The Insanity of Our Post-Modern Culture

This past Thursday, Uncle Sam ordered (I do not use that word lightly) me to attend, as if I haven't already done enough for my country, what he so eloquently called Bystander Intervention Training.  This title itself is incredibly confusing, never mind the ensuing briefing I had to suffer.  A logical person would indeed ask him or herself "What the hell is Bystander Intervention Training?," and believe me, I sympathize.  This is a valid question, I asked it of myself.

The title could be construed in a myriad of ways.  Do you learn how to be a bystander?  Do you learn how to intervene with bystanders?  Do you learn how to intervene as a bystander during training?  Do you learn how to standby during intervention, or during intervention training?  The list goes on . . . 

Well, I, your humble liason of military affairs, am here to inform you that Bystander Intervention Training is training that instructs one how to prevent sexual assault if one should find his or herself to be a bystander should a sexual assault arise, or if it appears as though someone is taking advantage of another.  You are probably thinking to yourself, and again, rightfully so, "Jesse, surely you jest!"  Unfortunately, I jest not.

Now, before I dump on the Air Force, let me say they did do one thing right: they segregated the sexes for this briefing.

So, upon this journey in illicit carnality we embarked. 

Many, many ridiculous things were said during this briefing, and unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, I cannot recall them all.  There are two things that stick out in my mind in particular, and they both involve women and society.

First, and perhaps worst of all, the person giving the briefing had us perform an exercise that involved all the men in the room closing their eyes and imagining their mother, sister, wife or daughter being sexually assaulted.  There are so many issues with this on so many levels.  First and foremost, average, healthy, mentally sound men don't think about sexual assault or rape.  Period.  They just don't.  Healthy, mentally sound men do not say to themselves as they walk out the door to have a drink at the local watering hole, "Gee, I really hope I don't have to intervene in a sexual assault this evening."  Nor do healthy, mentally sound men who have a grasp on the reality and gravity of rape or sexual assault say to themselves as they walk out the door, "Ooo, a good, old fashioned forced, unlawful, carnal knowledge sounds good tonight.  I think I just might do that."

So, its bad enough that they are forcing these things, these thoughts down our throats.  Mind you, this is mandatory, I get in trouble if I refuse to go.  We have to sit there and pretend that this is part of our everyday lives, that this is something that we encounter or have to deal with on a regular basis.  Don't misunderstand me, I am fully aware that rape or sexual assault occurs more often then it should, but it doesn't occur so often that I need to be forced to make it part of my daily routine, whether it be in thought, potency, or act.  This is just simply ridiculous.

The second part of this awful exercise is not only do they ask us to meditate on rape and sexual assault, but they ask us to envision our mothers, daughters and sisters in a sexual encounter.  Albeit a sexual encounter against their will, a sexual encounter nonetheless.  With the exception of Freudians, mainstream psychology would deem this reprehensible.  Again, normal, healthy, mentally sound men do not think about, nor do they want to or enjoy thinking about or envisioning their sisters, mothers or daughters in a sexual situation, be it rape, assault or consensual.  This is just not a normal thing.

The second thing that really stuck with me was a question that was posed to us, and it was, "Do you think it is acceptable for consenting adults who are intoxicated to engage in sexual activity?"  

Thankfully, the obvious scenario that arose in the mind of every single man in the room, and probably simultaneously at that, was immediately excluded.  The person giving the brief expalined a married couple doesn't count.  Then he said that its not ok for intoxicated, consenting adults to engage in sexual activity.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Marriage set aside, this statement maintains its idiocy.  

Our post-modern society encourages all sorts of sexual behavior.  Thanks to the Sexual Revolution, we have been freed from the chains of the drab and boring and dull sex our ancestors used to engage in.  After all, it was the hippies who were the first to try all these new things, right?  No one ever did what the hippies did, right?

In our society, we can do whatever we want when it comes to sex.  It can be homosexual, it can be heterosexual, it can be in public, it can be in bars, it can be sodomy, it can be oral, it can be in a french maid outfit, it can be in a pink bunny suit, it can be performed while high on cocaine or ecstasy, or it can be done in the middle of a crowded dance floor in a club in South Beach.  The military hands out condoms like candy and reminds us to practice safe sex.  Surely, I belabor the point.  But, but, throw alcohol in the mix, and sex suddenly becomes illicit!?!?!?

You can do all these things, and no one can tell you that its wrong.  If you want to do it, just do it!  Express yourself, its healthy to explore your sexuality.  This is what we constantly hear, right?  But all of a sudden, alcohol is involved and sex is the forbidden fruit!  If I, at the age of 28, wanted my girlfriend to come over and have dinner, then maybe we had a few glasses of wine, we snuggled on the couch, one thing led to another . . . yada yada yada, the military would look down on such reprehensible behavior, because, of course, you can't drink and copulate, right?  But, the eighteen year old who walks into the med clinic looking for condoms because he is going to go to the closest club, to find the closest, scantily clad slut and bring her back to his dorm room and have her spend the night is told "Good, job, you are practicing safe sex!  Go get 'em, tiger!  Knock 'em dead!  Express yourself!"

It cannot be described better than how Shears from Bridge on The River Kwai described the final scene of the book, "Madness . . . madness!"

My last point is this.  One of the angles that the man giving the briefing came at us from was "Do you think that this (sexual assault/rape) is how women should be treated?"  Of course no one thinks that!  But my problem with this is that in no way, shape or form does the military or society attempt to acknowledge, identify, separate or protect womanhood at any time.  They allow them to live with men in close quarters, they allow them to serve along side men, they allow them to perform all the same jobs as men do (with very, very few exceptions) and they even appoint them leadership positions over men.

The last example is a particularly grave case of the failure of women in the military, for, in order to get a bunch of men, and women for that matter, to listen to you, you have to act like a man!

Society and the military refuse to acknowledge the distinction between the sexes, and they do their best to breed this into the culture of the military (despite their attampts, take comfort in the fact that the enlisted corp, believe it or not, doesn't take to kindly to this being forced upon them, even after all these years), except now, this man has the audacity to call upon our natural sense of chivalry which has been all but completely wiped out by the military and society to rally us against rape and sexual assault!

It has always been more acceptable in culture, for some reason unbeknownst to me, for men to be a little sexually promiscuous and not women.  Except today, woman are allowed to be as sexually explicit as the dirtiest old man one can imagine.  So, on any old day, a woman can, to use an example from above, dress in a tiny ball of string that barely covers anything at all, walk into a club, dance like an animal until her clothes fall off, find the closest willing victim and take him back to her apartment to explore her wildest and deepest sexual fantasies (how is that not assault, after all it is purely utilitarian), and in doing this she degrades her own womanhood.  But, we, as men in the military are all of a sudden, and in the example of rape/sexual assault alone, called upon to be the knight in shining armor for a maiden we are told on a daily basis doesn't exist. 

I can save a woman from rape, only to have her tell me she is a liberated woman and curse me for holding the door to the emergency room open so she can get to a doctor after her traumatic experience.

"Madness!"  

On Veteran's Day

Today, as we all know, is Veteran's Day.

Across the Fruited Plains, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, from the Appalachians to the Sierra Nevada, from the Dakotas to Brownsville, TX, a self-proclaimed grateful nation honors our Fallen and our survivors and offers great thanks to all those who have served in the Armed Forces in any capacity.  As a current member of a struggling, yet somehow operational and efficient war fighting force, I appreciate the outpouring of support from this great nation.

However, this is not the purpose of this piece.

At the risk of sounding as if I speak from atop a high horse, or sounding as if I am patting myself on the back, please try to understand what it is I am about to say.

The decision to serve, although at first I was a bit reluctant, became an easy one.  Indeed, with every passing day, the idea of sacrifice becomes easier to accept and embrace.  What is my point, you ask?

It is this: On this Veteran's Day, I extend a honest and heartfelt thanks to my friends, family and loved ones.  It is you who make this present calling of mine possible and fulfilling.  It is you who drive me to do what it is I do, and it is you who grant me the opportunity to offer such a sacrifice.

And, know this:

Amidst the the present chaos, the instability, the uncertainty and the fear, amidst the trouble that brews globally and here at home, amidst the darkness that looms over our homes, our churches and our country, know that there are men in service of this country that are unbending, committed, faithful, heroic, and will not in any way, shape or form, forsake the duty that has been bestowed upon them.  Know that they stand, ever vigilant, with you in mind, waiting and watching, and indeed hoping and praying, that the opportunity arises to honor the oath that they took . . . and to heart they took it.

Know that despite what you hear about the military, no matter how bad it is, know that these men are watching over you, that these men will bleed themselves dry for everything that you and I believe in.  They will bleed themselves dry for God, for family and for country.  They will not forsake their morality, their principles, their oath, their faith, our this country.  Politics is irrelevant to them.  Know that these men believe in the same things you do, and it is this that drives them.  Take comfort in the fact that these men are out there, that they have a firm grasp on reality and that they fully understand the mountain we as a nation must climb in order to escape this dark valley we find ourselves in.  Know that these men understand not just where their loyalties happen to lie, but rather where they must lie.

If the world collapses around us, if this nation falls to pieces, if we, as a people, as a nation, as a culture, stand on the brink of utter annihilation, know that there are men, brilliant men, honorable men, faithful men that know their oath was made not to a single person, not to a single office, but was made to the Constitution and to the people, and most importantly, to God.  They understand that their oath goes beyond a mere document and incorporates the Good, the True and the Beautiful.

These men are prepared to go to their deaths not only for this country, but for this country and for God and His Divine Truth.  There are men who sacrifice for more than just this country, and are prepared and willing to fight the enemies of Truth, whether they attack from outside or from within.  Know that these men are prepared to die at the hands of those who were once their comrades-in-arms, should it come to that.

In these tough times, times in which the future of our nation is cloudy and uncertain, take comfort in the knowledge that if it all falls to pieces tomorrow, out of the ashes the Truth will resurrect, and it will be riding on the shoulders of these men, no matter how few, no matter how bloody and beaten, no matter how defenseless.  If it all falls to pieces tomorrow, we may not get to see the resurrection of Truth in our lifetime, but the Truth will survive, and it will survive because of the men that I have been writing about: The Old Guard, The Remnant, The Few.

Culture may collapse, society may break apart and chaos may reign for some time, but these men are out there, and these men will bear the light of Truth and ensure its protection.

It may seem that I have gotten off topic, but I have not.  These men, and men from the past, are and were willing to go to their deaths for more than just freedom and their country.  They go to their deaths for God and for family and for truth.  These men join the military to fight for Truth.

Consider the thought that these men are in the military for a very, very specific reason.  A dear friend of mine said, after we finished discussing the reality that our lives are about to become very difficult, that if he goes to his death, "it will be for my friends and those that I love."  And indeed, if these men go to their deaths, it will be the same for them, and they will also go to their deaths for God.  In the words of the great Colonel Dick Winters: "I wasn't a hero in the war, but I served in the company of heroes."



In the movie The Watchmen, the main character, after learning his friend was behind a great number of evils in the world, was faced with a choice.  His friend offered him the world if he would come and join him, and not reveal the truth to the people.  The main character couldn't embrace this lie, and his friend threatened him with death.  The main character simply said, "I guess that's always been the difference between you and I, I will never surrender, not even at the risk of annihilation."

These men will not surrender, not even at the risk of annihilation.  Ultimately, these men will conquer.  Out of the ashes of destruction, heroes will rise.

Sleep well tonight, knowing that there are men in the military who take their task to heart.  Believe me, I have been blessed and honored to get to know them and serve alongside of them.

To Our Fallen.  

The Problem With Islam.

Today I watched Ahmadinejad, you know, the president of Iran . . . excuse me, president of The Islamic Republic of Iran, as it is officially entitled, make a speech before the UN.  The UN that is headquartered in New York City, in Manhattan.

President Ahmadinejad, the terrorist turned politician/president (yes folks, terrorist . . . need I remind you that Ahmadinejad was one of the terrorists that took part in holding Americans hostage during the Iran Hostage Crisis?  Well, he was.) addressed the UN on American soil and accused the U. S. of violent colonialism, exportation of brutal capitalism that has resulted in poverty, crime and human rights violations across the globe, terrorism in the Middle East and murder in Afghanistan and Pakistan.  Finally, his crowning moment, Ahmadinejad stated that 9/11 was an inside job orchestrated by the Americans in the name of good old-fashioned American greed.  He claimed that America perpetrated the attacks in order make money and help the American economy by the trade of arms and the business of war.  I am not making this up.  He said it.  Thankfully, not long after Ahmadinejad opened his mouth, the American and British representatives present at the time got up and walked out.

I am happy they walked out.  But my question is, why are we giving this Islamist a platform, especially one on American soil, to spout such garbage?

But this is not my main point.  His speech reminded me of a recent and often debate I find myself in with people.

In light of the recent Ground Zero Mosque debacle, the majority of people have invoked the First Amendment to justify the construction of said mosque.  I hold the position that the First Amendment does not apply to this situation for two reasons.

One, the First Amendment, while it makes "no laws regarding the establishment of religion, nor prohibit(s) the free exercise thereof," in no way guarantees a building permit.

Two, and this is the argument that most people disagree with me upon, pure and simple, Islam is not a religion.

My opposition's stance, stated as simply as possible, is that since Islam claims a belief in a monotheistic being and has certain "religious" bylaws and goals, that it is indeed a religion.  My stance, stated as simply as possible, is hogwash.

The first question, logically, is what is the definition of religion?

Merriam-Webster answers thus:

"1 a : the state of a religious (a nun in her 20th year of religion) b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance 2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices."

So, by all appearances, Islam is indeed a religion.  Islam claims "service and worship of God . . . commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance."  Islam also has "a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs and practices."  So, it appears my argument is dead in the water.  But, I say this requires deeper probing.

I will not argue that Islam fulfills the second part of the definition of religion.  Islam indeed has commitment and devotion and an institutionalized system of "attitudes, beliefs and practices."  It is with the first part of the definition that I have contention.

The first part of the definition is "service and worship of God."  All definitions are taken from Merriam-Webster's Dictionary.

The verb "serve," means simply "to be a servant," and comes from the Latin "servire," which means to be a slave.

The word "service," means "the occupation or function of serving," and shares the same Latin root as "serve."

"Serving," means "to be a servant to," and, again, has the common Latin root.

So, what defines a "slave" and a "servant?"

A "slave" is "1: a person held in servitude as the chattel of another 2: one that is completely subservient to a dominating influence."

A "servant" is "one that serves others (a public servant); especially : one that performs duties about the person or home of a master or personal employer."

So, I think it can be agreed that "service" to God requires a surrender of the will to Him.  Those in service of God "perform duties about" the House of the Lord.  Christ Himself says so.

Now, let us look at the word "worship."  Worship is "reverence offered a divine being or supernatural power; also : an act of expressing such reverence; a form of religious practice with its creed and ritual."

So, what about "God?"  "God" is defined as "(capitalized) : the supreme or ultimate reality; as : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe."

Thus it can be said that the first definition of religion, "the service and worship of God," can be best explained as surrender of the human will in reverence to the supreme and ultimate reality, the Being perfect in power, wisdom and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe.  Is that agreed?

The crux of the issue is this:  the Judeo-Christian God is bound by the natural law that He Himself established.  The Judeo-Christian God does not, by any means endorse the murder of nonbelievers.  In fact, when we hear one claim that he killed in the name of the Judeo-Christian God, we label him a nut.  Do we not?  When was the last time any legitimacy was lent to a person who claimed that God told him to murder?  When?

Natural law forbids murder, period.  There is no room for murder in Judeo-Christian religions.
But, I won't even use the mass-murder of Christians and Jews in the name of Allah as an argument against the religious status of the Islam movement.  Instead, I will use something much more abhorrent.

Judeo-Christian God, as mentioned earlier, is bound by the established Natural Law.  The Judeo-Christian God never asks his faithful to contradict either Natural Law or reason.  This is not the case with Islam.  Allah's will is ultimately supreme, and does not incorporate Natural Law.

Now, getting back to the more abhorrent example than murder.  As stated, Islam is legalistic, and this legalism is said to be the supreme will of Allah, Allah is the source of all Islam law.  In Islam, it is legal for men to marry prepubescent females.  Indeed, Mohammed himself took his wife Aisha when she was merely six years old, and consummated this marriage when she was only nine years old.

We read in the Hadith of Bukhari that "the prophet wrote the marriage contract with her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old."

Furthermore, we read in the Qu'ran, 65:4, referencing divorce, that "If you are in doubt concerning those of your wives who have ceased menstruating, know that their waiting period shall be three months. The same shall apply to those who have not menstruated."

Whom does "To those that have not menstruated" refer to?  Only females who have not reached sexual maturity "have not menstruated."  Referencing a waiting period for females who "have not menstruated" clearly shows that not only is it permissible to give a female away at such a young age, but it is also permissible to consummate a marriage when the female is prepubescent.

Islam was handed down to Mohammed in a cave by one of Allah's angels.  This is what Mohammed himself has claimed.  No one else was present, and the law came to Mohammed directly from Allah.  According to the Supreme Law of Allah, given the world by Mohammed, permits sexual intercourse between mature men and prepubescent females.

Getting away from this disturbing bit of info, let us look at Islam in a political-historical light.

Mohammed, after claiming to be the voice of Allah, not only consummated a marriage with a nine year old female, but also waged war.  Mohammed claimed that Allah instructed him to wage physical war against the infidels and gain land for Allah.  Mohammed founded Islam in 622 A. D.  In the same year, Mohammed rallied the nomadic tribes of the Arabian Peninsula by promising them land and money, not by promising them eternal salvation.  A mere ten years later, in 632 A. D., the entire Arabian Peninsula was ruled by Mohammed and the Supreme Law of Allah.  A mere 28 years later, in the year 661 A. D., the Islam caliphate's land stretched, east to west, from modern day Pakistan to modern day Tunisia, and north to south from modern day Chechnya to the Indian Ocean and the southernmost tip of the Arabian peninsula.

It is a historical fact that this was not done peacefully.  This was done by warfare, no historian disputes this.  This was not done by a peaceful spread of the gospel, but by the violent thrust of the sword.  Then, by 750 A. D. the Supreme Law of Allah reigned from the border of China and India all the way to the Atlantic Ocean, to include Spain, Portugal and Morocco.  I ask you, was this done by the Grace, salvation and redemption that Islam offers, or was it done by the sword?  Interesting parallel:  at the outset of Chrisitanity, the early Christians were being murdered, at the outset of Islam, Muslims were murdering.  The fact is, Islam doesn't believe in Divine Grace.

Mohammed, who is the only go between regarding Allah and his people, refers to Jews as "pigs" and "dogs."  Mohammed also called for the extermination of the infidels.  Here it is important to note the the great Islamic philosopher Averroes taught that a literal interpretation of the Qu'ran was proper for the masses.  Compare this to the great Western philosophers like Aristotle and Aquinas who both emphasize reason.  Islam unquestionably demythologizes reason, whereas Christianity and Judaism elevate it as an aid to salvation.

The only way to salvation for Muslims is strict adherence to the will of Allah, which has been dictated by a sexually perverse, violent, greedy illiterate man who spent the night in a cave.  Please note that the Judeo-Christian idea of Paradise, or Eden, or Heaven, is fulfillment and perfect happiness due to the fact that we behold God.  In contrast, the Islamic idea of Paradise is "a place of physical and spiritual pleasure, with lofty mansions (39:20, 29:58-59), delicious food and drink (52:22, 52:19, 38:51), and virgin companions called houris (56:17-19, 52:24-25, 76:19, 56:35-38, 37:48-49, 38:52-54, 44:51-56, 52:20-21)."  Mind you there are seven of these heavens.  Heaven, for Islam, is a physical ecstasy, not a spiritual one.  Christians are called to have our spirit triumph over our flesh, but Islam constantly indulges the flesh.  Whether it be through power, money, sexual perversion, sex in general, blood lust, political power, land entitlement or heaven, Islam constantly seeks fulfillment of the flesh.

How do I tie this all together you ask?

Aristotle defined God as a substance, which indeed makes Him a reality.  As I said earlier,"the service and worship of God," can be best explained as surrender of the human will in reverence to the Being perfect in power, wisdom and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe.  Also stated earlier was that "God is the supreme and ultimate reality."

So, if God is a substance, a reality, who is perfect in goodness, does it not stand to reason that rejection of the established Natural Law is also a rejection of the supreme and ultimate reality, the perfect goodness, namely God?

Can a system that dictates actions based on the musings of an illiterate, perverted murderer claim to serve and worship the supreme and ultimate reality, the perfect goodness, God?

Islam does not serve and worship God, which is the first definition of religion.  They serve themselves.  They reject natural law and endorse evils across the whole spectrum.  The Judeo-Christian God and Allah are not the same god. Muslims have 99 names for Allah, and not one single one of them is Father.  The Christian God is Triune, Allah is not.  The Christian God is bound by His own natural law that He set in motion, whereas Allah dictates morality supremely, and the result is murder, rape and sexual perversion.

Is Natural Law not an ultimate reality?  Is morality not an ultimate reality?  The only was Islam is morally justifiable is through moral relativism, which is, of course, self-defeating.  Natural Law is an ultimate reality set in motion by the Ultimate Reality, the Final Substance, God.  Islam does not serve an ultimate reality, but rather a fleeting humanity.  In this regard, Islam is not a religion.

Any Doubt Now?

I have a question. Can it now officially be said that supporters of Obama are either totally disconnected from reality, or they are intellectually dishonest?

I think it can. Any question about what it is Barack Hussein Obama stands for can no longer be in doubt.

Where shall we begin? Let us start on the campaign trail, with our fearless leader's own words. He said himself he was setting out to fundamentally change America. He started with AIG, then went on to the banks, then went on to the car companies. On one hand he took taxpayer dollars to apply a short term, false solution to an economic problem that has been brewing for ages. He stole money from taxpayers to build a foundation made out of toothpicks for a structure made of steel beams of which the rivets have been working themselves loose for roughly seventy years. When he wasn't doing that, he occupied himself with printing more and more of our fiat currency and driving the value of our dollar to an all-time low.

It is simple economics folks. Lets say I had two apples, and my neighbor wanted one. Since I only have two apples, they are both of extremely high value to me because of the limited number I possess. But lets say I had ten apples and my neighbor wanted one. I would say to myself, "Of course you can have one, I have plenty." It is the same with the dollar. The less the actual physical amount of dollars exists in the economy, the more valuable each dollar is. So, when the feds continue to print and print and print dollars, what happens to the value thereof?

When Obama wasn't destroying our economy or devaluing the dollar, he was busy projecting weakness throughout the world. He has stabbed Israel in the back, he has forbidden the use of phrases such as "Muslim terrorist," and he has constantly apologized to the world for the past two centuries of American greatness, literally bowing to leaders of nations that have longed bowed to the great United States.

After that, he goes after state sovereignty by labeling Arizona's decision to enforce the law as "possibly racist." Further, he rejects separation of powers by trashing a correct, accurate and in line with precedent decision that the US Supreme Court made during the State of the Union Address that he incorrectly interpreted! Also, he attacks the Police Department of Cambridge, MA, by saying that Sgt. Crowley, an officer with an impeccable record, "acted stupidly" by enforcing the law that he has been trained to and gets paid to. Apparently, our president has little or no respect for the rule of law.

So, after the banks, the investment firms, the car companies, the market, the constitution, and now, the Gulf of Mexico, ask yourself, "What is the next target that Obama will fix his almighty cannon against?"

He is now going after the very institution that quite possibly got him elected. That is right, he now seeks to destroy the press, the free press, the one institution that has been, love them or hate them, the one thing that has been able to cry foul, whether you agree with them or not.

Our president, again turning everywhere but to the Constitution, has pointed out that the print media in foreign nations are doing so much better than ours because they are subsidized by the government! Obama has said that since the dawn of the Internet, the revenue of print media has been steadily decreasing. Yes, this is true. So now Obama is coming to the rescue yet again and asking for money from the Congress to prop up the print media, because, according to Obama, it would be a shame to lose this great institution of America. Obama is pushing for a subsidized news media.

Tied in with this is something very, very important. A push by this administration to heavily regulate and supervise the information on the Internet is under way and is being sold as necessary to the security of this nation.

So, let's think about this. Obama wants to regulate the Internet and at the same time give money to the print media. Hmm, so he will control the information on the Internet and at the same time subsidize print media. Hmm, so doesn't it stand to reason that all of this is solely due to the desire of this administration to control information?

Give somebody money to do something (for example, print only the info you want printed), and put a stranglehold on those who don't listen to you when you simply ask nicely (for example, all the information on the Internet that tells the truth about Obama that he wishes would go away).

This administration runs this country like a mob boss runs his city, through brute force.

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, it does.

Does the name Petrobras mean anything to anyone out there? Well, if it doesn't now, make note of it and remember it.

The following is scary, shocking stuff. This is huge.

Petrobras is a Brazilian oil company. They are the largest and most successful oil company in Brazil, turning a one billion dollar plus a year profit, and a few years ago, it was nationalized by the Brazilian government.

What concern of this is ours, you ask?

Let's look at the way Obama is punishing BP for the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico. Back in May, Obama demanded that an escrow account be established by BP and that BP incur the price of all the cleanup, damages, etc., from this disaster. Now, I have no problem with BP doing so, but the problem is that the president has no constitutional power or authority to do what Obama did.

So, Obama continues to "keep a boot to the throat of BP," and make damn well sure that he does as much financial damage to BP as humanly possible, all under the guise of fixing the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.

Remember George Soros? Well, George Soros of Moveon.org fame is, as well all know, a huge supporter of Obama. Also, Mr. Soros was a very big campaign donor to the Obama campaign.

Now, work with me here. Remember everything I am telling you. Petrobras is a nationalized Brazilian oil company. The Obama administration continues to shake down BP and run them into the ground. Obama has failed to be authoritative on the situation in the Gulf, letting the oil flow while he goes to "clear his mind" on the golf course, AGAIN! Obama also put a halt to ALL oil drilling in the Gulf, so he is personally putting people out of work. George Soros was a donor and is a supporter of Obama.

Now, keep all that in mind.

Shortly after Obama was elected he pushed a law through the Congress and Senate that required any and all oil companies drilling within American waters or on American soil to drill NO DEEPER THAN 1620 km.

Now, George Soros recently invested a large sum of his own money in Petrobras and became the owner of a good number of shares. The oil company Petrobras's deepest well is currently at 2260 km, obviously well beyond the mark set by the Obama administration.

Drum roll please . . . Two days after George Soros, a supporter and benefactor of Obama, invested his money in Petrobras, which is drilling way beyond Obama's self determined mark, the OBAMA ADMINISTRATION ALLOTTED TWO BILLION DOLLARS OF AMERICAN MONEY TO PETROBRAS OIL.

Ask yourself now why Obama continues to let the oil flow.

As Billy once said, "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark."

There is an old Scottish folk song entitled "Both Sides the Tweed." The Tweed is a river that forms part of the border between Scotland and England. Originally, the song was an attack upon the Treaty of Union of 1707 in which Scotland essentially forfeited their sovereignty to England. However, it was changed a little and and it made a resurgence in 1979 after the Scots finally voted, albeit way overdue, for a separate parliament from the English. This was subsequently vetoed by the English Parliament due to their infamous "40% of all eligible votes" clause, which counts votes of abstentions as votes against.

I can't stand the English.

In this song we read a few lines that are extremely relevant to America right now:

"What's the spring-breathing jasmine and rose?

What's the summer with all its gay train

Or the splendour of autumn to those

Who've bartered their freedom for gain?

"Let virtue distinguish the brave

Place riches in lowest degree

Think them poorest who can be a slave

Them richest who dare to be free."

So, now what folks, now what? Like the wife of a sea captain, who walked the lonely widow walk on the roof of her house, constructed by her loyal husband with his own bare hands, waiting for his return from the briny Atlantic, we now too must wait. We, like so many woman of Old New England, now do the same, but for us, it is a widower's walk. We walk that lonely widower's walk, waiting for our devoted and loyal spouse, Lady Liberty to return to our shores yet again.

We wait, we pray, that the bloodshed of millions, the labor of billions, the sacrifice of so many has not been in vain. We wait and pray, while walking that widower's walk, that the bride of so many young men that willingly laid down their lives for, the bride Lady Liberty, who so many great men and women worked their fingers to the bone for, we await her return from foreign and distant shores. We watch across the briny and windswept Atlantic for our spouse Lady Liberty to make a triumphant and glorious return to our shores yet again. We look for that glimmer on the horizon, that lamp at night that signaled the return of the captain. Our we look for the bright white sails as they make themselves visible, heralding the return of the captain. But again, for us, we await the return of our bride, Lady Liberty.

And So It Begins: Another Theater of War Comes Knocking at Our Door.

As you may or may not know folks, Iran has formally threatened Israel, The United States and the world with a formal act of war.

On Sunday, June 6, the 66th anniversary of the Allied Invasion of Normandy, Iran pledged the naval forces of of the legendary Immortals. That is, the Revolutionary Guard.

The Revolutionary Guard claims a direct military line from The Immortals of the ancient Persian Empire. These Immortals earned their title just as you might think. They were the personal military of the Emperor Xerxes, who claimed himself divine, and answered only to him, and were separate from the Persian Army. The Immortals were a force to be reckoned with, and were rightly called so. They laid a path of destruction ranging from the western parts of India to Greece, and expanded the Persian Empire to be the largest and most powerful empire in the world at that time. The Immortals lost their title as the best fighting force in the world to none other than our ancestors, the Spartans. Funny how these damn Persians insist on being a thorn in the side of the West, for centuries.

Anyway, the Revolutionary Guard claims The Immortals as their military ancestors, and indeed, the Revolutionary Guard is structured much in the same way The Immortals were. They are separate form the regular Iranian Army, are the Ayatollah's personal military, and answer only to him.

So, on Sunday, Hojjatoleslam Ali Shirazi, a personal aid and military liaison to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, announced publicly that Iran is ready, willing and able to provide a military escort to the next "humanitarian aid" ship that attempts a copycat "Charge of The Light Brigade."

We read in the UK's The Guardian that " 'Iran's Revolutionary Guard naval forces are prepared to escort the peace and freedom convoys that carry humanitarian assistance for the defenceless and oppressed people of Gaza with all their strength,' pledged Hojjatoleslam Ali Shirazi, Khamenei's personal representative to the guards corps."

I really don't think I need to explain what the implications would be if Revolutionary Guard naval forces engage with Israeli naval forces. The U. S. will be engaged in another theater of war, and it would be a just war no doubt. Israel is one of our closest allies. And we have exhausted all diplomatic avenues. War with Iran is inevitable.

But I want to address something that Egypt did recently, and let me start with this.

China persecutes both Catholics and MUSLIMS on a daily basis. We all know that the Roman Church is underground in China, but you seldom hear about the persecutions of the Muslim inhabitants in China.

In western China, there is a large population of ethnically Turkic people called Uihgurs (pronounced weegur) that have lived in China for many, many years. There are roughly 9 million Uighurs living in northwest China, namely in the province of Xinjiang, are said to have occupied central Asia since the 700s, and, as I stated, are ethnically Turk.

The Uighurs claim that the Han people (Han is the ethnicity of over 85% of the native Chinese population, and is the ruling ethnicity) invaded Uighur land, namely central Asia, which is now the Xinjiang province. Many of the Uighurs in Xinjiang belong to a group named East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), and this group has been violently combating the supposed Han occupation of Xinjiang, labeling it "Chinese Imperialism." The East Turkestan Islamic Movement is officially listed as a terrorist organization by the U. S., China, and the UN (SURPRISE!)

Where am I going with this you ask? ETIM claims their land is occupied by a foreign force. ETIM stages violent uprisings against this foreign force on a regular basis since the 1990s. ETIM claims that they are suffering under great religious and cultural oppression at the hands of the Chinese and have sparked violent riots, most notably in July of 2009, which resulted in the death of 150 people. The U. S. and the UN both claim that ETIM has ties with al-Qaeda. Doesn't this all sound vaguely familiar?

Ohh, that's right! Hamas says the same thing! So, my question is, why isn't Iran aiding the oppressed Muslims of China? Since September 11, 2001, China has publicly used the American wars against Islam to crack down on the Uighur people.

And yet, I think there is more . . . I am racking my brain . . . Oh yeah! Chechnya, Bosnia, East Timor, Sri Lanka. I know I am leaving some places out. All the inhabitants of all these regions claim they are persecuted, defenseless, oppressed and that their land is being occupied by foreigners, and that is why they murder. Hmm, what do they all have in common? Oh, of course, they are all Muslims!

So again, where is Iran in aiding the "defenseless and oppressed" people of Chechnya? Of Bosnia? Of East Timor or of Sri Lanka?

No, its only in Israel that Iran is providing such aid. Go ahead, convince me that this has nothing to do with Israel being full of Jews. Convince me that Muslims don't hate Jews more than any other group. After all, where is Iran in all the other cases of oppression of their Muslim brothers?

Lastly, on Saturday, June 5th, the highest court in Egypt ruled to strip the citizenship of any and every native, Egyptian male that is married to a Semitic Israeli woman. Egyptians are Muslim. Where are Turks, the Iranians, and FGM and TTH and the civil rights movements on this issue?!?!?!? Where are they???!!! Why are they not out rioting in the streets protesting against this violation of "civil rights" perpetrated towards native, Egyptian, Muslim males?

Egypt claims it is in the best interest of their national security to do this! But Israel, they have no rights to national security.

The whole world has lost it. Arizona decides to enforce law, and they are accused of being racists and violating civil rights. Israel defends a legal blockade and tries to keep its borders secure and they are vilified on the world stage. But Egypt strips citizenship from men who are married to Semitic women, and its ok because it is in the best interests of their national security.

Could you imagine if the U. S. tried to prevent Muslims from migrating to this country for the sake of national security?

God help us all. I am sorry folks, but another theater of war is truly knocking at our door.

Turkey Strikes Again, And Now Its Time for the US To Say Goodbye

Remember in my last post how I mentioned that Turkey's true colors were starting to show? Well, it seems as though I may not be crazy after all.

I am going to begin by discussing Hamas for a bit.

Hamas (in Arabic, an acronym for "Harakat Al-Muqawama Al-Islamia" -- Islamic Resistance Movement -- and a word meaning zeal) is a political body based in the Gaza Strip and organized and run by Palestinian Sunnis.

Its origin lies in the famous 6 Day War, when Muslims living in Israeli occupied territory began violent riots of resistance and overthrow. Hamas rose from the political party known as the Mujama.

It was with Mujama that Israel experienced something very similar to what the U. S. experienced after the Russians left Afghanistan in 1979.

In 1978, Russia invaded Afghanistan with the hopes of annexing that nation. The U. S., obviously in very deep with Russia due to The Cold War, sent the CIA and other special operation forces to Afghanistan to train and equip the local resistance, called the Mujahideen. The goal of the U. S. was to aid Afghanistan, which lacked a formal army, in defeating a common enemy. Any blow to Russia is a punch landed by the U. S., a defeat for Russia is a victory for the U. S., regardless of where on the globe it occurs. Eventually, in late 1979, after barely a year, the Russians left Afghanistan because they did not feel like expending the energy required to defeat the Afghan rebels who were being aided by the United States.

When Russia left, so did the CIA and the other special operations forces. But what didn't leave with the U. S. was all the weaponry and training that we supplied to the Mujahideen. Among the soldiers of the Mujahideen was young man rising quickly through the ranks due to his eagerness to learn and natural leadership skills. His name was Osama Bin-Laden.

Osama Bin-Laden had the training and the weapons, and now all he needed was the money. He found the money, and the rest is history.

The Mujama political party of Palestine was quietly being encouraged by Israel because, at the time, the Mujama had no military ambitions and was viewed by Israel as an alternative to our old friends over at the PLO. Another thing that Israel liked about the Mujama was that the Mujama was opposed to any international meddling, or conferences, or the like, for any resolution to the situation in Palestine, and so was Israel. So, Israel would give encouragement to the Mujama in hopes of bringing about internal change in Palestine.

Well, in 1987, during the 6 Days War, Hamas splintered from the Mujama, the Mujama disintegrated, and Hamas turned on Israel.

In order to best summarize what Hamas has been responsible for over the years, I quote from the Council on Foreign Relations:

"Hamas is believed to have killed more than five hundred people in more than 350 separate terrorist attacks since 1993. Not all Hamas's attacks have been carried out by suicide bombers. The group has also accepted responsibility for assaults using mortars, short-range rockets, and small arms fire. In 1996, Hamas bombings played an important role in undermining the election hopes of Labor Party leader Shimon Peres, who represented the succession to assassinated Oslo Accords signatory, Yitzhak Rabin. (Likud's Benjamin Netanyahu, who ran against the accords, won instead). Between 2001 and 2003, in particular, Hamas and its comrades of Palestinian Islamic Jihad carried out dozens of such attacks, ultimately leading Israel to begin construction of a barrier between itself and Palestinian regions."

Most notably, as you may or may not remember, Hamas was responsible for the 2008-2009 missile attacks on Israeli villages and took part in the kidnapping and murder of three Israeli soldiers by the Lebanese Army.

Lastly, the following is, word for word, the Hamas Charter:

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory).

"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. "

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."

"After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying."

"Moreover, if the links have been distant from each other and if obstacles, placed by those who are the lackeys of Zionism in the way of the fighters obstructed the continuation of the struggle, the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to the realisation of Allah's promise, no matter how long that should take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said:

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Muslim).

"The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine. Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a universal organization which constitutes the largest Islamic movement in modern times. It is characterised by its deep understanding, accurate comprehension and its complete embrace of all Islamic concepts of all aspects of life, culture, creed, politics, economics, education, society, justice and judgement, the spreading of Islam, education, art, information, science of the occult and conversion to Islam."

Sound like nice folks, huh?

I need not belabor the point any longer. Hamas is defined as an official terrorist organization by the U. S., the UN and NATO. We all get the point.

Enter Turkey.

I am going to begin with the Foundation for Human Rights, Liberties and Humanitarian Relief. This organization, its Turkish acronym is IHH, is indeed based in Turkey and was one of the main organizers, along with the Free Gaza Movement (FGM), of which the world already knows is supported by Hamas, of the recent "Charge of the Light Brigade" (if I may . . . trust me, my tongue is firmly ensconced in cheek) on the Israeli blockade of Gaza.

The IHH, has been known, for over ten years to be linked with and even take part in acts of terrorism across the globe. We read in the June 2nd issue of the Washington Times that the connection of the IHH to terrorist organizations has been known by the U. S. for over ten years. Furthermore, an investigation launched in 1997 BY THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT, revealed that "IHH offices in Istanbul were searched and security forces found firearms, explosives and bomb-making instructions, along with a jihad flag . . . After analyzing seized IHH documents, Turkish authorities concluded that 'detained members of IHH were going to fight in Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Chechnya.'" "'

Keep in mind folks, this IHH claims to be just your average, friendly, neighborhood charity organization.

The report also reveals that an investigation by our weaker brethren, the French, found that the president of this "charity organization" was found to have been actively recruiting soldiers in the mid-1990s for the coming Jihad. The French report goes on to cite phone records showing numerous phone calls from IHH headquarters to an al-Qaeda safe house in Milan, as well as phone calls to other Algerian terrorist operatives in various locations in Europe. Also, the French report "identified IHH as having played an ' "important role" ' in the al Qaeda-backed Millennium bomb plot in 2000 that targeted Los Angeles International Airport."

According to the story, added to the list of crimes can be impersonating a charitable organization, forgery of official documents, such as passports, and weapons trafficking. Of course, those are all run of the mill activities for charity organizations, right? I have no doubt that the March of Dimes does the same things.

Now, let us connect the dots. Don't worry, there are very few steps involved.

First, this IHH organization has been openly supported by the Turkish government. Second, IHH was a main organizer of the recent "Charge of the Light Brigade." Third, the Turkish government has resoundingly denounced the Israeli raid, the Israeli blockade and our support of Israel. Fourth, the Turkish government likened the deaths of NINE individuals from different nations to the 9/11 attacks on America. That alone should infuriate this nation. Fifth and last . . . I really hope you are all sitting down . . . Prime Minister Recep Tayyid Erdogan of Turkey was quoted today, saying that Hamas is not a terrorist organization.

I quote, from the Jerusalem Post, ' “I do not think that Hamas is a terrorist organization," ' Erdogan was quoted as saying. ' "They are Palestinians in resistance, fighting for their own land." '

The Prime Minister of Turkey doesn't believe Hamas is a terrorist organization!

Prime Minister Erdogan, you proved me right today. Turkey's true colors are coming to the surface. Turkey has shown the world where they truly stand. Mr. Erdogan has expressed exactly how he feels about Hamas and Israel.

Today, June 4, 2010, I am calling for the United States of America to officially sever ties with Turkey. Turkey is not to be trusted, Turkey is no longer an ally of the United States, and with every day that passes, Turkey makes it more and more clear that the United States cannot be allies with both Israel and Turkey. Just look at the chain of events. From uranium sales to Iran, to support of IHH, to support of FGM, to the support of the "Charge of the Light Brigade," to the condemnation of Israel and the attack on Israeli sovereignty, to the insistence that the U. S. use diplomacy with Iran, and now coming to the defense of Hamas. No friend of Hamas should be a friend of ours.

It would be suicidal for the U. S. to sever ties with Israel, absolutely suicidal. Here is why, when the U. S. goes to war with Iran, rest assured, it will happen, who is going to have our backs in that region? Is Lebanon? Is Syria? Is Egypt? Is Jordan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman or Turkey going to have our backs? Dare I say no? None of those nations will be there for us, but Israel will.

The Islamist philosophy of Turkey has finally surfaced, and guess what? It rules in all those other nations too. This war is going to happen regardless of what we do. To quote one of my favorite college professors, "We can no longer sit idly by and watch them (the Islamists) take over the world. It is time to be like our ancestors the Portuguese and wrap our rosary beads around our rifles and do something about it!" The inhabitants of that region of the world are all cut from the same cloth. The time of denial must end, the time of pussy footing must end, we must, for the sake of Western culture and for the sake of our children, join with Israel and squash these nations once and for all. All other avenues have been shown to be dead ends. All of them. We have exhausted all diplomatic possibilities.

Pray for our leaders. Pray for Israel. And pray for ourselves.

The Hits Just Keep on Coming.

They just keep on coming, for Obama and his administration, that is. Two big hits against the Obama Administration today.

Let us start with Israel. You can add the Israeli raid on the "humanitarian aid" ship to the pile of things that this administration has brilliantly displayed a complete and utter ineptitude for.

But before I get into that, let me touch on Turkey. And let me start with a simple question. Who the hell does Turkey think they are?

After supplying a ship for the more than just a humanitarian effort, as admitted by the Free Gaza Movement itself, and harboring that ship in its harbors, Turkey now has the gall to demand that Israel end the blockade. We read in the New York times that Ahmet Davutoglu, the foreign Minister of Turkey "demanded that Israel apologize for the attack, release the detained passengers, return the bodies of the dead, agree to an independent investigation and lift its blockade of Gaza."

Furthermore, Mr. Davutoglu went on to say, regarding the United States, that ' “We (Turkey) expect full solidarity with us. It should not seem like a choice between Turkey and Israel. It should be a choice between right and wrong, between legal and illegal.” '

The Prime Minister of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan was quoted as saying ' “No one should think we will keep quiet in the face of this.” ' The article went on to read that Turkey "accused Israel of state-sponsored terrorism and likened the psychological impact of the raid to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States."

So, let me get this straight. After supplying and harboring a ship for a "humanitarian aid mission" that was publicly known to be more than just that and was publicly known to be sponsored by our good friends over at Hamas and the PLO, Turkey "demands" that Israel drop the blockade and that we, the U. S. turn our backs on 7o years of allied history with Israel and condemn their actions of protecting their national security and their sovereignty. Lets be honest, no one really knows who and what was on those ships.

Where were you, Mr. Erdogan and Mr. Davutoglu, when the Lebanese army kidnapped and murdered three Israeli soldiers? Where where you when just two days ago Lebanon fired upon two Israeli airplanes? Where were when Hamas was firing missiles into villages in Israel killing innocent civilians? Why do you sit idly by as the PLO and Hamas incessantly send suicide bombers to Israel to kill more civilians? Where were you on 9/11 or 9/12? Why were you not out condemning the actions of al-Qaeda as an attack on American life, liberty and sovereignty? Where were you when Hamas launched an all out invasion of Israel in 2008?

Frankly, Mr. Erdogan and Mr. Davutoglu, you both make me physically ill.

The fact of the matter is that Turkey's true colors are starting to bleed through their protective outer garment of cooperation and alliance with the U. S. This is the same Turkey that just two weeks ago sold uranium to Iran. And the other fact is that this "humanitarian aid flotilla" was filled not with passionate, peace-loving activists, but with anti-Semitic, agitating war mongers. I encourage you to search on Youtube and check out the video of the Israeli soldiers being greeted by the "peace-activists."

The dirty little secret folks? Israel acted completely within the scope of both moral and international law. We read in The Washington Post that "Allen Weiner, a former State Department lawyer and legal counsel at the U.S. Embassy at The Hague, said Israel was technically operating legally."

Mr. Weiner went on to explain that ' "Israel claims to be in a state of armed conflict with a non-state group, with Hamas in Gaza. Under the laws of war, a blockage is legal . . . That includes operating on the high seas. You don't have to wait until you are on territorial waters." '

As far as the moral law is concerned, this was most definitely a matter of national security and sovereignty. As I said, no one really knows what was on that "humanitarian aid" ship, do they?

Now, where is the blunder by the Obama Administration? It is actually more of a domestic blunder than an international one. Well, they could be stronger with Turkey and put them in their place. Thankfully, this administration hasn't condemned Israel's actions, and it doesn't seem that they will.

The issue can be found in the same two articles I already referenced.

In the New York Times, we read ' “The Israelis have traditional and well-founded concerns about international investigations,” ' said a senior administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity. ' “But everyone recognizes that for an investigation to be credible, others have to be able to vouch for the results.” '

And in The Washington Post, we find the following: Though officially the Obama administration insisted that Israel was ' "best positioned" ' to conduct an investigation, a senior administration official acknowledged that an Israeli probe will not be seen as legitimate, so ' "we are pushing hard for an international role." '

So, this administration is saying that when a body investigates itself on charges of crimes legitimate fears of honesty and thoroughness naturally arise, so the best thing would be for an external investigation. I have no problem with this, for the sake of fairness an external investigation would be a good and just course of action.

You may still wonder where I am going with this.

Does anyone remember, not too long ago now, a little thing that happened with some guy named Joe Sestak? Allegations of bribery were brought against the White House, remember that?

After over three months of stonewalling and dodging and ignoring, the White House finally released a report to the public. And it said, in a nutshell, that no one need worry. The White House has conducted an investigation of itself, regarding allegations of high crimes brought against the White House, and the White House itself found through its investigation of itself that the White House itself was guilty of no inappropriate behavior at all. Everybody can rest easy, the White House has found itself innocent!

WHHHAAAAATTTTTT?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!

Didn't an official from the same administration just say that an external investigation would be best? Didn't an official from the same administration just say that a body conducting an investigation of itself would not be seen as legitimate?

Need I say more, folks?

Do you think I could say that to the district attorney if I was accused of bribing a public official that I have found myself innocent? I'm going to go out on a limb here and say probably not.

The Obama Machine has yet another wrench in its gears. They can't stay out of their own way.

Second hit against Obama and his cohorts?

Does anybody remember the governor of Illinois, Rod "I got caught by an FBI wiretap selling an empty Senate seat in the Illinois State Senate while the FBI was investigating me on completely unrelated charges, oh that's right they were corruption charges too, but they didn't know about the senate seat thing yet" Blagojevich?

Yeah, well he's up for trial. Guess who is being subpoenaed? Our dear friend Rahm Emmanuel has been subpoenaed. He is supposedly a critical witness. " ' "He's the supposed victim of an extortion." ' One of the charges against Blagojevich accuses him of attempting to extort Emanuel while he was a congressman."

I wonder what might come to light. Hmmm?

The point again is that these people can't stay out of their own way. You think it was a three ring circus while Clinton was in office? Well, what can I say other than welcome to Barnum and Bailey's . . . on steroids.

Obama may become wrapped up in this thing two. "Among the 24 counts of fraud, conspiracy, bribery and racketeering that could land Blagojevich a long prison sentence are charges he dangled President Barack Obama's vacant U.S. Senate seat to the highest bidder or demanded a cabinet post for himself in exchange for naming an Obama aide to the seat."

It should be interesting.

I heard a comment Rush Limbaugh made the other day on his program. He was talking about an article, I think in The Wall Street Journal, and the columnist was saying never mind re-election, he thinks Obama will end up resigning before the end of his first term.

Here are the links to all the articles I referenced, just copy and paste.

www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/world/middleeast/02policy.html?scp=2&sq=mark%20landler&st=cse

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/01/AR2010060100548_2.html?sid=ST2010053101699

news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_blagojevich_trial

blogs.suntimes.com/blago/2010/06/rahm_emanuel_subpoenaed_by_bla.html

And by the way, pray for Israel.

In Christ,

Jesse

Miracles Never Cease

It's true, miracles really never do cease.

Why do I bring this up you ask? There are a few reasons. Where shall I begin . . . ?

I will start with something related to a previous post.

Today, the 27th day of May, 2010, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has shocked this country and the world. The democratic majority of the senate of the Commonwealth has passed a law that I truly believe not a single voter in Massachusetts ever thought would get passed.

The state senate resoundingly (28-10 vote) slapped in the face the Boston City Council, which had recently passed a motion to boycott the State of Arizona due to that state's new immigration bill, by approving a sweeping immigration bill that restricts the rights of illegal aliens residing in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Part one of the bill passed by the senate bars the Commonwealth from conducting business with any private company found guilty of breaking federal statutes regarding hiring of illegal aliens.

Part two toughens existing punishment for anyone found falsifying or using any form of identification.

Part three, possibly my favorite part, explicitly denies in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens.

Part four requires that the Commonwealth's health program verify legal US residency through the Department of Homeland Security in order to receive coverage. Further, the new bill requires that only legal residents be given priority for subsidized housing.

This is huge. It really is huge. Of course, if you ask me, I would tell you the new law isn't strict enough. However, it is a great step in the right direction, especially coming from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This is a sign, folks, this really is a sign. There may be hope after all.

I wonder how the Boston City Council will react?

Second reason I say miracles never cease is in regards to a federal matter.

This mess with Sestak is not going to go away. Regardless of the White House statement which is supposed to come down soon and assure us all that nothing inappropriate occurred, this issue is here to stay.

The reasons it is here to stay, you ask?

1.) Joe Sestak - Joe Sestak has repeatedly confirmed his own accusations against this administration of bribery. He has said numerous times since February that he was indeed offered a job by the administration to drop out of the race in Pennsylvania. Is Sestak the type of man that will all of a sudden say he made the whole thing up? What would Sestak have to gain by lying about this? Why would Sestak, a democrat, make up a story like this about a democrat president who could at a later date offer him a job legally?

2.) Dick Morris - Dick Morris, a conservative by no means, but a brilliant political strategist, has gotten the buzz out there. He has uttered the word, a word which I have been saying for a long time, impeachment. If Sestak is telling the truth, then there are grounds for impeachment. The word is out there buzzing around with no help from conservatives, the Tea Party or the vast right wing conspiracy.

3.) Impeachment - the grounds for such an impeachment, namely violation of a federal law by the President of the United States, is a ground which cannot be made into a partisan issue. Sure, they will try and they will also play the race card, but the fact remains that no politician would stand in front of their constituents and tell them that the president breaking federal law is no big deal.

4.) The main stream press - The White House Press Corps, across the entire political spectrum, is daily seeking a direct answer to a direct question from Robert Gibbs, and they are daily being stonewalled. The simple question is can you confirm or deny that Joe Sestak was offered a job by this administration. Robert Gibbs refuses to say either way. I can completely understand him not coming out and saying "We did offer him a job, and the President knew about it." But I cannot understand for the life of me why, if the allegations were totally off target, he wouldn't vehemently deny it!!! Why, if the allegations are false, hasn't Rahm Emmanuel, three months after the fact, been able to say to Gibbs, when they ask, deny it? It has been three months since Gibbs was first asked about it, and no answer or response has been prepared for the press!!! What!?!?!?!?! Three months and no plan of attack?!?!?!??!?! Three months and not even an attempt to spin this?!?!?!?! Go back and watch the videos, even the main stream press is upset about this one!

I was watching the oil leak on television earlier today. They have cameras down there recording all the action, so one may actually watch the leak. Well, as they plugged the leak and the picture gradually became clearer, I noticed something on the ocean floor of the Gulf of Mexico. Low and behold, there they were, Obama's poll numbers!

It is possible that were are standing on the brink of a defining moment in history. Will the rule of law prevail?

What is definitely undeniable is that we are watching events unfold before our time that will undoubtedly echo in eternity. This could be huge.

The following post is an email I sent that caused my mother and sister to start a blog. Let us see if anyone finds it interesting:

Dear friends, family members, associates, fellow countrymen, fellow Catholics, comrades, partners in crime, partners in the vast right wing wing conspiracy, lend me your ears!

Now is the time to rise up and take a stand. Now, in this time of tumult, of unrest, of white, racist Christian, gun owning militiamen, we must rise and finally rally for truth, for justice, for sanity.

Dear compatriots, as you may or may not know, that in light of recent developments in the sovereign state of Arizona regarding that state's audacious, outrageous, racist decision to enforce existing immigration law, a few (seriously, maybe three) different cities have decided that Arizona must be boycotted. These cities have decided that it is their metropolitan duty to boycott such heinous acts as enforcing the law. They have claimed that such a law is a violation of basic, human civil rights!

Roughly four days ago, the Los Angeles city council voted to boycott the state of Arizona. Following in this city's shining example, Highland Park, Illinois decided that its varsity girls basketball team, which was slated to play a tournament in Arizona, will not be traveling there due to the horrid decisions of Arizona's congress. (As a side note, Highland Park High School annually sends children on field trips to China, but of course, China's record of humanitarian decency is unquestionably divine!) And finally, on Wednesday, the city elders of Boston voted that Arizona's (if I may steal a quote from Bush Sr.) "agression will not stand!" The city of Boston must join their metropolitan brethren and decry the tragedy of the aforementioned unholy, inhumane, audacious decision by Arizona to enforce the law!

Now, keeping that in mind, let me recount for you the recent developments in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts regarding the arrest of suspected terrorists. On Thursday, the skull bashers, the rib crackers, the headhunters . . . none other than the Cardinal's Army, the Massachusetts State Police aressted Pir and Aftab Khan, of Allston, MA. For my dear comrades who are unaware, Allston is a village of Boston, it is within Boston City Limits.

Now, this is the important part. The warrants that these men were arrestted on, since they were only suspected of being linked to the Times Square suspect and there was no actual evidence of terrorist activity or involvment, were (are you sitting down?) charges of beingin this country illegally!!!!

So, on this day, the 14th day of May, in the year of our Lord 2010, I, for no other reason other than consistency's sake, am calling for the City of Boston to boycott the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the City of Boston itself!!! The Boston City Council must take a stand and denounce the atrocitities against civil rights committed by the Commonwealth, the State Police, and the Attorney General of Massachusetts, Martha Coakley. The city must also boycott itself for allowing such atrocities to occur within city limits on this particular council's watch. So, again, for consistency's sake, I am calling for the Boston City Council to boycott the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the City of Boston itself.

I am asking you, friends, to join me in the fight for civil rights and sanity. Let us demand this boycott by the council. Join me now!!

In Christ,

This was my family's idea.

Good day to all!

I once heard it said that bloggers are failed journalists. I wonder if that is true?

Is it possible that people blog simply because they can't get published? I suppose so.

However, it is also possible that people blog simply because it is easy and accessible and free.

I am starting this blog at the suggestion of my older sister and my mother. How in God' name I will get anyone to read it, or even be interested in reading it, is beyond me.

I will attempt to keep this blog current and it's topic will be, generally speaking, current affairs. Although, anyone out there who is afraid of religion, politics, philosophy and history should give this blog a wide berth, for such niceties will often grace the pages of this post modern form of media.

God Bless.