would "inevitably present religious teachings that identify homosexual behavior as immoral."
"Thus, while chaplains fulfill their duty to God to preach the doctrines of their faith, they would find themselves speaking words that are in unequivocal conflict with official policies," the letter said.
Retrieved from:
http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=34186
Wednesday, December 01, 2010
Wikileaks Shows Iran Wags Obama
by Robert Maginnis
Posted 12/01/2010 ET
Wikileaks’ release of 250,000 classified U.S. diplomatic cables is a security tragedy that confirms Israel’s warnings about Iran’s atomic threat and exposes President Obama’s failing foreign policy.
Last week, the organization known as Wikileaks published the third installment of stolen classified U.S. government documents. Previously it released hundreds of thousands of battlefield reports on Iraq and Afghanistan, which endangered our troops and compromised our operations.
The latest documents expose the inner workings of U.S. diplomacy, which, at best, embarrasses the administration. But these candid assessments by American diplomats with comments attributed to foreign leaders provide valuable insights, especially regarding the crisis with Iran.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a major theme in the Wikileaks documents which reveal five important conclusions:
* First, many Arab leaders are deathly afraid of the Persians. The cables indicate Arab officials are privately much more concerned about Iran’s nuclear program than they admit publicly.
One cable asserts King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia repeatedly asked Washington to “cut off the head of the snake”–a reference to Iran —“ while there is still time.” Another Saudi official warned if Iran is not stopped, Arab states would develop their own nuclear weapons.
Abu Dhabi’s Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Zayed Al-Nayan labeled Iran an “existential threat” and warned against the dangers of “appeasing Iran” because “Ahmadinejad [Iran’s president] is Hitler.” Bahrain’s King Hamad Bin Isa al-Khalifa accused Iran of being the source of “much of the trouble in both Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Part of the Arab leaders’ fear may be questions about the perceived instability of Iran’s leader. In 2005, then commander of the U.S. Central Command, Gen. John Abizaid, met with military leaders from the United Arab Emirates who, according to a cable, “all agreed with Abizaid that Iran’s new president Ahmadinejad seemed unbalanced, crazy even.”
* Second, military action against Iran is favored by many Arabs but an Israel-alone success is doubtful. Back in 2005 Crown Prince Bin Zayed asked whether it would be possible to use air power to “take out” all of Iran’s nuclear facilities. A U.S. official said in a cable that was unlikely, to which the prince responded, “Then it will take ground forces!”
There are other likeminded Arab leaders. Cables indicate Kuwaiti interior minister Jaber Al-Khaled Al-Sabah told a U.S. official in 2009 Iran “will only be deterred from achieving its objectives–including a nuclear weapons capability–by force.” Bahrain’s King Hamad warned Gen. David Petraeus in 2009, “The danger of letting it [Iran’s nuclear program] go on is greater than the danger of stopping it.” Earlier this year Saudi King Abdullah encouraged the U.S. national security adviser, retired Gen. James Jones, to use covert ways to weaken Iran.
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was in Paris this spring where he was asked by French officials whether Israel could successfully strike Iran without American support. A cable indicates Gates said, “He didn’t know if they would be successful, but that Israel could carry out the operation.” Then Gates added that any strike “would only delay Iranian plans by one to three years, while unifying the Iranian people to be forever embittered against the attacker.”
* Third, no one knows for certain when Iran might have an atomic weapon, but the time for action is rapidly drawing to a close. Crown Prince Bin Zayed expressed a common worry among Arab leaders. It “is not how much we know about Iran, but how much we don’t,” Bin Zayed said.
Ehud Barak, Israel’s defense minister, shares the crown prince’s concern about the unknown. In a secret June 2009 cable, the American ambassador to Israel reported Barak argued the world had 6 to 18 months “in which stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons might still be viable.” After that, Mr. Barak said, “any military solution would result in unacceptable collateral damage.”
The Israeli was pointing out the time remaining in which a conventional strike would be possible. Apparently the Israelis understand Iran is hardening its nuclear facilities and at some point only nuclear weapons would be effective and therefore “unacceptable.” Barak’s 18 months expire this December.
* Fourth, North Korea provides Iran with considerable technical assistance. The media have long reported that North Koreans have been in Iran hardening atomic facilities, assisting with Tehran’s nuclear programs and outfitting the Persians with advanced ballistic missiles.
Leaked cables confirm Iran obtained advanced missiles from North Korea that can reach European capitals. One cable insists North Korea sent Iran 19 BM-25 advanced missiles, a Russian-designed nuclear capable missile. Apparently the Russians were skeptical when presented with the allegation, according to a cable, that is until last month when Pyongyang rolled out what experts identified as a BM-25.
China helps North Korea transfer dangerous items to Iran and allows the sale of banned materials to Tehran as well. A 2007 cable detailed the transfer of missile parts from North Korea through Beijing, where the parts were loaded on an Iranian commercial aircraft. Earlier this year U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked the Chinese to stop Iran from buying gyroscopes and carbon fiber for its ballistic missiles, and another cable indicates Chinese firms sold Iran precursors for chemical weapons.
* Fifth, the U.S. likely paid a high price for China’s and Russia’s erstwhile anti-Iran economic sanction support. Both nations have traded extensively with Iran and were reluctant until incentivized to support new sanctions out of concern for their economies, according to cables.
China imports nearly 12% of its oil from Iran and feared its support for new economic sanctions designed to pressure Tehran would jeopardize that supply. But a series of cables suggest a U.S. envoy facilitated meetings between the Saudis and the Chinese to fix the problem. A 2010 cable confirmed the fix: “Saudi Arabia has told the Chinese that it is willing to effectively trade a guaranteed oil supply in return for Chinese pressure on Iran not to develop nuclear weapons.” The cables do not reveal America’s cost to land the deal.
The Russians cast a more difficult bargain. Cables early in 2009 identified Moscow’s strong objections to President George Bush’s European-based ballistic missile defense to counter Iranian missiles. By late summer Mr. Obama scrapped that system, claiming “our intelligence had changed.” Then a 2010 cable reported a senior Moscow official “indicated Russia’s willingness to move to the pressure track” against Iran’s nuclear program.
Wikileaks Criminal
Wikileaks is a criminal organization which should be shutdown and the U.S. government needs to better secure our secrets. But this security tragedy has a silver lining: It validates Israel’s many warnings about Tehran and exposes Obama’s failing Iran policy. It is past time Obama develops a strategy that capitalizes on the collective angst to prevent Tehran’s mad mullahs from acquiring atomic weapons.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=40291
Posted 12/01/2010 ET
Wikileaks’ release of 250,000 classified U.S. diplomatic cables is a security tragedy that confirms Israel’s warnings about Iran’s atomic threat and exposes President Obama’s failing foreign policy.
Last week, the organization known as Wikileaks published the third installment of stolen classified U.S. government documents. Previously it released hundreds of thousands of battlefield reports on Iraq and Afghanistan, which endangered our troops and compromised our operations.
The latest documents expose the inner workings of U.S. diplomacy, which, at best, embarrasses the administration. But these candid assessments by American diplomats with comments attributed to foreign leaders provide valuable insights, especially regarding the crisis with Iran.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a major theme in the Wikileaks documents which reveal five important conclusions:
* First, many Arab leaders are deathly afraid of the Persians. The cables indicate Arab officials are privately much more concerned about Iran’s nuclear program than they admit publicly.
One cable asserts King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia repeatedly asked Washington to “cut off the head of the snake”–a reference to Iran —“ while there is still time.” Another Saudi official warned if Iran is not stopped, Arab states would develop their own nuclear weapons.
Abu Dhabi’s Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Zayed Al-Nayan labeled Iran an “existential threat” and warned against the dangers of “appeasing Iran” because “Ahmadinejad [Iran’s president] is Hitler.” Bahrain’s King Hamad Bin Isa al-Khalifa accused Iran of being the source of “much of the trouble in both Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Part of the Arab leaders’ fear may be questions about the perceived instability of Iran’s leader. In 2005, then commander of the U.S. Central Command, Gen. John Abizaid, met with military leaders from the United Arab Emirates who, according to a cable, “all agreed with Abizaid that Iran’s new president Ahmadinejad seemed unbalanced, crazy even.”
* Second, military action against Iran is favored by many Arabs but an Israel-alone success is doubtful. Back in 2005 Crown Prince Bin Zayed asked whether it would be possible to use air power to “take out” all of Iran’s nuclear facilities. A U.S. official said in a cable that was unlikely, to which the prince responded, “Then it will take ground forces!”
There are other likeminded Arab leaders. Cables indicate Kuwaiti interior minister Jaber Al-Khaled Al-Sabah told a U.S. official in 2009 Iran “will only be deterred from achieving its objectives–including a nuclear weapons capability–by force.” Bahrain’s King Hamad warned Gen. David Petraeus in 2009, “The danger of letting it [Iran’s nuclear program] go on is greater than the danger of stopping it.” Earlier this year Saudi King Abdullah encouraged the U.S. national security adviser, retired Gen. James Jones, to use covert ways to weaken Iran.
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was in Paris this spring where he was asked by French officials whether Israel could successfully strike Iran without American support. A cable indicates Gates said, “He didn’t know if they would be successful, but that Israel could carry out the operation.” Then Gates added that any strike “would only delay Iranian plans by one to three years, while unifying the Iranian people to be forever embittered against the attacker.”
* Third, no one knows for certain when Iran might have an atomic weapon, but the time for action is rapidly drawing to a close. Crown Prince Bin Zayed expressed a common worry among Arab leaders. It “is not how much we know about Iran, but how much we don’t,” Bin Zayed said.
Ehud Barak, Israel’s defense minister, shares the crown prince’s concern about the unknown. In a secret June 2009 cable, the American ambassador to Israel reported Barak argued the world had 6 to 18 months “in which stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons might still be viable.” After that, Mr. Barak said, “any military solution would result in unacceptable collateral damage.”
The Israeli was pointing out the time remaining in which a conventional strike would be possible. Apparently the Israelis understand Iran is hardening its nuclear facilities and at some point only nuclear weapons would be effective and therefore “unacceptable.” Barak’s 18 months expire this December.
* Fourth, North Korea provides Iran with considerable technical assistance. The media have long reported that North Koreans have been in Iran hardening atomic facilities, assisting with Tehran’s nuclear programs and outfitting the Persians with advanced ballistic missiles.
Leaked cables confirm Iran obtained advanced missiles from North Korea that can reach European capitals. One cable insists North Korea sent Iran 19 BM-25 advanced missiles, a Russian-designed nuclear capable missile. Apparently the Russians were skeptical when presented with the allegation, according to a cable, that is until last month when Pyongyang rolled out what experts identified as a BM-25.
China helps North Korea transfer dangerous items to Iran and allows the sale of banned materials to Tehran as well. A 2007 cable detailed the transfer of missile parts from North Korea through Beijing, where the parts were loaded on an Iranian commercial aircraft. Earlier this year U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked the Chinese to stop Iran from buying gyroscopes and carbon fiber for its ballistic missiles, and another cable indicates Chinese firms sold Iran precursors for chemical weapons.
* Fifth, the U.S. likely paid a high price for China’s and Russia’s erstwhile anti-Iran economic sanction support. Both nations have traded extensively with Iran and were reluctant until incentivized to support new sanctions out of concern for their economies, according to cables.
China imports nearly 12% of its oil from Iran and feared its support for new economic sanctions designed to pressure Tehran would jeopardize that supply. But a series of cables suggest a U.S. envoy facilitated meetings between the Saudis and the Chinese to fix the problem. A 2010 cable confirmed the fix: “Saudi Arabia has told the Chinese that it is willing to effectively trade a guaranteed oil supply in return for Chinese pressure on Iran not to develop nuclear weapons.” The cables do not reveal America’s cost to land the deal.
The Russians cast a more difficult bargain. Cables early in 2009 identified Moscow’s strong objections to President George Bush’s European-based ballistic missile defense to counter Iranian missiles. By late summer Mr. Obama scrapped that system, claiming “our intelligence had changed.” Then a 2010 cable reported a senior Moscow official “indicated Russia’s willingness to move to the pressure track” against Iran’s nuclear program.
Wikileaks Criminal
Wikileaks is a criminal organization which should be shutdown and the U.S. government needs to better secure our secrets. But this security tragedy has a silver lining: It validates Israel’s many warnings about Tehran and exposes Obama’s failing Iran policy. It is past time Obama develops a strategy that capitalizes on the collective angst to prevent Tehran’s mad mullahs from acquiring atomic weapons.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=40291
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)