Christmas vs. the Bible

An interesting article from www.ucg.org analyzing the Bible and Christmas. This follows this post about the pre-Christian practices in moden Christmas. For a free magazine subscription or to get this book for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632.

Christmas vs. the Bible


How well do the customs and traditions of Christmas match the biblical account of Christ's birth?



An objective look shows that many traditions supposedly rooted in the Bible don't match the biblical account.



Did three wise men travel to see Jesus? The Bible doesn't say how many there were. There could have been more. We are told only that they gave Jesus three kinds of gifts: "gold, frankincense, and myrrh" (Matthew:2:1Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,, 11). Did everyone exchange gifts when Christ was born? Gifts were presented to Jesus because He was born "King of the Jews" (verses 2, 11). This was the expected custom when appearing before a king, thus the wise men brought gifts fit for a king: gold and valuable spices. Jesus alone was the recipient of the gifts; others did not exchange gifts among themselves.



Did the wise men, as nativity scenes often depict, arrive to find Jesus in a stable manger, there having been "no room in the inn"? (Luke:2:7And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.). No. When the wise men arrived, apparently some time after Christ's birth, Joseph's family was residing in a house (Matthew:2:11And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense and myrrh.).



Did the writers of the four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) consider Jesus' birth to be one of the most significant events for Christians to acknowledge or celebrate? Mark and John do not even mention the event. Although Matthew and Luke do, neither gives the date. None of the biblical writers says anything about commemorating Christ's birth.



Did Jesus Christ tell us to celebrate His birth? No. He left explicit instructions regarding how His followers are to commemorate His death (1 Corinthians:11:23-26[23]For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:[24]And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.[25]After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.[26]For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.), but nothing about His birth.

Action Alert: Rein In The Rogue NLRB

A very interesting post from http://biggovernment.com/ about mandated union laws. This follows this post about the new congressional districts in Texas being redrawn so that the new seats favor the Democratic party in a Republican state. This follows this previous article about encouraging American energy independence. This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran  and Venezuela. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and you can read a very interesting book HERE!

Action Alert: Rein In The Rogue NLRB

by Bret Jacobson


You may be aware of this week’s NLRB showdown, where two Democratic Members of the National Labor Relations Board will try on Tuesday to overhaul rules governing 6 million workplaces and about 100 million working Americans to make it easier for union bosses to organize new members. The consequences are serious: employees will get less information about what they’re signing up for and employers will have less chance to talk to their workers. The unelected bureaucrats say they’re helping employees, but really it’s just to help the big political spenders from Big Labor. But you can help stop this farce!







While the Obama administration doesn’t seem to want to listen to small business owners, other leaders in D.C. will get the message. So sign a petition to top national leaders via Halt The Assault or contact your Member of Congress to support commonsense legislation to make the playing field fair once again (Americans For Prosperity’s site can help if you wish to support the Workforce Democracy and Fairness Act).



Bloggers can do even more by embedding a petition code into their site.





Every little bit helps when small business owners live in a world where facing federal bureaucrat regulations is their biggest single problem and Americans just want to get back to work.

Bachmann: Deport All 11 million Illegal Immigrants, In Steps

An urgent post from http://www.alipac.us/ about Michele Bachmann's plan to deport all illegals. This follows this post about welfare benefits going to illegal aliens. This follows this post about the Presidential Candidate strongest on immigration.  This follows this post  about Louisiana suing about the appropriations of House Seats and the Electoral College(think about redistricting in your state)!   This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants such as the 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso, where President Barack Obama recently bashed immigration enforcement! For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and you can read a very interesting book HERE!

And Remember when contacting public officials to please be firm but respectful. Any over the top messages could result in law enforcement action against you. Just let these politicians know that you are aware of what they have done and that you intend to remove them from office in the 2012 elections.

Bachmann: Deport All 11 million Illegal Immigrants, In Steps




Intent on drawing a clear contrast between rival Newt Gingrich and herself, presidential candidate Michele Bachmann called for 11 million illegal immigrants to be deported from the United States in steps.



In the week since a GOP debate during which Gingrich supported legalizing some undocumented immigrants, Bachmann has pounded the former House Speaker, likening his position to "amnesty" and circulating a letter he co-authored in 2004 that supported a path for worker legalization.



Asked by radio host Laura Ingraham on Monday about an earlier statement she made differentiating between immigrants who had recently entered the country illegally from those with longstanding ties to the United States, Bachmann said she was never referring to legalization.



"What I'm talking about is the order of deportation, the sequence of deportation," Bachmann replied. "It is almost impossible to move 11 million illegal immigrants overnight. You do it in steps."



Topics: illegal immigration, Michele Bachmann, GOP debate, deportation,US Mexico Border,Hispanic voters



By Josh Lederman


Thehill(.)com



Bachmann said deporting those convicted of crimes would be the first step.


She also said that while she hadn't seen any polls detailing her level of support among Hispanic voters, she believes they are seeking the same answers from government as everyone else: a chance to pursue a prosperous life.



That doesn't include extending government benefits such as in-state tuition to illegal immigrants, Bachmann contended, this time pushing back on another of her competitors, Gov. Rick Perry, who has upheld that policy in Texas.



"When we give the welfare state, then people won't be able to come out of it. It's the biggest trap that people can have," she said.



DISCUSS THIS ARTICLE WITH OUR ONLINE ACTIVISTS HERE http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-1286438.html#1286438

Pakistan, Russia and the Threat to the Afghan War

A very interesting post from http://www.stratfor.com/ about the affect that blocking the supply lines will have on the U.S. in Afghanistan. This follows this post about the chance that Pakistanis might retaliate for the defensive airstrike on the border.  This follows this article about  American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and read this very interesting book HERE!


Pakistan, Russia and the Threat to the Afghan War

November 30, 2011



By George Friedman



Days after the Pakistanis closed their borders to the passage of fuel and supplies for the NATO-led war effort in Afghanistan, for very different reasons the Russians threatened to close the alternative Russia-controlled Northern Distribution Network (NDN). The dual threats are significant even if they don’t materialize. If both routes are cut, supplying Western forces operating in Afghanistan becomes impossible. Simply raising the possibility of cutting supply lines forces NATO and the United States to recalculate their position in Afghanistan.



The possibility of insufficient lines of supply puts NATO’s current course in Afghanistan in even more jeopardy. It also could make Western troops more vulnerable by possibly requiring significant alterations to operations in a supply-constrained scenario. While the supply lines in Pakistan most likely will reopen eventually and the NDN likely will remain open, the gap between likely and certain is vast.





The Pakistani Outpost Attack



The Pakistani decision to close the border crossings at Torkham near the Khyber Pass and Chaman followed a U.S. attack on a Pakistani position inside Pakistan’s tribal areas near the Afghan border that killed some two-dozen Pakistani soldiers. The Pakistanis have been increasingly opposed to U.S. operations inside Pakistani territory. This most recent incident took an unprecedented toll, and triggered an extreme response. The precise circumstances of the attack are unclear, with details few, contradictory and disputed. The Pakistanis have insisted it was an unprovoked attack and a violation of their sovereign territory. In response, Islamabad closed the border to NATO; ordered the United States out of Shamsi air base in Balochistan, used by the CIA; and is reviewing military and intelligence cooperation with the United States and NATO.



The proximate reason for the reaction is obvious; the ultimate reason for the suspension also is relatively simple. The Pakistani government believes NATO, and the United States in particular, will fail to bring the war in Afghanistan to a successful conclusion. It follows that the United States and other NATO countries at some point will withdraw.



Some in Afghanistan have claimed that the United States has been defeated, but that is not the case. The United States may have failed to win the war, but it has not been defeated in the sense of being compelled to leave by superior force. It could remain there indefinitely, particular as the American public is not overly hostile to the war and is not generating substantial pressure to end operations. Nevertheless, if the war cannot be brought to some sort of conclusion, at some point Washington’s calculations or public pressure, or both, will shift and the United States and its allies will leave Afghanistan.



Given that eventual outcome, Pakistan must prepare to deal with the consequences. It has no qualms about the Taliban running Afghanistan and it certainly does not intend to continue to prosecute the United States’ war against the Taliban once its forces depart. To do so would intensify Taliban attacks on the Pakistani state, and could trigger an even more intense civil war in Pakistan. The Pakistanis have no interest in such an outcome even were the United States to remain in Afghanistan forever. Instead, given that a U.S. victory is implausible and its withdrawal inevitable and that Pakistan’s western border is with Afghanistan, Islamabad will have to live with — and possibly manage — the consequences of the re-emergence of a Taliban-dominated government.



Under these circumstances, it makes little sense for Pakistan to collaborate excessively with the United States, as this increases Pakistan’s domestic dangers and imperils its relationship with the Taliban. Pakistan was prepared to cooperate with the United States and NATO while the United States was in an aggressive and unpredictable phase. The Pakistanis could not risk more aggressive U.S. attacks on Pakistani territory at that point, and feared a U.S.-Indian entente. But the United States, while not leaving Afghanistan, has lost its appetite for a wider war and lacks the resources for one. It is therefore in Pakistan’s interest to reduce its collaboration with the United States in preparation for what it sees as the inevitable outcome. This will strengthen Pakistan’s relations with the Afghan Taliban and minimize the threat of internal Pakistani conflict.



Despite apologies by U.S. and NATO commanders, the Nov. 26 incident provided the Pakistanis the opportunity — and in their mind the necessity — of an exceptional response. The suspension of the supply line without any commitment to reopening it and the closure of the U.S. air base from which unmanned aerial vehicle operations were carried out (though Pakistani airspace reportedly remains open to operations) was useful to Pakistan. It allowed Islamabad to reposition itself as hostile to the United States because of American actions. It also allowed Islamabad to appear less pro-American, a powerful domestic political issue.



Pakistan has closed supply lines as a punitive measure before. Torkham was closed for 10 straight days in October 2010 in response to a U.S. airstrike that killed several Pakistani soldiers, and trucks at the southern Chaman crossing were “administratively delayed,” according to the Pakistanis. This time, however, Pakistan is signaling that matters are more serious. Uncertainty over these supply lines is what drove the United States to expend considerable political capital to arrange the alternative NDN.







(click here to enlarge image)



The NDN Alternative and BMD



This alternative depends on Russia. It transits Russian territory and airspace and much of the former Soviet sphere, stretching as far as the Baltic Sea — at great additional expense compared to the Pakistani supply route. This alternative is viable, as it would allow sufficient supplies to flow to support NATO operations. Indeed, over recent months it has become the primary line of supply, and reliance upon it is set to expand. At present, 48 percent of NATO supplies still go through Pakistan; 52 percent of NATO supplies come through NDN (non-lethal); 60 percent of all fuel comes through the NDN; and by the end of the year, the objective is for 75 percent of all non-lethal supplies to transit the NDN.



Separating the United States yields a different breakdown: Only 30 percent of U.S. supplies traverse Pakistan; 30 percent of U.S. supplies come in by air (some of it linked to the Karakoram-Torkham route, probably including the bulk of lethal weapons); and 40 percent of U.S. supplies come in from the NDN land route.



Therefore, Dmitri Rogozin’s threat that Russia might suspend these supply lines threatens the viability of all Western operations in Afghanistan. Rogozin, the Russian envoy to NATO, has been known to make extreme statements. But when he makes those statements, he makes them with the full knowledge and authorization of the Russian leadership. Though he is used to making statements that the leadership might want to back away from, it is not unusual for him to signal new directions in Russian policy. This means the U.S. and NATO militaries responsible for sustaining operations in Afghanistan cannot afford to dismiss the threat. No matter how small the probability, it places more than 100,000 U.S. and allied troops in a vulnerable position.



For the Russians, the issue is the development and deployment of U.S. ballistic missile defenses in Europe. The Russians oppose the deployment, arguing it represents a threat to the Russian nuclear deterrent and therefore threatens the nuclear balance. This was certainly the reason the Soviets opposed the initial Strategic Defense Initiative in the 1980s. Carrying it forward to the 2010s, however, and the reasoning appears faulty. First, there is no nuclear balance at the moment, as there is no political foundation for nuclear war. Second, the U.S.-European BMD scheme is not designed to stop a massive launch of nuclear missiles such as the Russians could execute, but only the threat posed by a very small number of missiles such as might be launched from Iran. Finally, it is not clear that the system would work very well, though it has certainly proven far more capable than the turn-of-the-century predecessor systems.



Nevertheless, the Russians vehemently opposed the system, threatening to deploy Iskander short-range ballistic missiles and even tactical nuclear weapons in Kaliningrad and other locations in response. The Russian concern is obviously real, but it is difficult to believe it is the nuclear balance they are concerned about. Rather, it is the geopolitical implications of placing BMD infrastructure in Central Europe.





Opposition to a Second Containment



Elements of the weapons, particularly radars and interceptors, are being deployed around the periphery of Russia — in Poland, Romania, Turkey and Israel. From the Russian point of view, the deployment of radars and other systems is a precursor to the deployment of other military capabilities. They are extremely valuable installations that must be protected. Troops therefore will be deployed along with air defenses, and so on. In other words, the deployment of the BMD infrastructure itself may have no practical impact on the Russians, but the indirect consequences would be to set the stage for more expansive military deployments. The Russians must assume this could entail a return to containment, the principle employed by the United States during the Cold War to limit Soviet power.



The Russians see the inclusion of other military forces at the locations of the interceptor and radar deployment as creating a belt of nations designed to contain Russia. Given the uncertain future of Europe and the increasing relative power of Russia in the region, the United States has an interest in making certain any disruption in Europe doesn’t give the Russians opportunities to extend their political influence. While the extent to which American planners chose the sites with the containment of Russia in mind isn’t clear, from the Russian point of view the motive doesn’t matter. Planning is done based on capability, not intent. Whatever the U.S. intent, the move opens the door for containment if and when U.S. policy planners notice the opportunity.



The Russians have threatened actions for years, and in the past few weeks they have become increasingly vocal on the subject of BMD and on threats. Rogozin obviously was ordered to seize on the vulnerability created by the Pakistani move and introduced the now-indispensible NDN as a point where the Russians could bring pressure, knowing it is the one move the United States cannot tolerate at the moment. Whether they intend to shut down the supply line is questionable. Doing so would cause a huge breach with the United States, and to this point the Russians have been relatively cautious in challenging fundamental U.S. interests. Moreover, the Russians are worried about any instability in Afghanistan that might threaten their sphere of influence in Central Asia. However, the Russians are serious about not permitting a new containment line to be created, and therefore may be shifting their own calculations.



It is a rule of war that secure strategic supply lines are the basis of warfare. If you cannot be certain of supplying your troops, it is necessary to redeploy to more favorable positions. The loss of supply lines at some point creates a vulnerability that in military history leads to the annihilation of forces. It is something that can be risked when major strategic interests require it, but it is a dangerous maneuver. The Russians are raising the possibility that U.S. forces could be isolated in Afghanistan. Supply lines into the landlocked country never have been under U.S. or NATO control. All supplies must come in through third countries (less than a third of American supplies come by air, and those mostly through Russian airspace), and their willingness to permit transit is the foundation of U.S. strategy.



The United States and NATO have been exposed as waging a war that depended on the willingness of first Pakistan and now increasingly Russia to permit the movement of supplies through their respective territories. Were they both to suspend that privilege, the United States would face the choice of going to war to seize supply lines — something well beyond U.S. conventional capacity at this time — or to concede the war. Anytime a force depends on the cooperation of parties not under its control to sustain its force, it is in danger.



The issue is not whether the threats are carried out. The issue is whether the strategic interest the United States has in Afghanistan justifies the risk that the Russians may not be bluffing and the Pakistanis will become even less reliable in allowing passage. In the event of strategic necessity, such risks can be taken. But the lower the strategic necessity, the less risk is tolerable. This does not change the strategic reality in Afghanistan. It simply makes that reality much clearer and the threats to that reality more serious. Washington, of course, hopes the Pakistanis will reconsider and that the Russians are simply blowing off steam. Hope, however, is not a strategy.







Reprinting or republication of this report on websites is authorized by prominently displaying the following sentence, including the hyperlink to STRATFOR, at the beginning or end of the report.



"Pakistan, Russia and the Threat to the Afghan War is republished with permission of STRATFOR."









Read more: Pakistan, Russia and the Threat to the Afghan War
STRATFOR

Christmas Before Christ? The Surprising Story

An interesting article from www.ucg.org about the pre-Christian practices in moden Christmas. This follows this post about the Puritan's approach to Christmas.  For a free magazine subscription or to get this book for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632.

Christmas Before Christ? The Surprising Story




article by Jerold Aust





Most people know the Bible doesn't mention—much less sanctify—Christmas. Does it make any difference as long as it's intended to honor God and bring families together?



Several months ago the popular American comedic actor Drew Carey was interviewed on an equally popular television talk show, The View. Mr. Carey surprised the audience when he addressed the value of telling children the truth about Santa Claus.



"I don't think you should tell kids that there is a Santa Claus," he said. "That's the first lie you tell your children." Instead, "tell kids that Santa's a character we made up to celebrate a time of the season." Otherwise "when kids get to be 5 ... they realize their parents have been lying to them their whole life."



Earlier in the year the Arts & Entertainment cable television channel aired a program about Christmas titled Christmas Unwrapped: The History of Christmas. The promo for this program read:



"People all over the world celebrate the birth of Christ on December 25th. But why is the Savior's nativity marked by gift- giving, and was He really born on that day? And just where did the Christmas tree come from?



"Take an enchanting journey through the history of the world's favorite holiday to learn the origins of some of the Western world's most enduring traditions. Trace the emergence of Christmas from pagan festivals like the Roman Saturnalia, which celebrated the winter solstice."



These two programs addressed the fact that Santa Claus is fictitious and that Christmas and its trappings emanate from pagan Roman festivals. By no means are these the only sources of information about the background of Santa Claus and Christmas.



Is there more to these ancient traditions and practices than meets the eye? And, more important, does it make any difference whether we continue them?



Celebration of the sun god

It may sound odd that any religious celebration with Christ's name attached to it could predate Christianity. Yet the holiday we know as Christmas long predates Jesus Christ. Elements of the celebration can be traced to ancient Egypt, Babylon and Rome. This fact doesn't cast aspersions on Jesus; it does, however, call into question the understanding and wisdom of those who, over the millennia, have insisted on perpetuating an ancient pagan festival that has devolved through much of the world as Christmas.



Members of the early Church would have been astonished to think that the customs and practices we associate with Christmas would be incorporated into a celebration of Christ's birth. Not until several centuries had passed would Christ's name be attached to this popular Roman holiday.



As Alexander Hislop explains in his book The Two Babylons: "It is admitted by the most learned and candid writers of all parties that the day of our Lord's birth cannot be determined, and that within the Christian Church no such festival as Christmas was ever heard of till the third century, and that not till the fourth century was far advanced did it gain much observance" (1959, pp. 92-93).



As for how Dec. 25 became the date for Christmas day, virtually any book on the history of Christmas will explain that this day was celebrated in the Roman Empire as the birthday of the sun god. Explaining how Dec. 25 came to be selected as the supposed birthday of Jesus, the book 4000 Years of Christmas says: "For that day was sacred, not only to the pagan Romans but to a religion from Persia which, in those days, was one of Christianity's strongest rivals. This Persian religion was Mithraism, whose followers worshiped the sun, and celebrated its return to strength on that day" (Earl and Alice Count, 1997, p. 37).



Not only was Dec. 25 honored as the birthday of the sun, but a festival had long been observed among the heathen to celebrate the growing amount of daylight after the winter solstice, the shortest day of the year. The precursor of Christmas was in fact an idolatrous midwinter festival characterized by excess and debauchery that predated Christianity by many centuries.



Pre-Christian practices incorporated

This ancient festival went by different names in various cultures. In Rome it was called the Saturnalia, in honor of Saturn, the Roman god of agriculture. The observance was adopted by early Roman church leaders and given the name of Christ ("Christ mass," or Christmas) to conciliate the heathen and swell the number of the nominal adherents of Christianity.



The tendency on the part of third-century Catholic leadership was to meet paganism halfway-a practice made clear in a bitter lament by the Carthaginian philosopher Tertullian.



In 230 he wrote of the inconsistency of professing Christians. He contrasted their lax and political practices with the strict fidelity of the pagans to their own beliefs: "By us who are strangers to Sabbaths, and new moons, and festivals [the biblical festivals spelled out in Leviticus 23], once acceptable to God, the Saturnalia, the feasts of January, the Brumalia, and Matronalia, are now frequented; gifts are carried to and fro, new year's day presents are made with din, and sports and banquets are celebrated with uproar; oh, how much more faithful are the heathen to their religion, who take special care to adopt no solemnity from the Christians" (Hislop, p. 93).



Failing to make much headway in converting the pagans, the religious leaders of the Roman church began compromising by dressing the heathen customs in Christian-looking garb. But, rather than converting them to the church's beliefs, the church became largely converted to non-Christian customs in its own religious practices.



Although at first the early Catholic Church censured this celebration, "the festival was far too strongly entrenched in popular favor to be abolished, and the Church finally granted the necessary recognition, believing that if Christmas could not be suppressed, it should be preserved in honor of the Christian God. Once given a Christian basis the festival became fully established in Europe with many of its pagan elements undisturbed" (Man, Myth & Magic: The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Mythology, Religion, and the Unknown, Richard Cavendish, editor, 1983, Vol. 2, p. 480, "Christmas").



Celebration wins out over Scripture

Some resisted such spiritually poisonous compromises. "Upright men strove to stem the tide, but in spite of all their efforts, the apostasy went on, till the Church, with the exception of a small remnant, was submerged under Pagan superstition. That Christmas was originally a Pagan festival is beyond all doubt. The time of the year, and the ceremonies with which it is still celebrated, prove its origin" (Hislop, p. 93).



The aforementioned Tertullian, for one, disassociated himself from the Roman church in an attempt to draw closer to the teachings of the Bible.



He wasn't alone in his disagreement with such trends. "As late as 245 Origen, in his eighth homily on Leviticus, repudiates as sinful the very idea of keeping the birthday of Christ as if he were a king Pharaoh" (The Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th edition, Vol. 6, p. 293, "Christmas").



Christmas was not made a Roman holiday until 534 (ibid.). It took 300 years for the new name and symbols of Christmas to replace the old names and meaning of the midwinter festival, a pagan celebration that reaches back so many centuries.



No biblical support for Santa Claus

How did Santa Claus enter the picture? Why is this mythical figure so closely aligned with the Christmas holiday? Here, too, many books are available to shed light on the origins of this popular character.



"Santa Claus" is an American corruption of the Dutch form "San Nicolaas," a figure brought to America by the early Dutch colonists (The Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th edition, Vol. 19, p. 649, "Nicholas, St."). This name, in turn, stems from St. Nicholas, bishop of the city of Myra in southern Asia Minor, a Catholic saint honored by the Greeks and the Latins on Dec. 6.



He was bishop of Myra in the time of the Roman emperor Diocletian, was persecuted, tortured for the Catholic faith and kept in prison until the more tolerant reign of Constantine (ibid.). Various stories claim a link from Christmas to St. Nicholas, all of them having to do with gift-giving on the eve of St. Nicholas, subsequently transferred to Christmas Day (ibid.).



How, we might ask, did a bishop from the sunny Mediterranean coast of Turkey come to be associated with a red-suited man who lives at the north pole and rides in a sleigh pulled by flying reindeer?



Knowing what we have already learned about the ancient pre-Christian origins of Christmas, we shouldn't be surprised to learn that Santa Claus, too, is nothing but a figure recycled from ancient pagan beliefs.



The trappings associated with Santa Claus-his fur-trimmed wardrobe, sleigh and reindeer-reveal his origin from the cold climates of the far North. Some sources trace him to the ancient Northern European gods Woden and Thor, from which the days of the week Wednesday (Woden's day) and Thursday (Thor's day) get their designations (Earl and Alice Count, pp. 56-64). Others trace him even farther back in time to the Roman god Saturn and the Greek god Silenus (William Walsh, The Story of Santa Klaus, pp. 70-71).



Was Jesus born in December?

Most Bible scholars who have written on the subject of Jesus' birth conclude that, based on evidence in the Bible itself, there is no possible way Christ could have been born anywhere near Dec. 25.



Again we turn to Alexander Hislop: "There is not a word in the Scriptures about the precise day of [Jesus'] birth, or the time of the year when He was born. What is recorded there, implies that at what time soever His birth took place, it could not have been on the 25th of December. At the time that the angel announced His birth to the shepherds of Bethlehem, they were feeding their flocks by night in the open fields ... The climate of Palestine ... from December to February, is very piercing, and it was not the custom for the shepherds of Judea to watch their flocks in the open fields later than about the end of October" (Hislop, p. 91, emphasis in original).



He goes on to explain that the autumn rains beginning in September or October in Judea would mean that the events surrounding Christ's birth recorded in the Scriptures could not have taken place later than mid-October, so Jesus' birth likely took place earlier in the fall (Hislop, p. 92).



Further evidence supporting Jesus' birth in the autumn is that the Romans were intelligent enough not to set the time for taxation and travel in the dead of winter, but during more-favorable conditions. Since Joseph's lineage was from Bethlehem, and since he had to travel from Nazareth in Galilee to Bethlehem, and since his expectant wife Mary traveled with him, it would have been nearly impossible for Joseph and Mary to make the trip in the winter. As recorded by Luke, Mary delivered Jesus in Bethlehem during the time of census and taxation-which no rational official would have scheduled for December.



What difference does it make?

The Bible gives us no reason-and certainly no instruction-to support the myths and fables of Christmas and Santa Claus. They are tied to the ways of this world and contrary to the ways of Christ and His holy truth. "Do not learn the way of the Gentiles," God tells us (Jeremiah:10:2Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.).



Professing Christians should examine the background of the Christmas holiday symbols and stop telling their children that Santa Claus and his elves, reindeer and Christmas gift-giving are connected with Jesus Christ. Emphatically they are not! God hates lying. "These six things the LORD hates, yes, seven are an abomination to Him: a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that are swift in running to evil, a false witness who speaks lies, and one who sows discord among brethren" (Proverbs:6:16-19[16]These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:[17]A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,[18]An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,[19]A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.).



Christ reveals that Satan the devil is the father of lies (John:8:44Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.). Parents should tell their children the truth about God and this world's contrary and confusing ways. If we don't, we only perpetuate the notion that it is acceptable for parents to lie to their children.



Can a professing Christian promote a pagan holiday and its symbols as something that God or Christ has approved? Let's see what God thinks about people using customs and practices rooted in false religion to worship Him and His Son. We find His views clearly expressed in both the Old and New Testament.



God specifically commands His people not to do what early church leaders did when they incorporated idolatrous practices and relabeled them Christian. Before they entered the Promised Land, God gave the Israelites a stern warning: "Take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them [the inhabitants of the land],... and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, 'How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.'



"You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way; for every abomination to the LORD which He hates they have done to their gods ... Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it" (Deuteronomy:12:30-32[30]Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise.[31]Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God: for every abomination to the LORD, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods.[32]What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it., emphasis added throughout).



Many centuries later the apostle Paul traveled to and raised up churches in many gentile cities. To the members of the Church of God in Corinth, a city steeped in idolatry, Paul wrote: "... What fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God ... Therefore 'Come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, and I will receive you.' ... Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God" (2 Corinthians:6:14-17[14]Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?[15]And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?[16]And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.[17]Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.; 7:1).



Instead of allowing members to rename and celebrate customs associated with false gods, Paul's instructions were clear: They were to have nothing to do with them. He similarly told Athenians who were steeped in idolatry, "Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent" (Acts:17:30And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:).



God alone has the right to decide the special days on which we should worship Him. Jesus Christ plainly tells us that "God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth" (John:4:24God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.). We cannot honor God in truth with false practices adopted from the worship of nonexistent gods.



Jesus said: "This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men" (Mark:7:6-7[6]He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.[7]Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.). With God no substitutes are acceptable. It makes no difference that Christians mean well when they observe Christmas. God is not amused or pleased.



The knowledge of how to honor Almighty God, who made us, preserves us and gives us eternal life, has been made available to you. Will you honor God or follow the traditions of mankind? GN

.

Ask your State Legislators to Prevent Illegal Aliens from Getting Public Benefits

An urgent post from http://www.numbersusa.com/ about welfare benefits going to illegal aliens. This follows this post about domestic terrorism. This follows this post about the Presidential Candidate strongest on immigration.  This follows this post  about Louisiana suing about the appropriations of House Seats and the Electoral College(think about redistricting in your state)!   This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants such as the 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso, where President Barack Obama recently bashed immigration enforcement! For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and you can read a very interesting book HERE!

And Remember when contacting public officials to please be firm but respectful. Any over the top messages could result in law enforcement action against you. Just let these politicians know that you are aware of what they have done and that you intend to remove them from office in the 2012 elections.Ask your State Legislators to Prevent Illegal Aliens from Getting Public Benefits






Each year, states and localities spend about $84 billion on services for illegal aliens. Clearly, this is an unwise way to spend taxpayer dollars when so many states are having trouble making ends meet. However, 11 states already require the use of the federal SAVE system to verify benefit applicants to ensure they are in this country legally, and therefore entitled to receive public assistance.






Please send your state legislators a fax and encourage them to pass legislation that would require benefit applicants to be run through the SAVE system so that illegal aliens cannot receive services meant for American citizens. Giving welfare benefits to illegal aliens only encourages these individuals to stay in the United States and even encourages more people to come here illegally.

You can find this fax by proceeding to


http://www.numbersusa.com/faxes?ID=13646

NATO "braces for reprisals" from Pakistani-backed jihadists in retaliation for airstrike

A very interesting post from http://www.jihadwatch.org/ about the chance that Pakistanis might retaliate for the defensive airstrike on the border. This follows this previous post about the defensive airstrike against Pakistan. This follows this article about  American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and read this very interesting book HERE!

NATO "braces for reprisals" from Pakistani-backed jihadists in retaliation for airstrike


"This will come back at us, and at a time and a place of their [the ISI's] choosing."



"Nato braces for reprisals after deadly air strike on Pakistan border post," by Julian Borger and Saeed Shah for the Guardian, November 27:



"Nato braces for reprisals after deadly air strike on Pakistan border post," by Julian Borger and Saeed Shah for the Guardian, November 27.

Senior officers from the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf), were scrambling to resume contacts with their Pakistani counterparts in the hopes of setting up a joint investigation into the incident.

But Pakistani officers severed communications and Islamabad cut Isaf's two supply routes running through Pakistan.

It also gave the US two weeks to vacate the Shamsi airbase in Balochistan, which has been used to launch American drone aircraft.

One Isaf source voiced concern that the Pakistani intelligence agency, the ISI, could go much further and use its suspected influence over insurgent groups in the tribal areas along the Afghan border to launch reprisal attacks on Nato. "This will come back at us, and at a time and a place of their [the ISI's] choosing," the source predicted. In September the chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, said the ISI was using insurgent groups such as the Haqqani network to wage a "proxy war" in Afghanistan....Posted by Marisol

Wknd Box Office: My Week w/ Marilyn, The Descendants, The Skin I Live In

Here is an interesting article from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/  reviewing some of the movies that came out over the past weekend. This follows this post some of the movies from last week and  THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed!  This all  follows this post about guidelines to chosing good movies to watch yourself!

Wknd Box Office: My Week w/ Marilyn, The Descendants, The Skin I Live In


By Debbie Schlussel



I’ve already reviewed some of the good new movies for Thanksgiving that came out on Wednesday.  Now, here are the also-rans–two I didn’t get to, and one (Marilyn) which just debuted in theaters in my area, today.  There’s one decent one and one which is just simply horrifying garbage.





* “My Week With Marilyn“: I’ve always thought Marilyn Monroe was the most overrated figure in history. She was nothing more than a selfish, neurotic, self-absorbed, manipulative, temperamental bimbo, respected only because like James Dean and JFK, she was mediocrity that died young. And, so, I expected to hate this movie. But I liked it, in part because it goes along with my view. On the other hand, others who buy into the “Myth of Marilyn” also like it. Thus, I guess Marilyn flicks are in the eye of the Marilyn beholder. I also liked this because it’s light and fun and full of glamor from the time in which it takes place, the ’50s. It’s not a “great” movie destined to be a classic, but it’s not bad. It’s entertaining and is what we expect to get out of a good time at the movies–almost two hours of escapism. It’s also enjoyable because Michelle Williams nails it, making us instantly believe she is Marilyn Monroe. She gets the persona down in every way, from the mannerisms and behavior to the voice and the look. It’s uncanny.





The story: Eddie Redmayne plays Colin Clark, a 20 year old English blueblood to the manner born. He wants to impress his aristocratic family, but also wants to pursue his interest in film and make something of himself. So he finagles his way into a job as a third assistant director a/k/a gopher on a set of a movie starring Marilyn Monroe and Laurence Olivier being shot in England. Olivier is directing the project, believing it to be a star turn for him. But despite the best laid plans, that’s not how it turns out. Monroe is her usual self. She’s bombastic, unreliable, always late, constantly forgets her lines, and always broods, pouts, and cries. Soon Clark and Monroe develop a friendship which appears on the cusp of turning into more.



It’s a bearable kind of chick flick, though less bearable because Marilyn Monroe is the man, and young Colin Clark is definitely the chick, doe-eyed, naive, fawning, and all. It’s somewhat predictable from beginning to end, but a balmy, light, pleasant road along the way.



TWO-AND-A-HALF REAGANS




* “The Descendants“: This highly over-rated exercise in ennui stars the world’s most arrogant actor, George Clooney. And he’s suited for the role as a know-it-all, workaholic lawyer and Hawaiian resident, who thinks he is smarter, better, and more moral than everyone else in his life. But he’s in for a rude awakening. He’s out of touch.



Clooney is the descendant of a Hawaiian princess and an American banker, and he’s the trustee for his far-flung set of waspy-looking Hawaiian relatives deciding what to do with 25,000 acres of valuable Hawaiian land they’ve all inherited on Kauai. Clooney wants to sell to a local hotel, golf course, and shopping mall developer, though some relatives want to keep the land intact. Clooney’s wife is an adventurous person who gets severely injured and put in a coma during a boating or water-skiing accident. Clooney must deal with his two young daughters and become close to them again, as he struggles with his wife’s deteriorating health condition in the hospital and discovers she was cheating on him.



The only thing admirable about this movie was the eventually close relationship between father and daughters. But that wasn’t enough to get me to like this very slow movie chock full of the smug Clooney moralizing and lecturing us as he does in real life. Annoying is the best word for this film in which little is resolved and the people are highly unlikable.



TWO MARXES




* “The Skin I Live In [La Piel Que Habito]“: This is the most disturbing, horrifying, disgusting, barbaric, warped movie I’ve seen in recent memory. I was absolutely sickened and should have walked out, as more than one person did (I was not at a studio screening–which I couldn’t attend due to a scheduling conflict, but went to see this on my own). This is billed as a “sci-fi thriller,” but don’t let that fool ya. It’s a complete piece of utter abomination and garbage. Nothing thrilling about it, and there’s hardly “sci-fi,” so much as there is rape and torture. This “movie” is absolute proof that no matter how warped and disgusting our own un-American Hollywood is, the movie industries of Europe are far worse and and even more beyond help. This movie is so sick, so bad that mere words are not enough to convey just how awful and perverted it is. But I will provide the spoilers here, so that you don’t waste a penny on this sickening cinematic display. (It’s in Spanish with English subtitles.)



Mr. Melanie Griffith a/k/a Antonio Banderas stars as a plastic surgeon, whose wife and daughter have both committed suicide and whose daughter was raped. Banderas’ surgery clinic is inside his mansion. Banderas’ wife was having an affair with Banderas’ half-brother, the maid’s wanted criminal son (the maid is also Bandera’s mother, unbeknownst to him). Then, the wife was engulfed in flames in the car while she’s there with her lover. She is hideously deformed from the burns, and when she sees herself in the mirror, she jumps out the window in front of her daughter.



Then there’s the daughter. Since both the daughter and the guy who raped her were hopped up on drugs and alcohol and begin having sex, I’m not sure I’d call it rape, as she tries to get him to stop in the middle–and then he knocks her out (okay, that part is the violence and rape). The daughter goes nuts after the rape and kills herself after some time at an insane asylum. To get revenge, Banderas kidnaps the guy who did it and gives him a forced sex change operation against his will, transforming him into a beautiful woman whom he keeps prisoner in his house. In the process, he discovers a new, tougher skin transplant morphing the cells of pigs and humans. Banderas develops a crush on this alleged rapist whom he’s forcibly changed into a woman, who looks similar to his dead wife.



One day, the maid’s criminal son, Banderas’ half-brother, returns to the mansion and rapes the newly sex-changed rapist. Banderas returns home and kills him and then begins having sex with the rapist whom he forcibly sex-changed to look like a woman. Ultimately, the kidnapped, sex-changed woman kills Banderas and Banderas’ maid/mother and returns to his mother, who has been looking for her kidnapped son for two years. He must tell his mother what has happened to him and how he’s been forcibly changed into a woman.



Sick. Nauseating. Disgusting. Warped. That’s what passes for “art” in arthouse movie theaters, these days. Thanks, Antonio Banderas, for contributing to the human waste material in the world’s intellectual septic tank. If you like this movie, you are in serious need of help . . . and a straitjacket.



FOUR MARXES PLUS

Christmas: a celebration banned by the Puritans!!!!!

An interesting article from www.ucg.org about the Puritan's approach to Christmas. This follows this post about the U.S. Thanksgiving. This follows this post about the Super Committee's failure. For a free magazine subscription or to get this book for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632.

Christmas: a banned celebration




In England "the Protestants found their own quieter ways of celebrating, in calm and meditation," while "the strict Puritans refused to celebrate at all ...The Pilgrims in Massachusetts made a point of working on Christmas as on any other day. On June 3, 1647, Parliament established punishments for observing Christmas and certain other holidays. This policy was reaffirmed in 1652" (Del Re, p. 20).



Even colonial America considered Christmas more of a raucous revelry than a religious occasion: "So tarnished, in fact, was its reputation in colonial America that celebrating Christmas was banned in Puritan New England, where the noted minister Cotton Mather described yuletide merrymaking as ‘an affront unto the grace of God'" (Jeffery Sheler, "In Search of Christmas," U.S. News and World Report, Dec. 23, 1996, p. 56).

Afghan officials: "Forces were retaliating for gunfire from two Pakistani army bases"

A very interesting post from http://www.jihadwatch.org/ about a defensive airstrike against Pakistan. This follows this post about Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood. This follows this article about  American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and read this very interesting book HERE!


Afghan officials: "Forces were retaliating for gunfire from two Pakistani army bases"


This account supports a senior Western official's statement that the airstrikes were a defensive measure, and suggests another case of curiously close proximity between jihadists and Pakistani military posts. U.S. officers reportedly also believed the Pakistani military was providing cover for jihadists in a firefight in late October, along with other recent allegations of jihadists' operating in the sight of the Pakistani military.



Once again, this may have been a tragic accident. Or jihadists may have tried to draw fire in the direction of Pakistani bases to create an incident. Or, it may have been the inevitable outcome of collaboration between Pakistan and its jihadist clients, and recent reports such as the ones linked above make the last scenario all too plausible. "Afghan officials: Fire from Pakistan led to attack," by Rahim Faiez and Sebastian Abbott for the Associated Press, November 27:



ISLAMABAD (AP) — Afghanistan officials claimed Sunday that Afghan and NATO forces were retaliating for gunfire from two Pakistani army bases when they called in airstrikes that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, adding a layer of complexity to an episode that has further strained Pakistan's ties with the United States.

The account challenged Pakistan's claim that the strikes were unprovoked.

The attack Saturday near the Afghan-Pakistani border aroused popular anger in Pakistan and added tension to the U.S.-Pakistani relationship, which has been under pressure since the secret U.S. raid inside Pakistan that killed Osama bin Laden in May.

Pakistan has closed its western border to trucks delivering supplies to coalition troops in Afghanistan, demanded that the U.S. abandon an air base inside Pakistan and said it will review its cooperation with the U.S. and NATO.

A complete breakdown in the relationship between the United States and Pakistan is considered unlikely. Pakistan relies on billions of dollars in American aid, and the U.S. needs Pakistan to push Afghan insurgents to participate in peace talks.

Afghanistan's assertions about the attack muddy the efforts to determine what happened. The Afghan officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said it was unclear who fired on Afghan and NATO forces, which were conducting a joint operation before dawn Saturday.

They said the fire came from the direction of the two Pakistani army posts along the border that were later hit in the airstrikes.

NATO has said it is investigating, but it has not questioned the Pakistani claim that 24 soldiers were killed. All airstrikes are approved at a higher command level than the troops on the ground....Posted by Marisol

Pelosi Bashes Catholics: “They Have This Conscience Thing”

An interesting story from http://www.lifenews.com/ about Nancy Pelosi bashing her fellow Catholics. (Why don't they excommunicate her?) This follows this post about abortion funding in Obamacare. For more that you can do to get involved click  HERE and you can also get a very interesting book HERE!

Pelosi Bashes Catholics: “They Have This Conscience Thing”


Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is at it again, bashing Catholics for their pro-life position when she has promoted abortion in defiance of Catholic Church teaching at every turn.



This time, Pelosi is upset that the nation’s Catholic bishops are protesting a potential Obama administration decision forcing insurance companies to cover birth control, contraception and drugs that could cause abortions. They say certain religious groups may not be exempt from providing the insurance, which would violate their moral and religious views.



Pelosi says the position is akin to having hospitals “say to a woman, ‘I’m sorry you could die’ if you don’t get an abortion,” she told the Washington Post.



“Those who dispute that characterization “may not like the language,’’ she said, “but the truth is what I said. I’m a devout Catholic and I honor my faith and love it . . . but they have this conscience thing” that the Post said Pelosi “insists put women at physical risk, although Catholic providers strongly disagree.”



Pelosi also defended controversial remarks she made about a bill to prevent Obamacare from funding abortions, where she claimed Republicans “want women to die on the floor.” http://www.lifenews.com/2011/11/21/pelosi-bashes-catholics-they-have-this-conscience-thing/

Thanksgiving Box Office: Hugo, The Muppets, Arthur Christmas, Melancholia

Here is an interesting article from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/  reviewing some of the movies that came out over the past weekend. This follows this post some of the movies from last week and  THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed!  This all  follows this post about guidelines to chosing good movies to watch yourself!





Thanksgiving Box Office: Hugo, The Muppets, Arthur Christmas, Melancholia

By Debbie Schlussel



Finally, some great movies at the box office. Three great movies and only one stinker. It figures that the “adult” movie by a Hitler-supporting Jew-hater is the only bomb in the bunch.




* “Hugo“: Finally a 3D movie that should be in 3D. Martin Scorsese directed this visually stunning and terrific story. You’ll love this, and it’s great for families. Kids will love it, but so will adults, as I did.  But you’ll  have to disregard that two of the co-stars are Sacha Baron Cohen and the actively anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian Ben Kingsley.



Set in 1930s Paris, Hugo is a young orphan who fixes the clocks at a train station. Unbeknownst to everyone, he lives alone in a hidden apartment inside the station’s clock tower. He and his father used to fix clocks, but his father was killed in a fire. Hugo and his father were trying to fix a mechanical robot, and Hugo continues to fix it, using parts he steals from the train station toy shop of an old man (Kingsley). Soon, though, he gets caught by the man and is forced to fix toys at the store, while he tries to get back his notebook about how to fix the mechanical robot, which the shopkeeper takes from him. But he meets the man’s granddaughter (Chloe Grace Moretz), and she and Hugo become fast friends, sneaking into movies and poring over books at a the train station’s used bookstore because of their shared love of reading classic books.





Hugo and the granddaughter try to figure out what the old man shopkeeper’s connection is to the mechanical toy robot and they soon make an incredible discovery about who this man, the grandfather, is and why he’s so sad.



A tremendous movie that moves slowly at first but is full of charm and magic. The style, color, sets, costumes, and everything else is simply terrific. The special effects and the colorful characters that populate the train station are rich, as is the story.



FOUR REAGANS



* “The Muppets“: I thought I’d hate this movie because 1) I never liked “The Muppet Show” as a kid, and 2) it’s written by and stars  Jason Segel, who is most well known for displaying his penis in multiple scenes on the big screen in “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” (read my review).  But I was wrong. This movie is terrific, aside from a bad left-wing message against businessmen and oil drillers. It’s very funny, entertaining, and will be enjoyed by kids and adults. In fact, many of the jokes, which make fun of the ’80s, might be a little over kids’ heads. But they will love it. Great for families. And very cute. It is typical Hollywood anti-business, anti-”big oil” stuff, though, as the villain is an evil, rich businessman who wants to drill for oil on Muppets land. So, you have to explain to your kids to ignore that message. It’s sad you have to do that with a kids’ movie. The late Jim Henson, as far as I remember, did not have political messages in his Muppets movies. The movie also has several musical numbers.



Gary (Jason Segel) has a brother, Walter, who looks like a Muppet and never gets older and more mature, unlike the adult Gary, who has grown up. Walter desperately wants to fit in but is constantly made fun of. Soon, he discovers re-runs of the ’80s series, “The Muppet Show,” and loves it, feeling he can identify with the Muppets. Gary has been dating a teacher, Mary (the talented Amy Adams, who has a great singing voice), for ten years, and she wants to get married, but she is upset that Gary takes Walter everywhere. Gary and Mary take Walter on their trip to Los Angeles, where they tour the old, decrepit Muppets studio. While there, Walter overhears the two Muppet lawyers negotiating to sell the Muppets studio to an evil businessman (Chris Cooper) who pretends he will update the Muppets’ land for more tours. But he really wants to tear it down so he can drill for oil. Walter and Gary try to find Kermit through maps of the stars’ homes and plot to take back the Muppets studios with a telethon.



You’ll see all the old Muppets in this movie, a few new ones, and plenty of celebrity cameos, including (sadly) James Carville (why?). The movie has several musical numbers and is overall a great movie, sadly enmeshed with the left-wing messages I note above. Without that, it would have been a FOUR REAGAN movie.



THREE REAGANS




* “Arthur Christmas“: I very much enjoyed this cute, animated movie for kids. I could have done without the cheesy Justin Bieber music video at the beginning, though.



Arthur Christmas is the clumsy, misfit younger brother in Santa Claus’ family. His father is Santa, and his big brother is the high-tech guru who runs computerized operations at the North Pole,where every delivery of Christmas gifts is planned, timed to the second, and coordinated using the latest in technology and intelligence. But a Christmas present of one girl gets misplaced in the computerized commotion. While Santa is willing to forget about it because it’s too late to deliver the gift–and he’s tired–Arthur and his grandfather, Grandsanta (who is upset he’s been involuntary retired) set off into the night to deliver the gift, using an old-fashioned sleigh, rather than the high-tech spaceship sleigh Santa now uses. What could go wrong?



Charming, cute, fast-paced, and great for kids.



THREE REAGANS




* “Melancholia“: This extremely boring, way too long, uber-pretentious piece of crap was directed by Hitler fan, and Jew-hating, anti-Israel fanatic Lars Von Trier.  It figures that a Nazi would make something beautifully and neatly shot with nothing else to offer.  There is barely a story and definitely no plot.  It’s stupid.  And I couldn’t wait for it to be over.  I also struggled to stay awake.  Starring the always dull, highly overrated pothead Kirsten Dunst, the movie begins with Dunst as a new bride in the limo on the way to her disastrous wedding reception at her sister and wealthy brother-in-law’s (Kiefer Sutherland) countryside mansion estate. They are two hours late, and when they get there, the depressed Dunst is constantly sullen and frequently disappears from the event. She finally realizes she doesn’t want to be married to the guy she just married and has random sex on the lawn with some guy from the reception. Then, the earth is about to be destroyed because a planet, Melancholia, is coming closer and closer to colliding with the earth. I’m not sure what else happens other than Dunst pouting and yelling at others, horses roaming, Dunst posing nude, and people shown sitting and looking.



A complete waste of time by a Nazi. Yay. You’ll be beyond melancholy that you wasted at least ten bucks and more than two hours on this high brow crap. Complete garbage.



FOUR MARXES PLUS

The Hispanic Terrorist Trend—Why No MSM Feeding Frenzy?

An urgent post from http://www.vdare.com/ about domestic terrorism. This follows this post about Newt Gingrich's weak position on immigration enforcement. This follows this post about the Presidential Candidate strongest on immigration.  This follows this post  about Louisiana suing about the appropriations of House Seats and the Electoral College(think about redistricting in your state)!   This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants such as the 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso, where President Barack Obama recently bashed immigration enforcement! For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and you can read a very interesting book HERE!

And Remember when contacting public officials to please be firm but respectful. Any over the top messages could result in law enforcement action against you. Just let these politicians know that you are aware of what they have done and that you intend to remove them from office in the 2012 elections.

The Hispanic Terrorist Trend—Why No MSM Feeding Frenzy?


http://www.vdare.com/articles/the-hispanic-terrorist-trend-why-no-msm-feeding-frenzy

By James Ryan

On November 10^th, witnesses heard six shots fired into the White House. One bullet lodged in the bulletproof glass of a residence window, and another was found along the exterior of the building. Shortly thereafter, an AK-47 assault rifle with a large scope was found in an abandoned car on a nearby bridge.

An “Idaho man” was arrested and charged. He had a criminal history including domestic violence charges, and reportedly had visited an extremist camp and stayed there before the shooting. He had an apocalyptic worldview, tattooed the world “Israel” on his neck, and frequently adorned himself in religious regalia. In a video he made, he declared that he was “the modern-day Jesus Christ that you all have been waiting for" who “was sent here from God to lead the world to Zion."



On November 20^th, a “New York man” was arrested in a plot to target government workers and federal government facilities with a bomb.

The man is unemployed and lives with his mother. He had subscribed to extremist magazines and frequented extremist websites on the internet. He had talked about plans to assassinate government officials and 'wage war' against the federal government.

You might expect pictures of these two men to be emblazoned everywhere as part of a months-long Main Stream Media blitz. You might expect the MSM to declare that the plots constitute a Trend, and demand something be done about it. You might expect the MSM to rush to uncover anyone who might be possibly remotely connected to the men—as it did after Jared Loughner shot up a supermarket in Arizona, making a wholly false connection to American Renaissance editor, and VDARE.com writer, Jared Taylor.

But we haven't seen that. Only scant media coverage has occurred. Most of that has focused on dismissing the men as “not a serious threat” and “mentally ill”.

Why the lack of MSM coverage for the Idaho man charged with shooting up the White House and the New York man plotting to “wage war” on the federal government? Perhaps it has something to do with the alleged shooter's name being Oscar Ramiro Ortega-Hernandez. And the man involved in the alleged bomb plot is named Jose Pimentel, although he sometimes calls himself “Muhammad Yusuf” or “Obama Hussein”.

Perhaps this is also why Oscar Ramiro Ortega-Hernandez escaped the notice of the Secret Service and other authorities for so long. After the shooting, the Secret Service said it did not have any records of him making any threats against the President. Yet many people who knew him reported that he regularly did just that. One of his friends told investigators that Mr. Ortega-Hernandez said he believed the President was the “Antichrist” and that he 'needed to kill him'. Another friend said Ortega-Hernandez said “President Obama was the problem with the government,” was “the devil,” and that he “needed to be taken care of.” The second friend also said Ortega-Hernandez appeared to be “preparing for something.” [In Gunshots, a Trail of Threats Is Reported, By Charlie Savage, NYT, November 17, 2011]

It seems that the Secret Service, like other federal investigative forces, has started to believe their own propaganda that the most likely “domestic terrorists” are native born Americans of “non-ethnic” European ancestry. In a recent video put out by the Department of Homeland Security, all potential terrorists were depicted as white, the sort of people traditionally considered to be “ordinary Americans”.

The Department of Homeland Security, in its training of state and local police forces, has perpetuated this image of “domestic terrorists”. According to many reports”. According to many reports, the DHS’ own internal documents



“list predominantly white conservative groups as the most likely terrorists; such as Ron Paul supporters, gun owners, gold bullion enthusiasts, and a myriad of other comparatively banal political interests that are largely the domain of white middle class Americans.” [DHS Video Characterizes White Americans as Most Likely Terrorists, By Paul Joseph Watson,Infowars.com, July 21, 2011]



It appears that, like Jared Loughner, Ortega-Hernandez and Pimental's actions were prompted at least in part by mental illness. But, according to the American Psychiatric Association, “second and later-generation Hispanic/Latino youth also are at higher risk for mental and emotional disorders,” compared to the population at large. [Mental Health in the Hispanic/Latino Community, PDF]

Has the American Psychiatric Association endorsed VDARE.com's discovery of “Immigrant Mass Murder Syndrome”? The psychological stress of immigration and cultural alienation was exactly the point made by Brenda Walker both in her article on “Immigrant Familicide” and in the article on the Virginia Tech massacre that launched the IMMS concept: Diversity Is Strength! It's Also...Immigrant Mass Murder Syndrome, April 23, 2007.

You won't hear any of this from Newt Gingrich and other advocates of mass Third World immigration.

Let’s review: In a race-neutral world, a man shooting up the White House, which has not happened in almost two decades, would be a top story for weeks. If it had been followed a week and a half later by the arrest of a man building bombs who had declared war on the federal government, it would be natural to look for possible patterns. Had the men been named Oskar Harman and Frank Penn, it’s not too far of a stretch to visualize an MSM feeding frenzy for months.

But in this case, there's a pattern that our media elites don't want people to see. So the stories have been moved off the front pages and network TV as fast as possible.

Move along, Americans. Nothing to see here.

James Ryan (email him) is an intelligence analyst who lives and works in the Washington, D.C. metro area.