Thursday, October 31, 2013

Is Halloween Only A "Cultural" Event?

BLOGGERS NOTE: I WILL BE MOVING FROM FACEBOOK TO TWITTER AND BLOGSPOT SOON!
An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about the culture of Halloween. This follows this post about atheism. This follows this post about changes after the Berlin Wall came down. For a free magazine subscription or to get the book shown for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.


And what does God say about coming out of a culture?

[Darris McNeely] Today's the day that everyone's going to be coming out with all of their costumes and robes, colors that represent the prince of darkness, the dead, the undead. All Souls' Eve coming up, and up and down the streets of America we will see people coming and going in all kinds of costumes like that and others representing darkness, representing evil, representing death. Again, as I said yesterday , it's amazing to consider the rational and the arguments that people will use to justify this.   I was reading on one article that talked about the fact that Halloween today has nothing to do with religion and the relics of its past. It has become a cultural event, and therefore it's okay for a Christian to take part in Halloween festivities as long as their conscience is not offended by such an event. And so I asked the question: Is Halloween something that's just cultural, and if it is, is it okay to participate in?



It doesn't take much of a research genius to go through the stories and find the underpinnings, the background, the origins of Halloween festivities. All Souls' Eve, the night that the people did what they could to keep the dead away from their own houses and their own lives. And such a non-Christian, thoroughly pagan festival, centuries old, represents things that in the Bible from the beginning in Genesis all the way to the book of Revelation God tells His people to stay away from.



But sometimes you see a little different twist like you do when you say, "Well, it's just cultural today" as if in our modern, to our modern mind and times we have changed it by our own good, by our own rational and reasoning that it's not religious. It's just cultural, therefore it's okay. As if the God who in the Bible says He doesn't change (Hebrews 13:8Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.



See All...). He is the same yesterday, today, and forever would change His view on something dealing with the dead, things that would be and are completely unclean.



There's one scripture that came to mind when I was thinking about this, and it's in Revelation chapter 18 where it talks about Babylon. Revelation 18 and beginning in verse 2 in this story about Babylon, a system portrayed throughout scripture as the antithesis of the Kingdom of God and anything dealing with the culture and the way of God and His holiness and His righteous life. And in Revelation 18:2And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.



See All... it is recorded that "He cried mightily with a loud voice saying, 'Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen and has become a dwelling place of demons, a prison for every foul spirit, and a cage for every unclean and hated bird!'" And so this picture of a future system called Babylon that is described here in the Bible as a dwelling place of demons and a prison for every foul spirit. Something that later on in the chapter here, verse 4, God says, "Come out of her My people lest you share in her sins and lest you receive of her plagues. For her sins have reached to heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities" (Revelation 18:4And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.



See All...). The system called Babylon at the time of the end makes one last effort to thwart the purpose and plan of God is here described as being the place, the repository of every demon and every foul spirit.



And so when we look around our culture today and we see demons and we see foul spirits, and we see people reveling in that and dressing up and laughing and partying in a cultural manner, do we ask the question: Is it okay? I think that it is not, and I think that because of what scripture says. It's not my judgment. It's God's judgment.



And when you read the rest of the story here in Revelation 18 about Babylon there will be a time of judgment upon an entire system that flies in the face of God, out of which God says, "Come out. Take no part in what she does" (Revelation 18:4-8 [4] And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

[5] For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.

[6] Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double.

[7] How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.

[8] Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her.





See All...). And so you can say something has been sanitized and changed because of the way a culture and a time looks at it, but God who is the same yesterday, today, and forever still has the same point of view. And so the lesson is there for us and the decision is up to you and to me.



That's BT Daily . Join us next time.

THANK THESE REPUBLICANS FOR OBAMACARE

A timely post about from www.AnnCoulter.com about Republicans who helped Obamacare. This follows this post about voter I.D. In the meantime, you can get more involved if you like here and read an interesting book HERE.

THANK THESE REPUBLICANS FOR OBAMACARE


We have Obamacare for one reason and one reason only: For a brief, ghoulish period in recent history, Democrats controlled the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives.



We don't have Obamacare because the public was clamoring for it. We have it because Republicans lost elections.



First, Republicans lost their majorities in the House and the Senate in 2006, thanks to George W. Bush's highly effective "Keep the Base at Home on Election Day" campaign, which consisted of pushing amnesty for illegal aliens.



Then in 2008, Republicans had the bright idea to run crazy-eyed crypt-keeper John McCain for president.



McCain supported: amnesty (until he needed our votes), retroactive Social Security benefits for illegal aliens, free speech-crushing campaign-finance laws, crackpot global warming legislation, criminal trials for terrorists and stem-cell research on human embryos.

He opposed: the Bush tax cuts, a marriage amendment to the Constitution, waterboarding terrorists and drilling in Alaska. Oh, also, he called the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth "dishonest and dishonorable." (As suggested by the subtitle, all this is covered in Never Trust a Liberal Over Three-Especially a Republican)   As a consequence, Democrats won the presidency, as well as huge majorities in Congress. The last time Democrats had controlled the presidency, the House and the Senate was 16 years earlier, back in 1993. Remember what they did back then? The very first thing? (No, Clinton masturbating on an intern came later.) That's right: They tried to pass Hillarycare.





Hillarycare went down in humiliating defeat, so the Democrats patiently waited nearly two decades for the stars to be aligned again. Then, the very next time they had the presidency, the House and Senate, they went right back to national health care. (Notice that, in neither instance, was public opinion involved.)



If an alien landed and asked why America has Obamacare when most people hate it, we'd have to say: Because the Democrats had 60 votes in the Senate.

The Democrats' policy is: We vote and vote and vote, until it finally comes out their way, then we never vote again. (This, too, is detailed in Never Trust a Liberal Over Three) That's why the moment this greased-through, widely detested law was enacted, liberals began hailing it as the "law of the land." How dare you question "settled law"? Are you unpatriotic?

Democrats would never have been in a position to pass Obamacare if both sides of the Republican Party hadn't helped them win elections. The establishment Republicans screwed over our party with their greed, incompetence and lassitude, and the conservative purists screwed our party by running candidates who could not possibly win.




True, the tea party also gave us the majestic Mike Lee, Ted Cruz and Ron Johnson, among a few other improvements. But was Dick Lugar really the biggest problem in the U.S. Senate? Wasn't Claire McCaskill a bigger problem?



And why are so many conservatives today burbling about the alleged deficiencies of Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell -- while ignoring the actual crimes of Democratic senators like Mary Landrieu from Louisiana, Mark Pryor from Arkansas and Mark Begich from Alaska?



All those Democrats voted for Obamacare -- and they're all up for election next year in states that could easily go Republican. If any one of these senators had voted "no" on Obamacare, it would not be law.



By contrast, McConnell not only voted against Obamacare, but presided over a Senate minority in which every single Republican voted against Obamacare, even that idiot McCain. Kentucky only seems like a red state because McConnell keeps winning elections there: It went for Clinton twice and has had a solid run of Democratic governors since 1947, interrupted by one-term Republican governors only twice in 66 years.



But McConnell is in hot water with Kentucky's "9/12 Project" -- a group with enough marketing savvy to have a name that no one understands.



The project's executive director, Eric Wilson, is hopping mad with McConnell because, when given a choice between raising taxes on all Americans or raising taxes only on those individuals making more than $400,000 a year, he chose to raise taxes only on the high earners.



It's the easiest thing in the world to be a purist, denouncing everyone else as a sellout and hack, while other people do the hard work of getting elected in blue states and preventing even rotten Republicans from voting for Obamacare. You want McConnell to stop all tax hikes? Give him a majority in the Senate.



Al Franken's Senate seat is another one that should be on Republicans' radar. He stole the 2008 election in Minnesota, going from a thousand votes down the day after the election to 300 votes up a few months later, after vast numbers of Franken votes kept being discovered in heavily Democratic districts. As economist John Lott pointed out at the time, the magically appearing votes for Franken were a statistical impossibility.



Obamacare could not have passed without the Democrats' prodigious vote theft in Franken's 2008 election. But if the Republican candidate had won, some conservatives would now be trying to take out moderate Republican Norm Coleman for being a "RINO." The far-left Democrat won, so conservatives can't be bothered to find someone to beat him.



The inability to distinguish Coleman and McConnell -- and whomever else the conservative purists have in their maw -- from Obamacare-ratifying Democrats is as insane as the left's inability to distinguish Saddam's rape rooms from the shortage of female CEOs in the U.S. Three and a half years after Obamacare passed without a single Republican vote, anyone who can't see a difference between the parties should be institutionalized.



There are some fantastic congressmen who could beat Franken in 2014, such as Rep. John Kline. But liberals are counting on tea party activists to insist on running someone who can't win.



Let me introduce you to Marianne Stebbins, a Ron Paul fan who helped lose the 2012 Senate election in Minnesota with a libertarian candidate, who lost to the Democrat 31 percent to 65 percent. She thinks the fight within the Republican Party is "frankly ... probably a more important debate than the one going on between the Republicans and the Democrats."



When your new health insurance premiums arrive in the mail, and you can't find a doctor in your plan who speaks English, tell me the fight between Republicans and Democrats is not that important.

Decisive hours in battle against Amnesty for illegals

A very interesting post from www.Alipac.US about targets to focus on in saving America. This follows this post about 7 Targets to hit in the War to Defend America. This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! For more about what you can do click here and you can read two very interesting books HERE.

Decisive final hours in battle against Amnesty for illegals


by

ALIPAC   Please take the following actions, then rally others to our aid...



Step 1: ALIPAC only has 24 hours left before our Nov 1 deadline to raise a minimum of $30,000 to both fight these multimillion dollar amnesty efforts and sustain operations through 2014. At the time of this email alert, we have raised only $25,000. Please put ALIPAC back in the fight against amnesty full force by making a donation at our secure online donations link before the deadline in 24 hours...

http://www.alipac.us/donations/

Step 2: ALIPAC has identified the 32 GOP turncoats who plan to vote with the Democrats to send an illegal alien amnesty bill to Obama's desk. While all 32 need to hear from you, we have created a smaller and more targeted list of the top 12 we believe to be the most vulnerable to a strong GOP Primary challenger in 2014.




We need your help recruiting and identifying the right GOP primary challengers for these 12, and while that search goes on, we need you to hit these offices hard!



Hit their DC offices and hit all their district offices! Hit them on the phones, their social media, by fax, and by mail in that order of importance.



We hear their staffers are ready to fight with you, they are ready to confuse, deny, and lie.



Are you ready to fight????



(Create your own distinctive version of this sample message)

"I am dedicated to removing _______ from office in the GOP Primaries of 2014 due to his efforts to supply Obama and the Democrats with the illegal alien amnesty they want. I know that __________ is out of line with more than 4 out of 5 GOP voters by supporting amnesty for illegal aliens and I plan to use my time and resources to target him for removal from office over this issue!"


ALIPAC's Top 12 Illegal Alien Amnesty Supporting Targets in the US Congress


http://www.alipac.us/f8/alipacs-top-12-illegal-alien-amnesty-supporting-targets-us-congress-291160/

We are providing you with the national organization, the right messages, the right strategies, and the right targets to defeat Amnesty and then proceed to take a lot of these politicians out of office in 2014.




Step 3: If you are within a 3 hour drive of Vista, CA we need you physically present outside Issa's offices with our other supporters to send a clear message you want him to abandon his plan to file an amnesty bill next week! Our largest support base is in Southern California... please mobilize!



Protest against Darrell Issa's illegal alien amnesty Thur Oct 31 11am PT Vista, CA

http://www.alipac.us/f9/protest-against-darrell-issas-illegal-alien-amnesty-thur-oct-31-11am-pt-vista-ca-290983/

Get in the battle, folks! We need to hear from you with your support and these illegal alien supporters need to hear from you with your opposition!




Let's roll!



William Gheen and The ALIPAC Team

www.alipac.us

www.AgainstAmnesty.com


PS: We need each of you to make 12 calls to the 12 offices we target above and then send in your donation of any amount right away before the deadline in 24 hours. Currently, we do not have the funds to fight amnesty well or make it into 2014. You have 24 hours to decide if you want to fight and if you want to keep the national organization that has played a key roll in defeating amnesty for you before in operation.

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Can atheists "prove" there is no God?

BLOGGERS NOTE: I WILL BE MOVING FROM FACEBOOK TO TWITTER AND BLOGSPOT SOON!


An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about atheism. This follows this post about changes after the Berlin Wall came down. For a free magazine subscription or to get the book shown for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.   Youth Focus from Vertical Thought... The God Debate





article by Doug Horchak





Can atheists "prove" there is no God?



Recently, two of the world's most vocal atheists published books to defend their claim that there is no evidence for God's existence. Richard Dawkins ( The God Delusion ) and Christopher Hitchens ( God Is Not Great ) have presented their best arguments for their position that God does not exist and that religion poisons the world. Ironically, their own books provide much "evidence" to the contrary.



So what are their claims? Let's consider their reasoning and conclusions. Common arguments by atheists against God include:



• Comparing the God of Israel to all gods through history. In the minds of atheists, all gods take on the same value. Whether it is Zeus, Thor, Baal, Vulcan, Vishnu or the God of the Bible, there is no difference in their eyes. They conclude that all gods have been humanly contrived to accommodate the social and psychological needs of man.



• Discrediting the notion of God because of violence done in His name. As atheists evaluate history, they often note how many times violence, genocide, killing, rape, murder and war have happened in the name of God. Whether the Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades or the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo and Africa, these types of violence are commonly cited as the hypocrisy of religion and a result of belief in God. Atheists conclude that there could be no benevolent, loving God behind this.



• Claiming errors and duplicity of Scripture. Many atheists deny the existence of the Judeo-Christian God based on alleged discrepancies of the Bible. Examples of biblical disagreements they cite include issues related to history, science, the teachings of Jesus, death, murder and war. If the Word of God—the Bible—contradicts itself, they reason, the book cannot represent the mind of an omniscient God.



• Showing that paganism is in mainstream Christianity. Both Dawkins and Hitchens cite the fact that, although mainstream Christianity claims its origins from Jewish forefathers and the writings of the Bible, much of its doctrine, ceremony, images and worship have their origins in pagan practices actually condemned in the Bible. They correctly note that the origins of Christmas and Easter (mainstays of many churches) come from Babylon, Egypt and Greece—not the true Creator God of the Bible.



Atheists point out that these practices are hypocritically borrowed from earlier pagan religions. If the forms of worship are this flawed, they reason that claims by these same worshippers that God really exists must likewise be hypocritical.



• Asking who designed God. When trying to debunk intelligent design (a movement of scientists claiming that the complexity of systems enabling all life to exist cannot be adequately explained by Charles Darwin's theory of evolution), atheists fall back to what they believe is the mother of all questions: Who designed or created God? In answer to Christians saying that God is the original cause of all things, they want to know who created Him. Since there is no acceptable answer to this question (at least to them), they believe that there clearly can be no God.



• Concluding that Darwinism must be true! Atheists believe that there is only one answer to the origin and development of life: that of Darwinian evolution. Most professors, teachers and scientists in the fields of zoology, anthropology and biology believe and teach this theory as fact. Atheists see this instruction by educators as further proof that there is no God.



When atheists make sense



You might be shocked to know that some of the observations from which atheists argue make perfect sense! When you consider the observations and knowledge of religion and history that avowed atheists embrace, it is easy to see why they struggle with believing in a Creator God! Much of the historical evidence of religion, biblical interpretation and deeds done in the name of God discredit religious people's efforts to justify their belief in God. Some facts to consider:



• The many gods in varied cultures through history do not represent the true God. These "gods" are, in fact, fictional and do not, nor have they ever, existed.



• The varied practices, doctrines and historic acts of Christians through the ages (in the Middle East, Europe, America and around the world) are confusing and hypocritical.



• The confused and often contradictory interpretations of the Holy Bible by so many denominations, sects, groups and individuals are mind-boggling. These individuals have misrepresented the Bible!



• Many of the practices that began in the church of Rome in the second and third centuries were borrowed from the pagan customs of the pre-Christian world. The observance of Christmas, Easter, New Year's Day and even worship on Sundays is not taught in the Bible!



A missing dimension, once again



The fact is, we do live in a world that is confused about virtually everything—including God, science, morality, religion and the Bible! While many people (like Hitchens and Dawkins) assume that the history of mankind and religion represents a God-centered worldview's best shot—actually, the opposite is true! The history of mankind generally represents man's rejection of God. Human history doesn't represent God at His best, but man at his worst!



For nearly 6,000 years man has been devising his own view of morality and life—which includes various forms of religion (including Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.). What we see in the practice, teachings and history of these religions is too often generated and designed solely by human beings—not by God at all!



Jesus Christ told His disciples nearly 2,000 years ago that, as time went on, the masses would be deceived by many claiming to be His true representatives. He said: "Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many" (Matthew 24:4-5 [4] And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.

[5] For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.





See All..., King James Version).



Put another way, the vast majority of the world's religions and religious leaders would be counterfeits. The result is that millions of people have been deceived by Satan the devil—the real ruler and god of this age (2 Corinthians 4:4In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.



See All...; Revelation 12:9And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.



See All...).



While there are as many views of the meaning of the Bible as there are religious sects, even this confusion was foretold by God! The written history of the God of Israel is unlike the accounts and historic writings referring to any other deity in human history. In the writings of the Holy Bible, God is referred to as transcending the physical realm, including the many gods conceived in the human mind. The gods of images and human imaginations are nothing compared to the invisible, all-powerful God of the Bible!



Evidence of a Creator



The Bible tells us that people, having the physical creation before them, are truly "without excuse" when it comes to knowing that God exists (Romans 1:20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:



See All...).



Interestingly, while the modern intelligent design movement acknowledges that the creation truly was created, a majority of educators deceptively decries the concepts of irreducible complexity and design inference as nonscience. Even so, a large and growing body of scientists and educators today realizes that this complex universe could not exist without some intelligence behind it!



In more than one place in the Bible, God tells us that "the fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God'" (Psalms 14:1(To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.) The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.



See All...; 53:1). And yet, some of these same "fools" that have sadly rejected the idea of a loving, omniscient creator God do have a clear understanding of the hypocritical, confusing and often violent history of mankind and its many religions.



Their fundamental error is that they attribute such confusion and chaos in man's history to the best the idea of God can offer, when, in fact, man's sordid past (and his immediate future) are the result of man's rejecting the true Creator. GN

.

News from El Paso, Texas: New Voter ID Working Smoothly

A timely post about from www.Vdare.com about voter I.D. This follows this post about the U.S. game of football. In the meantime, you can get more involved if you like here and read an interesting book HERE.

News from El Paso, Texas: New Voter ID Working Smoothly


http://www.vdare.com/posts/news-from-el-paso-texas-new-voter-id-working-smoothly

By Allan Wall

The Texas voter ID law, while not as stringent as Mexico's Voter ID system (see here) has been attacked as discriminatory by, among others, Eric Holder's Justice Department.
Now, however, the law is actually being used in an election, and the news from El Paso, Texas is that it's working smoothly:




County election officials said they haven't experienced any problems in the first election in which Texans are required to provide an ID in order to vote.Early voting for the Nov. 5 election began Monday. This is the first time since Texas implemented its voter ID law that requires voters to show a valid form of identification before casting their ballot. "So far it's not creating any problems at all. Everybody is complying with the law," said Javier Chacon, El Paso County elections administrator.

The article though has to include some unfounded criticism of the law:



But there are some who say the voter ID law will disenfranchise people of color and women. The law requires that the name on the identification card match the name listed on the voter registration card. This creates potential problems for some women who use maiden or hyphenated names.Democratic state Rep. Mary González of El Paso lashed out against the law and state Republicans in a statement saying, "The Texas GOP has long waged a war on women, and now they've taken that attack to our fundamental right to vote."

But where is the concrete evidence of anybody being "disenfranchised"?



Texas Secretary of State John Steen disputed allegations from González and others that people couldn't vote if the name on their ID didn't exactly match the name on the voter registration. "As long as the names are substantially similar, all a voter will have to do is initial to affirm he or she is the same person who is registered," Steen said in a statement. "Poll workers have been trained to account for names that might be substantially similar but not an exact match due to a number of circumstances including the use of nicknames, suffixes, and changes of name due to marriage or divorce."

The Texas law is still not as strict as Mexico's Voter ID system, in which only the official government-issued Voter ID card can be used. However, it's a step in the right direction.



The Legislature in 2011 passed a law requiring identification from voters, but the law was blocked by the Justice Department under powers granted by the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court earlier this year ruled that key elements of the Voting Rights Act were unconstitutional and Texas immediately announced it would begin enforcing the voter ID law.

See my article Eric Holder Vs. Texas - Standing In The Courthouse Door Crying "Voter Fraud Forever!"   The Justice Department has since filed a separate lawsuit challenging the ID law, but it remains in effect for the current election.



Well, it should be an attempt to prevent illegal voting, shouldn't it?



The county elections office lists seven accurate forms of identification that can be used to vote -- a driver's license, an election identification certificate, personal identification card, concealed handgun license, U.S. military identification card, U.S. citizenship certificate and a U.S. passport.

So there are several options, still not as strict as Mexico's law.



Identification must be up to date or have expired "no more than 60 days before being presented for voter qualification at the polling place; except for the United States citizenship," the county elections website states.

And here's what an actual Texas voter had to say:



Early voter Jose Rodriguez said Friday that the new law didn't inconvenience him. "No," he responded when asked whether voting was a hassle. "This time it was simpler and faster," the West El Paso resident said. Blanca Hernandez said Friday that she plans to vote but hasn't yet because she wants to educate herself a little more on the issues. The Northeast El Paso resident added that she doesn't have any second thoughts about voting under the new law."It's not going to dissuade me from voting because I already carry a valid ID," she said.Early voting continues through Nov. 1 for the Nov. 5 election, with voters being asked to decide nine proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution.Voters in San Elizario are deciding whether to incorporate as a city; Horizon City and Socorro are having municipal elections.

El Paso officials: Voter ID rolls out smoothly Luis Carlos Lopez, El Paso Times, Oct. 26th, 2013   In the comments section below the article there is a report of some provisional ballots due to name problems, but as this is still early voting there's time to fix that.

Tennessee mosque invites Hamas-linked Muslim scholar Jamal Badawi to speak

A very interesting post from www.jihadwatch.org about a major mosque in Tennessee. This follows this post about Islam in NYC Schools. This follows this article about American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries such as Iran. For more about what you can do to get more involved click here and you can read two very interesting books HERE.

Tennessee mosque invites Hamas-linked Muslim scholar Jamal Badawi to speak


This WZTV story is even more relentlessly biased than most, giving that impression that Badawi's unindicted co-conspirator status is something that "anti-Islamic websites" simply "claim," and that try as they might, these intrepid reporters just can't verify.

In reality, it is established fact, as noted on that celebrated anti-Islamic website known as USA Today. The Investigative Project on Terrorism reports that "Badawi has defended violent jihad including suicide bombings and has suggested that Islam is superior to secular democracy. Barzinji was named in a federal affidavit as being closely associated with Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas."
It is extremely revealing that the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro, which was the center of controversy since its inception, would feature Badawi as a speaker. This confirms the contention of foes of the mosque that it wasn't as "moderate" as it claimed.

Incidentally, Jamal Badawi also owes me a million dollars.
"Opponents: Scholar Scheduled to Speak at Local Mosque has Ties to Terror," from WZTV Nashville, October 22 (thanks to all who sent this in):
MURFREESBORO, Tenn. - There's a new concern tonight about a religious facility that's dealt with years of controversy. That concern involves the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro and a Muslim speaker who's going to be there next month. November 3 the Islamic Center is hosting a forum called God's Books. It includes scholars from various faiths, but there's an email circulating with specific concerns about one of them, a man mosque opponents say has ties to terror. Big questions, and Iman [sic] Ossama Bohloul plans to discuss them all next month inside the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro. Bohloul invited 2 Christian scholars and a Rabbi to speak, but he's getting criticism for his Islamic speaker, former Canadian professor Dr. Jamal Badawi.




Critics say Badawi has connections with radical Islam. J. Lee Douglas' group the 9/12 Project believes Badawi's appearance is a sign the Murfreesboro mosque is more than it advertises. In particular, he's concerned about reports on anti-Islamic websites that claim Badawi was an unindicted co-conspirator in a federal terrorists funding case.



It's a claim to date no member of law enforcement has publicly agreed with and we did some checking on Badawi with the U.S. Attorney's Office. A spokesperson there tells FOX17 NEWS there are no alarms raised by any law enforcement agency concerning the Islamic speaker. Imam Bohlol says it's silly for critics to say his mosque is hiding anything, considering everyone is invited to hear Badawi speak. Terrorist funding case opponents' link to Badawi began in Dallas in the early 2000s.



We reached out to that U.S. Attorney's Office to find out more about what role, if any, Badawi might have had in the case. We are still waiting for their response and will let you know if there's anything concerning.

Posted by Robert

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

"Mr. Gorbachev, Tear Down This Wall"

BLOGGERS NOTE: I WILL BE MOVING FROM FACEBOOK TO TWITTER AND BLOGSPOT SOON!

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about changes after the Berlin Wall came down. This follows this post about witches and Halloween. For a free magazine subscription or to get the book shown for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

"Mr. Gorbachev, Tear Down This Wall"






article by John Ross Schroeder





This historic demand, delivered by U.S. President Ronald Reagan in front of Berlin's Brandenburg Gate on June 12, 1987, came to symbolize the Eastern European revolt against Communist slavery in 1989. Nearly 2 1/2 years after the president's epochal visit, the Berlin Wall collapsed on Nov. 9, 1989. What are the prophetic implications indicated in God's Word?



June 12, 1987, turned out to be a warm spring afternoon in the then divided city of Berlin. The ugly Berlin Wall stood in the background as the articulate speaker delivered his stark public message to the Soviet leader. Armed East German border guards watched from military installations embedded in the wall itself. Crowds on the Eastern side, hoping to hear the president's speech by loudspeaker, were cruelly forced to back away from the Berlin Wall.



In the first part of his speech, Ronald Reagan reviewed previous visits by American presidents, particularly the memorable words of John F. Kennedy, "Ich bin ein Berliner" (I am a Berliner), uttered only a few months before his tragic assassination on Nov. 22, 1963. President Kennedy meant that "as a free man," he stood together with West Berliners in their struggle to secure their freedom against Communist aggression. During that speech he predicted that the Berlin Wall would come down.



Some 25 years later, President Reagan delivered his stark demand to the Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, "Tear down this wall." The detailed history behind these fateful four words is well worth recounting.



Doing battle over four words

The West German government invited President Reagan to come to Berlin to help celebrate the historic city's 750th anniversary. White House speechwriter Peter Robinson was asked to write a speech for the president about foreign policy. His final draft, including the phrase "tear down this wall," was reviewed by the National Security Council and the State Department. Both of these government bodies strongly disapproved of the four-word phrase.



Evaluations like "needlessly provocative" quickly emerged. One diplomat suggested an alternative phrase: "One day this ugly wall will disappear." Speechwriter Robinson reacted privately with, "One day, perhaps pigs will fly."



This momentous speech, defining President Reagan's general approach to foreign affairs, survived seven different drafts. In fact, the heated battle over these four words continued all the way to Berlin. Kenneth Duberstein, the president's deputy chief of staff, accompanied him in the limousine on the way to the Berlin Wall. During this journey, Ronald Reagan finally said: "So, Ken, I am the president." "Yes, sir," came the reply. "Well, Ken," chuckled Mr. Reagan, "Let's just leave that line in."



The president told an assistant, also on the scene, "The boys at State [the Department] are going to kill me [figuratively], but it's the right thing to do."



Witnesses to history

Several authors and journalists who were witnesses to the historic fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989 have recounted their own personal experiences in books, magazine articles and newspaper stories. I was dispatched to the scene by my bureau chief in England, accompanied by my daughter Stephanie acting as translator.



Twenty years later veteran writer Gerhard Marx persuaded me to accompany him to Berlin to cover the anniversary celebrations together. He spent his early youth in Germany during World War II, later immigrating to the United States and becoming an American citizen.



My colleague chose a hotel only a short walk from Checkpoint Charlie, the name given by the Western Allies to the most well-known Berlin crossing point between West and East during the Cold War. The site has become a tourist attraction, complete with a museum.



The Berlin Wall was constructed in 1961 to prevent East German citizens and some from other Warsaw Pact states from escaping to the West. The gates had already reopened slightly when Hungary opened its own border to fleeing Germans beginning in August 1989.



However, perhaps the defining movement that finally culminated in the wall's collapse in November began in the East German city of Leipzig, southwest of Berlin, with weekly prayer meetings in the Nikolai Church—followed by a peaceful march. In mid-October some 70,000 people in Leipzig marched peaceably through the city, unsure of whether the government would suppress these demonstrations. This public demonstration for individual freedoms helped precipitate the collapse of the Berlin Wall.



A celebration of freedom

Some 30 heads of state (mainly from Europe) met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in the Bellevue Palace on Nov. 9 for a celebration of freedom and then joined the public celebrations at the Brandenburg Gate.



American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also attended. (My colleague and I joined the exuberant crowds making their way to the Brandenburg Gate, where some 1,000 colorful domino stones were lined up to replicate the falling Berlin Wall two decades ago. Earlier young children were assigned to paint these stones in a variety of patterns and symbols.) This convergence of leaders was more European in nature than strictly German.



Somewhat in contrast, next year's 20-year festivities on Oct. 3, 2010, will concentrate on the reunification of West and East into one German state. Although this revolution for liberty really began earlier in the Polish shipyards under the leadership of Lech Walesea of Solidarnosc (Solidarity), the collapse of the Berlin Wall has captured the public imagination, becoming the more lasting symbol of freedom.



The Velvet Revolution, the deliverance of Czechoslovakia (since divided into the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic), came later in that November of 1989, clearly an autumn of epochal change in Eastern Europe.



World interest will once again refocus on Germany with the coming reunification anniversary celebrations in October of 2010. Although it is wise to periodically remind ourselves of any major, significant event that has resulted in much improved liberty—and a better economic and political life for many millions—human unity itself does not always result in genuine freedom, lasting prosperity and happiness. History shows that unbridled, lawless "freedom" eventually brings tears and monumental suffering.



Always remember that God is the unseen witness to human events. Even if He decides not to directly intervene before or during any specific occurrence, the Bible shows that His will is the ultimate deciding factor in the outcome of these major geopolitical events. This is one of the most important themes of the book of Daniel.



I didn't hear anyone giving God any credit during these celebrations, though undoubtedly He was accorded thanksgiving in some German churches. Still, it seems few really considered His role in these momentous events. At the very least, He allowed the Berlin Wall to fall. We should never think that He lacks the power to intervene in human affairs.



The Tower of Babel

This ancient tower depicted in the book of Genesis remains an important reminder. The Genesis account simply describes what humanity was up to some 4,000 years ago after rejecting God's guidance. "Come,...let us make a name for ourselves [a dubious motive], lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth" (Genesis 11:4And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.



See All...). God's previous instructions to Noah and the human family had been to populate the whole earth—not remain in one location (Genesis 9:1And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.



See All...).



But humankind has generally chosen to rebel against the Creator's wishes beginning with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Although the Almighty seems to generally refrain from intervening in human affairs, on this particular occasion He clearly did. He decided to nip this rebellion in the bud by taking an extreme measure—suddenly introducing many languages into the human configuration—thereby ensuring that humanity would carry out His will and scatter over the whole globe (Genesis 11:5-8 [5] And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.

[6] And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.

[7] Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.

[8] So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.





See All...).



God sees our future well in advance, and He knew that human ingenuity would move matters along faster than He wanted. "This is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose [imagine, King James Version] to do will be withheld from them" (verse 6, emphasis added throughout). Having made men and women in His own image (Genesis 1:26-27 [26] And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

[27] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.





See All...), our Creator has always understood the enormous ability and capacity of our human potential—both for good and for bad. Our first parents chose to imbibe of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.



The sovereignty of God

We hear a lot today about the sovereignty of various states. For instance, some farsighted political leaders in Britain fear any further loss of the nation's sovereignty to the European Union. But it is our Creator whom we should really fear. He remains in ultimate control of the destiny of nations and individuals (see Deuteronomy 32:7-8 [7] Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations: ask thy father, and he will shew thee; thy elders, and they will tell thee.

[8] When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.





See All...; Acts 17:26And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;



See All...).



Presidents of major countries sometimes use forceful words with remarkable effect—simple words like "tear down this wall." God can also speak to humanity in forceful words about events that He has the divine power to bring to pass. Those words have been preserved in the Bible, sometimes in the first person.



The Hebrew prophet Isaiah quotes God Himself as saying: "I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say: My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please... What I have said, that will I bring about; what I have planned, that will I do" (Isaiah 46:9-11 [9] Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,

[10] Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

[11] Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.





See All..., New International Version).



A future European Union of 10 nations

We rightly applaud the freedoms now experienced by the peoples of former East Germany, Poland, the Czech and Slovak Republics and other former Warsaw Pact nations in the East. Communist enslavement only brought poverty, atheism and a crushing of the human spirit.

But we should carefully look into God's prophetic Word, which tells us where Europe is ultimately headed. He has forecast a future union of 10 kings (or political entities) that will devastate the world and persecute Christians severely. For additional information, you may wish to request our free booklets The Book of Revelation Unveiled and Are We Living in the Time of the End?

Feminism and the Pinkification of Professional Football

A timely post about from www.badeagle.com about the U.S. game of football. This follows this post about George Soros and Mark Zuckerberg attempting to manipulate the U.S. Congress. In the meantime, you can get more involved if you like here and read an interesting book HERE.

Feminism and the Pinkification of Professional Football


by David Yeagley   Everyone has seen the pink footgear, pink body flags, and pink gloves being paraded on the NFL fields all over the country. Everyone knows that it’s about breast cancer awareness, and that it is a woman’s campaign.   Hardly a more worthy or important campaign could be thus launched. Yet, this ominous intrusion into the man’s world is tainted by raw feminism of the recent past which put women reporters in men’s locker rooms. Something is deeply amiss, despite the equality of death and spousal commitment.   While it is true that what affects one spouse intimately affects the other; while men’s prostate cancer has been ‘advertised’ by women as though women get prostate cancer also (by proxy, by spousal affectation in the conjugal, physical relation); the fact is, as Limbaugh pointed out, there is no campaign for men’s testicular cancer, or anything about particularly masculine forms of cancer. (Fact is, men sometimes get breast cancer also, rarely.)   Strong men are always the target of all women. Women are abjectly attracted to strong men, of any color, usually. The women generally looks to the man as the provider and protector, one way or another. But feminism as a political movement hates men. It is attracted to the man as an enemy, as something to be degraded, despised, and emasculated. (This is what the anti-Indian warrior image is all about. The strongest image of all must be removed unquestionably!)

Women simply cannot leave men alone. Something like professional football is irresistible–by any woman, of any political brand or hormonal condition. It is almost as if the women must participate in the strength of a man, be like him (like Xena), or attack him for being a man, for being stronger than her.

Perhaps my view here is itself tainted by my earlier experience of raw feminism at Yale Divinity. One of the last bastions of the male profession, the ministry was invaded by very aggressive woman who, for the most part, were not considered the generally attractive type of woman, and could never market themselves as objects of sexual attraction. In other words, there was a lot of resentment and hurt in most of the female seminarians. They wanted to compete with men on an equal basis. After all, there were half of the image of God, and expected to be regarded as such. It was a kind of reaction, from anger. They couldn’t be regarded as beautiful, but they were determined to be regarded as equal.


It was a sad and disappointing experience for me, personally, and affected me ever after.
I note also that, in the recent edition (not yet on line), Fall 2013, of Reflections (a YDS quarterly) is on “the art of aging,” and features old women, in articles, by women authors, and in female photography. Of course, what could be a more natural loss of marketable beauty than aging? Liberalism, of course, wants all to be equal, always, at the cost of every natural inclination.

The photo featured in the first article in the YDS Reflections, Fall 2013 edition. From the Marianne Gontarz York collection

Female homosexuality is a major element of feminist “equality,” of course. In an environment like Yale Divinity, it can be very aggressively advocated, as homosexuality in general. It isn’t always the case, but one dare not protest it any too loudly when it is the case. It would be the epitome of un-Christian behavior, to condemn anyone for anything so personal.




So American professional football is going to have to take it on the chin, so to speak. It is a feminist tackle from behind. A devastating blow, leaving a professional concussion on the game, indeed.



Note that move of the kick-off line from the 20 to the 30 yard line. There are no more kick-off returns now. It is a wasted gesture. This is one of the first, most notable emasculations of the game. Why was this exciting, dramatic play cut out? The injuries occur during punt returns, where there is little blocking available. What are the stats on kick-off return injuries? Some stats do show that there are more injuries on the kick-off returns, but they don’t say what kind of injuries. Why, it’s a full 2%! And the reduction of injuries is a full 0.2%. Great accomplishment.



It is liberalism invading another American cultural tradition, trying to destroy it, or to at least control it with tyranny. Unfortunately, the breast cancer campaign is their front line offense now. True, there are many men on the field and in the crowd whose lives have been affected by their wives’ breast cancer. That is undeniable. It’s just a shame that such a sincere concern must be ‘infected’ and inappropriately injected into the men’s sports world. It is a most egregious inpropriety.



But, propriety has never been a principle of liberalism. Only coercion. Only tyranny. Only oppression and control.



Men wear pink now. Men must bow to women–mean, angry women, who are using normal, feminine women as their offensive line.



And so this is the new mascot for all professional football: a pink ribbon. It’s all about women’s breasts now, the female protrusions. It’s like some primitive goddess worship on the front line. Save the breasts! Bow to the breast!


7 Targets that must receive thousands of calls

A very interesting post from www.Alipac.US about 7 Targets to hit in the War to Defend America. This follows this post about Chain Migration’s effect on increasing immigration. This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! For more about what you can do click here and you can read two very interesting books HERE.

7 Targets that must receive thousands of calls:




Our activists bringing the news into the forums area of www.alipac.us are confronted with the dark side of the illegal alien invasion of America we are fighting in stories like the one about the Chinese illegal alien in New York who just butchered a mother and 4 children, and the illegal aliens who just ended the lives of two innocent little girls playing in the leaves in their own yard before rushing to a car wash to try to remove their blood before detection by authorities. Thousands of Americans are being killed each year by illegals, more will be killed if amnesty passes, and the atrocities will become permanent if they pass "immigration reform."   Billionaire destroyer of nations George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, and Mark Zuckerberg's 300 GOP traitors and Evangelicals are deployed into the offices of Republican lawmakers today to give them the front impression of support for amnesty! Only a massive outcry from you on the phones, faxes, websites, and social media can counter them. Please make a donation of any amount and then call as many GOP Lawmakers in DC as possible right away....

Call, call, call, then hit their Social media pages! 7 Targets that must receive thousands of calls:


Target 1: Congressman Darrell Issa -- "Congressman Issa don't file your illegal alien amnesty bill this week to help Obama!"

Phone numbers: 202-225-3906, 760-599-5000, 949-281-2449


Fax: 202-225-3303, 760-599-1178

Twitter-- https://twitter.com/darrellissa

Facebook-- https://www.facebook.com/darrellissa
Target 2: Paul Ryan -- "Congressman Paul Ryan, stop working with Chicago Democrat Congressman Luiz Guitirezz to craft amnesty legislation for illegal aliens!"
Phone numbers: (202) 225-3031, 608-752-4050, (262) 654-1901, 888-909-RYAN (Toll Free)


Fax: (202) 225-3393, 608-752-4711, (262) 637-5689

Twitter-- http://paulryan.house.gov/contact/#.UjcZ8lUeH50.twitter

Facebook-- https://www.facebook.com/reppaulryan
Target 3: John Boehner -- "Stop working with Obama behind the scenes to pass amnesty for illegal aliens. The Obama Boehner amnesty will destroy future border and immigration law enforcement!" Phone numbers: (202) 225-6205, (513) 779-5400, (937) 339-1524, Toll-free for 8th District (800) 582-1001

Twitter: http://twitter.com/SpeakerBoehner

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/johnboehner

Target 4: Eric Cantor --


"Stop working with Obama behind the scenes to pass amnesty for illegal aliens. The Obama Cantor amnesty will destroy future border and immigration law enforcement!"Phone numbers: (202) 225-2815, (540) 825-8960, (804) 747-4073

Fax: (202) 225-0011, (540) 825-8964, (804) 747-5308


Twitter: http://twitter.com/GOPLeader

also- http://twitter.com/CantorPress
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/HouseChamber
Target 5: Jeff Denham -- "The fact Congressman Jeff Denham is the first Republican to sign the Democrats illegal alien amnesty bill means it is time for a strong GOP primary challenger to replace him in 2014!"
Jeff Denham has just become the first Republican in Congress to sign the Democrat's amnesty bill and is asking others in the GOP to follow him. Let him know how you feel about his actions.


http://www.alipac.us/f12/republican-...l-push-290899/

Phone numbers: (202) 225-4540, (209) 579-5458
Fax: (202) 225-3402, (209) 579-5028
Twitter: https://twitter.com/RepJeffDenham

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RepJeffDenham
Target 6: Trent Franks -- "Congressman Trent Franks, I support you because you are endorsed by ALIPAC. Please stand strong against amnesty for illegal aliens and these amnesty supporters protesting at the end of your driveway! No form of Amnesty!"
Phone numbers: 202-225-4576, 623-776-7911


Fax: (202) 225-6328, 623-776-7832

Twitter: https://twitter.com/RepTrentFranks

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TrentFranks
Target 7: ALIPAC List of GOP Lawmakers likely to support amnety for illegal aliens. These offices need to hear from thousands of angry Americans upset about illegal immigration and the current push for amnesty!
http://www.alipac.us/f8/traitor-list...stance-289229/

If you have made your donation and/or are making these calls, please post your shout out to other activists, progress report, feedback, findings, suggestions, or any questions at this tracking thread....


http://www.alipac.us/f8/we-not-going...5/#post1376749



Please awaken, activate, and respond to us ALIPACers! We have held amnesty back to this point and each day we push them back favors our ability to stop them.



William Gheen and The ALIPAC Team

www.alipac.us

www.AgainstAmnesty.com

Monday, October 28, 2013

Editorial: Healthcare.gov Crashes!!! What does that mean for the rest of Obamacare???

Editorial

Last Week the nation got to see one of the glaring problems of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), and that was the website which the administration had three years to prepare for. Were the Repubicans right about the shutdown, AND if the website is having problems, what else is?

Tax Dollars Will Fund Abortions and Planned Parenthood Under Obamacare, Here’s How

BLOGGERS NOTE: I WILL BE MOVING FROM FACEBOOK TO TWITTER AND BLOGSPOT SOON!
An interesting story from www.lifenews.com  about Obamacare funding abortions. This follows this post about Down’s Syndrome. For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and you can also get two very interesting books HERE.



On a Friday night back in December 2009, Senate Majority Leader Reid was in tense negotiations with then-Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, as Reid desperately needed Nelson’s vote to secure Senate passage of ObamaCare. Finally, Nelson had what Politico described as a “breakthrough” that lead to a deal, as Politico reported a few days later. Part of the deal, Politico wrote, was that “people who receive federal subsidies would need to write two separate checks as a way to ensure that none of the federal dollars went toward the abortion premium.”



Six days later, Senator Nelson took to the Senate floor to explain in detail the deal he had negotiated. With respect to the two check requirement, Senator Nelson said: “In the Senate bill, if you are receiving Federal assistance to buy insurance, and if that plan has any abortion coverage, the insurance company must bill you separately, and you must pay separately from your own personal funds–perhaps a credit card transaction, your separate personal check, or automatic withdrawal from your bank account– for that abortion coverage. http://www.lifenews.com/2013/10/25/your-tax-dollars-will-fund-abortions-and-planned-parenthood-under-obamacare-heres-how

Wknd Box Office: All Is Lost, The Counselor, Enough Said, 12 Years a Slave

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 about 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 choosing good movies to watch yourself!

Wknd Box Office: All Is Lost, The Counselor, Enough Said, 12 Years a Slave


By Debbie Schlussel

Only one good choice among the new movies at theaters, this weekend. Actually it’s a great choice. (I did not see Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa. Why? Obvious reasons.)

* “All Is Lost“: Absolutely terrific. One of the best movies I’ve seen this year. This is the smart man’s “Gravity” (read my review). It’s got a similar story, although in a different atmosphere, but the person struggling to survive is much smarter here.

And there’s much less dialogue. Whereas Sandra Bullock talks non-stop and does everything wrong in “Gravity,” Robert Redford’s character (who is a nameless solitary man) says almost nothing and does everything right. Yet, both are trying to stay alive in challenging atmospheres that threaten to end their lives. The most dialogue is about two or three lines uttered by Redford at the beginning of the movie, reading aloud some sort of good-bye note to family.

I thought I would find this movie boring and slow because of the lack of dialogue, but, in fact, the movie was riveting and I was on the edge of my seat the entire way through. The movie is spectacular, both in story/plot and visuals. Its attention to detail is terrific

Redford plays a man who is alone on his sailboat in the middle of the Indian Ocean. He wakes up, one morning to the hull of the ship filling up with water. A stray cargo container that has fallen off some ship (and contains “Made in China” athletic shoes) crashes into the sailboat and creates a giant, gaping hole. (I wondered if the cargo container was meant to be symbolic of “Made in China” products crashing our economy and creating a giant, gaping hole in America’s future.)

The rest of the movie shows Redford’s travails and triumphs as he attempts to repair the hole and survive, with all of the odds against him. I’m making it sound far less interesting than it is. It’s actually a great adventure and really a great movie about the human will to survive (“Never Give Up” is the movie’s tag line). Despite all the disasters and horrible conditions, Redford remains ever calm and calculating, using his brain and know-how to stay alive.

While young kids won’t get this, you can take your teens to see this movie (but don’t complain to me that I didn’t warn you about the one F-word in it). Don’t let Redford’s lefty politics keep you from seeing this fantastic movie. And I recommend you see this in the theater, as it won’t have the same effect at home on video.

I highly recommend “All Is Lost.”

FOUR REAGANS



* “The Counselor“: More disgusting, violent garbage put out by Rupert Murdoch.

Extremely pretentious, absolutely disgusting, and very violent. This is yet another one of those time bandits. It robbed me of two hours of my life I’ll never get back. The movie is very high style–expensive, gaudy, flashy clothes, cars, and jewelry (and even a pair of pet leopards–or tigers, I forget which and don’t really care). The movie is long, slow, and boring.

It’s also very bloody. There are a beheading, point blank gunshot murders, bodies in tanks, and–at least this part one could enjoy watching–Brad Pitt gets murdered with some mechanical wire device strapped around his neck that keeps squeezing.

Cormac McCarthy, at age 80, should probably get out of the business. This is his first screenplay that made it to the big screen and doesn’t come from one of his novels. It should be his last. The conversations in the movie are pretentious and absurd. Nobody talks like that. And the movie tries too hard to be both philosophical and a Quentin Tarantino movie. It stinks at both.

A lawyer (Michael Fassbender), whose name we are never told (he’s merely called, “Counselor”) needs money. So he decides to go in on a drug deal with clients and friends of his (including Javier Bardem and Brad Pitt). The drugs are smuggled from Mexico through a southern border town in tanks in tanks carried by truck. But there is a complication, the drug deal goes bad, and the lawyer gets blamed for it. The lawyer knows he will have to flee, lose everything that’s important to him, and be in fear for his life forever. The same goes for his friends and clients.

Oh, and did I mention the dumb feminist angle in all of this? The person pulling all the strings and getting all the money–while screwing all the men over and getting them killed–is Cameron Diaz (who is a terrible actress, not believable in this movie, and who hit the wall about 13 years ago). Yay, grrrrl power! Diaz, who wears all kinds of fancy, flashy post-modern style clothes and jewelry (and very ugly silver-white nail polish) is just awful in this movie. I almost think this movie was made so that she could show us her breasts (which are laid out in one scene plus about two millimeters of her nipple). And so that she could masturbate on the front window shield of a fancy sports car in an incredibly sleazy and unintentionally very comical scene. This is after she tells her boyfriend (Bardem), “I’m going to f— your car.” Classy. That’s all anyone will be talking about with regard to this incredible joke of a movie.

A complete waste of time and extremely obnoxious. I hated this.

FOUR MARXES PLUS THREE BETTY FRIEDANS



* “Enough Said“: I had mixed feelings about this movie. On the one hand, it’s mostly light and very funny. But then it gets slightly melodramatic and sad for my taste. Also, I could have done without the main character, Eva (Julia Louis-Dreyfus), who plays a mother of a teen daughter, advising her daughter’s teen friend that she should have sex with some random guy. Um, nice parenting. I did like that the movie made fun of left-wing female poets and how intolerant and base they actually are. And I liked the movie’s slight commentary on the deviant, all-too-casual sexual behavior of teens today.

Eva is a masseuse and divorced single mother. She is about to lose her teen daughter to college and her daughter’s classmate and friend is a little too close to Eva. Eva and some friends go to a party hosted by someone in the publishing industry. While there, she meets Marianne (Catherine Keener), a poet, who hires Eva to massage her. Eva also meets Albert (James Gandolfini in his last role), who asks Eva out on a date.

Soon, Eva becomes good friends with Marianne, who constantly, snobbishly attacks her ex-husband. Eva also becomes romantically involved with Albert, who talks about how his ex-wife treated him terribly. Eventually, Eva puts two and two together and realizes that Marianne and Albert are divorced from each other. But Eva doesn’t want to tell either of them that she knows the other because she thinks it’s too awkward and too late. But Eva and Albert’s relationship is poisoned by Marianne’s attacks on her ex.

The movie presents several ethical dilemmas, and it’s definitely entertaining. But, as I noted above, I could have done without the slight, brief, melodrama, as well as the horribly irresponsible parental “advice” from Eva to her daughter’s friend. This would have been a TWO REAGAN movie but because of that, I give it . . .

ONE-AND-A-HALF REAGANS



12 Years a Slave: Racism, 2013, and My Beef with the Solomon Northup Movie

By Debbie Schlussel

“12 Years a Slave,” in movie theaters today, is yet another movie about which I had mixed emotions. It’s an interesting story, the main character is a fine, admirable, and incredibly courageous man, and it’s based on a true story. But it appears to have been made for pure propaganda purposes, especially when we see what’s going on today in a culture that Solomon Northup–this movie’s protagonist–would probably abhor. But race-baiting is hip in our Obama/Kanye world.

Those who’ve looked into its historical accuracy say that this movie hews quite closely to the book of the same name, written by Solomon Northup, a free man from New York, who was kidnapped and sold into slavery for 12 years. However, the New York Times reports that many believe Northup embellished his story to tailor it to the former slave narrative from the time. It also reports that Northup’s book appears to have actually been written (and story embellished) by a White abolitionist with an agenda. We might have a hint of the movie’s own agenda when we note that one of the movie’s consultants is Henry Louis “Skip” Gates, Jr. (the man who accused the Cambridge police officer of being “raaaaacist!” for arresting him–and then they both had a beer with Obama, after he said the police “acted stupidly.)
My beef with this movie is that it was heavy-handed, and I feel like I’m being hit over the head with repeated two-by-fours of racism movies, when we have a Black President, Black reparations (affirmative action, minority set-asides, ObamaPhones, ObamaCare, welfare, etc.). This is like the fifth or sixth racism movie we’ve been subjected to this year, and that’s too bad, because this was probably the best by far of all of them . . . and the most honest in terms of historical accuracy and truth (maybe–read the New York Times link above).
There was the Jackie Robinson movie, which left out that he was a lifelong Republican (read my review), the lying, fraudulent “The Butler” movie (read my review), which made the Republican butler into some sort of anti-Reagan crusader he never was, a Nelson Mandela movie (or two), a Winnie Mandela movie (or two), and this. Those are the ones I can remember off the top of my head, and I’ve heard enough N-words uttered in these movies to last me several lifetimes. Ditto for the White on Black violence depicted over and over and over again. Yes, slavery happened, and racism is a part of American history. It is actually still practiced today in the Muslim world, and where are the movies about that?
But when will we see the movies about the current state of racism: Black racism against White people which I feel quite often, living as a White minority in a Black suburb where I grew up? (Just last night, two Black women at a movie theater threatened to beat and kill me, with the Black and White managers laughing at the racially-motivated incident and threatening to lock me up in the theater.) Where is the movie about murder for “Jogging While White” and assorted other racist crimes that occur every day in 2013 and don’t fit Hollywood’s preferred narrative on racism? When are we going to see the movies about how Black America itself has introduced a culture whose music (hip-hop/rap) and lifestyle encourages many fatherless children born to many women–with many of those children growing up hopeless, involved in drugs, and likely to commit crimes, especially if they are male?
These racism movies only serve to make Black Americans feel like they are still being oppressed, despite what they have achieved and who is Prez and so on. The movies only motivate more Black racism against the rest of us in America. There is nothing to resolve now, as far as issues present in this movie. That is the past. Slavery is long over. Sadly, I’ve spoken with many Blacks who still think they are slaves in America 2013, who still blame racism for everything that happens or doesn’t happen to them. Victimhood sells. Or Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would be outta business. And Barack Obama would not be President.


I’m sure I’ll get the usual retorts from some readers that there are plenty of Holocaust movies, too, and I don’t get sick of those. Um, wrong. I reviewed just one Holocaust-related movie this year. And it was a documentary about Israelis who remained friends with Nazis after the War, despite the Holocaust. That’s something new. And the thing is–despite my maternal grandparents having survived the Holocaust, most of both sides of my family being wiped out in it, and my mother being born and subjected to a displaced persons camp in Bergen Belsen–I don’t ask for ObamaPhones, special treatment in university admissions and public hiring, welfare, and minority set-asides. And that’s despite the fact that the Holocaust was recent. Slavery happened long ago. While anti-Semitism is at its highest levels since the Holocaust, racism is at its lowest levels in White America. In fact, both anti-Semitism and racism–in poll after poll–are embraced most by one group: Black Americans. And the anti-Semitism is higher among wealthier, more educated Blacks.

But I digress. Now to the movie.

I cannot disregard the excellent acting by Chiwetel Ejiofor, who plays Solomon Northup, the free man who was sold into 12 years of slavery. Ejiofor, it should be noted, was born to Nigerian parents. So, none of his ancestors were victims of slavery in America. Northup was educated and a classical musician who played violin. He was upper class among free Black men and White ones, as well. I’m glad the movie shows that he did have White friends and allies (from New York) who were involved, after all, in freeing him from slavery. Unfortunately, that is a tiny, almost afterthought in the film. The one really good, anti-slavery man (Brad Pitt) is a Canadian.

We see Northup tricked by two men who say they perform in a circus and have a business opportunity for Northup to play in it. Instead, he was drugged, and wakes up in chains, and no one believes that he’s a free man. We see the indignities he must suffer as a slave, and the horrible things that happen. I could have done without the masturbation/sex scene at the beginning with another slave. Was this really necessary? We see the repeated violence against and torture of slaves. We see the disgusting things they are forced to do, sexually, as minstrels, as laborers, and otherwise. None of this is new. (Nor is the fact that there were free Black men in America at the time of slavery.) And it is depicted very forcefully.

The things I liked most about this movie are the smart things Solomon Northup did, such as making ink from blackberries, so he could secretly try to contact his family and friends in the North to seek his freedom. It reminds us that once Black Americans did value education and brilliance, and they taught themselves without affirmative action, set asides, favorable treatment, and the drug that is entitlements. There wasn’t much emphasis on this in the movie. And it reminded me, also, that there aren’t enough movies about the positive things educated Blacks have done, such as George Washington Carver’s many inventions, or the many Western towns developed and established by Blacks. Those movies would be inspirational. This just inspires more hate.

I hope this is the last of this kind of movie I’ll see. But I know it won’t be. As I said, America–particularly the minority “civil rights” community–loves victimhood. That’s what sells tickets. That’s America’s mentality today.

Gimme, gimme, gimme, you crackaz. I deserve it because, 150 years ago, a free man of my complexion was enslaved.

To me, that was the point of this movie. There can be no other.

TWO OBAMAS PLUS ONE MICHELLE PLUS TWO JESSE JACKSONS PLUS TWO AL SHARPTONS