incapable of victory

after watching the world community reaction after the events of this weekend, i've come to the conclusion that the desire in the international community to rid themselves of an american unipolar world and their annoyance with this gnat of a state Israel is greater than their fear of nuclear terror states or the command of islam to be spread from iraq to spain. no, those folks in europe are more concerned with perceived american arrogance and appeasing their own islamic populations.

but europe has been anti-semetic for quite some time.. and the eu is a counterweight against american trade prowess. not to mention the corrupt governments on the take from saddam in the oil for food scandal. (france, russia, germany to name a few)

and we have our beloved american left who would have you believe that america is the source of all the trouble in the world and if they were just in power, we would not be having any of this middle east conflict..

“If you think what's going on in the Middle East today would be going on if
the Democrats were in control, it wouldn't, because we would have worked day
after day after day to make sure we didn't get where we are today. We would have had the moral authority that Bill Clinton had when he brought together the
Northern Irish and the IRA, when he brought together the Israelis and the
Palestinians.” -howard dean

talk about american arrogance - as if howard dean's party
has any moral authority or clarity. this has been going on since isaac and
ishmael but howard dean has the right idea.. how could american voters ever have
not got his party in power ??? a party that will say anything, sell anyone out,
promote any point of view just to try to get elected.

but alas, the
party of no one, yet everyone, or the party of whatever the polls may be reading
are hoping to seize control of the house and senate this year.. these are the
whims of the unprincipled. these are the people of the jimmy carter wing of
american politics.. those who continually snatch defeat from the jaws of victory
time and time again.
--------------------------------------

Jaws of Defeat
By David Horowitz
FrontPageMagazine.com July 31, 2006

The United States and Israel
and every sentient being in the path of the Islamist crusade are teetering on
the brink of a massive defeat in Lebanon and thus in the war on terror. Lest it
be forgotten, this is a war that began with the Ayatollahs’ revolution in Iran
in 1979 which established the first radical Islamic state whose masters’ war cry
was “Death to America” and the establishment of a global Islamic empire. Nearly
thirty years later, Iran is on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons and its
imperial war is now being waged on Iran’s Lebanese frontier by its Hezbollah
proxy. One month into the fighting which began with the attacks by Hamas and
Hezbollah on the state of Israel, the scenario for the West’s defeat in this
phase of the war is quite obvious and quite simple.

The appeasers of
Islamofascism, who have been calling for a ceasefire and bewailing “civilian
casualties” in Lebanon and Gaza, will succeed. Hezbollah will agree to turn over
its arms to the pro-Hezbollah Lebanese army. The pro-Hezbollah UN will establish
a security zone on Lebanon’s southern border to keep the area clear of
non-government militias, of which the Hezbollah “militia” is the only one. The
credulous in the Western camp will greet this as a victory for the peacemakers.
But exactly the opposite will be the case.



According to a recent
poll in Lebanon eighty percent of the Lebanese Arabs support Hezbollah. In other
words, just as Hamas, which was created by the same Muslim Brotherhood that
spawned al-Qaeda, is now the Palestinian government, so Hezbollah will emerge as
the government of Lebanon. The Lebanese army will become the new Hezbollah
“militia.” Only it won’t be a militia. It will be the terrorist army of a
sovereign power, with the right to openly negotiate its arms deals with Syria
and Iran. The next battle with Iran, in other words, will be World War III.



In fact, the next battleground in the spread of Shi’ia fascism
is already in progress and aflame. It is Iraq, where Iran’s Shi’ia armies are
already in the field under the command of the sheik of Sadr City, the
America-hating cleric Moqtadar al-Sadr. Al-Sadr, it should be noted, is alive
and in the field because the appeasers in this country, beginning with the
Democratic Party but extending into the Bush State Department, stymied the first
battle of Fallujah and the Bush offensive generally when al-Sadr was trapped in
Najaf and could have been killed and his militia destroyed. The Bush
administration had to delay the Fallujah attack until after Kerry’s defeat in
the November 2004 elections in order to avoid the political complications that
would have attended the battle in the midst of an election campaign. By then
Sistani had staged a "peace march" and going after Sadr was off the table.



But the first battle of Fallujah is only one of many defeats
inflicted by the appeasers and abettors of Islamic imperialism in the West. The
aid to the enemy within the Western camp has taken many forms, beginning with
the hysterical and reckless attacks on the commander-in-chief of America’s
forces as a liar and murderer, and the source of the terror that the Islamists
create. Are there terrorists in Iraq? There were none there before George Bush
created them. Is Hezbollah a Nazi army? It’s because the Jews “occupied”
Palestinian lands. Of course, this is two lies in one. All Israeli “occupation”
is the product of four aggressive Arab wars against Israel. When Israel
withdraws – as in Lebanon – it is attacked. The source of the terror in Lebanon,
as in Iraq, is to be found in the Koran and in the despotisms of the Arab Middle
East. But the appeasement camp cannot face the reality that its enemy is
implacable and its hatred uncaused by anything its targets – Jews, Christians,
“infidels” – have done.



The division of America is the greatest
threat to our ability to prevail in the War on Terror – and the Left knows this
and is incited by it. America is not divided enough for the American Left, which
is now in full purge mode in Connecticut, where it is attempting to bring down
the one statesman in the Democratic Party who might re-unite this country in the
face of its enemies.

Those who in the midst of these wars clamor for
ceasefires with an implacable foe, those who call for withdrawals that would
leave sovereign states in the hands of the terrorist forces, those who decry
civilian casualties caused by the only forces in this war who do not target
civilians, those Blame-America-Firsters who exploit the Abu Ghraibs on our side
and not their atrocities, those whose hysterical fear of the conflict we face
takes the form of pathological denial and projects the rabid hatred of the enemy
for us onto our own commander in the war, are destined to have a lot to answer
for before this conflict is over.

the coming burden of damascus ?

"See, Damascus will no longer be a city but will become a heap of ruins. The
cities of Aroer will be deserted and left to flocks, which will lie down, with
no one to make them afraid." (Isaiah 17:1-2)

i think i've gone through this once before here in blog land, but i think that with the recent events in the middle east, it's important to look at this prophesy as it relates to current events. we know that the current flare up among the muslim world and Israel is due to iran pulling strings behind the scenes. we know that iran has an apocolyptic ruler who has called for the destruction of Israel. we now also know that syria and iran have signed a defense accord and there is strong evidence that russia is now involved with syria and iran in a defense accord as well. this sets up the alliance for the gog-magog invasion of Israel and it also sets up the impending destruction of damascus (inhabited continously for over 5000 years).

DEBKAfile reports a war council in Damascus chaired by Syrian president Bashar Assad, attended by Hizballah’s Hassan Nasrallah and senior Iranian official Ali Larijani

Iran‘s state news agency confirmed Nasrallah’s presence in the Syrian capital “for consultations.”
DEBKAfile’s military sources note that Nasrallah crossed over despite the heavy Israeli air bombardment of Lebanese-Syrian border regions. The war conference is attended also by Hamas leaders Khaled Meshaal and Mussa Abu Marzouk as well as the Palestinian Jihad Islami chief Abdallah Ramadan Shelah. The Palestinian terrorist leaders were invited in their capacity as commanders of the second front against Israel in Gaza.

This anti-Israel coalition will no doubt decide on the two fronts’ next steps in their war against the “Zionist enemy.” The fact that Assad is there and the consultation is taking place in his capital indicates that he and the other participants feel confident enough to decide on a further escalation of the violence.

The conference began hours after the Israeli cabinet decided against broadening the campaign against Hizballah or attacking Syria indicating that Tehran, Damascus, Hizballah and the Palestinian terrorists sensed a weakening of Israel’s resolve to fight back. This sort of soft talk from Jerusalem is not taken on trust but makes the Syrians suspect that Israel is playing a double game. Their response will be to redouble their hostilities in the very near future.

---------------------------------------------------------------

add to that syria's current war footing

additionally, hizballah has threatened 'surprises' for Israel.. interestingly, many rumors have surfaced that russian special forces moved the WMD from iraq to lebanon's bekaa valley prior to the us lead invasion of iraq. this valley is under the control of syria and hizballah and if they have WMDs at their disposal and aim them at Israel, i think we would have a smoldering, ruined damascus on our hands..

it's a very interesting time to be alive and to be a student of Bible prophesy.. it's coming to life on the top stories of the news each and every day. there is not a single thing that has to happen before the church is raptured out.. thank Christ for the gift we've been given every day! and if you haven't accepted that gift, there is no better time to do it than now!

The End of Israel's "Peace Through Weakness"

The End of Israel's "Peace Through Weakness"
By Michael Reagan
FrontPageMagazine.com July 20, 2006

We were right all along, and that gives us the right to say “we told you so.”

Nobody wanted to listen when former Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu and a lot of American conservatives warned that you cannot negotiate with terrorists such as Arafat, Hezbollah, and Hamas, or their sponsors in Syria and Iran. We were accused of being warmongers and told that the future of Israel lay not in defending itself, but in making concession after concession to an enemy sworn to demolish the Jewish state and drive its people into the sea.

Goaded by the peace-at-any-price crowd who can never recognize evil when it stares them in the face (because they don’t recognize that evil exists), Israel attempted to mollify the anti-Israel United Nations and the hand-wringing leftists here and abroad by playing nice with their sworn enemies.

Israel withdrew from Gaza, driving their own people – who had settled there with Israel’s approval and encouragement – out of their homes and land. In return for this magnanimous gesture, the terrorists showered missiles on Israeli territory almost daily.

Undaunted by this display of the real and vicious nature of the enemy, Israeli’s government pushed on with plans to evacuate the West Bank, and hand it over to what purports to be a Palestinian state aborning.

The response: more missiles raining down on innocent Israeli citizens and more threats to destroy Israel.

When it finally dawned on the Israeli government that appeasement does not work when the enemy refuses to be appeased with anything less than total victory and the total destruction of the state of Israel, one would have thought that the international left-wing appeasement movement would have applauded Israel for going all-out to defend its people.

It’s obvious that this was not to be – the appeasers merely stepped up their rhetoric, demanding that the international community intervene and force Israel to sit down and negotiate with Hezbollah and Hamas. There is now a great hue and cry demanding diplomacy and negotiations, all aimed at preventing Israel from finally putting an end to the terrorism that they have for so long endured. Nobody echoes Douglas MacArthur’s warning that there is no substitute for victory.

You’d think the appeasers would learn from what happened when MacArthur was prevented from achieving victory in the Korean War. The reality of a crazed North Korea would not exist as a nuclear-armed communist dictatorship had MacArthur been listened to.

The international community, which is content to let the United States and Britain shoulder the burden of fighting the war on Islamic terrorism, stands on the sidelines. Instead of cheering us on, it condemns us for defending them against the terrorism that threatens them as much as it does us.

They whine about the need to accommodate the displaced Palestinians by allowing them to have a state of their own, side-by-side with Israel, but ignore the fact that the Palestinians could have their state for the asking, but are prevented from doing so by Hamas and Hezbollah and their sponsors in Iran and Syria who will accept nothing less than the destruction of Israel.

It really irks me to hear the networks give time to the likes of Madeline Albright, Clinton’s Secretary of State and one of those demanding diplomacy as the only means of dealing with the Mideast crisis. The administration she served sat idly by in the face of such outrages as the first World Trade Center bombing and the bombing of the USS Cole. In return for their patience we got 9/11. In return for their efforts to broker peace between Israel and the PLO, all we got was continued tension and unrest in the Middle East. In return for her submission to North Korea we got missiles aimed at the U.S. and Japan.

Newt Gingrich is right. We are in the midst of World War III, and you don’t win wars by courting the enemy; you win them by doing what Israel is doing: fighting back with everything you’ve got. God help the Israelis if they listen to the siren song of peace through weakness, of victory through negotiation.

We were right all along, and we have a right to crow.

August 22, 2006

the western powers that be have given iran a deadline for an answer to their proposal to appease the iranians to cease their rogue nuclear ambitions... that deadline was june 29th. iran countered with an august 22nd date and has since offered up rhetoric about being afraid of traveling to europe because of assassination attempts..

so, i'm out browsing my daily reading sites and i run across a headline.. the headline reads: Apocalyptic signals from Iran worry U.S. intelligence

some chatter about the us intelligence community being concerned with why 8/22 seemed to be arbitrarily chosen by the iranian government.. well, seeing as it takes a subscription to find out what they were going to say, i went to the internet to figure out what the heck 8/22/06 is on the islamic calendar..

so, this is obviously something worth looking up !!! *grin*

well, come to find out, 8/22/06 is the anniversary of the day that mohammed ascended to heaven according to islamic tradition.. so, now, we've put the pieces of the puzzle together. western intelligence has concern that iran is planning some sort of event timed with mohammed's magic carpet ride. and to boot, you now have this out of iran today:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned on Friday that continued Israeli strikes against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip could lead to an "explosion" in the Islamic world that would target Israel and its supporters in the West.

Again, Ahmadinejad questioned Israel's right to exist. "This is a fake regime ... it won't be able to survive. I think the only way (forward) is that those who created it (the West) take it away themselves," the president told a rally in Teheran in support of Palestinians.

it will be interesting to see what the summer brings.. what a great time to be alive!

hating on canada

this is an interesting piece that outlines what the mindset of the militant muslim looks like. canada, the most pc country on earth, ever conscious to not offend anyone has made friends in the islamic community... and i think this further points out the lack of understanding that most people have about what we are facing.

it's interesting, i often have discussions with some of my hippy friends who call the united states a 'Christian theocracy' and that our rights are being trampled by the evil Christians in power.. yet, they claim the plight of the palesinians as their own, talking about how they have been trampled by the zionist crusaders (interesting term).

it would almost be entertaining to see a community of hippies and their free wheeling subculture juxtaposed with shari'ah law.. but i digress. anyway, take a read and think about the implications.

-------------------------------------
"We Hate Canada"
By Robert Spencer
July 5, 2006

Investigators have recently uncovered a series of Internet postings made by the wives of a group of suspected jihad terrorists. They include these comments (all spelling and punctuation is as it was written):

“Know what you will face one day. Let them call you a terrorist, let them make you look like a savage, but know that THIS [the American military] is the filth of the earth, the uncivilised destroyer of humanity.”

“[And] if [my husband] ever refuses a clear opportunity to leave for jihad, then i want the choice of divorce.”

“All muslim politicians are corrupt. There's no one out there willing to rule the country by the laws of Allah, rather they fight to rule the country by the laws of democracy.”

“Are you accepting a system that separates religion and state? Are you gonna give your pledge of allegiance to a party that puts secular laws above the laws of Allah? Are you gonna worship that which they worship? Are you going to throw away the most important thing that makes you a muslim?”

“May Allah crush these jews, bring them down to their kneees, humuliate them. Ya Allah make their women widows and their children orphans.”

“May Allah curse the jews.. Ameen”

These posts and others like them were written not in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia or Yemen. They were written in Canada by several of the wives of the jihad terror plotters recently arrested there: Mariya, the wife of the suspected plot ringleader, Fahim Ahmad; Nada Farooq, wife of Zakariya Amara, who is thought to have been Ahmad’s second-in-command; Rana, the wife of another suspect, Ahmad Ghany; and Cheryfa MacAulay Jamal, a convert to Islam and the wife of Qayyum Abdul Jamal, who is alleged to have stirred the others to act with his fiery sermons preaching jihad and hatred of Christians, Jews, and the West – and whose violent exhortations were tolerated by mosque officials because he took out the garbage.

Leftist analysts who explain Islamic jihad as a reaction to Western atrocities and oppression, as well as those on the Left and the Right who assume that education and exposure to Western culture and values will blunt the force of that jihad, are hard-pressed to explain the phenomenon of jihadists and jihad sympathizers who are born and raised in Western countries. Of course, the Council on American Islamic Relations and other advocacy groups attempt to fill this gap with their largely trumped-up reports of hate crimes against Muslims in Western countries, but when the best they can come up with are some insults at a supermarket, it’s hard to build a case for large-scale oppression of Muslims.

But if they are not oppressed, what would possibly have inspired the hatred and contempt these women feel for their own country? When asked what she thought was unique about Canada, Nada Farooq replied, “Who cares? We hate Canada.”

Why would someone who lives in Canada and benefits from its freedom and prosperity hate Canada? Almost certainly because she has been taught to do so. Nada Farooq and the other women who wrote the comments above have no doubt been taught that all non-Muslim society and culture is jahiliyya – ignorance or barbarism, worthless and to be despised.

The Egyptian Qur’an commentator and Muslim Brotherhood theorist Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966), whose writings are popular today among Muslims in the West, emphasized this: “It is not the function of Islam to compromise with the concepts of Jahiliyya [the society of unbelievers] which are current in the world or to co-exist in the same land together with a jahili system….Islam cannot accept any mixing with Jahiliyyah. Either Islam will remain, or Jahiliyyah; no half-half situation is possible. Command belongs to Allah, or otherwise to Jahiliyyah; Allah’s Shari’ah [law] will prevail, or else people’s desires: “And if they do not respond to you, then know that they only follow their own lusts. And who is more astray than one who follows his own lusts, without guidance from Allah? Verily! Allah guides not the people who are disobedient.”[Qur’an 28:50]…The foremost duty of Islam is to depose Jahiliyyah from the leadership of man, with the intention of raising human beings to that high position which Allah has chosen for him.”[1]

Likewise, Syed Abul Ala Maududi (1903-1979), founder of the Pakistani political party Jamaat-e-Islami, which is still the largest exponent of political Islam in Pakistan, declared that non-Muslims have “absolutely no right to seize the reins of power in any part of God’s earth nor to direct the collective affairs of human beings according to their own misconceived doctrines.” If they do, “the believers would be under an obligation to do their utmost to dislodge them from political power and to make them live in subservience to the Islamic way of life.”[2]

This is a matter of religious conviction. These ideas will not be dislodged by education about Western values, which are all part of the jahiliyya these women and their husbands despise, or by better access to jobs or housing. One primary lesson that authorities should draw from these Internet postings is that Islamic terror is not a problem that can be solved by social engineering. It cannot be assuaged by gestures of good will, negotiations or concessions. There is in Western countries today a large and growing population of Muslims, among whom are many who have no intention of assimilating or adopting Western values and perspectives, and who regard the West with as much or more disdain and contempt as these women show in their Internet postings. The jihad ideology as such must be confronted and combated, or it will continue to spread, and breed terrorists and subversives.

But for authorities to understand this and take positive steps to deal with it, they would first have to admit that Islam has anything to do with terrorism at all – something they have taken great pride in denying. And that denial only ensures that there will be many more jihad cells in Canada and Western countries, with the wives of the plotters cheering from the sidelines.

palestinian folly

i think the article below is notable.. while the bush haters in the united states continue their chant of bush lied, Israel is faced with a legitimate threat with WMD's. even in the face of the evidence of WMD's found in iraq, the power hungry left wing of american politics plays their dangerous game of abandoning the truth and principal to forward their quest for office.

this is also important as it relates to the forthcoming palestinian civil war and the effect on Israel that will have. i can see Israel making good on it's promise to eliminate the hamas leadership if they do not return the IDF soldier being held hostage. this would work to unify the palestinian cause and you really wouldn't be surprised to see hizbullah launch attacks in the north against Israel. since hizbullah is financed by iran and syria, and with the recent defense accord between those two countries any action by Israel would likely be responded to by factions loyal to both groups, if not from both directly.

if a terrorist group attacks Israel with WMD's, then i anticipate Israel's response to be overwhelming in scope.

An interesting prophesy.. Isaiah 17:1 - The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city and it shall be a ruinous heap..

*Damascus is the oldest continually inhabited city in the world - it's never been destroyed in recorded history.
-----------------------------
Al-Aksa claims chemical capabilities
By KHALED ABU TOAMEH

The Aksa Martyrs Brigades announced on Sunday that its members have succeeded in manufacturing chemical and biological weapons.

In a leaflet distributed in the Gaza Strip, the group, which belongs to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah Party, said the weapons were the result of a three-year effort.

According to the statement, the first of its kind, the group has managed to manufacture and develop at least 20 different types of biological and chemical weapons.

The group said its members would not hesitate to add the new weapons to Kassam rockets that are being fired at Israeli communities almost every day. It also threatened to use the weapons against IDF soldiers if Israel carried out its threats to invade the Gaza Strip.

"We want to tell [Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert and [Defense Minister Amir] Peretz that your threats don't frighten us," the leaflet said.

"We will surprise you with our new weapons the moment the first soldier sets foot in the Gaza Strip."

for the record..

just because i've had this discussion a few times already tonight..

there is one path to salvation. one path to eternity. that path is through the blood of Jesus Christ. there is no one singualar event in history i am more grateful for. i am not worthy for the gift i've been given and for that i am forever thankful.

i am one happy child, you should be too :-)

apostate

2 Timothy 4:3-4

3For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
--------------------------------------------------
the recent discussions by the episcopal church as it relates to gay clergy and salvation through Jesus Christ are telling indeed. the below article describes the inner workings of an apostate church. one that will die on the vine as it's faith in Jesus has faded.

Episcopalians refuse affirmation of Christ
By Hans Zeiger
COLUMBUS, OHIO (6/20/06)
The House of Deputies of the 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church today overwhelmingly refused to even consider a resolution that affirmed Jesus Christ as the "only name by which any person may be saved."

"This type of language was used in 1920s and 1930s to alienate the type of people who were executed. It was called the Holocaust. I understand the intent, but I ask you to allow the discharge to stay," said the Rev. Eugene C. McDowell, a graduate of Yale Divinity School and Canon Theologian for the Diocese of North Carolina.

The convention's Committee on Evangelism first heard the resolution and discharged it to the chagrin of that committee's chairman, the Rev. Colenzo Hubbard, a noted evangelist and director of Emmanuel Episcopal Center in the Diocese of West Tennessee. The Rev. Hubbard motioned to lift the resolution from the discharge list, but after heated debate, more than seven tenths of the House of Deputies rejected the motion.

Drafted by the Rev. Guido Verbeck, rector of St. Paul's Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Western Louisiana, Resolution D058 declared the Episcopal Church's belief in an "unchanging commitment to Jesus Christ as the Son of God, the only name by which any person may be saved," and it acknowledged evangelism as "the solemn responsibility placed upon us to share Christ with all persons when we hear His words, 'I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No-one comes to the Father except through me' (John 14:6).

" The resolution further affirmed "the substitutionary essence of the Cross and the manifestation of God's unlimited and unending love for all persons," while calling on the Episcopal Church to renew its Scripture-based witness to "all persons."

The Rev. Hubbard said that he voted for the resolution in committee because of his simple responsibility as a Christian. Hubbard quoted several verses of Scripture to demonstrate his conviction. "I do agree that Jesus Christ is both the substitutionary essence of the Cross and the manifestation of God's unlimited and unending love for all persons," said Hubbard, once a star on the University of Alabama football team.

Echoing Hubbard, Canon Dr. Kendall Harmon, a leading conservative in the denomination, argued for a "reaffirmation of what some have called 'the scandal of particularity' of the Cross."

Judy Mayo from the Diocese of Fort Worth also opposed discharge. "My friends, this is a church convention, and this is the very essence of our faith. This may be the most important thing we deal with at this entire convention...Surely we can say together that Jesus Christ is Lord. And if we can't, we have no reason to be here."

But liberals outnumbered Hubbard, Harman, and Mayo by far.

The Rev. McDowell of the Diocese of North Carolina told VirtueOnline after the floor vote, "In the Episcopal Church we don't do up and down votes on Jesus Christ as Lord, and to do so is potentially a mean-spirited approach, to ask questions that aren't meant to be questions."

McDowell explained that how one lives his life is the more important issue than whether one affirms Jesus as Lord. To place a statement of belief over actions is the essence of "self-righteousness," he said. "Actions speak louder than proclamations...What Jesus calls us to do is to live our lives."

McDowell outlined his basic theology of grace: "Salvation by grace is remembering that we are the children of a living God. Grace is already there. And salvation is realizing we now live into that salvation. And sanctification is the transforming of my life from one that's me-centered to one that's God-centered."

But to acknowledge the exclusive Lordship of Christ in a resolution would be too much for McDowell and the majority of deputies at the 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church.

The Rev. Robert Certain of the Diocese of San Diego told the House of Deputies that he refused to consider the resolution because the General Convention of 1982 had endorsed salvation through Christ alone, and a resolution was unnecessary.

But the message was clear to the Rev. Donald Perschall, rector of St. John's Episcopal Church in Centralia, Illinois, as he left the convention hall Tuesday, shocked by the events of the day. "On top of leaving the Anglican Communion, we've decided to leave Jesus Christ behind as well."

It was not a surprise vote though; the liberalization of the Episcopal Church predates 1982. Episcopalians have made it clear by their rejection of traditional marriage and other recent innovations that a new set of principles now dominate the Episcopal Church. Though the trend toward liberalism in the Episcopal Church has been ongoing for decades, it was in 2003 that the consecration of a homosexual as Bishop of New Hampshire crystallized the departure of the denomination from its bearings in classical Anglicanism.

Dr. Michael Howell of the Diocese of Southwestern Florida and a member of the Special Committee that deliberated the Convention's response to the global Anglican Communion's Windsor Report, told VirtueOnline that the discharge of Resolution D058 is "very much related" to the failure of Resolution A161 moments earlier.

A161 would place a moratorium on the consecration of homosexual bishops and the blessing of homosexual unions in a minimal effort to comply with the Windsor Report. It was soundly defeated on the floor of the House of Deputies Tuesday.

"If we cannot affirm the unique salvific power of Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior, we are no longer a Christian church." Switching to a sarcastic tone, Howell declared, "We have no need for a Creed. Why do again what we did in the past?"

"This clearly shows that we are of a mind that does not affirm Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. And we should not be surprised that our church is dying spiritually," said Howell.

The final tally on the electronic vote was 70.5 percent for discharge (675 votes) and just 29.5 (242 votes) to consider the resolution affirming Jesus Christ as Lord.

FULL TEXT RESOLUTION D058 SALVATION THROUGH CHRIST ALONE Discharged in committee. Discharge upheld by House of Deputies, 75th General Convention.

Resolved, the House of _____ concurring, That the 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church declares its unchanging commitment to Jesus Christ as the Son of God, the only name by which any person may be saved (Article XVIII); and be it further Resolved, That we acknowledge the solemn responsibility placed upon us to share Christ with all persons when we hear His words, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

No-one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6); and be it further Resolved, That we affirm that in Christ there is both the substitutionary essence of the Cross and the manifestation of God's unlimited and unending love for all persons; and be it further Resolved, That we renew our dedication to be faithful witnesses to all persons of the saving love of God perfectly and uniquely revealed in Jesus and upheld by the full testimony of Holy Scripture.

----------------------------------------
2 Timothy 3
1 But know this, that in the last days, grievous times will come.
2 For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 without natural affection, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, no lovers of good,
4 traitors, headstrong, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God;
5 holding a form of godliness, but having denied the power thereof. Turn away from these, also
6 For of these are those who creep into houses, and take captive gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts,
7 always learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
8 Even as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so do these also oppose the truth; men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith.
9 But they will proceed no further. For their folly will be evident to all men, as theirs also came to be.
10 But you did follow my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love, steadfastness,
11 persecutions, and sufferings: those things that happened to me at Antioch, Iconium, and Lystra. I endured those persecutions. Out of them all the Lord delivered me.
12 Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution.
13 But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived.
14 But you remain in the things which you have learned and have been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them.
15 From infancy, you have known the holy Scriptures which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith, which is in Christ Jesus.
16 Every Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

2 Peter 3-4
3 knowing this first, that in the last days mockers will come, walking after their own lusts,
4 and saying, "Where is the promise of his coming? For, from the day that the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."

inconvenient indeed..

not a lot of time to write lately, but i found this article entertaining..

------------------------
Scientists respond to Gore's warnings of climate catastrophe
"The Inconvenient Truth" is indeed inconvenient to alarmists
By Tom HarrisMonday, June 12, 2006

"Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it," Al Gore sensibly asserts in his film "An Inconvenient Truth", showing at Cumberland 4 Cinemas in Toronto since Jun 2. With that outlook in mind, what do world climate experts actually think about the science of his movie?

Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."

But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites?
No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field.

Even among that fraction, many focus their studies on the impacts of climate change; biologists, for example, who study everything from insects to polar bears to poison ivy. "While many are highly skilled researchers, they generally do not have special knowledge about the causes of global climate change," explains former University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball. "They usually can tell us only about the effects of changes in the local environment where they conduct their studies."

This is highly valuable knowledge, but doesn't make them climate change cause experts, only climate impact experts.

So we have a smaller fraction.

But it becomes smaller still. Among experts who actually examine the causes of change on a global scale, many concentrate their research on designing and enhancing computer models of hypothetical futures. "These models have been consistently wrong in all their scenarios," asserts Ball. "Since modelers concede computer outputs are not "predictions" but are in fact merely scenarios, they are negligent in letting policy-makers and the public think they are actually making forecasts."

We should listen most to scientists who use real data to try to understand what nature is actually telling us about the causes and extent of global climate change. In this relatively small community, there is no consensus, despite what Gore and others would suggest.
Here is a small sample of the side of the debate we almost never hear:
Appearing before the Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development last year, Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson testified, "There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years." Patterson asked the committee, "On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?"

Patterson concluded his testimony by explaining what his research and "hundreds of other studies" reveal: on all time scales, there is very good correlation between Earth's temperature and natural celestial phenomena such changes in the brightness of the Sun.

Dr. Boris Winterhalter, former marine researcher at the Geological Survey of Finland and professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, takes apart Gore's dramatic display of Antarctic glaciers collapsing into the sea. "The breaking glacier wall is a normally occurring phenomenon which is due to the normal advance of a glacier," says Winterhalter. "In Antarctica the temperature is low enough to prohibit melting of the ice front, so if the ice is grounded, it has to break off in beautiful ice cascades. If the water is deep enough icebergs will form."

Dr. Wibjörn Karlén, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden, admits, "Some small areas in the Antarctic Peninsula have broken up recently, just like it has done back in time. The temperature in this part of Antarctica has increased recently, probably because of a small change in the position of the low pressure systems."

But Karlén clarifies that the 'mass balance' of Antarctica is positive - more snow is accumulating than melting off. As a result, Ball explains, there is an increase in the 'calving' of icebergs as the ice dome of Antarctica is growing and flowing to the oceans. When Greenland and Antarctica are assessed together, "their mass balance is considered to possibly increase the sea level by 0.03 mm/year - not much of an effect," Karlén concludes.

The Antarctica has survived warm and cold events over millions of years. A meltdown is simply not a realistic scenario in the foreseeable future.

Gore tells us in the film, "Starting in 1970, there was a precipitous drop-off in the amount and extent and thickness of the Arctic ice cap." This is misleading, according to Ball: "The survey that Gore cites was a single transect across one part of the Arctic basin in the month of October during the 1960s when we were in the middle of the cooling period. The 1990 runs were done in the warmer month of September, using a wholly different technology."

Karlén explains that a paper published in 2003 by University of Alaska professor Igor Polyakov shows that, the region of the Arctic where rising temperature is supposedly endangering polar bears showed fluctuations since 1940 but no overall temperature rise. "For several published records it is a decrease for the last 50 years," says Karlén

Dr. Dick Morgan, former advisor to the World Meteorological Organization and climatology researcher at University of Exeter, U.K. gives the details, "There has been some decrease in ice thickness in the Canadian Arctic over the past 30 years but no melt down. The Canadian Ice Service records show that from 1971-1981 there was average, to above average, ice thickness. From 1981-1982 there was a sharp decrease of 15% but there was a quick recovery to average, to slightly above average, values from 1983-1995. A sharp drop of 30% occurred again 1996-1998 and since then there has been a steady increase to reach near normal conditions since 2001."

Concerning Gore's beliefs about worldwide warming, Morgan points out that, in addition to the cooling in the NW Atlantic, massive areas of cooling are found in the North and South Pacific Ocean; the whole of the Amazon Valley; the north coast of South America and the Caribbean; the eastern Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caucasus and Red Sea; New Zealand and even the Ganges Valley in India. Morgan explains, "Had the IPCC used the standard parameter for climate change (the 30 year average) and used an equal area projection, instead of the Mercator (which doubled the area of warming in Alaska, Siberia and the Antarctic Ocean) warming and cooling would have been almost in balance."

Gore's point that 200 cities and towns in the American West set all time high temperature records is also misleading according to Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. "It is not unusual for some locations, out of the thousands of cities and towns in the U.S., to set all-time records," he says. "The actual data shows that overall, recent temperatures in the U.S. were not unusual."

Carter does not pull his punches about Gore's activism, "The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."

In April sixty of the world's leading experts in the field asked Prime Minister Harper to order a thorough public review of the science of climate change, something that has never happened in Canada. Considering what's at stake - either the end of civilization, if you believe Gore, or a waste of billions of dollars, if you believe his opponents - it seems like a reasonable request.

a belief in islam and the clerics..

tragic, yet telling.. the best picture in to the mind of people that do this type of thing in the name of allah is the statement:

"When I asked how he could do this to me, he said that he believed in only
two things - Islam and the rule of the clerics.."

----------------------
Child Abuse - Mullah Style
By Philip Sherwell Telegraph.co.uk May 30, 2006

A leading Iranian pro-democracy and
women's activist, who was jailed on trumped-up charges last year, has revealed
how the clerical regime cynically deploys systemic sexual violence against
female dissidents in the name of Islam.

Roya Tolouee, 40, was beaten up by Iranian intelligence agents and subjected to a horrific sexual assault when she refused to sign forced confessions. It was only when they threatened to burn her two children to death in front of her that she agreed to put her name to the documents.

Perhaps just as shocking as the physical abuse were the chilling words of the man who led the attack. "When I asked how he could do this to me, he said that he believed in only two things - Islam and the rule of the clerics," Miss Tolouee told The Sunday Telegraph last week in an interview in Washington after she fled Iran.

"But I know of no religious morality that can justify what they did to me, or other women. For these people, religion is only a tool for dictatorship and abuse. It is a regime of prejudice against women, against other regimes, against other ethnic groups, against anybody who thinks differently from them." Miss Tolouee's account of her ordeal confirms recent reports from opposition groups that Iranian intelligence officials use sexual abuse against female prisoners as an interrogation technique and even rape young women before execution so that they cannot reach heaven as virgins.

Few women from the Islamic world are willing to discuss such matters, even with each other, but Miss Tolouee said that the regime routinely committed sexual attacks against female detainees.
She dropped her voice to a whisper and sobbed quietly as she described her experience, hoping not to upset her six-year-old son, Nima, as he picked at a piece of pizza in a hotel restaurant.
But he tried to comfort her. "I don't like it when my mummy talks about prison. It makes her cry," he said sadly. Miss Tolouee, who founded a women's group in Iranian Kurdistan and then launched a monthly magazine that was closed down by the judiciary last summer, was detained in the city of Sanandaj in August after taking part in anti-regime demonstrations that spread across Kurdish areas.
"Four armed men and three armed women barged into my house at night and took me away," she said. "My kids were terrified and crying. I was questioned all night by different interrogators and then thrown alone into a cell."

She was held in solitary confinement in the prison of the feared internal intelligence service, with only a blanket and a cup that often had to serve as a lavatory.
For the first six nights, she was taken to a basement where interrogators demanded that she admit to organising the protests, and also that she identify co-conspirators on a list of names they put to her.

"When I wouldn't do what they wanted, they slapped me. But after the sixth night, the routine changed. I was left alone in a small dark room with two men. One was the assistant prosecutor and called himself Amiri. The other had a filthy mouth and said terrible things. They started slapping me again. For the rest of the night they did to me what no woman should ever experience. Amiri said, 'I'm going to hang you, but before I hang you, I will make an example of you so that no woman will dare to open her mouth here again'." He then sexually assaulted her.
When she asked Amiri how he could act like that, he told her that only Islam and clerical rule were important to him. The attack left her badly bruised and bleeding internally, but she refused to sign the papers they put before her. To her assailants' fury, she demanded to see a lawyer and cited international treaties on human rights.

The following night they did not sexually molest her again as she was still bleeding - and hence "unclean". Instead, they told her that they would kill her children by setting them on fire before her eyes.

Finally, she admits, she cracked. "I threw myself at Amiri's feet and begged him not to harm my children. I said I'd do anything they wanted. Whatever they wanted, I would sign." She admitted to conspiring against the regime by giving interviews to the foreign media and leading the protests, but said that she did not implicate others.

After several more nights in solitary confinement, Miss Tolouee was moved to a general women's prison, where she saw horrendous festering wounds inflicted by lashings on other detainees.
Trying to maintain her dignity and strength, she taught the women about their basic human rights and helped to secure the provision of sanitary supplies for the first time. "We had a great feeling of camaraderie," she recalled.

Miss Tolouee was released on bail after 66 days in jail because, she said, "The regime had got what it wanted". But she still feared for her children's lives and decided to flee. She made it first to neighbouring Turkey with Nima and then her daughter Shima, 14, was smuggled out to join them.

Fearful of the reach of regime agents, who have killed exiled dissidents, an opposition group called the Alliance of Iranian Women helped them to reach the United States last month.
Miss Tolouee has been granted political asylum and intends to maintain her campaign against Teheran. She still has relatives in Iran - she does not want to go into details for reasons of security - but says that they have given her their blessing to speak out, despite the possible consequences.

The world's attention is currently focused on Iran's nuclear ambitions under its hardline president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who came to office while Miss Tolouee was in prison. But inside Iran, she says, little has changed.

"Sometimes the regime seems a bit better, sometimes a bit worse, but for the people of Iran, the suffering continues," she said.

interesting perspective..

"The 50 million Muslims of Europe will turn it into a Muslim continent within a
few decades."

---Libyan ruler Khaddafy says Europe and America will either turn Muslim or
declare war on Islam.

de facto censorship..

very, very interesting..
-------------------------------------
Google dumps news sites that criticize radical Islam Search giant axes another news page, calls terrorism discussion 'hate content'

© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

Search engine giant Google has cut off its news relationship with a number of online news publications that include frank discussions of radical Islam – the New Media Journal becoming the latest termination, as its owner just discovered.

Frank Salvato, who began the agreement with Google News last September, said he received a reply from the company's help desk Friday indicating there had been complaints of "hate speech" on his site, as first reported by media watchdog Newsbusters.org.

The e-mail, which cited three articles that dealt with radical Islam and its relationship to terrorism, read:

Hi Frank,
Thanks for writing. We received numerous reports about hate content on your site, and after reviewing these reports, decided to remove your site from Google News. We do not allow articles and sources expressly promoting hate speech viewpoints in Google News (although referencing hate speech for commentary and analysis is acceptable).
For example, a number of the complaints we looked at on your site were found to be hate content:
http://www.newmediajournal.us/staff/peck/05102006.htm
http://www.newmediajournal.us/staff/stock/05082006.htm
http://www.newmediajournal.us/guest/imani/04222006.htm

We hope this helps you understand our position.

Regards,
The Google Team

Newsbusters says it has observed a pattern of intolerance toward conservative sites that deal with radical Islam and terrorism.

Rusty Shackleford, owner of The Jawa Report, received a similar e-mail message March 29 informing him: "Upon recent review, we've found that your site contains hate speech, and we will no longer be including it in Google News."

Two weeks later, Jim Sesi's MichNews.com was cut off, with Google providing three examples of "hate speech" by conservative writer J. Grant Swank, Jr.

Newsbusters commented: "At first blush, one can easily ignore such business decisions by the most powerful company on the Internet as being routine. However, on closer examination, such behavior could give one relatively small technological corporation (when measured by the size of its workforce) a degree of political might that frankly dwarfs its current financial prowess."

The media watchdog noted columnist and blogger Michelle Malkin wrote in February 2005 her difficulties in becoming part of Google News. Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs had a similar complaint.

When Google News launched its beta site in April 2002, it said its mission was to construct an unbiased news engine free of human intervention using new methods of aggregating news from sources worldwide.

According to the April Nielsen/NetRatings report, 49 percent of all searches conducted in the U.S. in March 2006 were carried out on Google.
Along with the dropping of conservative news providers, Google has received other complaints of liberal bias.

Last June, a conservative book publisher said Google rejected his ad for a book critical of Bill and Hillary Clinton while continuing to accept anti-Bush themes.

Eric Jackson, CEO of World Ahead, said his ads for "Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine" were rejected, without further explanation, due to "unacceptable content."
As WND reported, 98 percent of all political donations by Google employees went to support Democrats.

CEO Eric Schmidt gave the maximum legal limit of donations to Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry and to primary candidate Howard Dean.

Schmidt also contributed the maximum amount to Sen. Clinton, whose role in helping her husband intimidate his female accusers is addressed in the new book.

In May 2005, Google rejected an attempt by the conservative activist group RightMarch.com to run ads critical of Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., while continuing to run attack ads against besieged House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas.

Also, Google agreed to allow the communist Chinese government to have the search engine block "objectionable" search terms such as "democracy."

In addition, the company came under fire for an editorial decision to rank news articles in search results by "quality," giving preferential placement to large and predominately liberal media outlets such as CNN and the BBC over conservative news sources, even if they are more recent or pertinent.

things that are silly..

ok, so it's late.. and i'm tired and my eyes are weary..

that being said, i thought i'd put a few thoughts on paper.. thoughts especially important to me with the da vinci code buzz that is going on..

this life we hang on to so dearly to is simply a temporary stop in the rest of forever. if i were not a Christian, you'd think i was a hindu or that i subscribed to a eastern philosophy of some sort.. but the reality is that what we do here that we consider important is, in a large reguard, insignificant.. you might think you would come back as a cow, or as a moth, depending on what you believe.. but at the end of the day, there is only one set of beliefs that make sense to me..

Jesus Christ died on the cross for the sins of mankind .. you can take that or leave it.. in your own well educated mind, this may be a fantastic tale of fiction and lore.. however, regardless of how smart you are or how many degrees you have earned, your only path to immortality, and that is what you desire, is from a God that knows that you are imperfect (which you are) and that his Son is the only path to what you desire..

yet, you rebel. you have it figured out.. trust me, i have it figured out. and i'm far smarter than you.. or am i ?? or are you ?? you give up your eternity to indulge your pride and your simple worldly pleasures.. and i indulge those too.. the difference ? i don't wait for another man to tell me it's ok, to confirm my behavior as acceptable.. i wait for the judgement and reward of a patient, yet just God. a God that loves me for who i am yet hates my sin. a God that sent his Son to die for my sins.. yet i abuse that.. i sin with impunity.. with no concern for me or him or anyone... i am simply a consumer. i take large bites out of the world i live in, while taking for granted the one that will save me from it.

so, at the end of the day, i sometimes find myself inspiring imperfect people that i would convict for reasons i am myself guilty.. i find myself unwilling to release a worldly love for the love of eternity because i'm weak..

but, every day.. when i walk in to my house alone, when i want to share that moment that i should share with the love of my life, i now do just that.. i've just realized that the love of my life isn't who i thought it was.. it is who has always been there for me, yet i've taken for granted..

life is short here.. live it right. even if i don't.. you should.

i miss those who i loved unconditionally.. but my love is far from cold. thank you for loving me so much that you provided your Son to save my sorry butt.. much love and many thanks.

more truth than we care to believe...

this is exactly what i was thinking when the contents of the letter were published.. follows the outline perfectly and this guy is enough of a nut to start it up..

interesting to watch the world powers line up just as they should..
-------------------------------------------
Iran letter precursor to war?
Analysts say it follows Muhammad's instructions for jihad

© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

Some Middle East observers believe Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's letter to President Bush could be a precursor to war, based on a traditional Muslim pattern of offering acceptance of Islam before establishing it by force.

Robert Spencer, editor of Jihad Watch, says Ahmadinejad appears to be following the teachings of Muhammad, who gave specific instructions to followers as they engage in "holy war" against "those who disbelieve in Allah."

In a Hadith, regarded by Muslims as sacred writings about Muhammad, the Islamic prophet says a series of offers should be made to "enemies" to embrace Islam, or at least accept Islamic rule, and if they are rejected, "seek Allah's help and fight them."

In his letter, Ahmadinejad argues only Islam can "overcome the present problems of the world" and asks Bush, "Will you not accept this invitation? That is, a genuine return to the teachings of prophets, to monotheism and justice, to preserve human dignity and obedience to the Almighty and His prophets? Mr President, History tells us that repressive and cruel governments do not survive."

Another observer of Islam, journalist Stephen Adams, said the letter seems to parallel a missive from al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden to Americans prior to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
Interviewed on the Michael Medved radio show yesterday, Adams noted bin Laden stated his grievances against the United States and gave Americans the opportunity to "repent."

Based on precedent, Adams continued, he expects the next step will be for Iran to make the invitation public. Then the "crimes" of the U.S. will be published and the grievances will be cited at Friday prayers in mosques. Finally, comes a fatwa, amounting to a declaration of war.
Adams, associate editor of Citizen magazine, said it's possible this scenario could unfold in a matter of weeks.

In a column for WorldNetDaily, Middle East analyst Laura Mansfield said she believes the letter could be a "last warning."

Mansfield says the question must be asked: "Why deliver such a letter when there is little chance it will result in policy changes for either country?"

Like Spencer and Adams, she points out: "Islamic theology documents that no attack can be carried out in jihad without first offering the 'unbelievers' the opportunity to 'repent' and accept Islam. Only when that overture is rejected can an attack occur."

The Iranian president has made clear, at least to audiences at home, Tehran's ultimate intentions.

As WorldNetDaily reported in January, Ahmadinejad told a crowd of theological students in Iran's holy city of Qom that Islam must prepare to rule the world.

"We must believe in the fact that Islam is not confined to geographical borders, ethnic groups and nations. It's a universal ideology that leads the world to justice," Ahmadinejad said Jan. 5, according to Mehran Riazaty, a former Iran analyst for the Central Command of the Coalition Forces in Baghdad.

Ahmadinejad, who drew global attention for his contention the Holocaust was a "myth," said: "We don't shy away from declaring that Islam is ready to rule the world." Two months earlier, he threatened to "wipe Israel off the map"

Riazaty, in a post on the website Regime Change Iran, said the Iranian president emphasized his current theme that the return of the Shiite messiah, the Mahdi, is not far away, and Muslims must prepare for it.

According to Shiites, the 12th imam disappeared as a child in the year 941. When he returns, they believe, he will reign on earth for seven years, before bringing about a final judgment and the end of the world.

Ahmadinejad is urging Iranians to prepare for the coming of the Mahdi by turning the country into a mighty and advanced Islamic society and by avoiding the corruption and excesses of the West.

"We must prepare ourselves to rule the world and the only way to do that is to put forth views on the basis of the Expectation of the Return," Ahmadinejad said. "If we work on the basis of the Expectation of the Return [of the Mahdi], all the affairs of our nation will be streamlined and the administration of the country will become easier."

Israel can only lose once..

''Israel Can Only Lose Once''
Jack Kinsella - Omega Letter Editor

Israeli Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."
"Teheran is making a mockery of the international community's efforts to solve the crisis surrounding Iran's nuclear program," Peres told Reuters, adding that "Iran presents a danger to the entire world, not just to us."

If all world powers are united against Iran, military action can be avoided, Peres said.
"We can prevent all of this threat, without weapons, if there will be unity," Peres said, adding that the Security Council had to act on the matter. "If the crucial moment comes and they are incapable of taking [action] or making a policy...then they endanger their existence as an important world body," he said.

History records the main reason that the Jews decided, after almost two millennia after being exiled, that the continued survival of the Jewish race demanded a homeland. Israel's Founding Fathers summed it up in two words: "Never again!"

"Never again!" is so indelibly linked to the Holocaust and the attempted destruction of the Jewish people that the phrase has become a synonym for unimpeded genocide.
It was the slogan of Kofi Annan's special ten-year celebration of the Rwandan genocide in which the ruling Rwanda Hutu tribe set out to exterminate their traditional enemies, the Tutsi tribe.
When the bloodletting was finally exhausted, almost a million Tutsis had been slaughtered, in full view of the United Nations.

At the time, Kofi Annan was the head of UN peacekeeping operations, including the one in Rwanda that he ordered out of the country -- after ten Belgian peacekeepers were killed in an attack.

According to a 1998 article in the New Yorker magazine, Kofi Annan was told by the commander of peacekeeping forces in Rwanda of a plan by the then-government of Rwanda to exterminate the Tutsis, some three months BEFORE the slaughter began.

After the deaths of the Belgian peacekeepers, the magazine reported that Annan gave orders not to intervene. Full details of the commander's cable were reportedly forwarded to the American, French and Belgian ambassadors in the Rwandan capital, Kigali, the day after the report was sent to New York.

On the tenth anniversary of the Rwandan slaughter, Kofi Annan, now Secretary-General, designated April 7 as the "International Day of Reflection on the Genocide in Rwanda." Kofi urged the world to set aside a 'moment of silence' so that "such a tragedy can never happen again."

At the time of Kofi's 'never again speech' in 2004, at least THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND people had already been butchered at the hands of the Islamic Republic of Sudan's Janjaweed Militia.

Two years later, despite having declared the slaughter of the mainly Christian and non-Islamics in the south to be 'genocide' -- the slaughter continues.
In full view of the UN peacekeepers -- who eventually turned supervision of the slaughter over to the totally inept, under-funded and under-equipped African Union.
(Until one of the African Union's helicopters got shot down, that is. THEN the AU suspended all aircraft flights that were assigned to monitor a 'ceasefire'.)
That is what 'never again' means to the world community. It means 'never again' -- until next time, after which the UN will dedicate an 'annual' moment of silence and reflection that will be observed exactly once.

Israel was founded on the 'never again' principle, which means something different to them than it does to the rest of the world.

For two millennia, Jews were systematically rounded up and slaughtered in regional pogroms -- but it wasn't until the rise of Adolf Hitler that the wholesale slaughter of Jews threatened to wipe them from the face of the earth.

The Jews who survived the world's acquiescence to their slaughter declared that 'never again' would they trust the world community to ensure their survival.
Adolf Hitler had clearly and unambiguously outlined his planned extermination of the Jewish people some twenty years before in his political manifesto, "Mein Kampf" ("My Struggle").
And, while part of the world sat idly by (and the rest helped) Hitler imposed his 'Final Solution to the Question of the Jewish People' on almost six million of them.

THAT is what 'never again' means to Israel. Israel's foundational principle is that it would never again entrust its survival to global good will.

Israel's establishment as a Jewish State was an indictment to the world community that let the Holocaust happen, despite Hitler's having made his intentions perfectly clear -- and that it would never happen again because Israel wouldn't let it.

The establishment of Israel prevented the wholesale slaughter of Jews under the principle of collective security, but 'collective' has become a two-edged sword.

Jews were slaughtered indiscriminately throughout history, but the Jewish people survived, mainly because they were scattered throughout the world.

The Diaspora that ended the existence of the Jewish state in AD 70 also prevented the concentration of Jews in one place where they could be annihilated.
Israel's re-establishment in 1948 brought them all back into one place at precisely the moment in history when it is possible to annihilate the tiny Jewish state in a single, blinding, nuclear flash.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir famously observed during the Yom Kippur War that, "the Arabs can fight, and lose, and return to fight another day. Israel can only lose once."

In 1973, it was a rallying cry. Hitler's successors see it as a battle strategy.

Former president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani outlined it recently, telling the world that, "the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam."

Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has made it clear that his goal is the annihilation of Israel, an event that he described as Israel 'being eliminated by one storm'.

Revolutionary Guards commander General Mohammad Ebrahim Dehghani made global headlines with his declaration: "We have announced that wherever [in Iran] America does make any mischief, the first place we target will be Israel."

Noted Charles Krauthammer, "The logic is impeccable, the intention clear: A nuclear attack would effectively destroy tiny Israel, while any retaliation launched by a dying Israel would have no major effect on an Islamic civilization of a billion people stretching from Mauritania to Indonesia."

When viewed through the prism of Bible prophecy, things continue to develop precisely as outlined some twenty-five hundred years ago -- without deviating one iota from the original script.

We find Russia, Iran and the Islamic world on one side; Israel (and the 'Christian Crusaders') on the other.

The United Nations has already established a precedent for sitting on its hands in the face of slow, systematic, genocide.

"Sheba, and Dedan, and the merchants of Tarshish, with all the young lions thereof, shall say unto thee, Art thou come to take a spoil? hast thou gathered thy company to take a prey? to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to take a great spoil?" (Ezekiel 38:13)
Iran is talking about genocide in 'one storm'. "Thou shalt ascend and come like a storm, thou shalt be like a cloud to cover the land, thou, and all thy bands, and many people with thee." (Ezekiel 38:9)

But, as Shimon Peres noted, "Iran can also be wiped off the map."

"And I will plead against him with pestilence and with blood; and I will rain upon him, and upon his bands, and upon the many people that are with him, an overflowing rain, and great hailstones, fire, and brimstone." (Ezekiel 38:22)

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

comedy, if it weren't so sad..

http://www.aztlan.net/

take a peek at what the american southwest has in store.. a bunch of jew hating, anti-american mexican nationalists who want to take back texas, new mexico, california and arizona..

neat.

worth 1000 words..

immigration spaghetti

i found this article and thought i was worth sharing. it's apparent that the politicians are out of touch with the citizens of this country. first it was the democrats who lost touch with the common man.. now, it's the republicans. it really makes you wonder who these folks are listening to to come up with the things they do..

------------------------------------
Mexican illegals vs. American voters
By Tony BlankleyMarch 29, 2006

It is lucky America has more than two centuries of mostly calm experience with self-government. We are going to need to fall back on that invaluable patrimony if the immigration debate continues as it has started this season. The Senate is attempting to legislate into the teeth of the will of the American public. The Senate Judiciary Committeemen — and probably a majority of the Senate — are convinced that they know that the American people don't know what is best for them. National polling data could not be more emphatic — and has been so for decades. Gallup Poll (March 27) finds 80 percent of the public wants the federal government to get tougher on illegal immigration. A Quinnipiac University Poll (March 3) finds 62 percent oppose making it easier for illegals to become citizens (72 percent in that poll don't even want illegals to be permitted to have driver's licenses). Time Magazine's recent poll (Jan. 24-26) found 75 percent favor "major penalties" on employers of illegals, 70 percent believe illegals increase the likelihood of terrorism and 57 percent would use military force at the Mexican-American border. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll (March 10-13) found 59 percent opposing a guest-worker proposal, and 71 percent would more likely vote for a congressional candidate who would tighten immigration controls.

An IQ Research poll (March 10) found 92 percent saying that securing the U.S. border should be a top priority of the White House and Congress. Yet, according to a National Journal survey of Congress, 73 percent of Republican and 77 percent of Democratic congressmen and senators say they would support guest-worker legislation.

I commend to all those presumptuous senators and congressmen the sardonic and wise words of Edmund Burke in his 1792 letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe: "No man will assert seriously, that when people are of a turbulent spirit, the best way to keep them in order is to furnish them with something substantial to complain of." The senators should remember that they are American senators, not Roman proconsuls. Nor is the chairman of the Judiciary Committee some latter-day Praetor Maximus.

But if they would be dictators, it would be nice if they could at least be wise (until such time as the people can electorally forcefully project with a violent pedal thrust their regrettable backsides out of town). It was gut-wrenching (which in my case is a substantial event) to watch the senators prattle on in their idle ignorance concerning the manifold economic benefits that will accrue to the body politic if we can just cram a few million more uneducated illegals into the country. ( I guess ignorance loves company.) Beyond the Senate last week, in a remarkable example of intellectual integrity (in the face of the editorial positions of their newspapers) the chief economic columnists for the New York Times and The Washington Post — Paul Krugman and Robert Samuelson, respectively — laid out the sad facts regarding the economics of the matter. Senators, congressmen and Mr. President, please take note.

Regarding the Senate's and the president's guest-worker proposals, The Post's Robert Samuelson writes: "Gosh, they're all bad ideas ... We'd be importing poverty. This isn't because these immigrants aren't hardworking, many are. Nor is it because they don't assimilate, many do. But they generally don't go home, assimilation is slow and the ranks of the poor are constantly replenished ... [It] is a conscious policy of creating poverty in the United States while relieving it in Mexico ... The most lunatic notion is that admitting more poor Latino workers would ease the labor market strains of retiring baby boomers ? Far from softening the social problems of an aging society, more poor immigrants might aggravate them by pitting older retirees against younger Hispanics for limited government benefits ... [Moreover], [i]t's a myth that the U.S. economy 'needs' more poor immigrants.

"The illegal immigrants already here represent only about 4.9 percent of the labor force." (For all Mr. Samuelson's supporting statistics, see his Washington Post column of March 22, from which this is taken.) Likewise, a few days later, the very liberal and often partisan Paul Krugman of the New York Times courageously wrote : "Unfortunately, low-skill immigrants don't pay enough taxes to cover the cost of the [government] benefits they receive ? As the Swiss writer Max Frisch wrote about his own country's experience with immigration, 'We wanted a labor force, but human beings came.' " Mr. Krugman also observed — citing a leading Harvard study — "that U.S. high school dropouts would earn as much as 8 percent more if it weren't for Mexican immigration. That's why it's intellectually dishonest to say, as President Bush does, that immigrants 'do jobs that Americans will not do.' The willingness of Americans to do a job depends on how much that job pays — and the reason some jobs pay too little to attract native-born Americans is competition from poorly paid immigrants." Thusly do the two leading economic writers for the nation's two leading liberal newspapers summarily debunk the economic underpinning of the president's and the Senate's immigration proposals.

Under such circumstances, advocates of guest-worker/amnesty bills will find it frustratingly hard to defend their arrogant plans by their preferred tactic of slandering those who disagree with them as racist, nativist and xenophobic.

When the slandered ones include not only The Washington Post and the New York Times, but about 70 percent of the public, it is not only bad manners, but bad politics. The public demand to protect our borders will triumph sooner or later. And, the more brazen the opposing politicians, the sooner will come the triumph.

So legislate on, you proud and foolish senators — and hasten your political demise.
----------------------------------------

in the name of religious tolerance

it is interesting to watch the growing love by the lefties out there for the religion of islam.. it's one of those situations where the motto of 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' really seems to fit. we know that the left hates george bush.. they hate him with such passion that it almost totally consumes their every waking moment. we also know that the radical islamists hate george bush too.. he's taken the fight to them in their homeland and they don't like it. america is just a bunch of Jew loving zionists that need to be killed.. ok, we get the idea.

that brings me to this story i found.. a really sobering look at what life is like under islamic law.

----------------------------------------------
Man faces death penalty for becoming ChristianDespite ouster of Taliban by U.S., court still prosecutes ex-Muslim
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

Despite the fact the hardline Taliban regime is no longer in power, an Afghan man faces possible execution for allegedly abandoning his Islamic roots and becoming a Christian.

"Yes that's true, a man has converted to Christianity. He's being tried in one of our courts," Supreme Court judge Ansarullah Mawlavizada told the Middle East Times.

The case centers on Abdul Rahman, believed to be 41, who converted from Islam to Christianity some 16 years ago. His relatives reportedly notified authorities about the conversion.

The constitution in Afghanistan is based on Shariah law, which states any Muslim who rejects his or her religion should be sentenced to death.

"We are not against any particular religion in the world. But in Afghanistan, this sort of thing is against the law," the judge told the Associated Press. "It is an attack on Islam. ... The prosecutor is asking for the death penalty."

If he indeed is sentenced, Rahman would be the first person punished for leaving Islam since the Taliban was ousted by American-led forces in late 2001, in the wake of the Sept. 11 terror attacks on the U.S.

Prosecutor Abdul Wasi says he offered to drop the charges if Rahman made the switch back to Islam, but the defendant is maintaining his Christian beliefs. The judge is expected to rule within two months.

About 99 percent of Afghanistan's 28 million people are Muslims, with the rest mostly Hindus.
---------------------------------------

'a religion of peace.'

iran putting troops in to iraq..

it looks like iran is purposely placing troops in iraq to confront us forces. obviously, this adds suspense to the unfolding drama in that part of the world. rumsfeld doesn't seem amused..

interestingly the president's trip to india, pakistan, afghanistan and iraq would also have been a good time to inform our allies in that region of an impending attack on iran..

from world tribune:
-----------------------------------------
Rumsfeld: Iran has deployed elite forces in Iraq
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Friday, March 10, 2006
WASHINGTON — Iran has deployed elite forces to confront the U.S. military in Iraq in what has been termed a major escalation, the Pentagon says.

"They are currently putting people into Iraq to do things that are harmful to the future of Iraq," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said. "It is something that they, I think, will look back on as having been an error in judgment."

Officials said Iran has deployed members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Iraq in early 2006. They said the IRGC operatives helped foment unrest and bolster Shi'ite militias in Iraq amid sectarian violence triggered by the bombing of the Golden Dome mosque in Samara on Feb. 22.

In a Pentagon briefing on Tuesday, Rumsfeld said Iran was deploying members of the Quds Brigade of the IRGC. The Quds Brigade has been regarded as the special operations forces and specialized in insurgencies abroad.

The brigade has been identified as the trainer and controller of Hizbullah in Lebanon. In February, National Intelligence director John Negroponte reported Iranian attempts to strike U.S. forces in Iraq.

"The Revolutionary Guard doesn't go milling around willy-nilly, one would think," Rumsfeld said. "Is it possible some more Iraqi civilians will be killed? Sure."

Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the reports of the Quds Brigade infiltration in Iraq marked the most recent of developments that stemmed from Iran. Pace said the military has assessed the number of IRGC fighters in Iraq, but would not elaborate.

Officials said the Quds Brigade was also believed to have brought weapons and relayed expertise for the assembly of improvised explosive devices. They said the Iranian-origin IEDs were shaped charges that could rip through U.S.-origin main battle tanks and armored personnel carriers.

"There have been some IEDs and some weapons that we believe are traceable back to Iran," Pace said.

Officials said the military has captured IEDs manufactured along the Iranian-Iraqi border in 2006. The IEDs were said to have been aimed at U.S. and British troops in a drive by Teheran to force an early coalition withdrawal from Iraq.

"We're working with the Iraqi government to enhance the capacity, the total numbers dedicated to border control, and also their capacity," Pace said.