On September 18, 2014, I wrote the following on my Facebook page about beheading by Muslims:

“When this happens in America, I won’t come on FB and write, “I told you so.”

That was less than three weeks ago.  Then, I read the following article about a murdering Muslim in Oklahoma who recently beheaded a woman.

This article was from the Wall Street Journal and not some tabloid news source; I will assume the facts as reported are accurate.

I’m not certain if this particular woman who was beheaded is the very first person in America to be murdered in this manner, but as far as I know, she takes the number one spot.

I’m wondering something:  does this bother anybody?  I mean, does this cause any of my readers to pause for a moment and genuinely reflect about this horrific killing?  What this means?  What a milestone, a turning point, we have reached here in America?

Muslims are beheading people, not only in Syria and Iraq, but now, here in our own country.  Does this bother you or cause you to pause for a moment and wonder what is happening to this country?

As a Christian, I believe that God is judging America for our wickedness, sin and rebellion.  We have become an evil nation, full of the most awful sort of filth and scum that would cause most normally bad people to blush.

I’m not saying that America is devoid of good, moral and God-fearing people…not at all.  As a matter of fact, our country is still full of people that I would be proud to have as my neighbor and who live by the Golden Rule to “love your neighbor as yourself.”

But I’m speaking about the ever increasing amount of evil that seems to now be part and parcel of American society:  homosexuality, “gay” marriage, transgenderism, atheism, murder, perversion of every sort and type, pornography, violence and sex glorified in the media, child molestation, etc.  The list is virtually endless.

To read or watch the news is to be pummeled by ever increasing amounts of filth and perversion to such an extent that the average person, myself included, has become so over-saturated with it that the most horrific acts of violence doesn’t seem to bother us that much anymore.  After watching one beading on the Internet, the next ones don’t quite seem all that revolting, do they?

We live in the midst of such filth and squalor all around us, morally speaking, that the putrid smells don’t seem to bother us any longer; we are used to them by now and just go about our daily business, absorbed and preoccupied by our own trials and tribulations.

For example, consider this article about Nicki Minaj’s ‘Anaconda’ video, which now has over 200 million views in the month since it was uploaded.  No, I haven’t watched it and don’t plan on doing so, but I’m certain it’s just one more piece of trash spewing out of the cesspool known as the American music industry.

We have become desensitized.  Worse, things have become so rotten in this country that we have become almost immune to the senseless and ceaseless violence and corruption that has become so much a normal part of our lives.

We might think America will continue to run full-speed ahead in our present course of action without suffering too many consequences for our evil actions.  After all, the stock market is continually reaching new heights, the economy continues to chug along nicely, all of us have more food and entertainment than we could possibly need…life has been good for so long that few, if any, can recall times that were truly bad.

And I have to admit that I’m as comfortable as anybody else.  Well, let me qualify that:  I’m certainly more comfortable than the woman who was just beheaded in OK and her co-worker who was slashed by the Muslim, but I’m not expecting the same treatment to happen to me today.  Things could change, of course, and quickly.

I can hear, though, the plaintive baying of the avenging hounds in the distance, the cries of judgment from a holy God who, as He promised, “will by no means clear the guilty” (Exodus 34:7).  America, it cannot be argued by anyone, is indeed guilty of many crimes against this patient God who appears has lost patience with a country that once honored and feared Him.

I am no prophet and refuse to try and speak as one, but it seems clear that America, living on borrowed time for so very long, may be long overdue in paying the piper.  And I fear whenever the debt is suddenly called up and payment is instantly demanded, few of us will be ready.

The horror of that day will be beyond anything we have ever experienced in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

 

I am being sued by a debt collector.  This is something I have never had to deal with before, and I am finding it interesting.

The good thing about this is I don’t owe the money, so the anxiety, fear and shame of being hounded by one of these bottom-feeders is not weighing too heavily on my mind.

But in the research I am doing to fight this lawsuit, I’m learning some interesting facts.  First, debt collecting is big business in the United States.  Though individual statistics that describe the depth of the problem among all Americans throughout all the states are not easy to come by, here are some from New York City:

• Debt collection cases equal 50% of the NYC civil case load
• In 2009, there were approximately 241,195 cases filed, a number that surpassed the number of housing cases filed
• About 90% of these cases were filed by debt buyers, or the people that come after you for the money you allegedly owe and eventually sue you
• Only 1% of the people who are sued (like myself) are represented by an attorney when they go to court

In my research on this topic, it appears the problem is growing at a phenomenal rate; many people are being sued by debt collectors and the cases filed against people are at an all time high.

Why are people being sued by debt collectors?  For many, going into debt with credit cards and not being able to pay the balances are one main reason.  Other reasons include not paying your utility bills (gas, water, electric, cable, etc.), car loans, gym memberships, cell phone, medical debt, etc.

How does a person wind up in the often times cruel clutches of a debt collector?  By not paying your bills is the short answer.

If you have credit card debt that has become unmanageable (a fancy term for not being able to pay the bill every month) and you have taken the unwise step of ignoring your monthly statements and deciding to not pay the bills, you will shortly be contacted by the credit card holder, either by phone, mail or email, that you have missed payments and that you need to solve this deficiency.

If you fail to respond to any of the credit card issuer’s requests, they will continue to try and contact you for a certain amount of time.  After this, the credit card company will tire of contacting you as the debt becomes older and older and may then sell it to a debt collector or debt buyer.

These can be companies that buy these old debts in mass quantities for pennies on the dollar.  What this means is this:  for illustrative purposes, assume you owe Discover Card $2,000 and were contacted by them for months in order to receive payment from you.  You never responded after their repeated attempts.  All goes quiet after a period of time and you start to think that maybe Discover got tired of hounding you and now everything will be okay; they forgot about you and nothing more will come of it.

This is wishful thinking, of course.  What is probably happening is that Discover is bundling up many other bad loans like yours and might then sell them to the aforementioned debt buyer (DB) for as low as 2 or 3 cents on the dollar.  The DB may pick up that bad loan you stiffed Discover on for only $40 or $60; if they can collect anywhere close to the $2,000 that you originally owed, they come out smelling like roses.

In my next post, I will discuss more on this problem of what to do when you are being hounded by debt collectors.

 

 

“The soldier is the Army. No army is better than its soldiers. The Soldier is also a citizen. In fact, the highest obligation and privilege of citizenship is that of bearing arms for one’s country” 
― George S. Patton Jr.

There are many reasons why I’m not a Jehovah’s Witness.  My e-book discusses at least five.  I have written several posts on JW’s here on my blog, detailing more reasons why I would never be a JW.  (To read more, please type in “Jw” or “Jehovah’s Witnesses” in the search bar to your left.)

This morning while checking my email, the Thomas Moore Law Firm sent me the following article and video about the Marines singing a worship song.  You might be asking yourself, “What does this have to do with today’s blog about JW’s?”

Good question.

You need to watch the video to gain the full understanding of my post, and in particular, the segment starting at 2:09 where the Marines start singing, “There’s no God like Jehovah, there’s no God like Jehovah…”

If you can’t understand all the words or if the song is unfamiliar to you, here it is with the lyrics.

I believe most men desire to have a cause to fight for, whether it be to protect their family from bodily harm or to protect their country from an invading force which threatens themselves and their loved ones.

WW2 comes to mind, when young Americans by the millions eagerly went to their local recruiting offices and willingly and gladly signed up to fight the Japanese and Nazi’s.  Many of these brave soldiers would sacrifice both life and limb for the love of their country.

Sadly, such devotion is not possible while being a Jehovah’s Witness.  Not only are they forbidden to take up arms against a sworn enemy like Adolf Hitler’s Germany, they are unable to salute the very flag by which they have been given the freedom to go door-to-door and spread their bastardized form of what they consider “the gospel.”

Which brings up this video of the Marines.  Here are some of America’s finest and bravest warriors, standing, many of them, their arms across the necks and shoulders of their fellow soldier, gustily singing a praise song to…Jehovah.

I admit to being inspired and encouraged by this video, more so when the Marines would shout out the famous “Oorah!” that has become a trademark among this fighting elite.  Such a display of camaraderie and devotion to country while singing a praise song to Jehovah by men whom you would never expect to do such a thing is awe-inspiring.

For many young man—millions even—the opportunity to serve their country by taking up arms against the enemy is the height of sacrifice and devotion.  Though war can never, and should never, be glorified just for the sake of shedding blood, it often becomes a necessary thing to drive out a real and dangerous evil, such as Hitler.

But not for JW’s.  Their chance to serve their country is forever foreclosed by a rigid, authoritarian manmade religious system that demands complete and total allegiance to their perverse rules that forbids its members from giving back to their country what their country has willingly and gladly given to them:  freedom, safety and a protected place to raise their families.

Obviously, we are not all warriors, but some among us are, called to answer the call of duty to one’s country when the desperate need arises.  How many JW men were called to fight for their country and did not because they chose instead to listen to cowardly and selfish men who somehow convinced them that “Jehovah’s will” was not to take up arms in defense of either their nation or the world?

I watch that video of those Marines, singing their hearts and souls out to God, men who will perhaps give the last full measure of their devotion by sacrificing their own lives on the altar of liberty and freedom, shedding their precious blood for the sake of their loved ones and countrymen.

But not JW men.  None of their voices will be joined with the voices of these brave warriors singing to Jehovah, the very name by which all JW’s so proudly identify themselves with.

I wonder, do some JW’s, if they would stumble upon this video and watch and hear brave soldiers unashamedly lifting up their voices to Jehovah, wish that they, too, could be in that room and be a part of that worship experience with other like-minded men?  Do some JW men long to serve their country in such a capacity, to share in the  “warrior camaraderie” so exquisitely exhibited in this video?

For almost 150 years, all JW men have been denied this experience, denied the honor of serving their country, and in some cases, perhaps even in many cases, denied the honor of dying for their country in a cause greater than themselves.

I think of the men who stormed the beaches in Normandy…so many of them ruthlessly gunned down by the Nazi’s on those  high cliffs, yet so many that fought their way up those deadly faces and secured the first line of offense against perhaps the most brutal and savage regime in recorded history.  Those men were a part of securing freedom for the entire continent of Europe and releasing whole nations from the cruel bonds of tyranny, slavery and brutality.

Why could not JW men fight alongside other non-JW men who sing such songs to Jehovah?  JW’s pride themselves—even boast—on knowing what they consider to be one of the only names for God:  Jehovah.  If so, why would they hesitate to serve and fight next to other men who are singing His praises and using the exact name by which they are identified with?

This is yet another tragic and pitiful aspect of the slavery one finds while being yoked to the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses: mind and thought control of such strength and power that the inherent and natural duty instilled in the heart of any patriot is silenced by the twisted logic and teaching of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society.

 

 

Of all our constitutional freedoms, the First Amendment ranks tops in my book.  Without it, our country would not be what it is today—or what it used to be.

There is no question that America is not the country it once was.  We are not advancing either as a nation or a culture but are increasingly declining.  The rapidity of our declension is nothing short of shocking.

One of the major reasons for this astonishing decline is the First Amendment:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

During the founding of America, the vast majority of people who inhabited these lands were God fearing Christians who loved and honored the Bible.  Biblical principles, ideas and ideals were central to the shaping of our public mores, attitudes and how our government was structured and defined.  This fact is so central to why America became the greatest civilization in the history of the Earth that it cannot—it must not—be overlooked.

Today, the phrase “post-Christian America” is frequently tossed about, meaning that though America at one time was indeed a Christian nation founded upon biblical principles, this is no longer  the case.  Now, we celebrate religious diversity under the idea of the “big tent” philosophy that now teaches that our strength lies in our infinite array of views, religions and practices.  This “melting pot” is believed by many to be the glue that binds us all together.  And the First Amendment guarantees that these myriad of views, many violently opposed to Christianity, will always be protected and given equal voice in our culture.

 

But is this true?  Are all voices, viewpoints, religions and beliefs as equal as others?  Does our strength truly lie in our diversity or does it lie in our singularity of beliefs?  I belief the answer is clear: diversity is dividing America and is driving all of us farther apart; the First Amendment is now hurting us instead of healing us.

Take the case of the Satanic Temple distributing coloring activity books in school children in Florida.  Here is a paragraph from the article:

“‘In response to a recent School Board decision in Orange County, Florida that allows for the dissemination of religious materials in public schools, The Satanic Temple will be distributing educational religious material to students,’ reads a statement from the group.”

Imagine if you were a parent in this school district and you discovered that a group of Satanists were going to distribute their literature to your little eight-year old.  How would that make you feel?  Do you think having little Suzy learn about worshipping the devil would be beneficial to her early childhood development and character?

Continuing with the article, the spokesperson for the group, Lucien Greaves, makes the following well-reasoned argument:

“We would never seek to establish a precedent of disseminating our religious materials in public schools because we believe our constitutional values are better served by respecting a strong separation of Church and State. However, if a public school board is going to allow religious pamphlets and full Bibles to be distributed to students – as is the case in Orange County, Florida – we think the responsible thing to do is to ensure that these students are given access to a variety of differing religious opinions, as opposed to standing idly by while one religious voice dominates the discourse and delivers propaganda to our youth.”

It’s tough to argue with his (or her?), particularly if you are steeped in the philosophy of political correctness and tolerance; after all, according to progressives and their allies on the left, what is the difference between worshipping the devil, Jesus, or Allah?  One religious viewpoint should certainly not dominate to the exclusion of all others, right?

This is precisely the point where the First Amendment is failing us, because if this cherished right means that little Johnny and Suzy are going to be exposed to Satanism as a rule of law, something must be changed because something has gone incredibly wrong.  We are heading on a path of sheer madness, and no culture can withstand the ramifications of these perverse ideologies being disseminated throughout its borders.

Let me test my readers:  do you think, in the spirit of tolerance and fairness, that the Church of Satan has the right to teach children their value systems in the same manner that Christians should have?  Would you agree that if children read from the Bible in public schools (which they can in only specific instances), that they should also be instructed out of the Satanic bible as well, or the Quran, the Book of Mormon, the Bhagavad Gita, ad nauseum?

Perhaps you vote “No” to all “holy” books and believe that none of them should be taught in public schools, believing in the “separation of church and state.”  But there is no such beast in reality, for schoolchildren’s mind do not exist in a vacuum and someone’s moral code must be presented to them.  And if not Christianity, Islam or Satanism, what then?  The religion of secular humanism will fill that void, which is precisely what is taught in our public schools ever since the Bible was outlawed in the sixties.

Americans have been cleverly duped for decades, perhaps even for generations, with the philosophy of tolerance and political correctness.  The bitter root of this gangrened tree has been producing its perverse fruit for decades, and this insane attempt of the Satanic group to place their demonic literature in the impressionable hands and minds of schoolchildren is simply the latest bumper crop we are reaping.

America is on a collision course with disaster; we see signs of our imminent collapse all around us, from the criminals running the government and occupying the White House all the way down to mothers and fathers murdering their own children and every putrid thing in between.

And one of the main reasons is because of the First Amendment.

“If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles… if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.”  Sun Tzu, “The Art of War”

After British aid worker David Haines had his head sawed off by ISIS, Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron said this of these barbaric Muslim terrorists:

“They  (ISIS) boast of their brutality. They claim to do this in the name of Islam. That is nonsense. Islam is a religion of peace. They are not Muslims, they are monsters.”

Muslims across the globe must certainly rejoice when they hear such foolish and nonsensical statements from yet another Western governmental buffoon in leadership.  In saying such ridiculous statements, Islam advances ever further in their eventual goal of conquering Europe.

Facts are stubborn things, and the naked truth is that Islam is anything but a religion of peace.  That cowardly Muslim hiding behind his black disguise who beheaded Haines is only doing what Muhammad, the founder and leader of Islam, commanded all faithful Muslims to do:  wage war against the infidels.  One might even say that this particular Muslim shown in these videos is a poster boy for this bloodthirsty religion, an icon of the savagery and brutality of Islam.

“The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement.”  (The Quran, sura 5:33)

But the lunacy of Cameron does not end with his inane comments, no, the brother of the beheaded man, Mike Haines, opined in this manner:

“The Muslim faith is not to blame for ISIL, nor is it the fault of people of Middle Eastern descent. ISIL are extremely dangerous, and pose a threat to every nation, every religion, every politics and every person. Radicalisation remains the biggest threat to the wholesale safety of every person in the world.”

The Muslim faith is not to blame for ISIL?  What religion is, then?  Christianity?  Buddhism?  Catholicism?  These men making such idiotic statements are guilty of at least two things:  willful ignorance of the facts of Islam or fear…they don’t want their necks being in the same condition as those other unfortunate souls were.

But what do Muslims “in the know” believe about the beheading of the Western journalist Thomas Foley and those of the two Brits?  Watch this video and you will learn that, according to Sharia law, beheading infidels is perfectly acceptable, as is the murdering of civilians.

Western leaders, such as Obama and Cameron, are appeasing the  Muslims, not wanting to offend the “religion of peace” in hope that Christianity and Islam can somehow coexist.  It can, on one condition:  if Muslims remain in the most minute fraction of a percent in the society where both Christians and Muslims live.  This has been the case since America’s founding and was the same for Britain.  But look what is happening now in Europe where Muslims are gaining in population, for example, in France’s “no go” zones.

Disaster only looms ahead for England.  There is no turning back.  Absent relocating the entire Muslim population out of England, this growing threat to this small nation will only increase until the Muslims take over the country.

It will happen sooner than any of us believe.

 

 

 

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!”  Isaiah 5:20 (ESV)

I have two distinct childhood memories that, for me, define the moral insanity that has gripped the American people today.  The first is the complete lack of anything that was “gay” or hinted at homosexuality being a normal and accepted lifestyle.

The second was the general consensus that drugs—the illegal kind— were bad for you, and that smoking marijuana was roundly condemned and criticized by the “older establishment” (our parents) and the government.

Though marijuana was smoked and homosexuality practiced,  both were deep in the closet and done in secret.   On an interesting point, a “pothead” was far more accepted than a “queer.”  What is equally interesting is that this term “queer,” far from being the term of endearment that it is today, was used in a derogatory manner to describe any male who acted effeminate.

Today, the tables have turned on the use of marijuana and the practice of homosexuality/lesbianism.  As noted in the paragraph above, a “pot head” in the earlier caste system of the United States was many levels ahead of homosexuality; now, it is more acceptable to be gay than it is to smoke weed, an interesting paradigm shift.

There is a movie titled “Reefer Madness” that was made in 1938 that tells of the dangers of marijuana.  It has become somewhat of a cult favorite, and for an old movie, it has a surprising number of over 420,000 views on Youtube.

In one section, beginning at approx. 29:32, two men, one a doctor and the other a government employee of the “Bureau of Investigation,” discuss several cases where criminal acts were committed by people high on the drug.  This particular case was of a “young boy, under the influence of the drug,  [who] killed his entire family with an axe.”

What makes this case pertinent is because of the recent tragic case of the South Carolina man, Timothy Ray Jones, Jr.,  who confessed to murdering his five children, ages one through eight.  One article  stated that the “controlled substance” Jones was on was “synthetic marijuana.”

(Photo above:  Timothy Ray Jones, Jr., who confessed to murdering his five children.)

This movie is dated and melodramatic, but the questions and concerns it raises are as valid today as then.  The United States government roundly and routinely condemned all use of marijuana, and to my knowledge, there was never any public talk of the medicinal benefits of the drug, unlike what is being pushed on the public today for its widespread use and acceptance.

(Photo above:  One of the main characters in the 1938 anti-marijuana movie, “Reefer Madness.”)

Today, there is little, if any, public discussion on the dangerous aspects  of marijuana.  Let’s be clear about something:  in my teenage years I smoked marijuana.  Not a lot, but I dabbled in it.  One of the reasons I never became an enthusiastic user is because of its negative effects:  fear and paranoia, which eclipsed any so-called benefits.  My experience is certainly not unique and isolated to myself; countless others exhibit the same and even more serious side affects.  Since this is true, why the sudden rush for legalization?

When you read the comments in “Reefer Madness,” you will see many that make light of the seriousness of the message this movie was seeking to convey.

Why this dramatic shift, from a drug once universally condemned to  now being acclaimed as one of the greatest pain benefits?  Why the mad rush for legalization?  And finally, why are the myriad stories of the harmful and dangerous aspects of weed being suppressed?

There is an interesting Greek word in the Bible used to describe witchcraft:  pharmakia, where we get the word “pharmacy” from.  One passage where it is used is in Galatians 5:19-21:

“Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.…” (NIV)

The word sorcery is pharmakia.  The “Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words” defines it as:

“…primarily signified ‘the use of medicine, drugs, spells;’ then, ‘poisoning;’ then, ‘sorcery…,’ In ‘sorcery,’ the use of drugs, whether simple or potent, was generally accompanied by incantations and appeals to occult powers, with the provision of various charms, amulets, etc., professedly designed to keep the applicant or patient from the attention and power of demons, but actually to impress the applicant with the mysterious resources and powers of the sorcerer.”

Such language is absent from the discussion of marijuana use in our society today, but the reality is, and I speak from personal experience, drug use opens up the door, for many people, into the bizarre and dangerous world of the occult.

The spiritual ramifications for marijuana use cannot be overemphasized.  If you believe that a Christian can smoke weed with no ill effects to their walk with Christ, this should be a clear indication that you have already been deceived by satanic forces. Again, I speak from personal experience here; drug use is toying with dark, spiritual forces that few today have adequate understanding of.

I urge anyone who smokes pot to carefully weigh what I have written.  If you claim to be a follower of Jesus and smoking weed does not offend your conscience, you have serious spiritual issues  with deception in your “faith.”  You must repent of this wickedness and see drug use for what it is:  an open door into the spiritual dark side.

 

 

 

Desmond Hague was fired as CEO of “Centerplate,” a concession company that feeds hungry sports fans at venues such as baseball games.

According to what video you watch, Hague can be seen kicking the Doberman and yanking on its leash.  The article linked above alleges that Hague lifted the dog up by the leash so it was hanging by its neck.

I want to be clear about something:  I reject all forms of animal abuse.  As a matter of fact, I was one of those kids that loved watching nature and animal programs on TV and wanted to become a marine biologist.  My initial major in college was “Ecology and Evolutionary Biology.”  You can rightly label me an animal lover.

In my late teens, I was interested in the work of Cleveland Amory, one of the first animal rights advocates.  He was an early hero of mine.

This being said, I am even more against what has become in this country an obsession over so-called “animal rights.”  As seen in this case with Hague, a man loses his livelihood and is vilified as some type of terrorist, on the level of ISIS, for what seems to me to be a exaggeration in mistreating this animal.  Far more than the abuse which may have happened to this Doberman was the abuse taken against this CEO.

Look at the incredible overreaction of what actually occurred in this elevator.  Was this dog injured?  I don’t think so.  I didn’t see the kind of kick the word itself implies, expecting to see the dog flying across the elevator from the force of the blow and slamming into the wall.  Isn’t this the type of violent action that is conjured up in your mind when you read the headline, “CEO kicks dog”?

Yes, Hague kicked the dog, but without enough force to cause the dog to move even an inch from where it was standing.  One might even call it a “foot nudge.”  Again, I’m not excusing what this man did to this dog, but as far as the allegation that he lifted up the dog by the leash so that it was hanging by his neck is another gross exaggeration.  Again, the image in my mind when I read this sentence was of a crazed, bug-eyed, laughing maniac holding a dog off the ground by its leash as the dog was being strangled to death, its legs kicking as it twists and squirms as it chokes to death.  What I saw was nothing of the sort.

But the prize for the most outlandish, knee-jerk reaction must come from this reporter in a Youtube video who said this (begin at .56):

“We want to warn you that the video you are about to see is graphic.”

Graphic?  You mean like the ISIS videos where those two American journalist’s heads were sawed off?  Are we about to see this CEO beheading this Doberman?  I’ve seen pictures of a little girl with her head sliced from her body by these Islamic savages, and if this reporter is warning me that what this man did to this dog is on the same level, I would rather not watch it; I can’t stand the sight of blood…even Doberman blood.

My concern, though, for being exposed to “graphic” violence in the elevator video was misplaced.  No blood, no flashing knife tearing away at the Doberman’s flesh, no blood-curdling screams of agony coming from the terrified mouth of this “puppy” as he is being kicked to death (another exaggeration of the left-leaning press; I was expecting to see a small ball of fur that could barely hobble on its tiny legs, another mental image conjured up by the word “puppy.”)

No, this reporter is guilty of false reporting, of playing on the easily manipulated emotions of the animal loving public that feeds on this kind of nonsense and exaggeration, that elevates animals to—and in many cases above—the level of humans.

But the insanity does not end with this reporters exaggerated claims of graphic violence; it continues with the overreactions of the company that fired Hague.  In the same article linked at my beginning paragraph, we read this:

“We want to reiterate that we do not condone nor would we ever overlook the abuse of animals,” said Joe O’Donnell, chairman of the board of directors for Centerplate, in a statement Tuesday. He apologized for Hague’s action and the distress it caused the company’s “employees, clients and guests.”

I’m wondering if O’Donnell is comparing the “distress” caused by Hague to the company’s “employees, clients and guests” to the same distress that the parents, friends and family of the murdered American journalists must have faced when they saw the bloody heads of their loved ones—Steven Sotloff and James Foley—balanced atop their handcuffed backs.

American culture is becoming more debased by the day as we continue to lose track of what is valuable and emphasize the trivial.  Our perverse and unnatural love affair with our pets is dehumanizing us, causing us to value the “rights” of animals over the rights of our fellow human beings.

If you doubt what I say, please let me ask you where is the outrage over the truly “graphic” and “inhumane” murders of the over 4,000 unborn children ruthlessly slaughtered every day in this country by abortion?  Where are the protests demanding that the perpetrators of these crimes against humanity—the abortion doctors—be brought to justice?

You rarely hear a peep of protest, and never from the liberal press, for abortion on demand is their pet darling.  No, these misguided people value the life of animals far above and way beyond that of their fellow humans.

The reporter I mentioned earlier, the one who warned us of the “graphic” content of the video?  What do you suppose she would say about the truly graphic nature of the following video that shows the inhumane and barbaric torture of one of the most innocent and helpless of our society, the unborn?  And let me warn you with all sincerity…the content of this video is not only graphic but horrific:

http://abortionno.org

What kind of a society have we become when we value the lives of animals over that of unborn babies?  When we become outraged over a man kicking a dog,  make such a public show of disapproval that the man loses his job, but fail to say one word over the barbarity of child sacrifice that would make ISIS members gloat in envy?

Do you want to see additional abuse…actual abuse of a living human being?  Continue to scroll through the above website.  If that minor yank on the leash of that Doberman disturbs you, check out this photograph of an actual instrument used in aborting tiny, defenseless, unborn infants:

(Above photo:  Tire-Tete
This abortion instrument works by pushing the spike into the child’s head. Once it is inside, the button is pushed. When it flattens, you can pull the child out.  From the “Grantham Collection.“)

More modern and seeming medieval abortion instruments can be found at the link above.

If you are outraged over what you saw inside that elevator, I hope your outrage is magnified 1,000 fold when you see what happens to babies in their mother’s wombs during a “safe,” legal abortion.

 

 

 

William Bowen runs silentlambs.org, an organization that tracks child sex abuse among Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Bowen and I are Facebook friends.  His page is here.  Today on my newsfeed he posted this story.  It moved me so much I had to include it here:

A sister writes…

Last week I visited back home and it gave me a lot to think about, in particular my JW grandmother and here is why. She was born in 1914 and was of the generation that was waiting for the new system to usher in paradise….she waited and waited

She would have been around when all the Bible students were waiting for 1925 to usher in the new system. She lived through both world wars but often told us about the 2nd world war and how she waited for Armageddon.…she waited still

The news coming out of Washington after the savage beheading of yet another American journalist, Steven Sotloff, seemed promising, with these words from Vice President Joe Biden:

“We will follow them to the gates of hell until they are brought to justice because hell is where they will reside. ..If they think the American people will be intimidated, they don’t know us very well.”

Strong words from a weak Vice President representing an even weaker foreign policy administration, but comforting and energizing all the same.  Americans are expecting such a response—and far more— from those in political leadership.

The article continues:

“Obama vowed the U.S. would not forget the ‘terrible crime against these two fine young men.’

‘We will not be intimidated. Their horrific acts only unite us as a country and stiffen our resolve to take the fight against these terrorists,’ Obama said. ‘And those who make the mistake of harming Americans will learn that we will not forget, and that our reach is long and that justice will be served.'”

Though I have not agreed with much that Obama has said or done as President, I wholeheartedly concur with his words.  The only thing that remains to be seen is whether or not his words will be backed with decisive action.

Secretary of State John Kerry added his opinion with this statement:

“‘Barbarity, sadly, isn’t new to our world. Neither is evil.’

‘We’ve taken the fight to it before, and we’re taking the fight to it today,’ Kerry said. ‘When terrorists anywhere around the world have murdered our citizens, the United States held them accountable, no matter how long it took. And those who have murdered James Foley and Steven Sotloff in Syria should know that the United States will hold them accountable too, no matter how long it takes.'”

I was encouraged by these words of affirmation to American values and our love of both justice and our untiring resolve to bring criminals to answer for their crimes.  We have done so in the past and it appears that this White House will continue in some way to furthering this noble legacy.

My readers might understandably be confused at this point, because the title of my post today reads, “Islam and their puppets in the White House.”  How does this square with what I have written?

Though Kerry spoke with powerful sentiment in the above paragraphs, his following statement nullifies much of the force of the White House’s strategy in defeating ISIS:

“The real face of Islam is not what we saw yesterday, when the world bore witness again to the unfathomable brutality of ISIL terrorist murders.”

As I previously wrote in another blog, the problem with ISIS is Islam.  Kerry’s statement that the “real face of Islam in not what we saw yesterday” may prove to be one of this century’s greatest understatements.  And coming from this administration, this lack of clarity and a failure to properly identify our enemies will only thwart our present and future efforts in eradicating this threat from our shores.

We must face facts on this current war on terror:  our enemies are Muslims who follow and embrace jihadist teachings in the Quran.  It is not Christians, Mormon’s, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Presbyterians, Baptists or Catholics that are cutting off people’s heads and crucifying them, but jihadist Muslims…those who revere Mohammad, pray to the false god Allah and follow the more radical and disturbing teachings of its book, the Quran.

Perhaps you have read the story of the Christian in Syria who was forced to recant his faith, accept Islam—which he did—and was ruthlessly beheaded anyway.  I started to watch the video (embedded in the article) but had to turn away when they began to cut his head off.

Though I did not watch the actual beheading, I continued to listen to the audio portion because I wanted to hear what these animals were saying as they beheaded their innocent victim.  Were they shouting, “Praise Jesus!” or “Praise the Lord!” while watching their satanically inspired terrorist slice through his jugular vein?  No, they didn’t.

They shouted “Allahu Akbar!” meaning, “Allah is great.”  This is a common Muslim expression, much like those Christians use as noted in the paragraph above.

I challenge everyone to browse through any Muslim related video on the internet where violence of some kind is predominant.  The most common phrase you will hear while the most vile atrocities are committed?  That’s correct:  “Allahu Akbar!”

Since this is an undisputed fact, how can Kerry say that the real face of Islam is not seen in this latest beheading video?  The reality is the opposite:  Islam is seen in all of its grotesque form whenever we witness such crimes against humanity at the hands of those who follow Muhammad.

In short, Islam is the problem, and the “real face” of Islam is seen in these atrocities.  For Kerry to say otherwise is disingenuous at best and at the worst, an outright attempt to deceive and lie to the American people about the true identity of one of our fiercest enemies today:  Muslims who are following the precepts of the Quran precisely as dictated by Muhammad.

One of the greatest deceptions of the American government on its people is the perpetuation of the false notion that Islam is a “religion of peace.”  This lie results in an ineffective and weak strategy for combatting and ultimately defeating this enemy that is not only living among us, but is growing in strength, numbers and influence.

Radical Islam and its followers—jihadist Muslims—are the enemy.  Wherever they are found, wherever they live, as long as they identify as followers of their prophet and read his unholy book, the Quran, and promise to live by its savage, brutal and inhumane dictates, these are our enemies who must be fought against and defeated.

Muslims, regardless of their claim to be non-violent, must reconcile their pacifist views to the words found in the Quran.

“And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” 

Who are polytheists to Muslims?  Christians, those who believe that Jesus is the Son of God, God the Son, the second member of the Trinity.  Read these verses from the Quran and see for yourself:  here and here and here.

The question for non-violent Muslims is simply this:  do you, or do you not, follow the teachings of the Quran in their entirety?  If they answer “yes,” then they must obey the mandate to “kill the polytheists wherever you find them…”

As Winston Churchill wrote, “Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities.”  We know that many Muslims desire peace and want nothing more than what most Americans want:  to live in harmony, health and happiness among neighbors, in an environment safe, secure and nurturing for their children.  

But Churchill continued and wrote:  “…but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith…”

Something is inherently wrong in Islam, and it does no good to pretend that one can be a faithful and peaceful Muslim while strictly adhering to the tenets of the faith; this cannot be done, for jihad is spoken about again and again in the Quran.  Only by twisting the clear meanings of those verses that mandate the killing of infidels into something different can a Muslim excuse their responsibility for violent jihad.

This is why Kerry is wrong, and inexcusably so.  This present administrations lack of clarity in accurately defining the problem with Islam, and their desire to appease its followers, is creating in our country an impossible situation.  Islam and American values cannot be reconciled; one must triumph over the other.  The sooner we recognize and accept this fact, the sooner we will embark on a plan to solve it.

It is difficult being a moderate, peace-loving Muslim who eschews all forms of violence when the book you read for inspiration and guidance—the Quran—contains these jihadist passages that command the killing and beheading of infidels.  And it is difficult for non-Muslims like myself to understand how you peace-loving Muslims can remain in this religion due to the amount of horrific savagery that is constantly being perpetrated under the umbrella of Islam.

Again, I understand that many Muslims, perhaps even the greatest majority, do not follow or embrace the most violent strains of jihad taught in the Quran.  But the reality is that these passages are in there, and according to my understanding of Islam, all faithful and true Muslims are required to follow them.  How do non-violent and jihadist rejecting followers of Muhammad answer this perplexing question?

I am very interested in reading your responses and hearing your arguments.

 

 

In years past, I spent an inordinate amount of time with University of Arizona students debating evolution.

It would be more accurate if I restated this and wrote that I wasted an inordinate amount of time debating evolution.  The fact is, nobody changed their minds; the students who believed that darwinian evolution was absolute fact remained so, as well as myself, who rejects such nonsense as “monkeys into apes.”  Evolution is the greatest fairy tale believed by intelligent people.

I grew weary of the debate and began avoiding any discussion revolving around it.  Since neither side was going to change their positions, it became a fruitless and unending debate that sometimes became quite heated.  Life is too short to be in constant stress.

Now, several years have passed, and I’m finding myself once again dabbling in the argument.  Recently, I watched a video by Trey Smith titled, “”The theory of everything: God, devils, dimensions, dragons…”  It must be popular, because as of right now, it has 794,382 views.

When I first started watching this, Smith, with his strange mannerisms and quirky personality, turned me off.  But I can be persistent, and something kept me watching.

I’m glad I did.

I quickly warmed to Smith’s unusual method of communication (he constantly moves his hands and can’t seem to sit still) and was hooked.  Not only this, but I grew to respect his obvious depth of knowledge and his obvious passion for the subject and genuine sincerity of his beliefs.

I often tell atheists/evolutionists (the two go hand in hand) that they have far more faith than I do.  As a matter of fact, I’m convinced that if I had the faith of your average evolutionist, I could not only walk on water but I could water ski on my feet…without a boat or a rope.  Solo.  By myself.

Smith tells the story of Mary Schweitzer, a molecular paleontologist at North Carolina State University.  She is credited with the discovery of red blood cells and soft tissue remains in dinosaur bones, an earth shattering find.

Why this is earth shattering is because it bring into doubt the belief that dinosaurs are millions of years old.  Red blood cells cannot survive that long, and the controversy erupting over her finding is causing reverberations across the evolutionary loving community.

And here is where the controversy becomes almost hilarious if it was not for the fact that it is such a subject of profound seriousness.   You no doubt have heard the saying, “Follow the evidence wherever it leads.”  Though scientists love to quote this because it shows how unbiased they are in being vanguards of truth, much of the evolutionary leaning scientific community is proving to be anything but.

In this segment from 60 Minutes,  Schweitzer is being interviewed about her incredible discovery.  But the “monkey wrench in the machinery” is the reality that such blood remnants found in these bones should not be there due to the “millions and millions and millions of years” of the alleged age of these dinosaurs.

At .36 the hostess says,  “It looks like the soft tissue she would have expected to find if it would have been modern bones.  This was impossible!  This bone was 68 million years old!”

At 1:20:  “The things Mary was finding inside dinosaur bones, blood vessels and even what seemed to be intact cells, posed a radical challenge to the existing rules of science that organic material can’t possibly survive even a million years…let alone 68 million.”

Then, the clincher at 2:30, Mary exclaims, “Eighty million years old!”

You see, Mary, steeped in her evolutionary blindness that prevents her from “following the evidence wherever it leads,” rejects the obvious fact any unbiased person would make after examining the facts:  dinosaurs are not as old as the evolutionary theory has claimed.

How would it make your average scientist feel if he or she was presented with overwhelming evidence of being brainwashed?  Or, do scientists who embrace Darwin’s unproven theory realize they operate on faith in the same manner as believers in creationism do?  Both belief systems require faith.  The question is, what is the most reasonable of the two faiths?

Since there was no one around at the moment of the “Big Bang,” no bevy of scientists armed with the latest sophisticated measuring instruments and video recorders, all the theories surrounding exactly how the universe got started is mere conjecture.  No matter how sophisticated the arguments put forth by scientists who favor the Big Bang, all of it is speculation.  In other words, they take the Big Bang by faith, in the same way that Christians do who believe “In the beginning, God created…”

I made a video some time ago that presents the issue in the form of a choice between which theory makes the most reasonable sense.  The comments and dialogue that this video created between me and my viewers is enlightening…very few would answer the question I presented.

Atheists often chastise theists for their reliance on “blind faith,” or believing in something—God—whose existence cannot, they allege, be proven.  Yet they fail to take the beam out of their own jaundiced eyes while in the midst of attempting to remove what they feel is a splinter in our eyes:  belief in something without supporting evidence.

I find their hypocrisy remarkable.