Christos Anesti

When He rose, empires fell.
By Jerry Bowyer

I wonder if the people sitting in churches this week understand how very much Jesus of Nazareth’s last week of life was driven by clashes pertaining to wealth and poverty, freedom and tyranny. Probably not. Theologians generally don't study history. Historians usually don’t study theology, and neither study economics. Here’s what happened: For over half of a millennium, Israel had been passed from empire to empire. Each new world power treated Jerusalem as a cash cow, diverting its wealth into imperial coffers in order to finance imperial ambitions. First there was Assyria, then Babylon, Persia, and Macedonia. Then finally Rome was given its turn. It was at this time that Jesus of Nazareth came into the world.

Rome didn’t care much about places like Nazareth; it was much more interested in Jerusalem. Jerusalem was a company town, and the company was The Temple. The Temple was the Herod family business, and it had been created for one reason and one reason only — to squeeze enough money out of the region for Herod and his dynasty to buy their way back into favor with Caesar Augustus.

Rome needed money to buy off the urban mob, and Herod needed Rome to keep down the Palestinian rabble. And so when the people came to Jerusalem to make their offerings to God, they were met at each step in the process of religious devotion with another checkpoint at which tolls were extracted. The journey to Jerusalem often meant crossing a Roman checkpoint — ka-ching! Since the trip was long and hard on the animals, it was better to travel light and buy the sacrifices in Jerusalem — ka-ching! You can’t use pagan Roman coins for that sort of thing, of course, so off to the money-changers — ka-ching again. Tithes, offerings, sacrifices, festivals, Rome got her cut — ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching. In fact, that’s the only reason there even was a temple or a King Herod. Rome would have long ago plundered it and killed him, except you don’t kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

If the temple was the bridge between heaven and earth, Herod was the troll who lived under the bridge. Every pilgrim was forced to pay the toll. That’s what kept Herod in power: no ka-ching, no king. Ordinary Jews hated the regime, and the anger was boiling over, but Herod didn’t care what they thought; he had Rome on his side.

Into this world steps the young son of a Galilean entrepreneur. Joseph was a tekton, a skilled contractor. His adopted son, Jesus, was a rabbi, who gathered around him a small group of apprentices (mathetai, disciples) and set off for Jerusalem. Along the way he said and did things that implied that the temple was losing its status as the exclusive provider of access to the presence of God. Most Jews had already come to similar conclusions. They knew the Temple was corrupt, and turned to small-group Torah study as an alternative. Jesus adopted and intensified this new worship model. He created a network of small, nimble, and self-replicating clusters of people who could study and pray together and care for the poor. In his words: “Wherever two or more are gathered in my name, I am there in the midst of them.” This threatened the Templar monopoly.

The Temple hierarchy was enraged by this. Their livelihood was at risk. Eventually Jesus went a step farther and staged a protest in which he overturned the foreign-exchange tables at the Temple where Roman coins were swapped for Jewish ones. The Temple was forced to shut down. That was the last straw. Jesus had demonstrated in a graphic, physical way that the Temple really did run on money. Even worse, he had demonstrated that during the time that The Temple, Inc. ceased to function the world still rolled along just fine without it.

Such knowledge could destabilize the entire world. Palestine was ungovernable without the Herodian Templar system, and an ungovernable Palestine meant the gold would cease to flow to Rome. It also meant the grain would cease to cross the Holy Land. As our tanks and ships run on oil, their horses and galley slaves ran on grain.

The Temple bureaucrats used their superior war chest to pay activists to call for Jesus’ execution, and even to bribe witnesses. The Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, knew how to keep his job in middle management — keep the money flowing to Rome. That meant killing Jesus.

Jesus was a politically sophisticated man. He knew what was coming.

He faced the executioners bravely. He accepted, even embraced his death, and overcame it. By doing this he took the stinger out of Jerusalem and Rome. Behind all the taxes and tolls, price controls, and monopolies, and behind the governors and tetrarchs and consuls and emperors, lurked a tax-hungry greed, and the greed was backed up by the threat of death. The emperor’s colossal ego was fed by the people of Rome; the Romans were fed by the bread and circuses; the bread and circuses were fed by the armies; the armies fed on the captive peoples, and the captive peoples who didn’t like it were fed to the lions, or (even worse) the crucifix.

Such it has always been. When tyrants rule, money flows uphill and pain flows down. At the top is always a Caesar (or his etymological cousins, a Kaiser or a Czar). In the modern age, they usually make a hypocritical nod to democracy by calling themselves “President,” but the suffix “for life” tells us what’s really going on. At the bottom is the enemy of the state and what awaits him is a cross, or a gas chamber, perhaps a syringe filled with poison, or the observation section of a rape room and then a trip to the paper shredder. Every tyrant rules the same way: through threat of torture, humiliation, and death.

But when Jesus said, “Go ahead, do your worst,” and, as his early followers testified, overcame death, he ripped the stinger out, rendering the whole wasp twitching and dying from tip to tail. When his followers chose the cross as their symbol, they seemed to be turning “the world upside down,” but they weren’t; they were turning the upside-down world, finally, right-side-up. To get the flavor, imagine a revolutionary-era Frenchman displaying a tiny replica of the guillotine, or modern Iraqis wearing little rape-room replicas around their necks, or industrial paper shredders. Imagine Russian dissidents making the sign of the syringe, or think of Holocaust survivors who display their tattooed identification numbers with pride instead of shame. This is what the early followers of Jesus did with the Roman cross.

Yes, Rome continued to plunder and murder for a time, but Jesus’ peaceful army grew. The empire tried to wipe them out, but the movement grew faster than Rome could kill. The Caesars gradually lost their grip on the world. Jesus’ new model survived, then prevailed and eventually spread. One by one it has been wiping the little Caesars from the face of the earth in a gale of creative destruction.

The gale blows still, Messrs. Putin, Kim Jong Il, and Ahmadinejad. The gale blows still, Raul, Hugo, Mugabe. House of Saud, the gale blows still.

What The "News" Won't Report - 2

The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change, held on March 2-4 in New York City, exceeded all expectations. More than 500 people attended, and 100 speakers delivered keynote addresses or participated in panel discussions. Addresses by the Hon. Vaclav Klaus, president of the Czech Republic, John Stossel of ABC News, and leading scientists received thundering standing ovations from a capacity audience. Press coverage was extensive, including television coverage by CBS, ABC, CNN, Fox, PBS, and the BBC, and print coverage by AP, Reuters, Greenwire, New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Investor’s Business Daily, New York Sun, and countless other press outlets.

What Isn't Being Reported Is: The SCIENCE Consensus States That What Little Global Warming We Have Has Little To Do With Humans!

A 2003 survey of 530 climate scientists in 27 countries, conducted by Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch at the GKSS Institute of Coastal Research in Germany, found:

- 82 percent said global warming is happening, but only
- 56 percent said it’s mostly the result of human causes,
- and only 35 percent said models can accurately predict future climate conditions.

Only 27 percent believed “the current state of scientific knowledge is able to provide reasonable predictions of climate variability on time scales of 100 years.”

That’s a long ways from “consensus.” It’s actually pretty close to what the American public told pollsters for the Pew Trust in 2006:

- 70 percent thought global warming is happening,
- only 41 percent thought it was due to human causes,
- and only 19 percent thought it was a high-priority issue.

The alarmists think it’s a “paradox” that the more people learn about climate change, the less likely they are to consider it a serious problem. But as John Tierney with The New York Times points out in a blog posted just a day ago, maybe, just maybe, it’s because people are smart rather than stupid.

And incidentally, 70 percent of the public oppose raising gasoline prices by $1 to fight global warming, and 80 percent oppose a $2/gallon tax increase, according to a 2007 poll by The New York Times and CBS News.

I’ve got news for them: Reducing emissions by 60 to 80 percent, which is what the alarmists claim is necessary to “stop global warming,” would cost a lot more than $1 a gallon.

Al Gore, the United Nations, environmental groups, and too often the reporters who cover the climate change debate are the ones who are out of step with the real “consensus.” They claim to be certain that global warming is occurring, convinced it is due to human causes, and 100 percent confident we can predict future climates.

(Click here for Heartland's video debunking Al Gore's "facts")

Who’s on the fringe of scientific consensus? The alarmists, or the skeptics?

These questions go to the heart of the issue: Is global warming a crisis, as we are so often told by media, politicians, and environmental activists? Or is it moderate, mostly natural, and unstoppable, as we are told by many distinguished scientists?

Former Vice President Al Gore has said repeatedly that there is a “consensus” in favor of his alarmist views on global warming. And of course, he’s not alone.

Two weeks ago, Jim Martin, executive director of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, when told of our conference, said, “You could have a convention of all the scientists who dispute climate change in a relatively small phone booth.” (Denver Post, February 12, 2008).

RealClimate.org predicted that no real scientists would show up at this conference.

Well ...

We have with us, tonight and tomorrow, more than 200 scientists and other experts on climate change, from Australia, Canada, England, France, Hungary, New Zealand, Poland, Russia, Sweden, and of course the United States.

They come from the University of Alabama, Arizona State, Carleton, Central Queensland, Delaware, Durham, and Florida State University.

From George Mason, Harvard, The Institute Pasteur in Paris, James Cook, John Moores, Johns Hopkins, and the London School of Economics.

From The University of Mississippi, Monash, Nottingham, Ohio State, Oregon State, Oslo, Ottawa, Rochester, Rockefeller, and the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm.

And from the Russian Academy of Sciences, Suffolk University, the University of Virginia, Westminster School of Business (in London), and the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.

And I apologize if I left anyone out.

These scientists and economists have been published thousands of times in the world’s leading scientific journals and have written hundreds of books. If you call this the fringe, where’s the center?

Hey Jim Martin, does this look like a phone booth to you?

Hey RealClimate, can you hear us now?

These scientists and economists deserve to be heard. They have stood up to political correctness and defended the scientific method at a time when doing so threatens their research grants, tenure, and ability to get published. Some of them have even faced death threats for daring to speak out against what can only be called the mass delusion of our time.

And they must be heard, because the stakes are enormous.

George Will, in an October Newsweek column commenting on Al Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize, wrote that if nations impose the reductions in energy use that Al Gore and the folks at RealClimate call for, they will cause “more preventable death and suffering than was caused in the last century by Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot combined.”

It takes more than four Norwegian socialists to win a Pulitzer Prize, so I’ll put George Will’s Pulitzer Prize and his recent Bradley Prize up against Gore’s Nobel any day.

You’ve probably read some of the attacks that have appeared in the blogosphere and in print directed against this conference, and against The Heartland Institute. Let me repeat for the record here tonight what appears prominently on our Web site:

- No corporate dollars were used to help finance this conference.
- The Heartland Institute has 2,700 donors, and gets about 16 percent of its income from corporations.
- Heartland gets less than 5 percent of its income from all energy-producing companies combined. We are 95 percent carbon free.

And let me further add to the record:

The honoraria paid to all of the speakers appearing at this conference add up to less than the honorarium Al Gore gets paid for making a single speech, and less than what his company makes selling fake carbon “off-sets” in a week.

It is no crime for a think tank or advocacy group to accept corporate funding. In fact, corporations that fail to step forward and assure that sensible voices are heard in this debate are doing their shareholders, and their countries, a grave disservice.

We’re not doing this for the money, obviously. The Heartland Institute is in the “skeptics” camp because we know alarmism is a tool that has been used by opponents of individual freedom and free enterprise since as early as 1798, when Thomas Malthus predicted that food supply would fail to keep up with population growth.

We opposed global warming alarmism before we received any contributions from energy corporations and we’ll continue to address it after many of them have found ways to make a fast buck off the public hysteria.

We know which organizations are raking in millions of dollars a year in government and foundation grants to spread fear and false information about climate change. It’s not The Heartland Institute, and it’s not any of the 50-plus cosponsoring organizations that helped make this conference possible.

The alarmists in the global warming debate have had their say--over and over again, in every newspaper in the country practically every day and in countless news reports and documentary films. They have dominated the media’s coverage of this issue. They have swayed the views of many people. Some of them have even grown very rich in the process, and others still hope to.

But they have lost the debate.

Winners don’t exaggerate. Winners don’t lie. Winners don’t appeal to fear or resort to ad hominem attacks.

As George Will also wrote, “people only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues.”

We invited Al Gore to speak to us tonight, and even agreed to pay his $200,000 honorarium. He refused. We invited some of the well-known scientists associated with the alarmist camp, and they refused.

All we got are a few professional hecklers registered from Lyndon LaRouche, DeSmogBlog, and some other left-wing conspiracy groups. If you run into them over the course of the next two days, please be kind to them ... and call security if they aren’t kind to you.

Skeptics are the winners of EVERY scientific debate, always, everywhere. Because skepticism, as T.H. Huxley said, is the highest calling of a true scientist.

No scientific theory is true because a majority of scientists say it to be true. Scientific theories are only provisionally true until they are falsified by data that can be better explained by a different theory. And it is by falsifying current theories that scientific knowledge advances, not by consensus.

The claim that global warming is a “crisis” is itself a theory. It can be falsified by scientific fact, just as the claim that there is a “consensus” that global warming is man-made and will be a catastrophe has been dis-proven by the fact that this conference is taking place.

Which reminds me ... the true believers at RealClimate are now praising an article posted on salon.com by Joseph Romm--a guy who sells solar panels for a living, by the way--saying “‘consensus’? We never claimed there was a ‘consensus’!”

And notorious alarmist John Holdren a couple weeks ago said “‘global warming’? We never meant ‘global warming.’ We meant “‘global climate disruption’!”

I’d say this was a sign of victory, but that would suggest their words and opinions matter. It’s too late to move the goal posts, guys. You’ve already lost.

It is my hope, and the reason The Heartland Institute organized this conference, that public policies that impose enormous costs on millions of people, in the U.S. and also around the world, will not be passed into law before the fake “consensus” on global warming collapses.
Once passed, taxes and regulations are often hard to repeal. Once lost, freedoms are often very difficult to retrieve.

It's Washington’s Birthday, Not Presidents’ Day

The Republic should go back to publicly celebrating the American Cincinnatus

By Gleaves Whitney

People ask why a few of us presidential junkies would like to see Presidents’ Day changed back to Washington’s Birthday. The technical explanation has to do with a misguided law called HR 15951 that was passed in 1968 to make federal holidays less complicated.

The real answer is simply this: George Washington is our greatest president, and too few American children know why.

George Washington earned the respect even of his former enemy, King George III, by doing something exceedingly rare in history: When he had the chance to increase personal power, he decreased it — not once, not twice, but repeatedly.

During the American Revolution, Washington put service before self. His personal example was his greatest gift to the nation. It has often been said that the “Father of our country” was less eloquent than Jefferson; less educated than Madison; less experienced than Franklin; less talented than Hamilton. Yet all these leaders looked to Washington to lead them because they trusted him with power. He didn’t need power.

Washington knew that the bold American experiment in self government under the rule of law could survive only if leaders exercised self-restraint and accepted institutional limits on executive power.

He believed that leading virtuously was more important than anything he could write or say. This is why Washington has been compared to two great republicans of Ancient Rome — Cincinnatus, who traded his sword for a plow, and Cato the Younger, who died defending the republic against the tyranny of Julius Caesar.Consider all the times that Washington put service before self.

In 1775, when he accepted command of the Continental Army, he promised Congress that he would resign his commission when the war was over. Once the British withdrew, he was true to his word, and surrendered command of an army fiercely loyal to him. In a moving scene before Congress on December 23, 1783 (then assembled in Annapolis, Maryland), Washington pledged loyalty to the civilian government he had served. He thereby established the principle that our nation’s military would always be under civilian rule.Earlier in the 1780s, Washington had been approached twice by army officers who promised their support if he decided to seize civilian power. In one famous incident in 1782, Col. Lewis Nicola wrote a letter urging Washington to overthrow Congress and become America’s king. The commanding general scolded Nicola the very same day.

In 1783, Washington caught wind of officers wanting to stage a coup d’état against Congress. The so-called Newburgh Conspirators were frustrated that Congress was not paying them what had been promised when the nation desperately needed their sacrifice. Washington would not be moved — that die would not be cast. On the Ides of March, he called the men together and sternly reprimanded them for losing faith in the idea of America. The new nation had a chance to succeed only if its leaders and military adhered to the rule of law.

When King George III heard that Washington would resign his commission to a powerless Congress, he told the painter Benjamin West: “If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world.”

Washington returned home to Mount Vernon in December 1783. Like Cincinnatus, he put down his sword and took up his plow, making him the most trusted man in America. Delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 selected him to be their president, knowing he would not abuse his position to aggrandize himself. And a grateful nation unanimously elected him president of the United States in 1789 and again in 1792, because they knew he would devote all his energies to serving the new nation.

Washington, when convinced that he had done all he could to help the country, retired after two terms as president. True to principle, he relinquished the power that was his for the taking. It was an example of selfless leadership that inspires Americans and the world to this day. Why don’t more American children know that?

Peggy Noonan's Old News

Conservative Columnist Peggy Noonan, of the WSJ, just stated in a piece what most of the base knew two years ago (or more). Peggy says, in part:

On the pundit civil wars, Rush Limbaugh declared on the radio this week, "I'm here to tell you, if either of these two guys [Mr. McCain or Mike Huckabee] get the nomination, it's going to destroy the Republican Party. It's going to change it forever, be the end of it!"

... Noonan responds,

This is absurd.

George W. Bush destroyed the Republican Party, by which I mean he sundered it, broke its constituent pieces apart and set them against each other. He did this on spending, the size of government, war, the ability to prosecute war, immigration and other issues.

Were there other causes? Yes, of course. But there was an immediate and essential cause.

And this needs saying, because if you don't know what broke the elephant you can't put it together again. The party cannot re-find itself if it can't trace back the moment at which it became lost. It cannot heal an illness whose origin is kept obscure."

I have to give Noonan credit. Along the way she gave warnings and tirades against what the Republican Party (under King George's "leadership") was doing. Most did not listen. My beef with the Sean Hannitys and Rush Limbaughs (and others) of the world is that they're too close to the trees to see the forest. They are such Party animals they can't smell their own Party's effluent! If you still identify yourself with "the Elephant" you are "party" to International Socialism, Mexico-first, Saudi-loving, money trumps everything - anti-Americanism!

If you can't see that, too bad for you.

Can the Elephant be saved and forgiven? Yes, just as all us sinners can be. But not from the leadership we have now.

Mother Delays Cancer Treatments So Baby Can Live

Expectant mother Lorraine Allard learned the devastating news that she was in the advanced stages of liver cancer when she was four months pregnant, according to the Daily Mail.

Allard, of St. Olaves in the U.K., had a choice: Delay treatment to save her baby, or terminate the pregnancy to save herself.

She chose the former, waiting until the fetus was viable before scheduling a Caesarean section.

"If I am going to die, my baby is going to live," Allard told her husband, Martyn, according to the Mail.

The baby came a week early and Allard, 33, gave birth on Nov. 18 to a healthy but premature boy she named Liam.

Exactly two months later, Allard died. She'd begun chemotherapy just after her son's birth. But in the end, it was too late.

Doctors believe Allard had bowel cancer that had gone undetected for years, eventually spreading to her liver. She realized something was wrong after she began suffering from stomach cramps, and tests revealed that her liver was covered with malignant tumors, the Mail reported.

"The doctors said they couldn't do anything because she was pregnant," Martyn Allard, 34, told the Mail. "She told them straight away they were not going to get rid of it. She'd have lost the will to fight."

The courageous and selfless mother was able to get out of bed and hold her tiny son several times beside his incubator before her death. Liam is the Allards' fourth child and first boy; his sisters are Leah, 10; Amy, 8; and Courtney, 20 months.

"Lorraine was positive all the way through," Martyn Allard told the paper. "She had strength for both of us. I can't begin to describe how brave she was. Towards the end we knew things weren't going well, but she was overjoyed that she had given life to Liam."

... Photo by Archant

... it makes you kinda humble to see such LOVE - doesn't it? - Tiger

The 10 Most Ignored News Stories of 2007 - Just Look Under the Rug

1. Developments moving U.S. and continent closer to a North American Union: President Bush ridiculed any talk of a continental merger as conspiracy theory, and recent articles published in The Nation and Newsweek magazines have attempted to characterize "NAFTA Superhighways" the same way, but numerous developments and admissions by officials this past year indicate otherwise.

2. Bush's refusal to pardon imprisoned Border Patrol Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, who were prosecuted by the president's friend, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton: Last month, a bi-partisan resolution was introduced into the House of Representatives calling on President Bush to commute the former agents' sentences immediately, allowing them to be home with their families by Christmas.

3. Research refuting man-made global warming: Former Vice President Al Gore won a Nobel prize in 2007 for his global warming campaigning to add to the Oscar for the documentary "An Inconvenient Truth. But numerous reports were issued throughout the year challenging the mainstream media's oft-repeated contention that the debate is settled over whether or not humans are causing global warming.

4. Lack of action on border fence mandated by Congress: The Secure Fence Act of 2006 required the construction of a double-layered barrier covering 854 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border, but Democrats led efforts to squelch the plan.

5. California bill introducing homosexuality to young children: Children as young as two years of age are in the bull's-eye of coming changes in California's school curriculum, which "gay rights" advocates now admit will alter the very foundation of information presented to public school classrooms.

6. Hillary and her felonious fundraising: A shady Chinese megadonor to Sen. Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign named Norman Hsu drew some attention from mainstream media then faded. But virtually ignored was the fact it merely represented a host of illegal fundraising accusations against the Clintons. One case proceeding in the courts will require Sen. Clinton and her husband to testify under oath to fraud charges in the midst of the presidential election campaign this year.

7. Illegal aliens who rape, murder, kill driving drunk, commit voter fraud, welfare fraud and burden the system: WND has reported on the growing list of illegal immigrants who have not only ignored U.S. immigration laws, but state laws against drinking and driving as well, killing innocents on the highways in the process.

8. Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein's resignation from the Senate Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, which she chaired, amid a conflict of interest due to her husband's ownership of two major defense contractors. : The firms owned by Feinstein's husband, Richard C. Blum, reportedly were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by the senator.

9. Progress of Law of the Sea Treaty: The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on a 17-4 vote, moved forward the Law of the Sea Treaty, or LOST, despite a wide spectrum of critics charging it would grant the United Nations control of 70 percent of the planet under its oceans and undermine U.S. sovereignty.

10. Syria's alleged WMDs and Israel's attack: Syrian President Bashar Assad claimed Israeli jets hit an unmanned military facility in a Sept. 6 raid. The Israel Defense Forces remained quiet, later admitting it targeted a military installation. But reports surfaced that Israel destroyed a facility at which North Korea was transferring nuclear technology to the Syrians.

... click Title link for full article - Tiger

FOXNEWS Gone Sour - So Much For Fair and Balanced

Fox News has long been considered a beacon to those that distrust televised liberal media, meaning every channel other than Fox. One of the indicators of the station’s right-leaning bent is that it has, for the most part, gotten the ‘War on Terrorism’ correct. However, with the undue influence of a Saudi Prince related to militant causes and with this month’s acquisition of Beliefnet, a religious resource website that proudly promotes radical Islam, signs show that the war coverage may soon be taking a turn for the worse.

In September of 2005, Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal purchased 5.46 per cent of Class B voting shares in News Corp, the company that owns Fox News and a number of other media and entertainment entities. This had replaced the three per cent stake in Class A non-voting shares bin Talal had previously held through his investment corporation, Kingdom Holding Company (KHC).

With his newfound voting rights, bin Talal stated his intention of supporting Rupert Murdoch, the principal owner of News Corp, helping Murdoch to stay in power and avoid hostile takeover by other interested investors. Some have said that this was like making a deal with the devil, as Murdoch has been left vulnerable to the whims of an individual that has been involved in despicable causes.

In April of 2002, bin Talal had donated $27 million during a Saudi telethon that was raising money for the families of suicide bombers. As well, he had given $500,000 to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) to be used towards the distribution and propagation of a set of Islamist books for American libraries. The set included Jamal Badawi’s Gender Equity in Islam, which sanctions the beating of women by their husbands, and a version of the Quran, Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s The Meaning of THE HOLY QURAN, which has been banned by the Los Angeles school system.

Utilizing his position of power within Fox News (today, he is the second largest shareholder), bin Talal has worked to influence programming at the station. An infamous example of this was reported in a December 2005 article found in WorldNetDaily, stating:

During the violent street protests in France one month ago, the prince said, Fox News ran a banner at the bottom of the screen that said “Muslim riots.”

“I picked up the phone and called Murdoch ... [and told him] these are not Muslim riots, these are riots out of poverty,” al-Walid said.

“Within 30 minutes, the title was changed from Muslim riots to civil riots.”

This incident was precisely the type of scenario that then-Mayor of New York City Rudy Giuliani tried to avoid, when after the 9/11 attacks, he rejected a $10 million check from bin Talal for the renovation of New York, that was attached to statements made by the Prince critical of the United States’ relationship to Israel. The question now is how many more incidents, such as the one concerning the French Muslim riots, have occured without the notice of the American public? And how far has bin Talal’s influence been able to reach?

The answer to the latter question may very well be in News Corp’s December 4th acquisition of Beliefnet, an internet-based religious information source.

Beliefnet came on the scene, first as a website in February of 2000 and then as a corporation in May of 2000, acting as basically a clearinghouse for religious thought. On the website, each of the world’s major religions were (are) given their own sections. This didn’t seem to be a problem, as favoritism towards one religion over another was nonexistant. However, within the Islam section, extremists began to gain a foothold.

On December 5, 2000, Beliefnet published an exclusive article written by the National Communications Director of the CAIR, Ibrahim Hooper, entitled ‘Why the Fury?’ a.k.a. ‘Why the Rage?’ [The article is still up on Beliefnet.] CAIR was created in June of 1994 as part of the Hamas terror network. Since then, the group has had a number of its officials charged with terrorist activity. Hooper, himself, has refused to condemn Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist organizations.

On February 8, 2001, Beliefnet, at the top of the homepage of its Islam section, refered to former Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon, as a “tyrant” and published an article calling Prime Minister Sharon a “war criminal.” The article, ‘Ariel Sharon: The War Criminal Takes Over,’ like Hooper’s, is still up on Beliefnet.

On October 13, 2001, Beliefnet prominently placed on its website a piece, what it called a “rallying cry,” by then-Vice President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), Ingrid Mattson, entitled ‘American Muslims, It’s Time for Us to Lead.’ ISNA, an umbrella group for radical mosques and Islamic centers throughout the United States and Canada, was recently named an “Unindicted Co-conspirator” by the U.S. government in connection to the raising of millions of dollars for Hamas. [As was CAIR.]

On November 5, 2002, Beliefnet (Beliefnet Books) introduced to its audience a compilation of essays, entitled Taking Back Islam, that comprised of pieces authored by a number of Islamists, such as: Mattson; MPAC Executive Director Salam Al-Marayati; CAIR National Legal Director Arsalan Iftikhar; and Yusuf Islam (formerly Cat Stevens), who was barred from entry into the United States, in September of 2004, for having suspected ties to terrorists.

Today, Beliefnet’s Islam section is entirely controlled by, and the content of it is entirely consumed by, radical Muslims.

A Republican to Love, Perhaps one of the Last! - Ann Coulter

If Republicans end up with a divided convention between Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani, I say we pick Gen. Pervez Musharraf.

Musharraf has declared emergency rule in Pakistan, shut down the media and sent Supreme Court justices home. What's not to like about a guy who orders policemen to beat up lawyers? I bet he has a good plan on illegal immigration, too.

The entire history of Pakistan is this: There are lots of crazy people living there, they have nuclear weapons, and any Pakistani leader who prevents the crazies from getting the nukes is George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison all rolled into one.

We didn't hear much about Musharraf – save for B. Hussein Obama's threat to bomb Pakistan without informing Musharraf – until the last few weeks.

Musharraf has been a crucial ally of ours since Sept. 12, 2001. His loyal friendship to the United
States while governing a country that is loyal to al-Qaida might prove dispiriting to the terrorists. So, until recently, the media mostly confined stories about Musharraf to page A-18.

Now, with the surge in Iraq working, Democrats are completely demoralized. Al-Qaida was counting on them. (We know the surge in Iraq is working because it is no longer front page news.)

In a tape released in early September, Osama bin Laden bitterly complained, "You elected the Democratic Party for this purpose" – of ending the war in Iraq – "but the Democrats haven't made a move worth mentioning."

... How might popular rule turn out in Pakistan? As Saul Bellow rhetorically said of multiculturalism, "Who is the Tolstoy of the Zulus?"

Pakistan is a country where local Islamic courts order women to be raped as punishment for the crimes of their male relatives. Among the Islamists' bill of particulars against Musharraf is the fact that he has promoted the Women's Protection Bill, which would punish rape, rather than using it as a device for social control.

According to the Boston Globe, the most common form of homosexuality in Pakistan – punishable by death – is pederasty.

Pakistan doesn't need Adlai Stevenson right now. It needs Mustafa Kemal Ataturk to impose military rule and drag a country of Islamic savages into the 19th century, as Ataturk did in Turkey. Pakistan's Ataturk is Gen. Musharraf.

To try to force democracy on the differing "I hate America" factions in Pakistan at this stage would be worse than Jimmy Carter's abandonment of the shah in 1979. It would result in what former Assistant Secretary of State Edward Djerejian called: "one man, one vote, one time."

The difference is: Instead of scimitars, this den of al-Qaida-supporting pederasts will have nukes.

... are you listening, George and Condi?

Savage Gets Savage On Islam!

CAIR Targets Another Conservative Talk Show Host

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is pressing advertisers to withdraw their sponsorship of Michael Savage's nationally syndicated radio program because of Savage's alleged "anti-Muslim bigotry."

Savage, on his Web site, is fighting back, urging his listeners to protect freedom of speech: "Email your representative; investigate CAIR for manipulating the U.S. media," his Web site says.

On Nov. 1, CAIR urged "radio listeners of all faiths" to contact companies that advertise on "The Savage Nation" to complain about an "anti-Muslim tirade" on Savage's Oct. 29 program. (CAIR periodically issues "incitement alerts," urging its members to contact various media outlets to express their concerns about "Islamophobic attitudes.")

CAIR was particularly disturbed by Savage's "shouted anti-Muslim attacks," which it quoted as follows:

- "I'm not gonna put my wife in a hijab. And I'm not gonna put my daughter in a burqa. And I'm not getting' on my all-fours and braying to Mecca. And you could drop dead if you don't like it. You can shove it up your pipe. I don't wanna hear anymore about Islam. I don't wanna hear one more word about Islam. Take your religion and shove it up your behind. I'm sick of you."

- "What kind of religion is this? What kind of world are you living in when you let them in here with that throwback document in their hand, which is a book of hate. Don't tell me I need reeducation. They need deportation. I don't need reeducation. Deportation, not reeducation. You can take C-A-I-R and throw 'em out of my country. I'd raise the American flag and I'd get out my trumpet if you did it. Without due process. You can take your due process and shove it."

- "What sane nation that worships the U.S. Constitution, which is the greatest document of freedom ever written, would bring in people who worship a book that tells them the exact opposite. Make no mistake about it, the Quran is not a document of freedom. The Quran is a document of slavery and chattel. It teaches you that you are a slave."

... he's right ya know!

Poking Giant Holes in Atheism’s Dogma

By: Phil Brennan - NEWSMAX.COM

"What’s So Great About Christianity?" by Dinesh D’Souza, Regnery, 344 Pages

If you have a son or daughter either in college or about to enter the halls of academia get your hands on this extraordinary book and give it to your offspring with instructions to read it from cover to cover.

There is no better way to inoculate a young man or woman against the virus of atheistic brainwashing epidemic on America’s campuses than Dinesh D’Souza’s new book, which carefully and calmly goes about the job of not only exposing the emptiness and lies of the atheistic materialism fervently embraced by a great number of academics, but also shows how effective Christianity has proven to be in combating its deleterious effects on our culture.

According to D’Souza atheism is losing and Christianity is winning. “God has come back to life,” he writes. “The world is witnessing a huge explosion of religious conversion and growth, and Christianity is growing faster than any other religion. Nietzsche’s proclamation ‘God is Dead’ is now proven false.”

The recent spate of books defending atheism and attacking religion reflects the near panic among atheists over the resurgence of Christianity. D’Souza’s book is nothing less than a massive refutation of the various allegations in such books as "God is Not Great: Why Religion Poisons Everything" by journalist Christopher Hitchens.

Also in D’Souza’s sights are Sam Harris’s "Letter to a Christian Nation" and, especially, "The God Delusion" by Oxford biologist Richard Dawkins, who gets a royal drubbing in the book.

Step-by-step, chapter-by-chapter, the author calls on innumerable sources to refute secularism’s myths -- such as what he calls the “fable” of Galileo’s treatment at the hands of the Vatican.

After explaining just what it was that got Galileo in trouble with the Church -- noting that Arthur Keostler had written that his defense was so “patently dishonest that his case would have been lost in any court" -- D’Souza deals with Galileo’s allegedly harsh punishment.

“Contrary to what some atheist propagandists have said, Galileo was never charged with heresy and was never placed in a dungeon or tortured in anyway," the author writes. "After he recanted Galileo was released into the custody of the archbishop of Siena, who housed him for five months in his magnificent palace. Then he was permitted to return to his villa in Florence.”

The author barely conceals his contempt for the incredible arrogance of scientists Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkin’s descriptions of themselves as “brights” because “they think they and their atheist friends are simply smarter that the community of religious believers.”

His treatment of Darwinism, as opposed to the scientific theory of evolution with which he has no quarrel, is devastating. Darwinism, he insists, furnishes the “brights” with ammunition they think refutes intelligent design. He goes on to demonstrate that their ammunition is composed of duds.

Among his other disclosures:

-Contrary to secularism’s claim that Christianity ushered in the “dark ages” and destroyed the Greco/Roman classical world, the Christian faith is “the very root and foundation of Western civilization.” and was “responsible for many of the values and institutions secular people cherish most.”

-He cites western art, science, the idea of limited government, the idea that the ordinary human being has inherent dignity and value rather than that accorded by society, the importance of the family and romantic love and even the concept that consent of both a man and a woman was a prerequisite for marriage.

-Rather than being an enemy of science, as alleged by secularists, Christianity provides the explanation that the universe is rational, that it operates according to laws. “Without the ‘irrational, belief that we live in an ordered universe,” D’Souza writes, “modern science is impossible.”

Western man, he adds, got this “faith in an ordered, unified and accessible universe,” from Christianity.

“Christianity reinvigorated the idea of an ordered cosmos by envisioning the universe as following laws that embody the rationality of God, the creator,” he explains.
As the old Baltimore catechism declared simply, proof of the Divine origin of the world lies in its “order and beauty.”

The universe is not eternal, it had a beginning, despite atheism’s contention that it has always existed. Writes D’Souza, “The finding of modern physics that the universe has a beginning in space and time … [the Big Bang event] is one of the most important scientific discoveries ever made. It provides, for all who take the trouble to understand it and reflect upon it, powerful and convincing evidence of an eternal, supernatural being that created our world and everything in it.”

After discussing the validity of miracles, the dismal record of atheistic regimes that butchered tens-of-millions of human beings in the last century alone, the absolute necessity of a moral law and the motivations of many atheists based on their lower instincts, D”Souza explains just what is so great about Christianity.

“In a society based on self-fulfillment and self-esteem, on looking out for yourself and advancing yourself, Christ calls us to the heroic task of self-emptying. He must increase and we must decrease. This we do by allowing his empire an ever greater domain in our hearts,” he concludes. “Goodness and happiness flow from this.”

For anyone being subjected to a barrage of secularist propaganda of the kind found on campuses, this book is a potent defensive weapon. No student should leave home without it.

Atheism is the Opiate of the Morally Corrupt

By: Phil Brennan - NEWSMAX.COM

In his blockbuster new book published Monday, "What’s So Great About Christianity," Dinesh D’Souza attacks atheism at its very roots, draws line between Darwinism, which he maintains is the creed of atheists, and the scientific theory of evolution, shows how atheistic inspired movements killed millions in the last century alone, and explains why Christianity is the fastest growing religion in the world today.

In an exclusive interview with NewsMax, Dinesh D’Souza tackles some of the issues raised in his book.

NewsMax: You say the new atheism is engaged in a one-sided all-out war on religion with Christians on the sidelines instead of fighting back. You write that 'atheists have been hammering Christians and the Christians have been running for cover.' How should Christians be responding?

"For a long time Christians have abandoned the public square, thinking that this is neutral space and if we just build up our homes and churches everything will be fine. But now a bunch of raging atheists have come charging into the public square, and they are blasting religion in general and Christianity in particular. The new atheists have mounted an aggressive intellectual and moral attack against Christianity. Their goal is to take over the minds of the next generation, so that America moves into a new age of science and moral freedom liberated forever from its Christian heritage."

The atheist belief that in essence the universe created itself and everything in it, including us, is on its face an absurdity. How can they defend it?

"Within the Newtonian framework, it was actually possible and even reasonable to believe in an eternal universe. Newton didn’t invent this idea; it went back to Aristotle. But Newton gave it a powerful scientific justification. The problem for atheists is that we now know that the universe had a beginning. The significance of the big bang is not just that matter came into existence, but that space and time came into existence. The laws of physics came into existence; there were no laws of physics preceding the big bang. For two thousand years the Bible has contended, in some ways against all reason and evidence, that the universe has not always existed; rather, it was created along with space and time. Now modern science has come to agree with the ancient Jewish and Christian text."

You accept the so-called 'big bang' theory as the method God used to create the universe. What evidence is there to prove that contention which most atheists deny?

"Today the evidence for a big bang or moment of creation is so strong that there are hardly any reputable scientists who do not believe it. Several lines of evidence have converged to make the big bang the closest thing we have to a scientific fact."

You write that Darwinism is the religion of most atheists. Can you explain why?

"Interestingly the leading atheists today are mostly Darwinians. I distinguish Darwinism from evolution. Evolution is a scientific theory. Darwinism is a worldview or metaphysics. Evolution simply tries to explain how one life form gave rise to another. Evolution doesn’t even pretend to account for the origin of life. Evolution cannot explain consciousness or morality. But the metaphysical Darwinists think they have come up with a master key to understand the entire universe. This is where they rely not on reason or evidence but on blind faith.”

Do you believe that God used evolution to create mankind? If so why would He have employed such a cumbersome procedure when all he had to do was think and his Divine will would have produced humans instantly, as we are informed by Holy Scripture in the Adam and Eve story?

"We don’t know what processes God used to create the universe. We also don’t know how God chose to create man. The Bible doesn’t say man was made out of nothing; rather the Bible says man was made out of the existing materials of the earth. 'Dust thou art and to dust thou shall return.' The Bible also says we are made in God’s image, but God is not a material thing. God is a spiritual being. So our resemblance to God is clearly not physical but rather spiritual and moral. For these reasons I’m not worried about whether evolution is right or not. It doesn’t threaten my Christian faith and it shouldn’t threaten anyone else’s.”

Atheists have blamed religion for killing millions of people in the name of Christianity. Isn’t it a fact that atheist have been the most murderous of all?

"Well, Henry Kamen’s study of the Spanish Inquisiton which is the most authoritative one found that the Inquisition killed around 2,000 people over a period of 350 years. That’s 2,000 too many. But compare that death toll to the number of people killed by atheist regimes in the past century. Pol Pot alone killed a couple of million, and he was a very junior tyrant by atheist standards. The regimes of Mao, Hitler and Stalin together killed more than 100 million people in the space of four decades. Atheism, not religion, is responsible for the mass murders of history."

Without God and the Ten Commandments and the moral way of life demanded of believers, how can there be peace among humans? Does not the denial of a necessary religious moral order lead inevitably to chaos among a mankind cut loose from all moral structures and ruled entirely by self-interest?

"Yes, morality is a defining characteristic of human beings and there is no way for us to rise 'beyond good and evil,' as Nietzsche would have it, and still remain human. Of course different religions put forward their own moral codes, and yet there are some important similarities between these. What seems to be new in the West is not a complete denial of morality but rather a denial of the idea of an external moral order. Many people seem to think that morality is something that we make up for ourselves. Of course this is a very attractive idea especially for young people because it offers them the prospect of escaping from the old moral rules, especially the rules about sexual restraint. I sometimes think that if it wasn’t for the Old Testament injunction against adultery, and Christ’s idea that if we have contemplated the sin we have in a sense committed it, if it wasn’t for these two things Western man would still be Christian."

Isn’t the demand for freedom from all morality and a license to do whatever one’s carnal desires crave the real reason why most atheists deny the existence of a divine lawgiver?

"I think it is the main reason, the desire to escape not just sexual rules but also to escape from ultimate moral judgment. Marx once said that religion is the opiate of the masses. He implied that religion was a kind of refuge. I turn this around and note that atheism is the opiate of the morally corrupt. Atheists try and escape the idea of judgment by getting rid of the judge."

What proof can you offer for the reality of a soul?

"The soul is that capacity that we all have within us to make free choices, both ordinary choices such as answering these questions, and moral choices, such as whether I should tell the truth or not. In both cases our choices are up to us. They are not determined entirely by physical laws such as the movement of atoms and molecules. If they were so determined then it would be pointless to say to someone, 'You shouldn’t have done that,' because clearly he would have had no choice in the matter. But this is absurd. We exercise choice all the time, and these choices are in some sense outside of the mechanical laws of nature. So we inhabit two domains: the natural domain and the metaphysical domain. Atheists ridicule the soul as the “ghost in the machine.” But there is a ghost in the machine, and it’s called free will."

Atheists reject the possibility of miracles. Why do they deny that miracles are possible?

"The short answer is because they don’t understand what science shows and what it doesn’t show. There is nothing in science that contradicts the idea of miracles. Science uses observations and experiments to posit laws. But these laws are provisional truths that are always open to revision. We believe that 'all swans are white' until we run into a black swan. We believe that 'light travels everywhere at 186,000 miles per second' until we find a situation where it doesn’t travel at that speed. Miracles are impossible only if the laws of the universe were known to be true in a final and unrestricted sense. But there is no scientific law, no matter how basic, that is true in this sense. I’m not trying to show that this miracle or that miracle is true, only that miracles are entirely consistent with modern science."

How can Christianity improve people’s lives?

"Christianity makes sense of the world that, without God, would lose its ultimate grounding and meaning. Christianity also gives life a goal and purpose. It makes available to us on a regular basis the experience of the sublime. It removes the cosmic loneliness that we all feel in the world. It enables us to cope with hardship and suffering and death. It fills us with the hope that we will ultimately see God. It gives us a reason to be moral and also shows us how to be moral. It’s simply a fuller, better, more fun way to live."

Christianity Sucks and Islam is Awesome?

By Doug Giles

Saturday, August 11, 2007

Townhall.Com

Man, don’t cha love how mainstream media and their soft-brain disciples make Christians out to be fish-stickered, bug-eyed equals to incensed Islam? If you were to accept as true what some atheists, secularists and prattling gay activists say about Christians, you’d think the church is chomping at the bit to chop off some heads of unbelievers, glory to Gawd!

Yep, if you were to believe the barf belched out by the BS brokers on the Left, you’d stagger away Kool Aid drunk with the belief that there is little disparity between conservative Christians and militant Muslims.

As a matter of fact, you probably would be bamboozled into believing that Islam is a peaceful, Little House on the Prairie religion being temporarily hijacked by jihadist renegades, and Christianity . . . Christianity is the real charity-vacant, vicious cult that’s vying for the opportunity to seize the whip and whip us good...

-the fact is! -

• Most Muslims do not condemn jihad.

• Christianity and Islam have neither similar traditions nor similar modern realities—Christian religious violence, real or imagined, does not mitigate the reality of jihad.

• A “Christian theocracy” in America is a figment of the Left’s imagination.

• The Islamic world has never developed the distinction between religious and secular law that is inherent in Christianity.

• Christianity has embraced reason—and Islam has always rejected it.

... The Judeo-Christian worldview (and subsequently, the great western traditions it under girds) is the only powerful cudgel in existence to ward off militant Islam. That’s what makes the Left’s lies about Christ’s Church and the Left’s desires to diminish it so diabolical. If the church’s presence and power gets marginalized via these secularists’s anti-Christian propaganda, then all I’ve got to say is, “I hope everyone is cool with wearing burkhas.”

Gingrich Continues To Highlight Government Missteps

The former House Speaker said he was "troubled by the failure of both major parties" in correctly addressing the issues and problems Americans face. Democrats, said Gingrich, are "trapped in a fantasy world" and the "party of unionized bureaucracy" while Republicans refuse to admit the nature of the systematic failure of big government.

Gingrich cited the example of Detroit - which he had previously discussed on Fox News Sunday - as an indicator of this failure. Detroit epitomizes the failure of the bureaucracy-based approach, he said. The Motor City has lost nearly half its population over the last 60 years. Its residents now have a per-capita income that is ranked 62nd in the nation. In 1950, Detroit ranked first.

Today, only 25 percent of Detroit's high school freshmen eventually graduate on schedule. And a majority of those who drop out of high school, said Gingrich, are likely to end up in jail. "How can we tolerate systems more likely to send people to prison than to college?" he said.

As for President Bush's global war on terror, "none of you should believe we are winning this war," said Gingrich. "There is no evidence that we're winning. ... This is a phony war."

Further, the failure to swiftly detect and deal with the terrorist cell members involved in the planned attack on Fort Dix, and the lawsuit of the "flying imams" against US Airways revealed that "our system is broken," said Gingrich, and that "something is fundamentally wrong."

To defeat the threat of radical Islamists, America must devote more resources to its intelligence, defense and foreign relations services, he said, adding that Web sites and religious services that incite Muslims to commit jihad should be shut down.

... Newt tells it like it really is, and that's why he'll never be elected President.

Ban Guns And We'll Reduce Murder & Suicide! - Really?

America's 1st Freedom, an NRA publication, has published an excellent article concerning the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy study on this very subject. Respected researchers Gary Mauser and Don Kates compiled statistics for the rates of murder and gun ownership for nations stretching from the Baltic to the Mediterranean and the Atlantic to the Pacific. Liberals and the MSM continue to publish statements such as:

- A gun kept in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member, friend or acquaintance, than to be used to kill someone in self-defense. (as if guns can kill!)

- Americans are more likely to be shot to death than people in the world's other 35 richest nations.

- Every day in America, 13 children are killed by guns, almost a classroom of children every two days.

What's the problem with these statements? According to the Harvard study NONE OF THEM ARE TRUE! BTW, you can download your own copy free of charge here.

Many aspects of the study are interesting. For example, in Russia, where firearms had been under state control for decades, Kates and Mauser found an exceedingly violent society. Russia had then, and continues to have, by far, the highest murder rate in the developed world.

Little Luxembourg, in 2002, had a murder rate nine times higher than neighboring Germany, where firearms are legal and widely owned.

Spain has 12 times the gun ownership rate of Poland, yet Poland's suicide rate is double that of Spain. It's illegal to own a firearm in Poland.

Now, the study also states that some countries simply have a low crime rate because of societal reasons. Norway, for instance, has a very cohesive one race-based population, and it's inherent crime rate is low and yes, you can own guns there. But, the relationship between low crime and gun ownership is not a direct connection, according to Kates and Mauser, because of Norway's stable population. Countries that have massive "non-cohesive" immigration? - Well, they have problems! Sound familiar?

It's all very interesting. If you can get your hands on the article, a subscription piece, do so, because it will open the eyes of many! Too bad the MSM won't publish this data. Huh!?!

Phone Etiquite

Rules for the phone.

How ALL business phones SHOULD be answered!

GOOD MORNING, WELCOME TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Press "1" for English.

Press "2" to disconnect until you learn to speak English

And remember only two defining forces have ever

Offered to die for you,

Jesus Christ

And the American Soldier.

One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

It's Been Said Many Times - It Bears Repeating

From the NewsMax.com Staff
Friday, July 20, 2007

Newt Gingrich: U.S. Fighting 'Phony War Since 9/11'

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich charges that the United States has been waging a weak and "phony war since 9/11" and continues to lose ground to radical Islam.

In a speech to the annual conference of Christians United for Israel, Gingrich charged that instead of fighting to win, President Bush is now pursuing appeasement through a proposed Mideast peace conference.

Comparing that to the attempted appeasement of Nazi Germany at Munich before World War Two, Gingrich said, "We don't have a peace process. We have a surrender process."

Gingrich said the United States and Western civilization are in a global conflict with radical Islam, and must choose between victory and surrender.

A Collection - FrontPageMag On A Roll

Read And Enjoy ...

Jimmy Carter's War Against the Jews

"From the late PLO terrorist chieftain Yasir Arafat to the Saudi royals, Arab dictators and militants of every stripe could always count on Carter to spring to their defense against Israel and the West. By contrast, Israel, the Middle East's sole democracy, is in Carter's warped vision a racist "apartheid" state, as deserving of international censure as her terrorist enemies in Hamas are deserving of support."

Which Muslims are on the enemy’s side and which on ours?

"Can there be more than one kind of Islamist?"

David's Blog - Straight Talk From a C.S.M.

"Jimmy Carter, you're the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home, and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage. You're the runner-in-chief. "

Plain Truth From The Grunts; The Most Noble

What Generals, Politicians, and Newsmen don't know; but Soldiers do!

... as printed in, The American Legion, June 2007 issue

Defining the World as only they know it, and indicating the true state of affairs:

Ali Baba - slang for enemy forces. Originated in first Gulf War but can mean a terrorist or enemy in the CENTCOM area.

Haji - slang for an Iraqi, but can mean any Middle Easterner who hails from a predominantly Muslim country.

Badgeless Wonder - refers to someone who doesn't have a security badge and must therefore be escorted around the classified area for an entire work shift. This ticks off the sodier assigned to escort duty.

Back to the taxpayers - Navy slang for where a wrecked aircraft gets sent to.

Bombaconda - slang for LSA Anaconda, a major supply base near Balad, Iraq. Balad is also called "Mortaritaville" because it is frequently hit by rocket and mortar attacks.

CHU - (Containerized Housing Unit) pronounced "choo". These are the global war terrorism's Quonset huts. Essentially, they are mobile homes about the size of a standard shipping container. A CHU is usually divided into 2 or 3 rooms. The containers are vented and have power outlets, and most can be fitted with an air conditioner.

Dome of Obedience - slang for a military helmet. Also called a "brain bucket" or "skid lid".

Embrace the Suck - Phrase heard in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Translation: The situation is bad, but deal with it.

Gatorade Run - a patrol specifically intended to make positive political contact with the locals. It may render medical aid and provide food. The goal: to win hearts and minds, etc.

Good Idea Fairy - Someone, often anonymous, who generates changes to the plan at the last moment.

Groundhog Day - Every day of your tour in Iraq. Term suggests the days never change - always long and hot, and the same events keep recurring. Like the movie.

In God We Trust, All Others Will Sign Hand Receipts - a sign commonly found on the wall or door of well-run supply rooms or arms rooms. Soldiers must sign a hand receipt for their weapons.

Johnny Jihad - slang for a Muslim or Muslim combatant.

Powerpoint Ranger - usually refers to an Army Captain or Major whose primary mission on a staff is to create Microsoft Powerpoint presentations.

Oxygen Thief - a totally worthless person, usually generals, politicians, or newsmen. (added emphasis)

Mookie - slang for Iraqi Shia leader Moqtada al Sadr.

Marineland - slang for Iraq's Anbar province, which is usually patrolled by U.S. Marines.

Road Toad - a Soldier assigned to road guard duty. A thankless job. It usually involves eating a lot of dust.

Time Vampire - someone who wastes your time through endless chatter and little productivity. The symbol for a Time Vampire is to slap your watch and hold up your pointed fingers on either side of your mouth like Dracula's fangs.

Semper I - pejorative Marine lingo for being overly concerned with one's own personal interests.

September 10 Americans - Americans who are "ostriches" and don't want to confront the reality and challenges of the war on terror; mostly, generals, politicians, or newsmen; All Democrats, of course, and President Bush! (added emphasis)

... remember, GOD Loves the Infantry - more "milspeak" can be found here, and, here.