Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Are We Living in the Time of the End?

An interesting article from www.gnmagazine.org about the time of the end. This follows this post about dangers around the world. For a free magazine subscription or to get this book for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632.
 
Are We Living in the Time of the End?


A Newsweek report notes that more scholarship has been devoted to the study of end-time biblical prophecies in the past 30 years than in the previous 300. A series of novels based on biblical end-time prophecies have sold more than 9 million copies. Is there a way to tell if we are nearing the end?

by Gary Petty

A resurgence of fascination with biblical prophecy has spawned religious debate over interpretations of the visions of Daniel, Jesus Christ's prophecy of the end of the age shortly before His crucifixion and the apostle John's mysterious images in the book of Revelation.



However, there are practical concerns behind these intriguing curiosities. People want to know about the future. We are living in turbulent times. Many are concerned about the state of the world, and some discerning souls are turning to the Bible—the prophetic passages in particular—for solace and insight.



A Newsweek article titled "The Way the World Ends" states: "Of all the books of the Bible, none has fired the imagination of the West more than the last, the mysterious Apocalypse [or Revelation]. The four horsemen of the Apocalypse, the Whore of Babylon, the deceitful Antichrist—these are just a few of the powerful and troubling images that Revelation injected into Western art and consciousness.



"Its prophecies have been of even greater consequence: the return of the Jews to the Holy Land, the millennial kingdom of Christ on earth, the Battle of Armageddon and the promise of a new heaven and earth have justified numerous wars and revolutions and inspired utopias and religious sects of every sort" (Kenneth Woodward, Nov. 1, 1999).



How can we understand biblical prophecy? Are there rules to the strange images and predictions? Where do we even start?



A pivotal passage



Let's begin by looking at divine predictions given to the prophet Daniel in the sixth century before Christ.



Daniel was a young Jewish man who had been taken captive by the Babylonians. According to Daniel 2, the Babylonian ruler, King Nebuchadnezzar, had a disturbing dream and decided that it possessed a hidden message. He called his astrologers and sorcerers together and commanded that they tell him the meaning. Of course, by their own human power they couldn't.



God, however, revealed to His servant Daniel the dream and its meaning. The Creator looks out across the expanse of time, understands what humanity will do and determines how He will intervene in human history to bring about His ultimate plan for mankind.



Daniel appears before the king and proceeds to proclaim that Nebuchadnezzar's dream involved an image of a man. We pick up the story in verse 32. Daniel tells the king: "This image's head was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay.



"You watched while a stone was cut out without hands, which struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold were crushed together, and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; the wind carried them away so that no trace of them was found. And the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth."



Daniel continues: "This is the dream. Now we will tell the interpretation of it before the king. You, O king, are a king of kings. For the God of heaven has given you a kingdom, power, strength, and glory; and wherever the children of men dwell, or the beasts of the field and the birds of the heaven, He has given them into your hand, and has made you ruler over them all—you are this head of gold.



"But after you shall arise another kingdom inferior to yours; then another, a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth. And the fourth kingdom shall be as strong as iron, inasmuch as iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything; and like iron that crushes, that kingdom will break in pieces and crush all the others.



"Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter's clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay. And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile. As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay.



"And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.



"Inasmuch as you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold—the great God has made known to the king what will come to pass after this. The dream is certain, and its interpretation is sure" (verses 32-45).



God reveals the meaning



The image of Nebuchadnezzar's dream may seem unfathomable, except that God, though Daniel, reveals the meaning. This simple prophecy supplies a major framework for many prophecies throughout Scripture. Nebuchadnezzar's image concerns four great empires, beginning with Babylon. From our historical vantage point today the elements of the prophecy become clear.



The Babylonian Empire was followed by three other empires. First came the Persian Empire that destroyed Babylon's rule. The Persians were, in turn, conquered by the Greeks under Alexander the Great. The Greek Empire eventually was gobbled up into the Roman Empire.



All this was recorded centuries before it came to pass. Fulfilled prophecy proves the divine inspiration of the Bible! But all of the prophecies of Daniel 2 aren't just for the past. He foretells that the fourth empire will exist at a time when the Messiah comes to rule the earth.



Let's go back and reread verse 44: "And in the days of these kings [the 10 kings represented by the toes of the image] the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever."



Here is a vital key to understanding end-time biblical prophecy. Before the Messiah comes to rule over God's Kingdom on the earth, there must first be a revived fourth kingdom, a resurrected Roman Empire, involving 10 rulers.



When will the Messiah return?



Did you know that between a fourth and a third of the Bible is prophetic? Much of that information is concerned with what it calls "the end time."



It seems that many generations have thought that they were living in the time just before the return of Christ. The Newsweek article mentioned earlier states: "In the 12th century, for example, the Crusaders saw the recapture of Jerusalem from the Muslims as a defeat of the Antichrist. Christopher Columbus set sail thinking his voyage to India would hasten the return of Christ to earth.



"For the same reason, Oliver Cromwell readmitted Jews to England after the English civil war, thinking his victory would establish the New Jerusalem on British soil. Isaac Newton wrote a book on biblical prophecy, hoping to prove that Ôthe world is governed by providence.' In Puritan New England, America's greatest theologian, Jonathan Edwards, studied John's Apocalypse and calculated that the millennium of Christ's kingdom on earth would begin in the year 2000."



Jesus prophesied, as recorded in Matthew 24:22, that unless He returns to intervene, all humanity will be destroyed. This horror is precariously possible with modern nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. The Messiah won't return until many prophesied events take place first—things like world wars, disease epidemics on a global scale and a rise in natural disasters.



No one knows the exact time of Christ's return. Jesus Himself said, "Of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone."



Jesus Christ's focus: Be prepared



Jesus also commanded His followers to be aware of events and how they relate to prophecy. Just after saying that no one knows the day or hour of His return, He told His disciples, as recorded in Mark 13:33-37:



"Take heed, watch and pray; for you do not know when the time is. It is like a man going to a far country, who left his house and gave authority to his servants, and to each his work, and commanded the doorkeeper to watch.



"Watch therefore, for you do not know when the master of the house is coming—in the evening, at midnight, at the crowing of the rooster, or in the morning—lest, coming suddenly, he find you sleeping.



"And what I say to you, I say to all: Watch!"



Christ's instructions to watch mean more than just being aware of events. His followers are to be spiritually prepared for His return. In Luke 21:34-35 Jesus says:



"But take heed to yourselves, lest your hearts be weighed down with carousing, drunkenness, and cares of this life, and that Day come on you unexpectedly. For it will come as a snare on all those who dwell on the face of the whole earth.



"Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man."



Will you be ready?



Are you being prepared for the return of Christ? Are you living your life in complete dedication to God and His ways? Is your religion a social club or a dynamic force of change in your life? The purpose of The Good News radio program and magazine is to challenge you to go to God and have Him change your life.



Why were your born? There is a big difference between grasping your future, and simply going on the way you have been. The choice is up to you. GN





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



Recommended Reading

We certainly live in troubling times. The world is filled with war, terrorism, unrest, poverty, corruption, crime, natural disasters and the like. Are these signs that we are in the prophesied time of the end? You need to understand what the Bible reveals about end-time events. Request our eye-opening booklet Are We Living in the Time of the End? to understand what it all means.

Critical State Votes Today: Only Hours left to speak out‏!!

An urgent post from www.Alipac.US about an in-state tuition bill in Oregon and Matricula Consular Cards in North Carolina. This follows this previous post about Oregon. If they are letting non-citizens comment about it, then they can let people from other states do so also! This follows this post which shows that there are 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso. On a related note, you can read about Miss Kentucky Latina here, an interesting article about Jessica Alba here or another article about Salma Hayek here. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and you can read a very interesting book HERE!

Critical State Votes Today: Only Hours left to speak out‏!





Friends of ALIPAC,



A massive volume of calls, followed by individual, distinct, and personalized emails is needed from ALIPAC supporters in all states concentrated into OR and NC!



OR



In about 5 hours, the Oregon Senate is going to vote on in-state tuition for illegal aliens. Make sure you have followed our detailed instructions at this link to weigh in before the vote. The illegals are calling in support of the bill so let's get those phones ringing this morning!



Stop Oregon from giving illegals in-state tuition at this link...

http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-1204636.html#1204636



NC



One of our bills in North Carolina (HB 33) heads to the house floor for a full vote today. This is a very important vote as it will likely set the trend for all of our state.



The vote will take place between 2-4pm ET today.



We need the phones ringing off the hooks today in North Carolina!



ALIPAC's President, William Gheen, is headed into the General Assembly this morning. He will be moving from office to office as your calls and e-mails come in.



Please take the following steps.



Step 1. Craft your own distinct version of this message. Make it distinct and then personalize it with the name of the lawmaker for best effect.



"I'm calling/writing to ask Representative _____ to please support and vote for HB 33 today to stop illegal aliens from using those worthless Mexican government Matricula cards as ID with police or to establish residency for state benefits, they should not be receiving. HB 33 will help reduce illegal immigration in North Carolina and help protect American taxpayers, workers, students, and voters from the negative impacts of illegal immigration."



Step 2: Access this link and begin calling NC House offices in random order. Call as many as you can before the vote. If you can spare the time, call them all!



NC House Rep Phone Numbers, Fax Numbers, and emails

http://ncleg.net/gascripts/members/memberList.pl?sChamber=House



Call! Call! Call! Personalized, polite, professional, enthusiastic calls are the most effective method to persuade lawmakers.



Step 3: Follow-up your call with a written e-mail or fax version of your distinct and personalized message. The written copy only serves to reinforce your calls.





Our top ALIPAC activists stand ready to assist you, hear your feedback, answer your questions, or receive any information you gather while conducting these missions at the following activism link....

http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-1204642.html#1204642



Let's stop illegal aliens and reduce incentives and ID for illegals in these critical battles in Oregon and North Carolina today!



The ALIPAC Team

http://www.alipac.us/

Monday, March 28, 2011

Red Alert: In-State Tuition for Illegals Bill In Oregon‏

An urgent post from www.Alipac.US about an in-state tuition bill in Oregon. If they are letting non-citizens comment about it, then they can let people from other states do so also! This follows this post about immigration bills in Texas and this post which shows that there are 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso. On a related note, you can read about Miss Kentucky Latina here, an interesting article about Jessica Alba here or another article about Salma Hayek here. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and you can read a very interesting book HERE!

 Red Alert: In-State Tuition for Illegals Bill In Oregon‏

Our good friends, allies, and supporters in Oregon need our help today. Another in-state tuition for illegal aliens bill is approaching a vote! The illegal alien supporters hope to pass this unpopular legislation in Maryland, Connecticut, and Oregon this year!




We must stop their bills as we have in over 20 states! We are very close to getting in-state tuition for illegals stopped in Wisconsin and Kansas!



Below is an email from a great group called OFIR, Oregonians for Immigration Reform, PO Box 1438, McMinnville OR 97128

Website: http://www.oregonir.org/  Email: ofir@oregonir.org



Please use ALIPAC's strategic message when you respond to their call for aid below. We need ALIPAC supporters from all states converging efforts on Oregon today!



ALIPAC Message

"Please oppose in-state tuition (SB 742) for illegal aliens as such bills are opposed by 80% of Americans because they would replace innocent American students in the limited seats in our colleges with illegal aliens at taxpayer expense!"



OFIR Alert

----

SENATE TO VOTE ON SB 742 INSTATE TUITION FOR ILLEGALS



March 27, 2011

OFIR members and supporters:



As of Friday, the Oregon Senate was set to vote on Senate Bill 742 next Tuesday, March 29. It is possible the vote could be delayed. If that happens, OFIR will notify members as soon as possible. Meanwhile, please continue to contact senators listed below and urge them to oppose SB 742.



SB 742 would give illegal aliens in Oregon in-state tuition, a $17,600 per year benefit. A $17,600 benefit that would be denied to an American citizens who went to high school in Idaho, Washington, California or any other state.



At a time when average Oregonians are forced to cut back, public schools are reducing staff and care for our disabled citizens, why is the Oregon Senate voting on a bill that would drive us further in debt?



Please consider calling members of the Oregon Senate and politely asking them to vote NO on SB 742.



E-mail addresses and phone numbers of Oregon State Senators, 2011



Senator Jason Atkinson (503) 986-1702 sen.jasonatkinson@state.or.us ;

Sen. Alan Bates (503) 986-1703 sen.alanbates@state.or.us ;

Sen. Lee Beyer (503) 986-1706 sen.leebeyer@state.or.us ;

Sen. Suzanne Bonamici (503) 986-1717 sen.suzannebonamici@state.or.us ;



Sen. Brian Boquist (503) 986-1712 sen.brianboquist@state.or.us ;

Sen. Ginny Burdick (503) 986-1718 sen.ginnyburdick@state.or.us ;

Sen. Peter Courtney (503) 986-1600 sen.petercourtney@state.or.us ;

Sen. Richard Devlin (503) 986-1719 sen.richarddevlin@state.or.us ;

Sen. Jackie Dingfelder (503) 986-1723 sen.jackiedingfelder@state.or.us ;



Sen. Chris Edwards (503) 986-1707 sen.chrisedwards@state.or.us



Sen. Ted Ferrioli (503) 986-1950 sen.tedferrioli@state.or.us ;

Sen. Larry George (503) 986-1713 sen.larrygeorge@state.or.us ;

Sen. Fred Girod (503) 986-1709 sen.fredgirod@state.or.us ;

Sen. Mark Hass (503) 986- 1714 sen.markhass@state.or.us ;

Sen. Betsy Johnson (503) 986-1716 sen.betsyjohnson@state.or.us ;



Sen. Jeff Kruse (503) 986-1701 sen.jeffkruse@state.or.us ;

Sen. Laurie Monnes Anderson (503) 986-1725 sen.lauriemonnesanderson@state.or.us ;



Sen. Rod Monroe (503) 986-1724 sen.rodmonroe@state.or.us;

Sen. Frank Morse (503) 986-1708 sen.frankmorse@state.or.us ;

Sen. David Nelson (503) 986- 1729 sen.davidnelson@state.or.us ;

Sen. Alan Olsen (503) 986-1720 sen.alanolsen@state.or.us

Sen. Floud Prozanski (503) 986-1704 sen.floydprozanski@state.or.us ;



Sen. Diane Rosenbaum (503) 986-1700 sen.dianerosenbaum@state.or.us ;



Sen. Chip Shields (503) 986-1722 sen.chipshields@state.or.us ;

Sen. Bruce Starr (503) 986-1715 sen.brucestarr@state.or.us ;

Sen. Chris Telfer (503) 986- 1727 sen.christelfer@state.or.us ;

Sen. Chuck Thomsen (503) 986-1726 sen.chuckthomsen@state.or.us ;

Sen. Joanne Verger (503) 986-1705 sen.joanneverger@state.or.us ;

Sen. Doug Whitsett (503) 986-1728 sen.dougwhitsett@state.or.us ;

Sen. Jackie Winters (503) 986-1710 sen.jackiewinters@state.or.us



----





The ALIPAC Team

AMERICANS FOR LEGAL IMMIGRATION PAC

http://www.alipac.us/

Post Office Box 30966, Raleigh, NC 27622-0966

Tel: (919) 787-6009 Toll Free: (866) 703-0864

FEC ID: C00405878





DISCUSS THIS NATIONAL EMAIL ALERT WITH OUR ONLINE ACTIVISTS AT...

http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-1204137.html#1204137

What Place Is Safe?

An interesting article from www.vericalthought.org about dangers around the world. This follows this post about radiation and iodine. This follows this post about NATO.  For a free magazine subscription or to get this book for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632.

What Place Is Safe?


by Frank Dunkle

Have you heard what has been going on in Libya? Demonstrations, riots, fighting. It's not only there; the turmoil seems to have started in Tunisia and spread across the Middle East. Scenes on the television news and Internet sites show crowds of people chanting and screaming. At times violence breaks out, with rock throwing, firebombs and gunfire.



But Libya, Egypt and Tunisia are far away from most of us, right? That sort of thing could never happen here, could it?



Violence far and near

I realize that for some of you reading this, Libya may be fairly nearby, but for most, the fighting in the Middle East is very far away. But it should still matter to you.



Vertical thinkers know that the Creator God takes a special interest in the Middle East, and particularly the area around Jerusalem. Bible prophecies show that what happens there can spread, and it will affect all the rest of the world. That is a discussion for another time, but if you would like to learn more, request or download the free booklet The Middle East in Bible Prophecy. It is important to realize that what we saw happening in the Middle East could happen in your neighborhood too.



History shows that time and again political unrest has led to bloodshed. In the 1830s and '40s a wave of revolutions swept across most European nations, with scenes that would appear very much like those we've watched on television in recent weeks.



This year marks the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War. It began because men could not reconcile their political differences about government and slavery. Political disagreements escalated into one of the bloodiest wars in history, right here in the United States.



Still, you might say, things have changed a lot since the 1800s. They have in ways, but it was less than 20 years ago that a six-day riot broke out in Los Angeles, California. Nearly a billion dollars of property damage occurred, 53 people died and thousands more were injured—not in the Middle East, but in California. It could happen in your town.



How can you be safe?

So, how can you be safe in a world of violence? Is there a place to be safe or measures you can take? In a word, yes! But real safety won't be found behind bars and locks or from guns and ammunition. That same God who is concerned with events in the Middle East is concerned with your safety as well. If you follow His direction in your life, He promises real, physical protection.



A particularly poetic portion of the Bible says it this way: "A thousand may fall at your side, and ten thousand at your right hand; but it shall not come near you." Why? "Because you have made the Lord…your dwelling place" (Psalm 91:7, 9).



Consider the story of a young man in the Bible who was in Jerusalem when an invading army captured and destroyed the city. This fellow named Baruch bewailed his fate, but God sent him a personal message promising to protect his life in the midst of war and destruction (Jeremiah 45:2-5). What does this story have to do with you, today? Everything!



These stories are not just ancient fables. They're examples and promises that we can rely on when the world around us gets crazy. What we saw in the Middle East will happen again and again. Yet we do not have to be afraid. If we look to and follow the one, true God, we can trust that He will keep us safe. For more information, see "Coming Calamities: Does God Offer Protection

URGENT ACTION ALERT & HEARINGS FOR WEEK OF MARCH 27‏

An urgent post from www.ircot.com  about immigration bills in Texas. This follows this post about materials to help make the case about immigration numbers and this post which shows that there are 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso. On a related note, you can read about Miss Kentucky Latina here, an interesting article about Jessica Alba here or another article about Salma Hayek here. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and you can read a very interesting book HERE!

ACTION ALERT




First of all, thank you for all you're doing!

Your phone calls are making a big difference.



The deadline to hear a bill on the House floor is nearly upon us and many immigration bills have yet to be heard. An E-Verify bill has yet to even get a hearing. Please continue to make phone calls and add Speaker Straus, Lt. Gov. Dewhurst, and Gov. Perry to your list. Tell them that you want all illegal immigration and border security bills to get a hearing. Let them know that with the down economy, an E-Verify bill is of most importance to you and your family. The Legislature should quit looking after the interest of only the largest Texas corporations and contributors, and start looking out for the interest of the average Texan who is paying their salary.



We need as many of you as possible in Austin to testify on these bills as well as to hold rallies when they do make it to the House floor. Please consider making your plans to come. The future of Texas is at stake.



Speaker Straus 512-463-1000

Lt. Gov. Dewhurst 512-463-0001

Gov. Perry 512-463-2000





HEARINGS FOR WEEK OF MARCH 28:





ELECTIONS COMMITTEE



Monday, March 28, 2011



2:00 pm or 30 Minutes after final adjournment



Location: E2.028



HB 2891 Sheets - Provision of voter fingerprints with a mailed in ballot.







JUDICIARY & CIVIL JURISPRUDENCE COMMITTEE



Monday, March 28, 2011



2:00 pm or 30 Minutes after final adjournment



Location: E2.028



HB 2014 Thompson - Related to criminal and civil consequences to trafficking of persons, etc.



HB 3000 Thompson - Creating the offence of continuous trafficking of persons.



HB 2973 Hunter -Protecting a person's right to petition, right of free speech, and right of association from meritless lawsuits.







STATE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE



Wednesday, March 30, 2011



2:00 pm or 30 Minutes after final adjournment



Location: JHR 140



FOR:



HB 1035 Legler - Related to proof of identity required of an applicant for a driver's license.



AGAINST:



HB 2757 Pena - Establishes TX Commission on Immigration and Migration and Migrant Worker Visa Program.



An excerpt from this outrageous bill:



"Under the pilot project memorandum of understanding, the governor may commit the state including the commission, to work directly with officials of the government of the Mexican state selected for the pilot project to encourage, facilitate, and support the migration of legal Mexican migrant workers from the Mexican state to Texas for the purpose of filling jobs with Texas businesses most in need of skilled and unskilled migrant labor."







PLEASE CONTACT STATE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE MEMBERS AS WELL AS YOUR STATE REP AND URGE THEM TO VOTE AGAINST HB 2757! THIS BILL WILL BE HEARD IN STATE AFFAIRS ON WED,. MARCH 30TH SO YOUR CALLS ARE NEEDED QUICKLY. PLEASE ALSO CONSIDER COMING TO AUSTIN TO TESTIFY AGAINST THIS BILL.







HOMELAND SECURITY & PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE



Thursday, March 31, 2011



8:00 am or upon final adjournment



Location: E1.026



HB 615 Kleinschmidt - Tests required for drivers license or commercial drivers license be conducted in English.



HB 19 Riddle - Relating to the penalty for operating a motor vehicle without a license.











COMMITTEE CONTACT INFORMATION:







Judiciary & Criminal Jurisprudence:



Rep Jim Jackson 512-463-0468



Rep Tryon Lewis 512-463-0546



Rep Dwayne Bohac 512-463-0727



Rep Joaquin Castro 512-463-0669



Rep Sarah Davis 512-463-0389



Rep Will Hartnett 512-463-0576



Rep Jerry Madden 512-463-0544



Rep Richard Pena Raymond 512-463-0558



Rep Connie Scott 512-463- 0462



Rep Senfronia Thompson 512-463-0720



Rep Beverly Woolley 512-463-0696







State Affairs:

Rep Byron Cook 512-463-0730

Rep Jose Menendez 512-463-0634

Rep Tom Craddick 512-463-0500

Rep John Frullo 512-463-0676

Rep Pete Gallego 512-463-0566

Rep Charlie Geren 512-463-0610

Rep Patricia Harless 512-463-0496

Rep Harvey Hilderbran 512-463-0536

Rep Dan Huberty 512-463-0520

Rep Rene Oliveira 512-463-0640

Rep John Smithee 512-463-0702

Rep Burt Solomons 512-463-0478

Rep Sylvester Turner 512-463-0554



Elections:

Rep Larry Taylor 512-463-0729

Rep Ana Hermandez Luna 512-463-0614

Rep Leo Berman 512-463-0584

Rep Dan Branch 512-463-0367

Rep Cindy Burkett 512-463-0464

Rep Joe Farias 512-463-0714

Rep Jason Isaac 512-463-0647

Rep Phil King 512-463-0738

Rep Marc Veasey 512-463-0716















JOIN IRCOT ON FACEBOOK & spread the word then PLEASE.....





Thanks for JOINING FORCES WITH US and being engaged in this battle!





Visit our website at: http://www.ircot.com/

Obama Nomination of Six For Appeals Court Shows Abortion Extremism

An interesting story from www.LifeNews.com about Obama's extremeism with court nominees. This follows this post about defunding Planned Parenthood.  For more that you can do to get involved click  HERE and you can also get a very interesting book HERE!


Obama Nomination of Six For Appeals Court Shows Abortion Extremism


by Brad Mattes

Demonstrating allegiance to the pro-abortion agenda, Stephen Six successfully captured the attention of President Obama and recently received a judicial nomination to the Federal Appeals Court. That’s bad news for America and here’s why: Mr. Six is notorious for using political powers to protect the abortion industry. As Kansas Attorney General, he personally thwarted the investigation and prosecution of crimes committed by Planned Parenthood.



The state’s abortion centers knowingly took advantage of more than 160 minors, covering for rapists and turning a profit off of pain. In addition, Planned Parenthood blatantly conducted at least 39 illegal late-term abortions. A shocking trail of evidence resulted in the nation’s first and only criminal case filed against the abortion giant. But the case — deemed legitimate by every judge who has reviewed it — is stuck. And Stephen Six is responsible.



Handpicked to fill a vacancy by the wildly pro-abortion Governor Kathleen Sebelius, Stephen Six got right to work. Among his accomplishments: botching a strong criminal case against notorious late-term abortionist George Tiller, blocking the release of documents and evidence in the Planned Parenthood case, and pushing for a gag order to silence vital testimony.



Phill Kline, the former Kansas Attorney General who filed the case against Planned Parenthood, is now a colleague here at Life Issues Institute. I encourage you to read Phill’s summary of the troubling turn of events. Full story at http://www.lifenews.com/

Wknd Box Office: Sucker Punch, Jane Eyre, Diary of Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules

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: Sucker Punch, Jane Eyre, Diary of Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules


By Debbie Schlussel



Here are my reviews of this weekend’s new movies:



* “Sucker Punch“: I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a more pretentious piece of tripe. So much style, so many cool special effects, and yet so little substance, all of it pure garbage. This is what you get when they make graphic novels–usually crappy–into even crappier movies. While this one wasn’t originally a graphic novel, it was written, supposedly, with a “graphic novel” sensibility, according to Zack Snyder, who wrote and directed it as well as several movies made from graphic novels. The story is ridiculous, but tries to pretend to have us in three different alternative universes . . . or something. Hey, make us wonder whether three ridiculous stories filled with stupidity are real or made up. Yeah, that’s the ticket. Three stories, all just horrid.


A 20-something girl’s wealthy mother dies, as does her sister, when she accidentally tries to save her from their evil stepfather, who either did or tried to rape the younger sister. Then, the stepfather takes her to a creepy, corrupt insane asylum, which is either really a brothel or it’s just in her imagination. We’re not told either way, not that I cared. The girl, Baby Doll, is scheduled for a lobotomy. While she waits for that–or while she’s getting it (that isn’t clear either)–we see her being trained to dance as all the girls in the whorehouse are trained to do. But when she dances–which we never see–everyone is hypnotized, and suddenly all of the girls are in some warrior futuristic world training to kill the enemy and blow up stuff and she-warriors. That world is supposed to show the girl Baby Doll how to escape the asylum. We go back and forth between these three stories. And it’s pointless.



Both leads in this awful movie are Australian because I guess there is a shortage of American actors in Hollywood, these days. Not that this would be the flick in which they’d desperately want to act. Co-stars Abbie Cornish, who is not Baby Doll (that’s Emily Browning), but some other character, called Sweet Pea. Yes, the names are stupid, just like the movie. Also, it’s amazing this isn’t rated “R,” but only PG-13. If you let your 14-year-old go to this, you’re an idiot.



Definitely not for kids. And, for that matter, definitely not for adults either. Only for morons wanting to feel unduly smart while wasting ten bucks and two hours of life.



THREE MARXES




* “Jane Eyre“: Unlike many, I’ve never seen any other movie incarnations of the Charlotte Bronte novel. But I really liked this version. Mia Wasikowska, an actress I normally didn’t think much of, really does well in playing Jane Eyre through tragedy after tragedy and struggle after struggle. Michael Fassbender is excellent in his role as her master and love interest.



Yes, it’s essentially a chick flick, but one of the better ones and very classy and well done. If you’ve read the book, you know the story. If you haven’t, it’s the period piece story of an English girl whose parents die and whose wealthy relative despises her. The relative sends her to live in a mean, tough orphanage of sorts. When she grows up and gets out, she becomes the governess of the young ward of a wealthy English lord and develops romantic feelings for him. But all is not a bed of roses.



Beautifully shot and well acted. A little slow, but that’s kind of the typical tempo for pictures involving that slower time period.



THREE-AND-A-HALF REAGANS


* “Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules“: This is a sequel to last year’s “Diary of a Wimpy Kid” (read my review), and I liked this one better. It’s funny, entertaining, and the main character, a middle school boy named Greg, isn’t the unethical creep he was in the first movie. In this one, he’s actually trying to do the right thing . . . sort of. It’s fine to take your kids to this, and you might laugh, too. As I said, it’s entertaining . . . though, mostly for young boys who like grossness and juvenile bathroom humor.



What I didn’t like about this is that the parents are complete morons (as in everything from Hollywood and, unfortunately, as in a whole lotta real life), and the movie encourages younger kids to do dumb stuff to get a lot of hits on YouTube. How much did YouTube pay for that product placement?



Greg, now beginning his second year in middle school, is no longer the picked on new guy. Instead, he has to deal with the worst harassment from his older brother, Rodrick, ever. And he has to deal with idiotic parents who are oh, so clueless while preaching empty moralisms they actually don’t practice or enforce, which makes it maybe not such a coincidence that the mom (Rachael Harris) looks and acts a lot like Sarah Palin. Greg is also trying to impress the beautiful new girl from California for whom he’s developed a thing.



Not a great kids’ movie, but fine, especially if you have young boys that need to let off some steam. Make sure they don’t get any ideas from the antics of Greg and his brother, though.



ONE REAGAN-AND-A-HALF REAGANS

Friday, March 25, 2011

Can Iodine Pills Protect You from Radiation Exposure?

An interesting article from www.ucg.org/commentary about radiation and iodine. This follows this post about NATO.  For a free magazine subscription or to get this book for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632.

Can Iodine Pills Protect You from Radiation Exposure?


A commentary by Larry J. Walker


The devastating earthquake and tsunami in northern Japan has shocked the world and dominated the news with heart-rending scenes of destruction and suffering. More recently a related crisis—leakage of radiation resulting from damage to nuclear reactors—has created widespread concern as far away as the United States, especially on the West Coast. I live in central Oregon, some 250 miles away from the Oregon coast, so it is sobering to hear newscasters single out "those of you living in the West" in their opening greetings.



Despite the reassurance of virtually all scientific authorities that there is absolutely no danger to anyone in the United States, many citizens are taking precautions that they think will save them from harm in the event that radiation exposure becomes an issue here.



Limitations of iodine pills

Will iodine pills save you from harm if you should be exposed to dangerous levels of radiation?



On March 21, the WebMD website posted this information in an article titled, "Potassium Iodide Pills, Can They Protect You from Radiation Exposure":



"In the wake of the nuclear plant meltdown in Japan, Americans are buying up potassium iodide pills—also called iodine pills. Potassium iodide helps prevent some of the damaging effects of radiation. The thyroid gland in the neck is one of the most sensitive organs in the body to radiation. Exposure to high levels of radiation—as occurs during a nuclear plant meltdown—can lead to thyroid cancer.



So how does potassium iodide help?



The thyroid uses iodine normally to make thyroid hormone. The radiation from a nuclear event releases radioactive iodine into the air. When the radioactive iodine enters the body, the thyroid quickly scoops it up.



Taking potassium iodide pills temporarily stops the thyroid. If taken prior to radiation exposure, the iodine pills counter the effect of the radioactive iodine on the thyroid. This helps prevent the development of thyroid cancer down the road" (WebMD.com).



However, the article also points out that, "It's important to note that potassium iodide pills protect only the thyroid. They don't prevent your body from taking in the radiation and don't help prevent radiation damage to other parts of the body."



Despite the reassurances from the scientific community, many stores carrying iodine pills have sold out their entire inventory to frightened consumers who are seeking protection in case the authorities are either wrong or withholding the truth.



This reaction is reminiscent of the widespread purchase of fallout shelters and stockpiling of food during the Cold War of the 1950s.



Greater earthquakes and nuclear dangers foretold

What can you do to protect yourself? Should you even be concerned?



In His famous Olivet prophecy, Jesus warned of mind-numbing tragedies that would take place at the time of the end, including earthquakes, tsunamis and major wars that would result in the annihilation of all humanity were it not for God's intervention (Luke 21:11, 25; Matthew 24:21-22). The term "apocalyptic" that is often used to describe large scale disasters stems from the Greek word apokalupsis (revelation) in the title of the final book of the Bible. The book of Revelation offers frightening details of this coming time of massive devastation and death.



Imagine the devastation in northern Japan on a worldwide scale! Massive earthquakes, tsunamis and nuclear warfare will exact a massive toll of human suffering and death on an unprecedented scale. Iodine pills, fallout shelters, stockpiled food or any other human efforts will not afford protection from this great time of trouble.



Jesus warns that most living in the end-time world will be complacent, apathetic and blissfully unaware of the impending devastation, as was the case in the world that perished in the great Flood of Noah's day.



The only source of real protection

The good news is that God offers protection to His people who remain vigilant and faithful. Jesus expresses this promise and exhortation: "But take heed to yourselves, lest your hearts be weighed down with carousing, drunkenness, and cares of this life, and that Day come on you unexpectedly. For it will come as a snare on all those who dwell on the face of the whole earth. Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man" (Luke 21:34-36).



Find out more about the times that are coming and what you can do to be assured of God's protection by requesting or downloading our free booklets, Are We Living in the Time of the End? and The Book of Revelation Unveiled.

Obama/Salazar Moratorium Has Crippled Domestic Oil Production

An interesting post from www.redstate.com about the domestic oil drilling ban. This follows this previous post about it.This follows this post  about a creative solution to Gulf drilling and this previous article about the recent news about the ban on offshore drilling to encourage American energy independence This is a key issue to prevent money from going to hostile countries such as Iran and Venezuela. For more posts like this click here!

Obama/Salazar Moratorium Has Crippled Domestic Oil Production


In 2011, Gulf of Mexico oil production will under-perform the government’s pre-Macondo forecasts by 355,000 barrels per day — almost 130 million barrels for the year. In 2012, the shortfall rises to 550,000 barrels per day — 200 million barrels. That’s fully one-third of the Gulf’s oil producing capability, and over 10% of total domestic oil production.




These are staggering numbers.



Alaska, our #1 oil producing state, will supply roughly 200 million barrels in 2012.



Two hundred million barrels is about what the U.S. imports from Iraq every year. Or roughly half of our Saudi Arabian import volume. Two hundred million barrels would supply all of Ohio’s yearly petroleum use, with quite a bit left over.



Replacing 200 million barrels of oil will require an additional supertanker full of oil every two days.



The Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA) provides a rather dry but telling explanation:



Off shore oil production in [the 2011 forecast] is lower than in [the 2010 forecast] throughout most of the projection period [through 2035] because of expected delays in near-term projects, in part as a result of drilling moratoria and in part due to the change in lease sales expected in the Pacific and Atlantic outer continental shelf (OCS), as well as increased uncertainty about future investment in off shore production. [AEO2011 Preview, p. 8. Emphasis added.]



Moratoria, access and uncertainty: issues which fall squarely in the laps of Barack Obama and Ken Salazar. Their misguided policy decisions come in times of rising global demand and rising world tensions. By the fall of 2012, we might look back on the “good old days” of $105 per barrel oil and $3.75 per gallon gasoline.

The projected shortfall comes from EIA forecasts. EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook, with detailed production and consumption forecasts covering the next 25 years, is published each April; AEO2011 is due to be published April 26, but a Preview came out last December.



Short Term Outlooks are published monthly. The most recent STO was published March 8.



The shortfall is the difference between the March 2011 STO (”where we are”) with the May 2010 STO (”where we might have been”). The May 2010 STO was the last monthly forecast which did not take post-Macondo regulatory actions into account. Since the STO only covers a 24-month time frame, supplemental values for 2012 came from last year’s Annual Energy Outlook.







The cumulative shortfall, just through the end of 2012, will be 387 million barrels, plus 723 billion cubic feet of natural gas (which contains the equivalent energy value of about 120 million barrels of oil).







How much are we talking about in dollar terms? Just on the value of the oil and gas alone, over $40 billion dollars worth. Somewhere around $6 billion of that would have flowed straight to the U.S. Treasury as royalty. This analysis is too simplistic to address the real economic cost, in terms of lost jobs, capital investment, income and payroll taxes, etc. Notice in the graph below that the cumulative value really starts to take off in 2012 as the volume loss accelerates.



Consider, too, that this shortfall does nothing to curtail demand. Not a single consumer will alter their consumption habits (that is, until the price adjusts). This volume of oil will be made up from imports, adding to our national trade imbalance.



Ultimately, as I have argued before, a half million barrels a day can make a substantial difference in the market price of oil. As we have seen supply disruptions (Libya, Yemen and elsewhere) against growing demand, buyers will inevitably bid up the value of that last barrel to come on the market.



This shortfall could be erased by an administration that correctly viewed the oil and gas industry, not as a convenient whipping-boy, but as a potential growth engine for our tepid economy. Capitalist risk-takers have already proven the potential of oil from shale plays such as the Eagleford of South Texas and the Bakken of North Dakota. We find ourselves at a moment in time when a true visionary in the White House could realistically set a goal of 50% or more growth in domestic oil supply, and couple it with a commitment to develop our plentiful, clean American natural gas resources. Such a visionary leader could become the first president since the 1973 embargo to succeed in putting America on a course to true energy security –



Hey, a fellow can dream, can’t he?



Cross-posted at  VladEnBlog.

Also at http://www.thehayride.com/



Thursday, March 24, 2011

Five Tea Party "MUST HAVES" in the Budget!!!

A very interesting post from www.hughhewitt.com about the budget debates and what you can tell your Congressman or Senator. This follows this post about Republicans giving in on the Continuing Resolution and this article about  the recent news about ending the ban on offshore drilling which would encourage 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!

Votes On The CR: Another Retreat For The House GOP, Another March Away From The November Mandate

House Rules Chairman David Dreier defended the necessity of the three week CR on yesterday's program, but it was clear to me and the audience that Chairman Dreier and the rest of the GOP Leadership know that the House GOP has now reached a turning point. They will win this vote, but they dare not bring back any more stop-gaps, which means either a shutdown or a surrender in April.







The GOP base and the Tea Party activists have five "must-haves":
a big bite out of current spending,
the defunding of Planned Parenthood
and CPB,
and the bar on regulation writing for Obamacare
and the EPA's carbon rules.

Speaker Boehner could give up $5 billion or even $10 billion in the effort to get to closure and the big budget, but he cannot walk away from the policy priorities which took the place of serious spending cuts. The failure to get this minimum amount of mandate will greatly impact the credibility of the House GOP.






If they cannot stand and fight here, where exactly are they going to do so? And whatever message they are trying to communicate isn't getting through, a casualty of a failed communication strategy that has relied primarily on Beltway MSM in no hurry to frame the debate on the GOP turf.






Fred Barnes wrote in the new Weekly Standard about the growing strength of the Republican Study Committee, now 177 strong --a caucus within a caucus. If the House GOP leaders retreat, expect the challenge to their "roadmap" to come from the RSC.






The stopgap measure looks as though it is full of gimmicks to get to the alleged $6 billion in cuts. "The $6 billion in new cuts include hundreds of millions of dollars in old accounts from the Interior and Agriculture departments," reports the Washington Post. "In addition, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which oversees funding for embattled National Public Radio, would lose $50 million from a 'stabilization fund.'”






After a massive scandal the best the House GOP can do is nick NPR for $50 million? That's it? And where are the details on the $6 billion? Does even one federal employee have to take one furlough day as a result? Or are these cuts the sort of accounting tricks that led California to its box canyon of neo-bankruptcy. $50 million from NPR, after the week it had? This is what what creates the deep sense of inevitable collapse of Republican resolve. There isn't any sense of a willingness to fight or the skills set to do so.






The Beltway sharpies around the leadership are advising them into the forfeit of their mandate, even with the examples of Christie, Walker, Kasich and Scott right in front of them, standing for the proposition that the country is sick with worry about the deficit and prepared to support real cuts, now, on the debt ceiling and on the budget.






But every delay is another march away from the mandate, another opportunity for the narrative to change. The strategy adopted so far has maximized the power of the old timers and greatly increased the vulnerability of the freshmen GOP who promised so much and have delivered so little.

How Long Will the NATO Alliance Last?

An interesting article from www.wnponline.org about NATO. This follows this post about a Cyber attack.  For a free magazine subscription or to get this book for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632.

How Long Will the NATO Alliance Last?


The 50th anniversary of the NATO alliance in 1999 was a celebration of the successful defense of the free world. Just 10 years later there are signs of serious trouble within the alliance.

by Paul Kieffer

One month before being officially nominated as the Democratic Party candidate for president in 2008, then Senator Barack Obama visited Berlin, Germany, and gave a speech to a crowd of some 200,000 Germans at the Victory Column, located 1 mile west of the Brandenburg Gate.



At the time, some opinion polls indicated that a number of Germans would rather have Obama as their own chancellor instead of Angela Merkel.



Obama's speech in Berlin on July 24, 2008, was well received by the enthusiastic crowd. However, the next day some commentators wondered whether people had really understood the implications of what Obama had said. He mentioned the threat of terrorism and emphasized that "no one nation, no matter how large or powerful, can defeat such challenges alone," and he praised "Europe's role in our [America's] security and our future."



The portion of the speech that really got news analysts' attention was Obama's reference to Afghanistan: "In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more—not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security...



"The Afghan people need our troops and your troops; our support and your support to defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda, to develop their economy, and to help them rebuild their nation."



With his speech in Berlin, Obama had served notice that as president he would expect Germans—and America's other NATO partners—to contribute their fair share of the resources needed for NATO's mission in Afghanistan.



An increasingly unpopular war

America's NATO allies in Europe are confronted by the challenge of meeting their obligations to the alliance's mission in Afghanistan in the face of growing public discontent over the war.



Germany is no exception. According to public opinion polls, two thirds of the German people doubt that a military victory can be achieved in Afghanistan. The same percentage of Germans oppose a continuation of their country's military presence in Afghanistan.



When German troops were first sent to Afghanistan, the German government insisted that they be stationed in northern Afghanistan instead of the southern part of the country. Officials emphasized repeatedly that Germany's NATO troops were limited to the official NATO mission in Afghanistan, described as assisting "the Afghan Government in exercising and extending its authority and influence across the country, paving the way for reconstruction and effective governance" (quote from the NATO Web site).



By contrast, American troops in southern Afghanistan were also fighting terrorism by going after the Taliban.



In their early deployment to northern Afghanistan, German troops experienced only occasional direct resistance by Taliban fighters. In recent months, however, the number of German casualties has increased as the Taliban have begun to target German patrols. It seems as if the Taliban are now engaging America's NATO allies, like the Germans, in an attempt to influence public opinion back home.



If so, their tactic is working. Public outrage in Germany was intense during the first week of September after a German NATO commander called for American air support to recapture two hijacked fuel trucks.



The air strike reportedly killed as many as 70 civilians and prompted Afghan President Hamid Karzai to issue harsh criticism of the German commander: "What an error of judgment! More than 90 dead all because of a simple lorry that was, moreover, immobilised in a riverbed. Why didn't they send in ground troops to recover the fuel tank?" ("Rift Widens Between US and Germany Over Botched Afghanistan Air Strike," The Guardian, Sept. 7, 2009).



Aside from the backlash from incidents like this one, German participation in NATO missions outside the geographic boundaries of NATO member countries is a continual domestic challenge. Each military deployment requires the approval of the German parliament, the Bundestag, and approval has to be renewed at regular intervals.



Despite growing public opposition to the war in Afghanistan, it has not yet become a major political issue, largely because Germany's membership in the NATO alliance is supported by all major parties. However, an increase in German casualties will no doubt lead to greater public clamor for an end to Germany's involvement in Afghanistan. As the Vietnam War proved, public opinion can be a key factor in deciding whether to continue or curtail military deployment.



Other European countries involved in Afghanistan are also facing domestic pressure to withdraw. Just days after the botched air strike on the fuel trucks, Britain, France and Germany proposed a conference to discuss how the Afghan government could take on greater responsibility for its own security, thereby lessening the need for NATO troops in the country.



Who's the bad guy now?

When the NATO alliance was formed 60 years ago by the United States, Canada and European nations, it was clearly defensive in nature. NATO countries were obligated to support any member nation attacked by an aggressor. The potential aggressor was clearly the Soviet Union, and the alliance's purpose was to prevent westward expansion of the Soviet sphere of influence in Europe.



Of course, during the Cold War there was occasional friction among NATO members or between the United States and European NATO countries. However, the overriding goal of preserving Western Europe's freedom and economic system provided a common interest strong enough to override temporary differences of opinion.



The demise of the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact alliance has changed all that. Europe is no longer threatened by an ideological "continental divide." Former Warsaw Pact countries have now joined the NATO alliance (and the European Union).



The defensive nature of the NATO alliance still exists on paper but not in practical application. Instead, the alliance has also assumed responsibility beyond its own borders in fulfilling United Nations peacekeeping missions.



Events of the last 10 years have shown that America and Europe—and even European nations among themselves—are not always unified in their assessment of strategic threats.



A prime example is former U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's characterization of the "old" and "new" Europe during the crisis over Iraq and the Iraq war. Aside from some exceptions—most notably Britain—Western European nations ("old" Europe) were reluctant to support U.S. President George Bush's "coalition of the willing," in contrast to Eastern European nations ("new" Europe).



More recently, European NATO members disagree over how to deal with Russia. Dependent on natural gas deliveries from Russia, NATO members in Western Europe generally support a cautious, conciliatory approach. By contrast, Eastern European NATO members prefer a more confrontational style.



It was no surprise when Eastern European NATO members supported the Bush plan to install a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic. In the summer of 2008 the United States signed a treaty with each country for the installation of a radar system in the Czech Republic and 10 missile silos in Poland.



President Obama's decision in September to stop the implementation of the project upset Eastern European allies. Their disappointment was best expressed by former Polish President Lech Walesa in a television interview: "The Americans are always concerned only about their own interests and just take advantage of everyone else."



Walesa urged Poland to reassess its relationship with the United States. Analysts now expect Eastern Europeans to see the need for better cooperation with Brussels on security issues. President Obama may have contributed to "new" and "old" Europe becoming more closely aligned.



Who pays the bill?

During the 1999 NATO bombing campaign to force Serbian troops out of Kosovo, then German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder voiced disappointment over America's reluctance to share spy satellite intelligence with its European allies. In his frustration Schroeder suggested that Europe should have its own spy satellites. He admitted, though, that America could do as it pleased since it was supplying over 90 percent of the equipment used for the Kosovo military intervention.



America's call for more equitable burden-sharing within the NATO alliance did not begin with Senator Obama's July 2008 speech in Berlin. With the Soviet threat gone, the unfulfilled desire to have Europe pay a larger share of its defense bill seems more futile now than at any time during the last 60 years when Europe enjoyed protection via America's nuclear shield.



Defense spending levels of NATO's main European members have declined in recent years, with a corresponding weakening of military capabilities. Germany, for example, today has 40 percent fewer soldiers and 50 percent fewer combat aircraft than it did at the end of the Cold War 20 years ago. Similar developments have taken place in key NATO nations like Spain and Italy.



The decay of European NATO military forces has reached the point that U.S. military officials are concerned that joint operations are becoming difficult and may well become impossible if the trend is not reversed.



Like the Kosovo intervention, the war in Afghanistan reflects unequal burden sharing, irritating even some European officials. In a speech last January, British Defense Secretary John Hutton had harsh criticism for European governments that fail to bear their fair share of the burden.



"Freeloading on the back of U.S. security is not an option if we wish to be equal partners in the transatlantic alliance," he warned in language less diplomatic than Obama's Berlin speech. "Anyone who wants to benefit from collective security must be prepared to share the ultimate price."



Hutton also appeared to question Germany's approach and that of other allies who believe that humanitarian and nation-building tasks are a fair substitute for combat duty. "It isn't good enough to always look to the U.S. for political, financial, and military cover. And this imbalance will not be addressed by parceling up NATO tasks—the 'hard' military ones for the U.S. and a few others (including Britain) and the 'soft' diplomatic ones for the majority of Europeans."



European NATO members would respond by saying that NATO's ISAF mission in Afghanistan is nation-building, not combat in support of Washington's "war on terror."



The beginning of the end?

American military commanders believe that the coming months will be crucial for the ultimate success or failure of the NATO mission in Afghanistan, which for them means a military victory over the resurgent Taliban. Likewise, the NATO mission in Afghanistan itself may well decide the future of the alliance itself.



If NATO cracks over Afghanistan, a short-sighted view would be that Europeans got tired of being pressured to do more fighting in America's war far from Europe and that America got tired of paying the lion's share of NATO's bills for European freeloaders. However, America did put up with the unequal burden-sharing within NATO during the Cold War because it was in America's own strategic interest to do so.



A realistic assessment would be that NATO is no longer a serious alliance with an overriding common strategic purpose as it was throughout the Cold War. Defending Western Europe against Soviet expansion served America's strategic purpose, and supporting America's efforts to do so was obviously in Europe's own best interests.



In the absence of a sustained response to an ongoing, common, immediate threat, NATO has become an alliance without a real purpose. Europe's strategic interests are no longer as closely aligned with those of the United States, as evidenced by the Iraq war, relations with Russia, and energy and environmental policies, to name just a few. History shows that the eventual demise of an alliance that has served its purpose can only be a question of time.



If Bible prophecy is our guide to understanding world events, the rift already evident within the NATO alliance can be viewed as a precursor to future events. Europe and the United States will eventually move in opposing strategic directions and become competitors instead of equal partners.



Out of Europe will arise a final resurrection of the Holy Roman Empire, whereas America's destiny—and her future relationship with Europe—will be determined by her unknown heritage linked to the biblical patriarch Abraham.



Want to know more? Order or download our free booklets The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy and You Can Understand Bible Prophecy. They will provide you with valuable insights concerning the future of Europe and the United States. WNP

Mexico's Gun Supply and the 90 Percent Myth

This is an urgent post from http://www.stratfor.com/ about guns in Mexico. This follows this post about Alexandra Wallace and this post which shows that there are 30,000 openly illegal immigrants in the border town of El Paso. On a related note, you can read about Miss Kentucky Latina here, an interesting article about Jessica Alba here or another article about Salma Hayek here. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and you can read a very interesting book HERE!


Mexico's Gun Supply and the 90 Percent Myth


By Scott Stewart



For several years now, STRATFOR has been closely watching developments in Mexico that relate to what we consider the three wars being waged there. Those three wars are the war between the various drug cartels, the war between the government and the cartels, and the war being waged against citizens and businesses by criminals.



In addition to watching tactical developments of the cartel wars on the ground and studying the dynamics of the conflict among the various warring factions, we have also been paying close attention to the ways that both the Mexican and U.S. governments have reacted to these developments. Perhaps one of the most interesting aspects to watch has been the way in which the Mexican government has tried to deflect responsibility for the cartel wars away from itself and onto the United States. According to the Mexican government, the cartel wars are not a result of corruption in Mexico or of economic and societal dynamics that leave many Mexicans marginalized and desperate to find a way to make a living. Instead, the cartel wars are due to the insatiable American appetite for narcotics and the endless stream of guns that flows from the United States into Mexico and that results in Mexican violence.



Interestingly, the part of this argument pertaining to guns has been adopted by many politicians and government officials in the United States in recent years. It has now become quite common to hear U.S. officials confidently assert that 90 percent of the weapons used by the Mexican drug cartels come from the United States. However, a close examination of the dynamics of the cartel wars in Mexico — and of how the oft-echoed 90 percent number was reached — clearly demonstrates that the number is more political rhetoric than empirical fact.





By the Numbers



As we discussed in a previous analysis, the 90 percent number was derived from a June 2009 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report to Congress on U.S. efforts to combat arms trafficking to Mexico (see external link).



According to the GAO report, some 30,000 firearms were seized from criminals by Mexican authorities in 2008. Of these 30,000 firearms, information pertaining to 7,200 of them (24 percent) was submitted to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for tracing. Of these 7,200 guns, only about 4,000 could be traced by the ATF, and of these 4,000, some 3,480 (87 percent) were shown to have come from the United States.



This means that the 87 percent figure relates to the number of weapons submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF that could be successfully traced and not from the total number of weapons seized by Mexican authorities or even from the total number of weapons submitted to the ATF for tracing. In fact, the 3,480 guns positively traced to the United States equals less than 12 percent of the total arms seized in Mexico in 2008 and less than 48 percent of all those submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF for tracing. This means that almost 90 percent of the guns seized in Mexico in 2008 were not traced back to the United States.



The remaining 22,800 firearms seized by Mexican authorities in 2008 were not traced for a variety of reasons. In addition to factors such as bureaucratic barriers and negligence, many of the weapons seized by Mexican authorities either do not bear serial numbers or have had their serial numbers altered or obliterated. It is also important to understand that the Mexican authorities simply don’t bother to submit some classes of weapons to the ATF for tracing. Such weapons include firearms they identify as coming from their own military or police forces, or guns that they can trace back themselves as being sold through the Mexican Defense Department’s Arms and Ammunition Marketing Division (UCAM). Likewise, they do not ask ATF to trace military ordnance from third countries like the South Korean fragmentation grenades commonly used in cartel attacks.



Of course, some or even many of the 22,800 firearms the Mexicans did not submit to ATF for tracing may have originated in the United States. But according to the figures presented by the GAO, there is no evidence to support the assertion that 90 percent of the guns used by the Mexican cartels come from the United States — especially when not even 50 percent of those that were submitted for tracing were ultimately found to be of U.S. origin.



This point leads us to consider the types of weapons being used by the Mexican cartels and where they come from.





Types and Sources of Guns



To gain an understanding of the dynamics of the gun flow inside Mexico, it helps if one divides the guns seized by Mexican authorities from criminals into three broad categories — which, incidentally, just happen to represent three different sources.





Type 1: Guns Legally Available in Mexico



The first category of weapons encountered in Mexico is weapons available legally for sale in Mexico through UCAM. These include handguns smaller than a .357 magnum such as .380 and .38 Special.



A large portion of this first type of guns used by criminals is purchased in Mexico, or stolen from their legitimate owners. While UCAM does have very strict regulations for civilians to purchase guns, criminals will use straw purchasers to obtain firearms from UCAM or obtain them from corrupt officials. Cartel hit men in Mexico commonly use .380 pistols equipped with sound suppressors in their assassinations. In many cases, these pistols are purchased in Mexico, the suppressors are locally manufactured and the guns are adapted to receive the suppressors by Mexican gunsmiths.



It must be noted, though, that because of the cost and hassle of purchasing guns in Mexico, many of the guns in this category are purchased in the United States and smuggled into the country. There are a lot of cheap guns available on the U.S. market, and they can be sold at a premium in Mexico. Indeed, guns in this category, such as .380 pistols and .22-caliber rifles and pistols, are among the guns most commonly traced back to the United States. Still, the numbers do not indicate that 90 percent of guns in this category come from the United States.



Additionally, most of the explosives the cartels have been using in improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in Mexico over the past year have used commercially available Tovex, so we consider these explosives to fall in this first category. Mexican IEDs are another area where the rhetoric has been interesting to analyze, but we will explore this topic another time.





Type 2: Guns Legally Available in the U.S. but Not in Mexico



Many popular handgun calibers, such as 9 mm, .45 and .40, are reserved for the military and police and are not available for sale to civilians in Mexico. These guns, which are legally sold and very popular in the United States, comprise our second category, which also includes .50-caliber rifles, semiautomatic versions of assault rifles like the AK-47 and M16 and the FN Five-Seven pistol.



When we consider this second type of guns, a large number of them encountered in Mexico are likely purchased in the United States. Indeed, the GAO report notes that many of the guns most commonly traced back to the United States fall into this category. There are also many .45-caliber and 9 mm semiautomatic pistols and .357 revolvers obtained from deserters from the Mexican military and police, purchased from corrupt Mexican authorities or even brought in from South America (guns made by manufacturers such as Taurus and Bersa). This category also includes semiautomatic variants of assault rifles and main battle rifles, which are often converted by Mexican gunsmiths to be capable of fully automatic fire.



One can buy these types of weapons on the international arms market, but one pays a premium for such guns and it is cheaper and easier to simply buy them in the United States or South America and smuggle them into Mexico. In fact, there is an entire cottage industry that has developed to smuggle such weapons, and not all the customers are cartel hit men. There are many Mexican citizens who own guns in calibers such as .45, 9 mm, .40 and .44 magnum for self-defense — even though such guns are illegal in Mexico.





Type 3: Guns Not Available for Civilian Purchase in Mexico or the U.S.



The third category of weapons encountered in Mexico is military-grade ordnance not generally available for sale in the United States or Mexico. This category includes hand grenades, 40 mm grenades, rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), automatic assault rifles and main battle rifles and light machine guns.



This third type of weapon is fairly difficult and very expensive to obtain in the United States, especially in the large numbers in which the cartels are employing them. They are also dangerous to obtain in the United States due to heavy law enforcement scrutiny. Therefore, most of the military ordnance used by the Mexican cartels comes from other sources, such as the international arms market — increasingly from China via the same networks that furnish precursor chemicals for narcotics manufacturing — or from corrupt elements in the Mexican military or even deserters who take their weapons with them. Besides, items such as South Korean fragmentation grenades and RPG-7s, often used by the cartels, simply are not in the U.S. arsenal. This means that very few of the weapons in this category come from the United States.



In recent years the cartels, especially their enforcer groups such as Los Zetas, Gente Nueva and La Linea, have been increasingly using military weaponry instead of sporting arms. A close examination of the arms seized from the enforcer groups and their training camps clearly demonstrates this trend toward military ordnance, including many weapons not readily available in the United States. Some of these seizures have included M60 machine guns and hundreds of 40 mm grenades obtained from the military arsenals of countries like Guatemala.



But Guatemala is not the only source of such weapons. Latin America is awash in weapons that were shipped there over the past several decades to supply the various insurgencies and counterinsurgencies in the region. When these military-grade weapons are combined with the rampant corruption in the region, they quickly find their way into the black arms market. The Mexican cartels have supply-chain contacts that help move narcotics to Mexico from South America, and they are able to use this same network to obtain guns from the black market in South and Central America and then smuggle them into Mexico. While there are many weapons in this category that were manufactured in the United States, the overwhelming majority of the U.S.-manufactured weapons of this third type encountered in Mexico — like LAW rockets and M60 machine guns — come into Mexico from third countries and not directly from the United States.



There are also some cases of overlap between classes of weapons. For example, the FN Five-Seven pistol is available for commercial purchase in the United States, but the 5.7x28 armor-piercing ammunition for the pistol favored by the cartels is not — it is a restricted item. However, some of the special operations forces units in the Mexican military are issued the Five-Seven as well as the FN P90 personal defense weapon, which also shoots the 5.7x28 round, and the cartels are obtaining some of these weapons and the armor-piercing ammunition from them and not from the United States. Conversely, we see bulk 5.56 mm and 7.62 mm ammunition bought in the United States and smuggled into Mexico, where it is used in fully automatic AK-47s and M16s purchased elsewhere. As noted above, China has become an increasingly common source for military weapons like grenades and fully automatic assault rifles in recent years.



To really understand Mexico’s gun problem, however, it is necessary to recognize that the same economic law of supply and demand that fuels drug smuggling into the United States also fuels gun smuggling into Mexico. Black market guns in Mexico can fetch up to 300 percent of their normal purchase price — a profit margin rivaling the narcotics the cartels sell. Even if it were somehow possible to hermetically seal the U.S.-Mexico border and shut off all the guns coming from the United States, the cartels would still be able to obtain weapons elsewhere — just as narcotics would continue to flow into the United States from other places. The United States does provide cheap and easy access to certain types of weapons and ammunition, but as demonstrated by groups such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, weapons can be easily obtained from other sources via the black arms market — albeit at a higher price.



There has clearly been a long and well-documented history of arms smuggling across the U.S.-Mexico border, but it is important to recognize that, while the United States is a significant source of certain classes of weapons and ammunition, it is by no means the source of 90 percent of the weapons used by the Mexican cartels, as is commonly asserted.


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.



"Mexico's Gun Supply and the 90 Percent Myth is republished with permission of STRATFOR."









Read more: Mexico's Gun Supply and the 90 Percent Myth
STRATFOR