YET ANOTHER person leaving Facebook!

A timely post from www.freedomfeens.com about why someone left Facebook. This follows this post about mysticsim, Dr. Strange, and Star Wars. This follows this post about rap songs referencing Donald Trump.
You can follow me here.

Why I Left Facebook, and where to find me online

by MWD

I’ve always thought it was pathetic when people scream “I’m leaving Facebook!”….or MySpace, or however far you want to take it back….I even saw this before the World Wide Web, on newsgroups, in 1990. But it’s only pathetic when people’s reasons for leaving are the usual “No one likes me! And people are mean to me!” Those are not my reasons for leaving Facebook. In fact, a lot of people like me on Facebook. I have 2200 “friends” on there. And a lot of them are people I enjoy talking with.
I find it interesting that you can’t just delete your Facebook account. It takes 14 days. Reminds me of a nanny waiting period to buy a gun. Facebook knows how annoying it is, and like the drug dealer giving out free samples to a junkie who gets off junk, Facebook says “You’ll be back…..” and tries to entice you not to leave. Sort of how some states make you be separated for a while before they’ll “grant” you a divorce. Anyway, if you do want to leave Facebook, here’s how to do it. (Skip step one there, and before you delete your account, delete all your photos. Who knows if Facebook will decide they own those at some point.)
So, if you’d like to know why I’m leaving Facebook, and where you can find me, read on…..

WHY I’M LEAVING FACEBOOK, EFFECTIVE NOON TOMORROW (12/19/2012):
1. Facebook is starting to act like The State. Instagram, which is owned by Facebook, has updated their “user agreement” to say that they can sell any of your photos and not pay you. And they can use photos of your face. They could sell a photo of you smiling with a gun to an anti-gun campaign. If you’re overweight, you could end up in the “before” photo for a weight loss pill. etc. etc.
In saying that they can change their user agreement this drastically, and that you’ve already agreed by being a member, they are acting like The State with its “Social Contract.” That is, Facebook is acting like the government. Even though Facebook has backtracked due to public outrage, that sounds to me like what politicians do right before an election. Do I really wanna trust someone who figuratively says “Well, we were gonna rape you, but you complained and people are watching, so we’ll wait and rape you later”? (It’s ironic that so many statists are among the outraged, because they don’t realize this is EXACTLY how all governments behave.)
2. I waste a lot of time on Facebook. I used to write books that I was paid to write, but I spend so much time on Facebook that I’ve stopped writing books. You could say “Why not just spend less time on there?” but that’s like giving a junkie a brick of drugs and saying “just use this once in a while.” While this is my problem, not Facebook’s problem, my solution is to leave. I’ll probably go through “withdraw” for a little while, but then I’ll go back to actually producing things instead of wasting time on Facebook.
3. Facebook is censoring people. They are suspending accounts of people who do not tow the mainstream media line on current events.
4. Facebook is hypocritical. They are suspending accounts of people who post political ideas that Facebook does not like. Then they tell those people “Facebook is not a place for politics”, when in fact, Facebook was spamming me for Obama right before the election.
5. Facebook is spying on you. Of course these days, you are being spied on everywhere, all the time, by governments and corporations, but Facebook is the worst of the worst. And their privacy settings are useless.
6. I don’t want to talk to a lot of the people on Facebook. But they want to talk to me, and foist their opinions on everything at me, and they’re usually wrong. It’s annoying. But it goes beyond annoying sometimes. I’ve had death threats simply for my political beliefs from strangers who would never have even heard of me if I weren’t on Facebook. Like I said in one of my books ten years ago, “The great thing about the Internet is that everyone in the world can talk to you. The horrible thing about the Internet is that everyone in the world can talk to you.” This is more true on Facebook than anywhere. It’s set up for that. None of those people would bother trying to find my e-mail and bug me, but on Facebook, that’s just part of what people do. It’s part of the business model.
7. FACEBOOK USERS AS A WHOLE SEEM FAR MORE INTERESTED IN SPREADING FEAR THAN DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT. This statement isn’t singling out any individual users, and there are exceptions. But as an entity, the collective mind of Facebook is far more into yelling “THE SKY IS FALLING!” than putting on a hard hat to protect their head from falling sky pieces. The final straw, for me, was when I posted two things on the same day…The first was a link to an article about new ways the government is planning to read your e-mail. The second was a link to an article we wrote on setting up encrypted e-mail so the government can’t read your e-mail. The thing about government reading your e-mail got 170 likes and 76 shares. The piece about actually DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT got ten likes and 3 shares. To me, that says all you need to know about Facebook and why you shouldn’t be on there. Most people on Facebook would rather live in a fear-spiral echo chamber than actually DO ANYTHING to protect themselves. I call it “Fear porn”, and it’s not a type of porn I’m interested in consuming.
8. I’d rather spend my time and effort building my own sites than building someone else’s business model for free. Especially when that “someone else” is a company like Facebook that has no respect, and apparently has absolute contempt, for its “customers.”
WHERE TO FIND ME:
I’m not leaving the Internet. I love the Internet. I’ve been on it since 1990 (before the World Wide Web), and I’m still going to be around. I just hate Facebook. You can find me on Twitter, here. You can find Freedom Feens, my thrice-weekly podcast with Neema Vedadi, here. You can subscribe to that via RSS or iTunes, and post comments on the site, and I sometimes comment back. You can subscribe to the torrent link here. (Please seed Feens episodes for when the Central Scrutinizer declares free speech illegal, deletes our website, and throws us in camps.) You can find my interview podcast, Anarchy Gumbo, here.
You can find my past media here, and my e-mail address here. (Though please submit news items for the Feens here, rather than via e-mail.) You can find my encrypted e-mail and PGP key here. If I know you well and you use private i.m. via Pidgin, you probably already have my Pidgin address. I don’t give it out to many people.
Only about five people have my phone number, and I don’t talk to people much on the phone, but you can call the Feens number during our live shows, info is here. During Feens Live shows, I’m also on the Feens chat page (my user name is MichaelFeen), and I occasionally pop in there at other times. I write for the Freedom Feens blog (the thing you’re reading right now), and you can comment on here, and I sometimes comment back. I’ll also start posting photos of my cats here sometimes, that was always a favorite on Facebook, and I know it helps power the Internet and keeps the tubes from getting slow.
Skype is not a good way to find me except during the Feens live shows. I never turn Skype on unless I’m doing a show, and I never check my Skype messages. I am on YouTube, but that’s a bad way to contact me. I rarely answer on there, but you can enjoy my videos. I have a Google+ account, but I never check it and will probably be deleting that too.
You can listen to us 24/7 (and occasionally live) on Freedom Feens Radio.
Even with all the above, that’s much more manageable than being on Facebook. Facebook is a time suck.
There is a Freedom Feens Facebook page that’s run by fans, but not by me. Apparently there will be some Feens updates there.
So anyway, that about covers it. Enjoy Facebook if you stay. It’s useful for some people. But I’ve got things to do, and roads to build.
–Michael W. Dean

Could the Dollar Fall? What the Federal Reserve is doing!

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about the Federal Reserve and the U.S. dollar. This follows this post about Jesus Christ and Christmas. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

Could the Dollar Fall?

 by Darris McNeely 

Could the dollar be challenged and replaced by another world currency? Will something that until recently was "unthinkable" become a reality? The global financial slump is challenging long-held assumptions.

UCG.org

Could the Dollar Fall?

Several recent headlines in London's Financial Times illustrate a continuing thought among world financial leaders. The first headline said, “Brazil and China Eye Plan to Axe Dollar.” “China Attacks Dollar's Dominance” read another. A third spoke of “De-Dollarization and the Ending of America's Financial-Military Hegemony.” Another spotlighted the lack of confidence in American financial leadership: “Dollar Falls as Geithner [the U.S. Treasury Secretary] Hails Recovery Hopes.”
Warning shots are being fired across America's bow. Many want an end to the era of the dollar as the world's reserve currency. If that happens, your financial world will be forever altered.

Could this happen?

The United States is now the world's largest debtor nation ($10.6 trillion). And China owns more of that debt than any other nation—more than $800 billion. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao has publicly expressed “worries” over China's significant holdings of U.S. government bonds, which ties China to America's good times and its bad times.
China is concerned that the U.S. Treasury bills (T-bills) and bonds it holds will lose much of their worth if the dollar is devalued or the financial crisis does not turn around.
By calling for the creation of another reserve currency, China, Russia and other nations seek insurance for their economies against the problems generated when one country's economy goes bad. They also seek to end American dominance over the world economy. America's decline and China's rise fit their geopolitical ambitions.
Ending the dollar's role in the world economy is not an easy matter. The Wall Street Journal stated: “The technical and political hurdles to implementing China's recommendation [to create a new standard world currency to replace the dollar] are enormous, so even if backed by other nations, the proposal is unlikely to change the dollar's role in the short term.
“Central banks around the world hold more U.S. dollars and dollar securities than they do assets denominated in any other individual foreign currency. Such reserves can be used to stabilize the value of the central banks' domestic currencies” (“China Takes Aim at Dollar,” March 24, 2009).

Will the dollar's reign soon end?

Before the dollar, the British pound sterling formed the underpinning of the global economy. It took two world wars and several decades for the world standard to shift from the pound to the dollar. Since the end of World War II, the dollar has been king.
Although the current financial problems ignited in America have led to a global meltdown, it will take more than what we've experienced so far to topple America from its current role. That is not to say this could not or will not happen.
Creating another world currency requires several factors to be in place. Research analysts at the private intelligence agency Stratfor outlined what those factors would be:
“As to a world beyond the dollar, the issue is that a reserve currency is not decided upon; it creates itself. Two things are needed to create a reserve currency. First, there must be sufficient liquidity to support a global system. That requires a central bank with an enormous amount of autonomy from a state government, and the U.S. Federal Reserve is unparalleled on this count. Not even the European Central Bank can compete.
“Second, the economy upon which the currency is based must be large enough to withstand fluctuations caused by other economies buying and selling its assets in massive amounts. Again, the United States is the only economy that potentially could qualify.
“Part and parcel of any replacement of the U.S. dollar would be a large-scale abandonment of U.S. T-bills as the core of Chinese currency reserves, which—as the conventional wisdom holds—would force intractable economic problems upon the United States. But a closer look reveals that this is not the case.
“First, selling U.S. T-bills en masse simply is not possible. Every seller requires a buyer, and the volumes at hand cannot be exchanged quickly. Second, starting down that road would cause the value of the securities in question to plummet, destroying the savings the Chinese have been building up for years. The so-called 'nuclear option' really is not an option at all” (“China's Calculated Currency Rhetoric,” March 25, 2009).
China has its own problems. The huge middle class created by their recent boom is beginning to experience layoffs and financial setbacks. The ruling Communist Party cannot afford discontent from this segment of its society. Once people have tasted materialism, they won't go back. For now it's in China's interest to blame a foreign power (America). It deflects attention from the home front.
Yet clearly, China is playing a very dangerous geopolitical game with calls for a new reserve currency.

What would it mean for Americans?

Since the end of World War II, the dollar has been the dominant world currency. For most living Americans, this is the world into which they were born. This is all they have known. Americans enjoy one of the world's highest living standards due to the stability and wealth created by America's dominant economic role.
So what would it mean for the American consumer if the dollar were no longer the world's reserve currency?
Everything Americans import would cost more— everything. Americans would have to buy the new currency in order to trade in world markets. Last year's $4-per-gallon gasoline would quickly look like a bargain.
The credit market would collapse. Investors would flee toxic assets, further locking up the economy.
The U.S. Federal Reserve would print more money to combat the credit squeeze, with the likely result being hyperinflation, meaning higher prices for available goods. Remember the stories of Weimar Germany after World War I when it took a wheelbarrow full of money to buy a loaf of bread? Not pretty.
American power and influence in the world would seriously decline. Little understood today is the role of the economy in shaping and controlling world events. The dollar's place in the world adds incalculable weight to American influence. With the dollar diminished, that influence would be reduced substantially. Russia and China are waiting for their turn to assume that power, but they would certainly meet with competition from the European Union.
Big losers from the fall of the dollar would include Japan and Latin America. Because they hold much of America's debt, China and the oil-rich Persian Gulf states would also see huge losses. Israel and Egypt would suffer as well because of massive amounts of American aid they would lose. What this would mean to the Middle East calculus is unknown, but Egypt could be destabilized as a result.
World politics would be altered. The vacuum of power created would be contested. The EU, which stands to gain from the fall of the dollar, would be among the chief contenders. China would no doubt make a play as well, but a number of factors would hinder its bid. Stability would arise from the potential period of chaos with another power becoming the global economy's main engine. America's time in the sun would be over.
American lifestyles would change radically. The end of cheap oil, low interest rates and deficit spending would mean a lower quality of life and higher taxes. What this would mean to the social fabric of the nation is unknown. But Americans' way of life would dramatically change.
This last point speaks to the character of the American people. Do they have the same qualities that helped a prior generation survive the upheaval of a Great Depression and World War II?

America losing the pride of her power?

Those pushing to create a different world are no doubt working hard to bring about the demise of the dollar and the end of America's dominant role in the world. In The Good News we have spoken before of America's prophesied loss of “the pride of [its] power” (Leviticus 26:19). While military might is what we think of first in this regard, economic factors are also important here. The dollar losing its reserve currency status would radically change America's leading role in the world.
For one, America's crippling foreign debt would get worse with decreased ability to finance the burden. In time the country would be at the mercy of those holding its obligations, with little room to maneuver. Economic enslavement to other nations would be on the horizon.
However, it's unlikely that this will happen immediately. China and several Arab states hold too many dollar-denominated instruments to see this change. As mentioned, they would lose too much. Right now the United States is too big, too rich and too powerful for them to allow it to fail. There is too much at stake on the global scene.
That does not mean things couldn't change—and change quickly—but the proper circumstances have to be in place.
It will not happen until the God of heaven allows it to happen. God has blessed America with its wealth, power and resulting prestige. He will move to change that when it fits His timing for His great plan for all the nations.
Until then we have days to live and many lives to touch. We have character to develop and mistakes to correct. We have days to love those close to us and, above all, time to discover God and His attention to the details of eternity, history and our lives. Make the most of the time while you can. GN

financial crisis debt United States World Regions Governments Economics News and Prophecy

You might also be interested in...

What's Behind the Falling Dollar?

With a barrel of oil near $100 and the dollar recently falling 16 percent...

America: On the Hinge of History

America and the world continue to face rapid, stressful change. Will you be...

• 

  Darris McNeely

  Beyond Today Presenter

  Darris McNeely works at the United Church of God home office in Cincinnati, Ohio. He and his wife, Debbie, have served in the ministry for more than 43 years. They have two sons, who are both married, and four grandchildren. Darris is the Associate Media Producer for the Church. He also is a resident faculty member at the Ambassador Bible Center teaching Acts, Fundamentals of Belief and World News and Prophecy. He enjoys hunting, travel and reading and spending time with his grandchildren.
  

Add to my study list

Print this Page

Appeared In...

Good News Magazine: September - October 2009

Join the conversation!

Log in or register to post comments

Mexico, NOT RUSSIA, Has A Plan To Stop Donald Trump. But It’s Just A Bluff—Given Patriotic American Leadership

A timely post from http://www.vdare.com about Mexican, not Russian, meddling. This follows this post about Senator Tom Cotton. This follows this post about the SPLC. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

<

Memo From Middle America: Mexico’s Jorge Castaneda Has A Plan To Stop Donald Trump. But It’s Just A Bluff—Given Patriotic American Leadership

>

---

Allan Wall

“Some Americans….dislike immigration, but there is very little they can do about it,” gloated Jorge Castaneda in Atlantic Monthly in 1995 [Ferocious Differences, July, 1995 ] In the past few decades, it would have been hard to say Vicente Fox’s foreign minister was wrong.  But the triumph of Donald Trump may mean Americans will finally reclaim control of our immigration policy. And Mexican elites don’t like that one bit.
Castaneda, like other Mexican elitists, is livid over Trump. Though it’s concealed in Mexican nationalist or globalist “human rights” rhetoric, the real reason Trump’s election victory terrifies them is it threatens their strategy of dumping the Mexican poor on the American taxpayers, in the process expanding Mexican influence within our borders.
The Mexican elite is already attempting to sabotage Trump’s efforts. Thus the Mexican foreign ministry is continuing and probably expanding its meddling through its vast consular network on U.S. soil. But Mexican elitists who aren’t part of the current Mexican government are also working these issues. Castaneda is at the forefront of these efforts.
Castaneda has a long history of working for “the whole enchilada” – a comprehensive migratory accord giving Mexico effective veto power over U.S. immigration policy. Of course, he has little in common with the poor mestizos he purports to champion, but instead operates as part of the academic/journalistic jet set lecturing Americans about why they should give up their country.
In a new column entitled Pintar Nuestra Raya [“paint our line,” the equivalent of “drawing a line in the sand”] Castaneda declared Mexico should resist Trump in three major ways [Jorge G. Castaneda website, November 11, 2016, first published in el Financiero. My translations].

• First, Castaneda says Mexico should declare the construction of The Wall is a “hostile act toward Mexico.” He urges the use of “legal, ecological, political, cultural and social” instruments so “it is not constructed.” He even says “they [= Americans] have no right” to build it.

How is building a wall on our side of the border “hostile?” The way the Mexican government incites migrants to break our laws is obviously more “hostile” than a common-sense measure to protect our sovereignty. And Mexico is in no position to say what we can or can not do. But they’ve been walking all over us for decades. It’s going to be a shock when the gravy train ends.

• Secondly, Castaneda says “NAFTA cannot be re-opened or renegotiated.“ But in the very next sentence, he writes in the future there can be a “certain renegotiation” of NAFTA “in exchange for other concessions.”

Other concessions? According to Castaneda we can’t build a wall and can’t renegotiate a trade agreement. So what other concessions does he want from us?

• Third, Castaneda says “massive deportation of Mexicans” is “unacceptable for Mexico.” Indeed, he openly says Mexico should try to make it “enormously difficult” for us to enforce our laws.

In other words, as Mexico’s elites see it, they should call the shots in our immigration system.
To frustrate our ability to enforce immigration law, Castaneda says Mexican officials

…could very easily tell the U.S. authorities that we accept a deportee on the condition that they demonstrate to us, with documents, their Mexican nationality. If they allege that by definition the undocumented don’t have documents, we say to them that we think that the great majority of the deportees are Central Americans, and that if they want to deport them that they send them to Central America. Some Mexicans will end up there… For the time being, such a delay of deportations will accumulate that the Americans themselves will not know what to do.

Note Castaneda’s disdain for ordinary Mexicans. He doesn’t mind some of them being accidentally deported to Central America to make his point.
But there’s a simple solution on the U.S. side. Just deport anybody, regardless of nationality, who enters illegally from Mexico to Mexico. Make Mexico deal with them. After all, they entered the U.S. from Mexico!
But Castaneda has an even more insidious suggestion. He openly states Mexico should use Central American immigration as a weapon against us [Mexico can use Central-American immigration as bargaining chip with Trump, Univision, December 8, 2016]:

There has been a surge in Central American immigrants heading for the United States since Donald Trump won the Election in November, according to several initial reports… If this is the case, it is only logical. Trump has vowed to build his wall. It does not matter if Mexico will pay for it or even if the threat is true. It makes perfect sense for anybody hoping to make it to the United States, from Salvador, Honduras or Guatemala, to do so before any wall is put up….If they have relatives in the United States, or if they think that their reception will be better with President Barack Obama still in power until January 20, then their decision is perfectly rational.

Castaneda recounts how during the Surge of 2014, the Obama Administration pressured Mexico:

When the first wave of unaccompanied minors came to the United States in July 2014, Mexico complied with the White House request to cooperate in stopping the flow of immigrants. The logic behind it was sound. The goal was to avoid sparking anti-immigrant hysteria in the United States precisely when immigration reform seemed set to prosper.

My italics! By “hysteria,” Castaneda means provoking Americans who want a sane American immigration policy.
Castaneda says in 2014, in hopes of an imminent amnesty in the U.S., Mexican President Pena “…declined to take either of the two feasible actions for a country caught up in this immigration situation.”
These “two feasible actions”:

• First, declare the Central Americans as “refugees,” let them stay in UN-supervised refugee camps in Mexico for a month, after which “they have the right to leave Mexico for wherever they choose: to the United States, or their home country.”
• Second, “To follow Turkey’s example”. Here Castaneda refers to Turkey’s Erdogan agreeing to stop the flow of refugees entering Europe in return for benefits for Turkey.

It’s telling that Castaneda sees the relationship of Mexico with the United States as being analogous to that between Turkey and the European Union.
According to Castaneda, “Mexico has agreed to do the United States’ dirty work without maintaining its values via the refugee option and without extracting any benefits from a Turkey-style alternative. But things have now changed.”
So what does Castaneda propose?

….Trump is no friend to Mexico. It makes no sense for Mexico to keep doing America’s dirty work with Trump as president if he wants to build walls, deport Mexicans or revise the NAFTA trade deal. Still, Mexico has a bargaining chip. Mexico can stop the flow of immigrants on the southern border, or it can allow immigrants free access to its northern border.

But how is this a bargaining chip? Aren’t there already hordes of illegal alien Central Americans entering our southern border? And did not those same illegal aliens pass through Mexico?
This means that Mexico either can’t or won’t stop the flow of Central Americans. Castaneda is either mistaken and a victim of his own arrogance or just bluffing.
The real bargaining chips are in the hands of President-elect Trump, not the Mexican government.
If we get control of our border, then hundreds of thousands of Central American illegal aliens could be stuck in Mexico. And that’s something the Mexican elite doesn’t want!
So rave on, Jorge. If Trump does what he pledged to do, Mexico may have to finally get control of its southeastern border!
And if Trump does what he said he’d do, it won’t matter what Mexican elites say about it.
American citizen Allan Wall (email him) moved back to the U.S.A. in 2008 after many years residing in Mexico. Allan`s wife is Mexican, and their two sons are bilingual. In 2005, Allan served a tour of duty in Iraq with the Texas Army National Guard. His VDARE.COM articles are archived here; his Mexidata.info articles are archived here ; his News With Views columns are archived here; and his website is here.

Donald Trump Insurgency

<< Previous post

Next post >>

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about Jesus Christ and Christmas. This follows this post about slavery. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

How Authentic Is the Christmas Portrayal of Christ's Birth?

 by Edmond Macaraeg Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

During the Christmas season the Christian world's attention is focused on its most important religious holiday that purportedly commemorates the birth date of Jesus Christ. The influence of tradition has caused the portrayal of Christ's birth to stray from the true biblical account. When compared to the carefully detailed account of the gospel writer Luke at least three very important deviations from Scripture stand out.

This holiday season here in the Philippines consumes one third of each year. The Philippines has the fourth largest Christian population on earth. With over 80 million of its people professing to be Christian (mostly Catholic), the “Spirit of Christmas” begins as early as September 1 and doesn’t end until January 6 each year. During this four-month season Christmas carols are played in public and pervade the airwaves. In an effort to authentically portray the birth of Christ, a new movie titled The Nativity Story was released on December 1 for showing in theatres during this year’s Christmas season. Starring Keisha Castle-Hughes as Mary and Oscar Isaac as Joseph with Shohreh Aghdashloo as Elizabeth, movie director Catherine Hardwicke sought to achieve authenticity in the movie’s depiction of the birth of Christ. The shooting location for Bethlehem was done in the village of Matera in Italy (the same location used in filming The Passion of the Christ), while the set for Herod’s castle and the Jerusalem temple was filmed at Ouarzazate in Morocco (the same filming location as The Gladiator and Kingdom of Heaven). While the effort to authentically portray Christ’s birth is commendable, the influence of tradition has caused it to stray somewhat from the true biblical account. The movie depicts His birth occurring in a shivering cold, windy and wintry season where fires were essential for keeping people warm. When compared to the carefully detailed account of the gospel writer Luke at least three very important deviations from Scripture stand out. The Roman decree for census and taxation . Let’s remember that with the collective wisdom of Roman tax officials, local Roman administrators made sure their tax collections would occur at the best of times—right after the main fall harvest with still good weather to minimize the potential problems stemming from lack of money or difficulty of travel due to winter conditions (Luke 2:1-5). There was no room in the inn. Why? Lodging at that time was likely filled because of the Jews’ custom to attend the annual fall festivals commanded by God. The Romans would have probably timed such taxation to coincide with the Jews’ annual travel to Jerusalem to observe these festivals (Luke 2:7). Shepherds were out in the fields that night. The weather was still warm enough for shepherds to keep their flock out in the fields at night (Luke 2:8). The Adam Clarke’s Commentary (Abingdon Press, Nashville) notes concerning Luke 2:8, “As these shepherds had not yet brought home their flocks, it is a presumptive argument that October had not yet commenced, and that, consequently, our Lord was not born on the 25th of December, when no flocks were out in the fields … On this very ground the nativity in December should be given up.” Alexander Hislop’s book, The Two Babylons,explains: “In that region, from December to February … the cold of the night was piercing. Thus the shepherds never kept their flocks and herds out in the open country from December through February—it was simply too cold” (p. 2, 1959). Most encyclopedias and similar historical references document that the December 25 nativity tradition is associated with the ancient Saturnalia celebration (for worshipping the pagan god Saturn). All such references (including the Catholic Encyclopedia) admit that Christ was not born on or even near December 25 in the middle of winter! Yet this ancient custom, even if celebrated in gross ignorance of its true pagan origin, refuses to die. Other aspects of Christmas’ celebrations also oppose biblical teachings. Regarding adapting pagan celebrations for the worship of the true God the Bible commands, “… do not inquire … ‘How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise’ … You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way … Whatever I command you be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it” (Deuteronomy 12:30-32) . Jesus Christ also spoke out against seeking to worship God by incorporating pagan customs, “And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men …” (Mark 7:7-9). For more informative details on this important subject, just request, read online or download our free booklets: Holidays or Holy Days: Does It Matter Which Days We Keep? and Jesus Christ: The Real Story.

pagan Christmas Birth of Jesus Christ Man's Holidays Holidays and Holy Days Christmas

You might also be interested in...

When Was Jesus Born?

Did His birth occur on December 25th? Can we even know when Christ was born...

A timely post from http://www.vdare.com about Senator Tom Cotton. This follows this post about the SPLC. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

<

On Immigration, Will Tom Cotton Succeed Jeff Sessions As “America’s Senator”?

>

---

Paul Nachman

Download show

We at VDARE.com have long regarded Jeff Sessions [R-AL] as “America’s senator” because of his tireless work on behalf of our native-born citizenry, especially on immigration and international trade.  But what happens now that he’ll apparently be leaving the Senate to become Attorney General in the Trump administration?  Fortunately, there is an answer: Senator Tom Cotton [R-AR]
Cotton is a rara avis in Sodom-on-the-Potomac: He grew up on a farm in Arkansas and then—despite being the lowest of the low (i.e. a white male from Flyover Country)—was accepted at Harvard.  He graduated with a B.A. in just three years.
Cotton floated around a bit after that, then returned to Harvard for law school.  After using the latter degree for a few years, this Harvard B.A./J.D. enlisted in the U.S. Army, subsequently seeing combat in Iraq and later serving in Afghanistan.
During his Iraq assignment, an “extra-curricular” initiative by Cotton attracted wide notice, as Wikipedia describes it:

In June 2006, while stationed in Iraq, he gained international public attention after he emailed a letter to The New York Times, criticizing the paper’s publication of an article detailing a Bush administration secret program monitoring terrorists’ finances. The newspaper ignored his letter, but it was published in Power Line, a prominent conservative blog which had been copied on the email.  In the letter, Cotton called for the journalists responsible for the newspaper article to be imprisoned for espionage. He asserted that the newspaper had “gravely endangered the lives of my soldiers and all other soldiers and innocent Iraqis here.” The article was widely circulated online and reprinted in full in several newspapers. [Links in original]

That attention along with encouragement from the crew at Power Line presumably sparked Cotton’s successful 2012 campaign for the House of Representatives, where he served one term.  Then in November 2014, he defeated incumbent Democratic Senator Mark Pryor’s bid for a third term (memorable video campaign ad here). So Cotton’s been a senator—indeed, the youngest senator—since January 3, 2015.
Above, I called Cotton a “rare bird” because even in the clubby U.S. Senate—the World’s Greatest Deliberative Body®—he’s been no go-along-to-get-along cipher. Instead, he has exhibited both seriousness and spine in committee (two-minute video example here regarding the detainees infesting Guantanamo) and on the Senate floor (three-minute example, appropriately skewering Minority Leader Harry Reid [D-NV]).
For a lengthier look at Cotton in conversation, see his 40-minute 2015 interview with the Hoover Institution’s Peter Robinson.
More recently, here’s part of Senator Cotton’s interview on November 14, 2016 with Tucker Carlson of Fox News [transcription by PN, emphases in original]:

Carlson: [first quoting Speaker of the House Paul Ryan] “I want to put people’s minds at ease; there will be no deportation force.”  I wonder what percentage of Trump’s voters kind of want a deportation force.  Whose “minds” is [Ryan] talking about?
Cotton: Well, Donald Trump said last night on 60 Minutes that he’s going to focus on criminal aliens, and I think most Americans are shocked that our government isn’t already focusing on criminal aliens.  There may be two million, three million.  That number is unknown, but if you’re a criminal and you’re not entitled to be in this country by law, then of course you shouldn’t be here, you should be returned back to your country.…
Cotton: On immigration, Donald Trump ran not just on security and enforcement, which is important, but he also ran on reducing legal immigration, and we need to do that.  Because people who work on their feet, they work with their hands in this country, they haven’t seen a pay rise in a long time, and part of that is because legal immigration has been at such high levels that it’s driven down wages and it’s taken a lot of jobs.
That’s why Donald Trump ran pretty well with Hispanics compared to some past Republicans as well.  So I think that Donald Trump has got the right approach to immigration.  You heard that some on 60 Minutes last night, but that’s one reason why he appealed to so many working voters across the country.
Carlson: Legal immigration, that’s the real [unclear].
Cotton: Yeah, legal immigration, we have to address legal immigration in addition to illegal immigration.

And there are other reasons to be hopeful that Cotton will be able and willing to step up once Sessions has left the Senate.  On September 26, 2016, he and Congressman Mike Pompeo [R-KS] published an article in the Wall Street Journal with the highly promising title, What We Learned in Scandinavia About Migrants: Sweden failed. Norway succeeded—in part because it did what Trump does: Listen.  [If the provided link yields a behind-the-paywall message, try Googling on the phrase “what we learned in Scandinavia about migrants.”]
(Pompeo is now Trump’s nominee for CIA Director—and, like Cotton, is an alum of both Harvard and the Army.)
Their article doesn’t disappoint.  Although you should read—and celebrate!—the whole thing, here are excerpts covering a couple of its main themes:

Norway … established measures to stop uncontrolled migration. It imposed new border controls featuring a border fence, increased waiting periods for residency and deportation of ineligible migrants. It also reduced migrant benefits to match those offered by its neighbors. Norway even advertised in foreign nations, warning that migrants who do not face war or persecution will be deported.
The result: Asylum applications in Norway fell 95% between the last quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016.
Norway is far from hardhearted. It has welcomed refugees for decades and its foreign policy prioritizes conflict resolution and humanitarian relief. But Norwegians understand that an Open-Border policy would strain their resources, disrupt the integration of other recently arrived immigrants, and undercut the legitimate desire of Norwegians to preserve their nation’s culture and character.[Links added.]

So we have two up-and-coming Republican officeholders extolling the idea of preserving a “nation’s culture and character.”  Pinch me!
Cotton and Pompeo go on:

Sweden threw open its doors in 2013, offering Syrian refugees permanent residency. Asylum applications from across the world—not just Syria—spiked. Sweden has since received more than 280,000 migrants, and counting. … These migrants are disproportionately poor, young, male, undereducated, conservatively Muslim and possess virtually no Swedish-language skills.
This radical policy occurred with little debate because political correctness pervades Sweden. They even have a term for the phenomenon: åsiktskorridor, or “the opinion corridor.” Any questions about the economic, fiscal and cultural impact of an immediate influx of migrants clearly lay outside the corridor; asking them could result in accusations of xenophobia or racism.
But these questions are real and they reflect legitimate concerns for the Swedish people. …
Faced with growing public dissatisfaction, the Swedish government finally relented and imposed border controls and other restrictions this summer. But not before committing more than 7% of its 2016 budget to migrant services, with costs set to steadily increase. …
Sweden’s failures have been repeated in Germany, France, Austria and elsewhere. Immigration was the key issue driving British votes to leave the European Union.
The parallels to the U.S. immigration debate are clear. For years, a bipartisan elite consensus has favored the mass immigration of unskilled and low-skilled workers into America coupled with the legalization of millions of illegal immigrants already here. Only one thing has stopped these elites from their desired immigration policy: Two-thirds to three-quarters of Americans consistently oppose any increase in immigration.
Immigration is the central issue of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. [Emphasis added!] He saw legitimate concerns about stagnant wages, low workforce-participation rates and lower levels of immigrant assimilation. He also understood that our own “opinion corridor” of political correctness largely ruled these topics out of bounds. When conventional leaders would not address their concerns, it’s not surprising that Americans turned to a new voice.

“Immigration is the central issue …”  Wow, pinch me again!
And with four successive tweets Cotton sent on November 25, he reinforced the impression that he’s fit—and maybe even eager—to assume from Sessions the mantle of “America’s senator.”  Here they are:

Higher wages for Americans are a feature, not a bug, of reducing levels of legal immigration! 1/ https://t.co/dIkduolACO

— Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) November 25, 2016

• There are no “jobs Americans won’t do”! Americans are majority in every job & sector. Want more? Pay more! 2/
• Employers in this story are paying more, offering more benefits & training. This is a good thing, not a problem! 3/
• Build wall, enforce law, limit legal immigration = safer streets, higher wages, better govt. Let’s get started! 4/4

Significantly, Senator Cotton dispatched these tweets in response to a typical Wall Street Journal article bleating about the reflexively-invoked “labor shortage” (Small Businesses Lament There Are Too Few Mexicans in U.S., Not Too Many, by Miriam Jordan and Santiago Perez, November 25, 2016 [updated on November 28, and if the provided link doesn’t work for you, trying googling on the phrase “small businesses lament”]).
Cotton’s career immigration-sanity grade (counting both House and Senate service) at NumbersUSA is “A−.”
However, he’s rated only “C+” in the critical category of “Challenge Status Quo,” which has to do with taking useful initiative on the subject, as distinguished from merely making useful votes on immigration-sanity bills while otherwise ignoring the subject.  But I’ll guess that when NumbersUSA goes through its next grading cycle, Cotton’s “Challenge Status Quo” rating will soar to reflect his recent full arrival in this arena.
(Congressman Pompeo’s career grade with NumbersUSA is “A,” and he has a “B” in “Challenge Status Quo.”  It would be excellent to have the CIA’s Director be someone who’s deeply knowledgeable about immigration, instead of being just another officeholder who’ll annoyingly lecture us, when provoked from slumber, that “America is a nation of immigrants.”)
So, VDARE.com regulars, please consider piling on the compliments to reinforce Senator Cotton’s highly encouraging behavior!  I did this soon after his appearance with Tucker Carlson by phoning Cotton’s Washington, DC office [202-224-2353] and emphasizing to the message-taker the importance of the senator’s strong statement about reducing legal immigration.
If you’re new at making such calls, you might want to first listen to the recording (MP3 clip, below) of my end [only] of that call as an example; it’s about 70 seconds long.
Audio Player

00:00

00:00

Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase or decrease volume.

It’s important that Cotton hear this encouragement from all over the country. It might well finally convince him he needs to become “America’s senator.”
It’s also critical that he receive massive approval from his fellow patriotic Arkansans.  They, too, might phone the DC office.  But if they’d like to engage in a lengthier, lower-pressure exchange with a staffer, it’ll generally be better to phone one of Senator Cotton’s district offices.  These are in Little Rock (501-223-9081), Springdale (479-751-0879), El Dorado (870-864-8582), and Jonesboro (870-933-6223).
Whether you’re in Arkansas or abroad in America, go to it, immigration patriots!
Paul Nachman [email him] is a retired physicist and immigration sanity activist in Bozeman, MT

Editorial: SPLC and #FakeNews

Editorial

SPLC, the Southern Poverty Law Center, is a fundraising organization that has a history of inventing "hate crimes" which usually turn out to be hoaxes. These "hate crimes" usually allege that mainstream America is Islamophobic, Homophobic, Xenophobic, Misogynistic, and the biggest of all, RACIST. The SPLC then targets particular organizations which it then lumps into at least one of these charged allegations and tries to delegitimize those particular organizations while the SPLC itself fundraises off of these charges.
As stated, almost ALL of the so-called "hate incidents" turn out to be frauds, but by the time these frauds are exposed, the fundraising and the effects of the hate charges have already borne their fruits.

Vote on Refugee funding and H-2Bs this week!

A timely post from www.numbersusa.com about budget funding for Refugees and H-2B visas. This follows this post about Rep. Michael McCaul. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

Vote on Refugee funding and H-2Bs this week!

Obama Admin. demands more refugee funding -- including to resettle border surgers -- in short-term spending bill. Tell GOP Leaders to reject!

Dear friends,

Last week, we told you about the Obama Administration's last minute request to double refugee spending in the upcoming spending bill and the possibility that Congress may continue an expansion of the H-2B guest worker program.

Funding for the federal government runs out at the end of this week, so Congressional action on both of these items is likely to come over the next few days. We need your urgent activism today!

Obama's requested increase in refugee funding wouldn't only fund the extra refugees that he wants to bring to the United States, but it would also be used to help house and resettle the thousands of aliens who have illegally crossed the U.S.-Mexico border in recent months and have been allowed by the Administration to claim asylum even though most don't qualify under existing law.

Additionally, pro-H-2B advocates are pushing for an extension of a provision that exempts returning workers from the annual caps, potentially quadrupling the number of H-2B foreign workers in the country for 2017. This is the same provision that Congress included in last year's December spending bill that generated so much outrage.

During last month's election, voters delivered a clear message -- they want to gain control of the refugee situation, secure the border, and reduce the number of foreign workers entering the U.S. each year. What will Congress do? Will it side with the voters or stick with the status quo?

Call GOP Leadership HERE'S A LIST OF CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS AND THE CHIEF APPROPRIATORS: HOUSE SPEAKER PAUL RYAN -- (202) 225-0600 HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER KEVIN McCARTHY -- (202) 225-4000 HOUSE MAJORITY WHIP STEVE SCALISE -- (202) 225-0197 HOUSE GOP CONFERENCE CHAIR McMORRIS RODGERS -- (202) 225-5107 HOUSE APPROPS. CHAIR HAL ROGERS -- (202) 225-4601 SEN. MAJORITY LEADER MITCH McCONNELL -- (202) 224-3135 SEN. MAJORITY WHIP JOHN CORNYN -- (202) 224-2708 SENATE GOP CONFERENCE CHAIR JOHN THUNE -- (202) 224-2764 SEN. APPROPS. CHAIR THAD COCHRAN -- (202) 224-5054 Please call EVERYONE on the above list! And when you've finished, you can also call your own Members of Congress using the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121. When the staffer answers, tell them that voters sent a clear message to Washington during last month's elections. Urge Congress to reject the White House's demand for increased refugee funding and to reject increases to the H-2B low-skilled visa program. We've also posted a fax that you can send to your three Members of Congress. Fax Congress or click http://www.numbersusa.com/sendfax?id=17417

Thank you for taking this urgent action today!

Chris Chmielenski