Showing posts with label NRA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NRA. Show all posts

Monday, December 12, 2016

Weekend Box Office: Miss Sloane, Office Christmas Party

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!

Weekend Box Office: Miss Sloane, Office Christmas Party

By Debbie Schlussel



It’s nearly Christmas time. So, this is supposed to be the time of year when most of the new movies are very good. That ain’t happening. Two new movies this weekend, neither of them good.
* Miss Sloane – Rated R: This is a very cold, very harsh, very dark, and very overwrought picture of the kind of lobbying that happens on Capitol Hill. As one who worked for several Congressman on the Hill, I can tell you that this movie is ridiculous and bears no resemblance to reality. The cat-and-mouse absurdities that go in during the course of this movie are just not how it’s done in real life. Not even close.
Plus, while the movie pretends to be even-handed on the gun control debate, it really isn’t. The protagonist, a female lobbyist, risks it all in order to get stricter gun control laws passed–it’s the only “moral” position she’s ever taken in her life. And with that, the movie is a more subtle version of the gun control propaganda we’re used to seeing in the movies, on TV, and throughout pop culture. On top of that, this is an attack on the free market and makes no bones about it. Our “heroine,” the lobbyist, is a free marketeer and evil until she gives it all up to pull out all the stops in favor of more gun control.
On top of that, the movie is long, slow, and boring, taking up 132 minutes of your life that just aren’t worth the wasting here.
Jessica Chastain–in very dark, harsh makeup–is a Elizabeth Sloane, the aforementioned lobbyist, who tells us flat-out that she believes in the free market and American free enterprise. That’s “bad” in the filmmakers eyes, as she bends the rules to almost the breaking point in order to get tax laws and import duties to go her clients’ way. But she’s also smart (or so we’re told). In order to get a client’s sugar-laden breakfast cakes out from under restrictive regulations, she recommends reclassifying them as cookies, which are covered by more relaxed rules.
But that’s the humdrum stuff. Now, a new client–the gun lobby (and presumably, the NRA)–wants to hire her lobbying firm and her to in order to relax gun laws. The lobby wants her to present guns as the ultimate equalizer for women against violence and would-be attackers. But Elizabeth doesn’t want that and laughs in the new client’s face, as well as that of her boss (Sam Waterston). Soon, she’s gone from her big firm to a smaller one in order to lobby for more gun control and fight her former employer in the fight.
Elizabeth has no life. She never sleeps (and takes a lot of pills to stay awake). She hires male prostitutes for sex, as there’s no time for a relationship. And so on. In the meantime, the team she’s poached from her former firm, helps her pursue several senators to get their votes for gun control. They’re working with a victim of “gun violence.” However, later in the film, there’s an incident that makes the gun lobby’s point.
The various machinations in this movie just don’t happen on Capitol Hill. The lobbying in real life is a lot more dry and basic. There just isn’t the intrigue–to the point of the cockamamie in this film–that is presented here. Not even close. And there aren’t mechanical bugs with cameras crawling into Senators’ and lobbyists’ cars. There also aren’t major Senate hearings into the personal lives of lobbyists. The only thing I can ever remember happening that was even close (and it didn’t involve an examination of the lobbyist’s private life or health), were the Senate hearings into corrupt, convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff’s multi-million-dollar rip-offs of federal Indian tribes. But in that case, there was major money-laundering, tax-evasion, and other crimes going on, including the use of jihadist Muslim Grover Norquist’s “non-profit” Americans for Tax Reform to launder Indian tribe money and hide the source and ultimate destination of it. Apparently, some of that money went to Islamic terrorist outfits tied to Al-Qaeda, too. That’s a legit inquiry by Congress.
The Senate inquiry into Miss Sloane, a major and prolonged scene in the movie, is just ludicrous, and it would never happen. After nearly 2.5 hours of this movie, there just isn’t a worthy payoff. Not even a little bit. (Unless gun control is what you consider a worthy payoff.)
The movie’s just a high-styled, low-brow bore pretending to be something important. It isn’t. Certainly not important enough for 132 minutes of your life and ten-bucks-plus from your wallet.
Yawn.
TWO MARXES
karlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpg
Watch the trailer . . .

* Office Christmas Party – Rated R: I hated this poor excuse for comedy. You’ve seen this crap–waaaaay toooooo muuuuuch of it–already in recent years. Juvenile, crass, depraved jokes pretending to pass for funny. And they just aren’t. Sure, I laughed several times. But most of this movie was just dumb. Extremely dumb. On top of that, it’s the usual message from liberal Hollywood: loser, drug-using, incompetent, unethical schmucks are the good guys and the heroes; straight-laced, disciplined people, who actually work for a living are the losers and the villains. (Ditto for the human resources manager who objects to female employees wearing too-sexy-for-work outfits–she’s “too uptight”). So typical, so stupid.
The story: Jason Bateman is the Chief Technology Officer at the Chicago branch of Zenotek, a failing internet-hosting and online promotions company. Everyone at the branch is either incompetent or a whiner. The boss is Clay VanStone (T.J. Miller), a rich idiot who wastes money and acts like a child. His rival sister, Carol (Jennifer Aniston), is the hard-working, responsible adult in the family and the company CEO. She wants to pull the plug on the Chicago branch and end the bleeding. She’s right. But, of course, in all Hollywood movies these days, responsible people and responsible decisions aren’t hip and they aren’t to be admired. Instead, they are to be condemned.
Clay and his sister agree that if he can land more business and keep the office profitable, it can remain open. So, he goes about trying to recruit the account of Walter Davis (Courtney B. Vance). At first, Walter rules out hiring Zenotek, and morale is lower than low. But Clay decides to throw a giant, wild Christmas party to entice Walter to change his mind and hire Zenotek. The party is filled with cocaine binges, topless naked women, a prostitute and her female pimp, and other lowlife stuff, which makes it “cool” in the world according to Hollywood. Soon, Walter is literally hanging from the chandeliers, trying to ride ropes of lighting–Tarzan-style–from across a second-floor balcony.
Ultimately there are hospital trips, annoying Uber rides, car crashes, and a power outage in the entire Chicago. Haha, funny. NOT. Also not funny: that a guy (Bateman–who is supposed to be the voice of reason here) drinks spiked eggnog from the male genitalia of an anatomically-correct ice sculpture and then gets his tongue stuck on it. If this is your idea of humor, that’s a not-so-thrilling statement on the state of America. And, sadly, that’s where we are. Forget Kris Kringle. This is Kris Kringeworthy.
Absolute garbage. And not even good for more than five or six laughs. If that.
FOUR MARXES PLUS TWO ISIS BEHEADINGS
karlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgplus.jpgisisbeheadingisisbeheading
Watch the trailer . . .

Monday, November 14, 2016

Editorial: Where Do We Need to tell Trump to Focus?

Editorial


Donald Trump won an electoral college mandate particularly on the issues of immigration enforcement and fairness in trade deals. There were additional issues such as gun rights and pro-life issues.


Immigration was particularly important because if the U.S. keeps bringing in people that will vote for the Democratic party, and for that party's stance on issues, then the Republican party and its platform would become extinct.


Donald Trump needs to focus on entrenching his win,( http://www.vdare.com/articles/i-was-right-that-trump-could-win-and-he-could-do-even-better-in-2020) and part of that strategy means increasing his percentage among the working class in the Rust Belt EVEN MORE!!


In addition, Donald Trump's immediate legislative resistance is likely to be in the Senate due to the filibuster. He needs to tell Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to eliminate it so that his mandate is not thwarted. http://www.dickmorris.com/trumps-first-task-outlaw-filibuster-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/


After the focus on these steps, judicial entrenchment, by Supreme Court and all federal Court appointees, can keep his mandate permanent as he signs all the bills for his promises into law!





Friday, June 17, 2016

Obama's CVE Program Is an Outrage -- and the Republicans Are Funding It

A timely post from www.rushlimbaugh.com about Barack Obama fighting "violent extremism" instead of ISLAMIC TERROR. This follows this post about Trump racism charges. This follows this post about rap songs referencing Donald Trump.
You can
follow me here.

Contact your House Member about this HERE

http://ziplook.house.gov/htbin/findrep?ZIP= 


Obama's CVE Program Is an Outrage -- and the Republicans Are Funding It


BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: If there's anything approaching on today's program a... I kind of hate to use the word "bombshell," but this is close.
If you are wondering, "Okay, how is a guy named Omar Siddiqui Mateen, with his family history and other things obviously clear, not learned about...? How does he pass a background check?"  Well, we have to thank the Obama administration for that.  I have a series  of stories here that are gonna boggle your the mind.  The first is from the French News Agency.  The headline: "Threats Against Muslims Must Stop After Orlando Attack: US Authorities."  Threats against Muslims must stop now.
"US authorities on Wednesday warned that threats against Muslims would not be tolerated, and possibly prosecuted, after alleged incidents in the wake of the Orlando gay club massacre, which was carried out by a Muslim gunman.  ...  'Civil rights violations are a priority for the FBI,' assistant special agent Ron Hopper told reporters. 'We will investigate reported incidents against individuals based upon any class, any protected class, to include race, religion, and sexual orientation.'"
So the focus of the United States government, the FBI right now, is trying to find people who might be threatening or saying negative things about Muslims, targeting them, finding them, and exploring ways to punish them.  That's just the tip of the iceberg.  Have you heard about the Obama counterterrorism strategy called Countering Violent Extremism?  It's actually... That's what it's called: CVE.  Have you heard of that?  Well, let me tell you about it.
Because the Republican leadership in the House is preparing now to meet Obama's request for $40 million of additional funding for the Countering Violent Extremism program.  The FBI is trying to investigate these terror threats, and you just heard that threats against Muslims must stop, and FBI says, "We're vigilant! We're looking out for this."  Are you also looking out for threats against America by Muslims?  Well, we presume so, but no. You would be wrong.  We're not allowed to!  That's what the CVE is.  You're not gonna believe this.
The FBI is trying to investigate terrorist threats but is hamstrung by this Countering Violent Extremism program.  The name, Countering Violent Extremism, was carefully chosen in order to suggest that there is no particular ideology causing the threat.  "Countering Violent Extremism" could require investigators to focus on extremist right-wingers -- and, in fact, does.  "Countering Violent Extremism" is carefully chosen in order to suggest that no particular ideology is causing the threat.  Any kind of "extremism" (such as in right-wing groups) that could lead to violence, will be investigated.
The theory behind Countering Violent Extremism -- the theory of the strategy -- is that, number one, Muslim communities have uniformly rejected terrorism so we don't need to investigate them. We don't need to, because they're a religion of peace.  Remember now, you think it's a joke, but Obama and the Democrats, when they say, "Terrorism has nothing to do with Islam; it's a bastardization; Islam is a religion of peace.  All these people out there, ISIS, ISIL, claiming to do what they're doing for Islam? They are not Islamists! They are extremists; they are not Muslim."
The acting belief, philosophy, policy of the United States government is Muslim communities have uniformly rejected terrorism; therefore, they don't need to be monitored or investigated.  Number two.  Instead of aggressively collecting intelligence with radical Islamic communities and suspects who could cause a threat, the FBI... Are you sitting down? The FBI is required to partner with "Muslim community leaders," who are essentially members of the Muslim Brotherhood.
The FBI, according to the Countering Violent Extremism initiative, should partner with Muslim community leaders like the Muslim Brotherhood, who will serve as our eyes and ears to let us know if there's a problem.  So the FBI cannot monitor -- by virtue of this program, law, whatever, we cannot monitor -- Muslim communities.  We are not supposed to!  We are to rely on Muslim community leaders within those communities to tell the FBI if there's something we need to be worried about.
Now, when you see this, all of this focus on Christians and all this focus on the NRA and all this focus on other extremist groups kind of makes sense.  I mean, it doesn't make sense.  But the fact that Mateen's a Muslim?  "No, no! No, no! He couldn't have been because Islam's a religion of peace.  They don't do this."  That's Obama's story, and he's sticking with it, and since it's Obama's story, it's the story of the federal government. It's the story of our investigative agencies.  The FBI is reportedly highly frustrated over this.
They cannot, day in and day out... There are exceptions, obviously. But day in and day out, they cannot investigate Muslim neighborhoods, communities, mosques.  They have to rely on "outreach to Muslim community leaders" in those mosques and neighborhoods to tell them if there's something going on in there that they need to be worried about.  And that's why it's called Countering Violent Extremism, not Countering Violent Islamic Terrorism, for example.  "Islamic" and "Muslim" is specifically left out of the title.  Now, this is insane, folks.
Not only is it commonsenseless; it's insane.  It's tying both hands behind our back, and we see the result.  You wonder how this gets equates gun, how does this guy pass a background check?  Hello, Countering Violent Extremism!  We're not allowed to find out.  We cannot use anything... "Okay, we've got a guy. We can find out what his put on the internet. We can find he's predisposed to violence. He's not happy with America. His father was an Islamist sympathizer." Can't use any of that!
We can't use it, because we're not allowed to Hoover up that kind of information unless Muslim outreach partners inform us.  So when a guy goes to get a gun, he passes our background checks, and that's it! You wonder how? This is how.  This is why things like Orlando happen.  We're not allowed, by virtue of Obama's legislation... Well, it is legislation, because this is the icing on the cake.  It's about to run out of money.  I mean, the FBI's trying to investigate, but they are limited by these guidelines -- Countering Violent Extremism -- that do not allow them.
Here's the bottom line or the upshot of this: Countering Violent Extremism does not permit the FBI to factor radical beliefs when determining whether there's a criminal threat.  We're not allowed to go there.  We're not... Call it a variation of profiling.  Not allowed.  But this is not profiling; this is hard, cold evidence we are to ignore it.  We're not allowed to use it because of Countering Violent Extremism limitations on investigating Muslim communities.  So why is Paul Ryan pushing to fund this program an additional $40 million in the next budget?
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH:  Look, there is much more on this CVE and the related items.  I have a short amount of time left in this segment, so I'm gonna wait until the segment following the next break commences to get into more detail on it.  And you can continue to digest it.  And it's inexplicable.  It's in utter defiance of common sense.  It's so outrageous, I'm sure many people don't believe it.  "Rush, that can't be true.  You're either having fun with us or you're just wrong.  It can't be true."  Folks, it's true and there's more.
It's even worse than what you've heard so far.
The practical application of CVE and its implications just have some more earth-shattering details to share with you.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Okay.  Look.  In addition to this Countering Violent Extremism, tell you what's coming up.  We've got the CIA director.  He admitted... He just totally pulled the rug out from under Obama yesterday, admits that ISIS is coming into the country via refugees.  They're coming in, sneaking in via the immigration program.  He said that ISIS is bigger than ever, cutting... Obama said, "We've got them on the run. They're in smaller numbers than they've been in 7-1/2 years."  John Brennan just painted an entirely different picture what Obama said yesterday.
The difference is, nobody's gonna hear what Brennan said because he was in congressional testimony on C-SPAN, maybe a couple news networks for 20 minutes, and Obama had a national address that everybody in the Drive-Bys covered.  So nobody's gonna hear Brennan.  They're gonna hear us talking about Brennan and they're gonna think, "Well, Limbaugh and the conservatives, they don't like Obama so they're probably making it up."  So you can't get through to people 'cause they can't critically think anymore.
People don't know the difference between fact and opinion. And I'm getting off the beaten path.  I want to stick with this, because so many people say, "Why can't we stop these people?"  We're not permitted to, because the administration has implemented policies that tell our investigators -- like the FBI -- things they have to ignore.  And it's all part of the Countering Violent Extremism initiative.  I'll take you back to San Bernardino.  One of the mass murderers in that attack was named Tashfeen Malik.
Some of this, I'm sure, you're gonna remember as I go through it.  "San Bernardino mass-murderer Tashfeen Malik wrote social-media posts," like on Twitter, Facebook and wherever else, "that endorsed jihad and expressed disdain for America. Yet, that did not cause US immigration agents to question her admission into our country... In fact, our government consciously avoided learning about Malik’s Islamist rants," because they were required to by law.  They're not allowed to go there!
Writing at National Review, Andrew McCarthy says, "Commentators stunned by this dereliction are attributing it to 'secret' guidance issued by the Department of Homeland Security."   Folks, again, I want to tell you: This is not my opinion.  This is not anybody's opinion.  This is fact.  It's the same thing with Mateen here.  They had to ignore. The background check people on the guns, whatever this guy had written on social media, hatred for America -- go, go ISIS! -- jihad. We're not allowed to even investigate it! If it was discovered, we had to forget it.
Our agents had to forget it.  They were not permitted to because of Obama's policy, Countering Violent Extremism.  I'm not making this up.  I mean, it puts a new light on what Trump said, you know, there may be something going on with Obama here.  None of this is making sense, and it doesn't make sense.  When it was learned in the aftermath of San Bernardino that one of the killers had practically telegraphed her intention all over social media and that investigators ignored it, people said: Well, you know, must be some secret guidance issued by Homeland Security, 'cause nobody's this stupid.
Well, "there is nothing secret about it. The instruction to refrain from scrutinizing social-media commentary," which is a huge source of intelligence!  You got people all over this country vomiting everything about themselves because they want to be famous.  They want to be noticed.  Social media is all about, "Notice me!  Notice me!  I matter.  I'm important."  So people put everything about themselves on social media -- and some of them put the most outrageous stuff -- hoping to get noticed.  They crave followers.  And these clowns are no different.
And yet our investigators are under orders to ignore all of that.
"The instruction to refrain from scrutinizing social-media commentary ... is a straightforward application of what passes for the official Obama administration 'anti'-terrorism strategy, known as 'Countering Violent Extremism.' Malik, a native Pakistani, who immigrated to the United States in July after living for a time in Saudi Arabia," as did Mateen, "joined her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, in [killing] 14 people in San Bernardino, California... Government officials now concede that Malik was inadequately screened before being permitted to relocate to the United States on a K-1 visa, issued because she was the fiancee of Farook, an American citizen.
"The couple married soon after her immigration. Malik's visa approval was already the stuff of scandal even before the latest revelations -- especially in light of President Obama's plan to admit thousands of immigrants from Syria and other bastions of Islamic supremacism, which inevitably breeds violent jihadism. Right after the massacre, it emerged that Malik had provided government screeners with a fake Pakistani address. She may also have been educated in a notoriously anti-Western madrassa. Neither fact was discovered during the vetting process,"   because the investigators are not allowed to pay attention to it.
And if they see it they are required to ignore it because they are not allowed to factor it in.  You're saying, "This doesn't makes sense, Rush."  It doesn't!  I know!  But remember the original point I made about the CVE.  FBI investigators admit they're frustrated.  They cannot themselves investigate Muslim communities because Islam is a religion of peace.  Muslim communities are thought to already have no violence in them.  This is straight from Obama, straight from the Regime.  The only way the FBI can learn of potential problems coming out of a Muslim community is if their partners -- community outreach specialists within that Muslim community -- inform them.
Well, it turns out that the people the FBI interact with happen to be Muslim Brotherhood or CAIR or other such representatives.  That's the only way the FBI can learn officially what's going on.  They're not allowed to do it! I know this doesn't... Folks, I can imagine you're saying, "Rush, this doesn't make sense.  You have to have something wrong here."  I know you're thinking that.  Even though you trust me implicitly -- even though after 28 years, 27, whatever it is, you know instincts I don't lie or make things up -- you still can't believe this.  This doesn't make sense.
I'm telling you, there's not a syllable, there's not a consonant, there's not a vowel of exaggeration in this.  The reason why this has all come up is because the CVE is about out of money.  It needs an infusion, and the Republicans are prepared to send Obama another $40 million to keep it going.  And people are asking, "Why?  Why?"  The thing is, what happened in the case of the San Bernardino Two and what happened in the case of Mateen whatever, these are not glitches.  These are not examples of our system not working.
These are examples of the system doing what it was designed to do: Ignore certain inarguable signs of who we're dealing it, under the premise that Islamic is a religion of peace and that there is no terrorism.  These people claiming they're conducting terrorist acts in the name of Islam are not Islamic, not Muslims.  That's Obama!  That's apparently his belief, and therefore the official belief US government.  A Power Line story today. I think this is John Hindraker. I'm not sure, but headline: "How Not to Counter Domestic Terrorism --
"Sources tell me that Speaker Paul Ryan is pushing this week to fund the Department of Homeland Security's 'Countering Violent Extremism' (CVE) program to the tune of $40 million. If you didn't know anything about this program, it might seem like a good idea for Ryan to get CVE funded in the wake of the Orlando massacre. ... You can tell from the name of the program that it's misguided," and it's designed to mislead.  Countering Violent Extremism?  You mean...? Why don't you just...? This is why the whole business of labels is important.
Obama, why won't you say militant Islamic terrorism, extremist Islamic terrorism?  Why won't you say it?  Precisely 'cause of this!  It doesn't exist, in his world.  Countering Violent Extremism imagines movies being shot up by wacko members of the Tea Party.  Of course, the things they imagine right wingers doing doesn't happen, don't happen.  "'Violent extremism' didn't produce the Orlando shootings..." Now, wait.  Now, wait.  See, this is important.  You're thinking, "Rush, now, come on."  No, no, no.  "'Violent extremism' didn't produce the Orlando shootings..."
Violent extremism did not cause the San Bernardino massacre.
Islamic terrorism did it. Islamic militant whatever you want to call it. Militant Islamic extremism, militant Islamic terrorism, Islamic extremist terrorists, that's who is responsible for Orlando and San Bernardino, not "violent extremism."  Violent extremism is specifically meant -- the way it's worded and structured by this administration -- to omit Islam.  And, in fact, that's the practical application.  Muslim communities are ignored as investigators try to find the answers to violent extremism.  Well, you can't find the answer when you not allowed to go look at the cause.  The cause is Islamist terrorism.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Here's Josh in Brick, New Jersey.  You're next.  Great to have you on the program.  Hello.
CALLER:  Hi.  Thank you for taking my call, Rush.
RUSH:  Yes, sir.
CALLER:  You referenced before about how the Obama administration is basically spending more resources targeting people that are going after Muslims, than the actual Muslim extremism itself. And I think the answer is very simple:  Obama has said very clearly that he views these Islamic terrorists as, you know, they just happen to get extreme information "off the internet," as if it's a computer virus that could happen to me, can happen to you, can happen to anyone.  It doesn't really represent an ideology.  But the people that don't like Muslims, they're bigots, and they really represent an ideology that has to be defeated.  That's just how I see it from here.
RUSH:  Well, you've got a point.  If I understood what you're saying, you're saying that Obama's saying that militant Islamic extremists, there's nothing really Muslim about 'em or Islamic.  They're just being radicalized.  We gotta forgive 'em, gotta accommodate, gotta explain 'em.  But the people that oppose 'em, they are really the problem. These are bigots, these are racists, these are Islamophobes, and we've gotta stop 'em.  Is that what your point is?
CALLER:  Exactly.  And he even said that they became radicalized over information on the internet, as if it was just a virus.
RUSH:  Right.  That's when Hillary is saying, "I don't know how you build a wall to keep the internet out."  Same thing.  These... Look, there's a -- I don't know -- willful denial.  Folks, I'll tell, when I found out about this CVE program today that I led off discussing, Countering Violent Extremism. When I read through that and I learned about it, I told a friend, "You know, I may not be able to talk about this today 'cause this has me so enraged. I might say things here that would get me in deep trouble, because it doesn't make any sense."
I just have to tell you flat-out: To tell the FBI you can't investigate Muslim communities when going after potential terrorism, because there isn't any in those communities because Islam's a religion of peace -- and the terrorists are not really Islam or Muslim, they're bastardizing it -- and the only way the FBI can actually learn, legally learn anything about those communities as if an appointed representative of that community shares the information with the FBI, such as in one of these appointed entities is the Muslim Brotherhood?
So if say the Neighborhood Watch commander in a Muslim neighborhood senses that something might be happening with one of the people that lives there. He can call the FBI and tell 'em, "Hey, there's something going on."  But the FBI cannot learn it on its own.  It cannot investigate it on its own.  That's federal law, as we sit here today.  The San Bernardino terrorists broadcast their intention all over social media.  FBI, under law, had to ignore it.  Ditto the Orlando terrorist.
In the aftermath, we learned that he was all over the internet telling people his anger, what was enraging him, and what his intentions were.  The guy called the FBI during the act.  He was on the FBI watch list.  They didn't do anything about it.  People said, "Why not?"  Now we know.  They're not allowed to.  The guy called the Washington Post in the middle of the act.  He calls 911; he calls the Washington Post.  When I heard that, I said, "Aand it still happened?"  He calls 911 in the middle of his rampage!  When you discover this, when you learn this, you say, "Wait a minute! This doesn't make any sense."
There's no amount... Talking about critical thinking, there's no amount of logic that explains any of this to me.  And I seriously... I thought about it. When I came across information last night and into this morning, I weighed whether or not to even get started talking about it, 'cause I had to put a muzzle on myself.  It's so senseless.  It doesn't seem that you can assign this to willful blindness.  It doesn't seem that you can assign this to willful ignorance.  Something like this does not... You can't categorize this as good intentions gone awry.  It has never made sense to me.
Every time there is a terror attack -- I don't care if it's in Paris, I don't care if it was in Belgium, I don't care if it's San Bernardino or Orlando -- what's the first thing we hear from authorities?  "Do not rush to judgment! We must guard against a backlash against Muslims."  That has... I can't tell you how often I have been profoundly suspicious of that.  It makes no sense.  There isn't a backlash.  We aren't committing acts of terror against Muslim communities in this country.  It just doesn't happen.  I can't think of a single instance!  It's the other way around.  And every time we're told, "You better watch out!  You can't afford any backlash here!" It's just... None of it makes any sense -- on the surface.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: This Obama.  This is from Tuesday afternoon.  We've heard the CIA director today, John Brennan, testify under oath before a Senate committee that ISIS is as big and bad as ever and that they're infiltrating America via our refugee program and immigration, and that we should be very concerned.  And this is exactly the opposite what Obama said two days ago.  So again I ask: Who are we to believe?  And I mean that.  Look, I... The CIA director's under oath.
The CIA director just threw Obama under the bus.  But it's budget time in Washington at the same time.  And the CIA has many budgets, including the black budget that nobody ever sees.  Got all kinds of money in it for black ops that nobody ever sees and that we never know.  But it still has to be appropriated.  Here we have the first of two.  This is Obama at the Treasury department.  This from the press conference where he got all defensive about people accusing him of never using the term "militant Islamic extremism" or "terrorism."
OBAMA:  All told, ISIL has now lost nearly half of the populated territory that it once controlled in Iraq.  And it will lose more.  ISIL continues to lose ground in Syria as well. Assisted by our Special Operations Forces, the coalition of local forces is now pressuring the key town of Manbij, which means the noose is tightening around ISIL in Raqqa as well.
RUSH:  Well, all well and good. But it's not what we were told today by the CIA director.  The next one...
OBAMA:  Our coalition continues to be on offense, ISIL is on defense, and it's now been a full year since ISIL has been able to mount a major successful offensive operation in either Syria or Iraq.  As ISIL continues to lose territory, it also continues to lose the money that is its lifeblood.  As a result of our strikes against its oil infrastructure and supply lines, we believe that we've cut ISIL's revenue from oil by millions of dollars per month.  In destroying the storage sites where they keep their cash, we've deprived ISIL of many millions more.  Cutting off ISIL's money may not be as dramatic as military strikes, but it is critically important, and we're seeing the results.
RUSH:  Okay, now, don't be distracted by the details. Because those details could be true, and ISIS could still be inspiring attacks here.  The point is, the president's intention, after Orlando, was to comfort the nation. "Hey, look, this stuff? Don't be concerned about it! We're beating 'em.  I mean, they're lashing out. These are last gasps."  But, on the other hand, they continue to happen.  Regardless what ISIL's strength or weakness is, acts of terror continue to happen that we somehow don't seem able to stop.  So these efforts to calm everybody and comfort us, and then the CIA director goes out there and directly contradicts this.  It's not good.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Dallas, Texas.  Chuck, great to have you on the EIB Network.  Hello.
CALLER:  Hi, Rush.  Thank you for taking my call.
RUSH:  Yes, sir.
CALLER:  Rush, I don't believe this is all just happenstance. I believe it's been pretty methodical.  I'm not a conspiracy theorist or anything like that, but it's a very methodical way to change.  And the best way to do things sometimes is what you tell people. Tell 'em what you're gonna do and just leave it open.  We've known all along that this country was supposed to change, and I think targeting all Western countries as soft targets is the way to change the mind-set of how we do everything.  Everything from religion --
RUSH:  Wait, wait.  I need to catch up with you.
CALLER:  Yes, sir.
RUSH:  What do you think is all part of a plan? What are we talking about here?  You mean the CIA director contradicting Obama?
CALLER:  CIA director contradicting Obama? How about the DOJ telling the FBI not to do certain things?  You don't have to make giant transition points.  You just have to whittle away a little at a time.
RUSH:  Okay.  So you said something about soft targets.  You've jumped into... You think I know your point halfway in, and I don't know what your starting point here with.
CALLER:  Starting point is: This has all been methodically planned out for a long time.
RUSH:  What has been methodically planned out?
CALLER:  The deconstruction of Western Civilization.
RUSH:  Oh, you're talking about a macro issue.
CALLER:  Yes, sir.
RUSH:  And so the assault and the desire to destroy Western Civilization, Western culture devised long ago, and it's been implemented piece by piece? So we're just seeing it now finally come to fruition, and we're just now catching up with it?
CALLER: I mean, what else could it be? What other theories are out there?  Nobody's doing it to the Chinese.
RUSH:  Well, oh, yeah, a lot of people tried.  Just the ones that do end up in jail --
CALLER:  Or dead, right.
RUSH:  -- or lynched or, you know, run over by a tank.
CALLER:  Yeah.
RUSH:  Look, hang on here.  Now that I know your starting point... Don't misunderstand my tone.  It's not your problem.  I just want to make sure I knew what you're talking about before I comment.  Hang on through the break and we'll pick it up when we get back right after this.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Okay, back to Chuck in Dallas.  So your premise is that there has been a long-thought-out, long-implemented strategy amongst enemies of ours around the world to effectively destroy Western Civilization; and it sounds like you think that we're actually helping them do it?
CALLER:  Yes, sir.  Just take, for example -- you'd mentioned it just today -- the CRVE (sic) that Obama wants to put through that --
RUSH:  No, it already exists.
CALLER: It already exists.  Okay.  Well, when did it start existing?  Did it start existing when Obama came into office?  If that --
RUSH: Yes, although -- although -- George Bush was sympathetic to this whole notion that we shouldn't --
CALLER:  I'm not -- I wouldn't exclude any president.  This is just one doc that just says: "Hey, we have to do this to not allow the FBI to do this so we can move forward with our overall plan."
RUSH:  Well, you made the point that the ChiComs are not letting it happen to them.  It seems to be Western civilization, which is the Western European democracies, which are now socialist democracies. They're under assault. Europe is under assault.  It's so bad over there that Great Britain's hoping to get out of it.  That's what the Brexit debate is all about, British exit from the European Union.
CALLER: Right.
RUSH:  Because it's been stampeded by enemies of Western civilization, and they're here, and they're coming across borders. Not just the southern border. They're coming in through New York. They're coming in the visa program. They're coming in as refugees.  And we're welcoming 'em in with open borders, under the presumption that that's what America is.  We actually have people saying that. To a certain extent, Chuck, I understand what you're saying, because it looks like... If you just casually glance at it, we have people who think the Constitution's a suicide pact.
That in the name of openness and in the name of human rights and in the same of civil rights, and in the name of whatever the hell else rights that you want to conjure up, we have a duty to let anybody come into this country with any purpose whatsoever "because that's what our values are. That's who we are.  We let anyone in, whatever and whoever they are."
And it seems like lately the more grievances they have against America, the better.  I don't like getting started on this 'cause I get so ticked off. I get so ticked off. I get ticked off at people that voted; I get ticked off at Republicans that won't stand up to this.  I got... What was I thinking about earlier?  It was about how some of this stuff is gotten away with.  I don't know.  I can't think of it now.  It will come to me later.  
END TRANSCRIPT

Thursday, June 16, 2016

Dividing The Coalition Of The Fringes: Why the Establishment Is So Berserk Over Trump Talking Sense on Immigration

An interesting article from http://www.vdare.com about the Muslim attack on homosexuals. This follows this post about homosexuals lobbying to INCREASE immigration! 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.


Trump wants to keep this guy out of the US--Hillary and Obama have no problem with him.Trump wants to keep this guy out of the US--Hillary and Obama have no problem with him.

Dividing The Coalition Of The Fringes: Why the Establishment Is So Berserk Over Trump Talking Sense on Immigration


From my new column in Taki’s Magazine:
The Orlando Latino gay slaughter is a nightmare for the establishment because Florida is a purple state with 29 electoral votes. And while the mainstream efforts to elicit Hispanic racialism haven’t gotten all that far outside of La Raza circles, gays have become a popular sacralized group. Trump’s alt-center offer to defend gays from Muslims is part of his clever divide-and-rule strategy aimed at the obvious (but henceforth unspeakable) divisions among the Obama Coalition.
As I’ve been pointing out for years, the Democrats’ coalition of the fringes has been held together only by the KKKrazy Glue of egging on paranoid fantasies against straight white men.
But the GOP upstart is asking gays: Who is more likely to be on your side: Donald Trump or Omar Mateen?
Personally, I’ve been to Trump Tower, and I’d guess that the GOP candidate employed more than a few gay men to decorate it.
Read the whole thing there.
[Comment at Unz.com]

Monday, February 22, 2016

Editorial: Why Effective Immigration Enforcement is SO Important that it is THE Issue!

Editorial

Immigration is the key to so many other issues. A candidate may be strong on the 2nd Amendment, be pro-life, and be in favor of traditional marriage, but if this candidate is weak on immigration, then the candidate is bringing in voters who will likely (over 90% of the time), vote for the party that opposes these things.

Therefore, what a voter needs to look for in choosing a candidate is (h/t Ann Coulter):

A presidential candidate who might conceivably: (1) deport illegal aliens, (2) build a wall, (3) block Muslim immigration, (4) flout political correctness, (5) bring manufacturing home, and (6) end the GOP’s neurotic compulsion to start wars in some godforsaken part of the world.

If a candidate refuses to say he’d deport illegal aliens (unless they’re arrested for breaking some other law), build a wall (instead he talks about “border security,” which is code for: No Wall), or reduce legal immigration at all...then that candidate is weakening the cause on other issues


Friday, January 8, 2016

Make sure your lawmakers know you support these bills to shut down Obama’s anti-gun agenda

A timely post from http://personalliberty.com about pro-gun laws. This follows this post about rap songs referencing Donald Trump. This follows this post about Pope Francis's opinion of Mexicans.
You can follow me here.


Make sure your lawmakers know you support these bills to shut down Obama’s anti-gun agenda

gun and constitutionWith the introduction of legislation Thursday, Rep. Steven Palazzo (R-Miss.) called on his colleagues to censure President Barack Obama for “unconstitutional executive actions” on guns.
Palazzo said an official condemnation from Congress is needed because Obama’s recent executive orders to expand gun background checks and create additional new gun regulations are only the latest examples of the current president’s extrajudicial attempts to override the legislative branch.
“For seven years, the President has gradually expanded his powers through executive overreach,” Palazzo said in a statement. “His actions this week to take away the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens is just the latest, if not most egregious, violation of the separation of powers found in the United States Constitution.”
“Congress must go on record to stand up as an equal branch of government — both against this President and any future president who attempts to use his authority to write the law instead of enforce the law.”
Whether Obama is setting precedents that will that will make it easier for future presidents to bypass Congress has been the primary matter of concern to opponents of the recent orders, including several GOP presidential hopefuls.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who is vying for his party’s nomination, told supporters that he plans to fight “tooth and nail” to reverse the president’s new orders.
“I reject the premise that our Constitution does not work as it is written and that we must choose between having the Bill of Rights and national security. Our nation did not become the most powerful nation in the world because we abandoned our 2nd and 4th Amendment rights when outside forces threatened us in ways even more menacing than we now face. It’s time for conservatives to push for a national security approach that focuses on our common enemy, rather than on the rights and liberties of the American people.” Paul recently said.
Paul recently introduced legislation, the Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection Act, in a bid to shut down the president’s one-man gun control efforts.
By decreeing any executive action with the potential to hinder 2nd Amendment rights as “advisory only” until a legislative equivalent of the action is passed by Congress, the legislation would ensure that any new gun control laws come from the legislative branch. Paul’s bill would also open the Obama administration up to civil lawsuits from Americans who believe the president’s actions violate their 2nd Amendment rights.

Wednesday, January 6, 2016

Crime How Will It Be Stopped?

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about crime and guns. This follows this post about the Sunni-Shi'ite conflict. This follows this post about Star Wars. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

Not long ago, in a small midwestern city, an older gentleman who happened to live in the same neighborhood as my son and his family went to a nearby grocery store to shop. My son and his wife often shopped at this store, and although they were careful, especially at night, they never thought what happened would ever happen in their relatively safe neighborhood.
The gentleman was in his 70s and appeared harmless. As he came out of the store, three young men accosted him and demanded money. Apparently he didn't move fast enough, or maybe he verbally disagreed with them. Regardless, they quickly turned violent.
They knocked him around, then one of them pulled out a pistol and shot him. The young men left him on the ground, helpless and bleeding. The elderly gentleman died from his wounds, wounds he received outside that well-lit, small-city supermarket.
If this can happen in a relatively small and peaceful midwestern city, what is life like in much larger cities where burglaries, robberies and murders happen regularly?
A world at risk
Have you been a victim of crime? The odds are that you—or someone close to you—have been victimized at least once, and possibly several times. Almost every day we hear of terrible crimes committed against innocent people. In some quarters walking the streets in broad daylight can be every bit as frightening and dangerous as dark alleys at midnight.
Political motives are often offered for violent terrorist acts. No nation anywhere in the world is a safe haven from the horrendous acts of violence recently witnessed in Russia, Israel, Spain, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Indonesia.
The horrible crimes we read about in our daily newspapers are only a drop in the bucket compared to the violent carnage perpetrated on humanity every single day.
Peace and safety are elusive and illusory in much of the world. We fear for our safety and the security of our families and loved ones. Parents worry that their children are at risk from drive-by shootings, violence on school grounds and possible kidnappings.
The high cost of crime
In 2003, crime rates in the United States were at a 30-year low. This is certainly encouraging news. Yet at the same time, it seems that almost everyone has been or knows a victim of a serious crime. Even with such record-low crime rates, last year about 1 in 44 Americans was a victim of a violent crime (murder, assault, rape or armed robbery) and about 1 in 6 was a victim of a crime such as burglary and auto theft.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation reported that 16,503 murders were committed in America last year.
But that's only part of the story. Total violent crimes—murder, manslaughter, armed robbery, rape and assault—numbered some 1,381,000. Property crimes—burglary, larceny, theft, motor vehicle theft, arson and the like—totaled some 10,436,000.
These statistics are repugnant to any sane-thinking citizen, especially those who value their freedoms. What about the freedom to remain alive, to live a normal life span and to enjoy grandchildren and great-grandchildren? What about the devastating cost to society?
Declines in crime
Although the drop in the U.S. crime rate is certainly good news, a look at the reasons for the decline is revealing.
The largest single factor in the crime decline is demographics: The U.S. population is aging. As the baby-boom generation has reached middle age, its members are far less inclined to commit crimes than they were in their younger years. The same goes for their children, who are now settling down and having children of their own.
At the same time, sociologists are predicting an increase in crime as more and more of these children approach the teen years and create a new crime wave.
Another major factor is the sheer number of U.S. citizens locked away from society. The U.S. prison population is at an all-time high, with 2.1 million adults locked away in federal and state prisons. Some 4.8 million more were on probation, parole or in jail in 2003.
As more and more criminals are locked up for longer periods of time, they are not on the streets committing additional crimes. The costs to American taxpayers, however, are staggering—about $30,000 per inmate per year, or some $60 billion annually. Costs for police and the judicial system easily bring the total governmental cost of crime to well over $120 billion per year.
Yet, as high as those costs are, it may be money well spent considering the even higher costs of crime and violence Americans would experience were these systems not in place to safeguard citizens. One need only look at some other countries where law and order are breaking down to see how much worse it could be.
Root causes of crime
What is the source of crime and violence? How did crime begin, and why is it perpetuated from generation to generation? Why, after centuries of trying, has mankind been unable to find a solution to the scourge of crime?
Modern experts have not given us the answers. For the solutions to crime and violence, we have to turn to God's Word, the Holy Bible. It specifically reveals the true causes.
Psychologists and sociologists have many rationalizations for why society is plagued with crime. Many place the blame on poverty, dysfunctional families, poor parenting and the like. Although these no doubt increase the likelihood of criminal activity, they are not the fundamental  cause.
Though sometimes committed out of irrational frustrations, crime is a personal choice. None of the above factors ever forced a person into criminal activity. We all have freedom to weigh courses of actions, to consider the consequences, to make and follow through on decisions. We are not forced to make decisions based on our social or family background.
Man's Creator, in His Word, makes it clear where crime originates. All too often it is the bitter fruit of our own greed and  selfishness.
“Where do these wars and battles between yourselves first start?” asks James. “Is it not precisely in the desires fighting inside your own selves? You want something and you lack it; so you kill. You have an ambition that you cannot satisfy, so you fight to get your way by force …” (James 4:1-2, New Jeru-salem Bible, emphasis added throughout).
What is man really like?
Many people assume that we human beings are essentially good and that we will eventually solve our problems through our efforts and ingenuity. However, thousands of years of history show that we are fundamentally incapable of living at peace with one another for very long.
After all, only 60 years ago citizens of the most advanced societies of modern civilization were slaughtering, maiming and exterminating each other on an unprecedented scale during World War II. And the world has seen dozens and dozens more wars since then, along with literally millions of individual crimes against one another.
The Bible paints a less-than-optimistic picture of man's nature. “The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it?” (Jeremiah 17:9, New American Standard Bible).
The prophet Jeremiah adds that we are naturally incapable of making the decisions that will allow us to live together in peace. “… I know the way of man is not in himself; it is not in man who walks to direct his own steps” (Jeremiah 10:23). Man needs help!
Wise King Solomon tells us that often the ways that appear right to human beings ultimately lead to tragedy. “There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death” (Proverbs 14:12; 16:25).
As Jeremiah asked, “who can understand” his own heart—his innermost thoughts and motivations? We human beings have a remarkable capacity to deceive ourselves, to rationalize our actions and justify our selfish behavior. Is it any wonder, then, that we live in a world plagued with crime?
The apostle Paul speaks of the results of what Jeremiah described as our “desperately wicked” heart: “There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is none who seeks after God. They have all turned aside; they have together become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no, not one … Their feet are swift to shed blood; destruction and misery are in their ways; and the way of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes” (Romans 3:10-12,15-18). Strong language indeed! Without sane spiritual guidance, humanity is incapable of living in real peace.
Spiritual deception
Paul reminds us that “all have sinned” (verse 23)—none of us is completely faultless or innocent, regardless of how we might view ourselves. James describes the process that leads to lawbreaking: “… Each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death” (James 1:14-15, New International Version).
Before you disagree with the Bible's description of our motivations and thoughts, ask yourself a few questions:
How often have you been tempted to take something that wasn't yours?
How many times have you shaded the truth to your advantage?
How often have you been so frustrated, disgusted or angry at another person that you wished that person didn't exist?
How often have you been tempted to enter a sexual relationship with someone other than your husband or wife, or to imagine such a relationship through pornography and fantasy?
Those evil desires, said James, are there within us craving to be satisfied. And too often we don't exercise the character and self-control to keep our greed and selfishness in check. We give in. Sometimes we're caught and suffer the consequences; other times we think we get away with it.
An unseen criminal mastermind
The Bible reveals another major factor at work in all human societies—an immensely powerful invisible being who continually leads man down a path toward selfishness and self-destruction. Scripture calls him Satan or the devil and describes him as the enemy of all humanity.
Jesus Christ described this being as the real power behind those who wanted to destroy both Him and His message. Confronting a group of men who wanted to kill Him, He said: “You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it” (John 8:44).
Jesus knew that Satan's lies misled our first human parents, Adam and Eve (Genesis 3). And Satan has continued his manipulative, corrupting influence ever since. This angelic being “sinned from the beginning” (1 John 3:8), and he has continued to sin and to lead and tempt men and women to sin for thousands of years.
The consequences of sin, however, can be deceptive in the sense that they are not always immediate. Adam lived for 930 years before death finally occurred. It is precisely because the penalties are often delayed that the sinner thinks he can get away with lawbreaking (Ecclesiastes 8:11). But God's great spiritual law is self-enforcing.
Satan's enormous influence on mankind
How great is the devil's influence? It is enormous. The Bible tells us that he “deceives the whole world” (Revelation 12:9). Along with the other fallen angels, the demons, he sows seeds of selfishness, greed, envy, jealousy and hatred among people everywhere.
The apostle Paul describes the state of most of mankind as “dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient” (Ephesians 2:1-2, NIV).
Satan's unseen influence is always at work, though very few recognize it. Under his influence, our primary motivation is “gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts” (verse 3, NIV).
The devil deceives us into thinking that the way to happiness lies in continually seeking self-satisfaction and gratification. We fail to recognize that this very thing is what ultimately leads to crime and untold human suffering!
The apostle John informs us that “the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one” (1 John 5:19). Whether we realize it or not, we have all fallen victim to his malignant, deceitful influence. Paul even calls him “the god of this age” (2 Corinthians 4:4)—meaning that Satan is whom most people unknowingly follow and worship, enshrouded as they are in spiritual blindness.
Jesus Christ commissioned Paul to go and open people's eyes to the truth “in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God …” (Acts 26:18).
Who is really imprisoned?
Most societies lock criminals behind bars for stealing from and killing their fellow man. But that's not the end of the story. Are those convicted of crimes against humanity the only ones behind bars, the only ones imprisoned?
Sadly, no. The rest of us must lock our doors and windows at night. The rest of us are the ones who look over our shoulder to see whether we're in danger of being mugged. The rest of us are the ones who must watch our children carefully, lest they be kidnapped, molested or murdered. The rest of us are the ones who live in uneasiness about our personal safety.
We are the ones who share in the high cost of crime through taxes to pay for law enforcement, the judicial system, the burgeoning prisons and jails. Through insurance we all pay the cost of vandalism and the millions of burglaries, arsons and stolen cars. Through higher prices, everyone pays the price for shoplifting, embezzlement and other employee theft.
In our modern society we are all “imprisoned”—if not in our homes, certainly in our minds. We fear for our lives when drugs, guns and thievery abound. In the larger metropolitan areas, gangs control whole regions of the cities, making it risky just to walk down the street.
We all pay a heavy price for the spiritual blindness that envelopes humanity. What a tragedy! But it won't always be this way. Peace has been promised mankind. It will come—not because of the efforts of human beings but in spite of  them.
The end of crime and imprisonment
Part of the promise of Jesus Christ's first coming was to bring peace to the earth “to all in whom [God] delights” (Luke 2:14, Revised English Bible).
But humanity has never seen that promised peace and goodwill. Those promises have been extended to only a few—those who willingly surrender their own wills, their own selfish motivations, to God and thereby put into action the way of life Jesus Himself lived and taught.
The rest of mankind is not now willing to submit to the way of peace as taught and exemplified by Jesus Christ. So the vast majority of people will experience those promises only after Christ comes to earth a second time. He will then establish the Kingdom of God on earth (Revelation 11:15). The gospel, or good news, that He proclaimed (Mark 1:14) will at last become a reality!
However, the transition will not come easily. When Christ returns, He will initially have to force peace on humanity. Most of mankind will be angry at His second coming (Revelation 11:18).
The nations will not submit to God's will without a fight! Jesus will have to “rule them with a rod of iron … tread[ing] the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God” (Revelation 19:15).
Nor will Satan willingly surrender his grip on humanity. Before Christ's second coming the devil will be filled with “great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time” (Revelation 12:12). In his rage he will persecute those who are faithful to God (verse 17) and lead the world's great geopolitical powers into massive bloodshed that will be brought to a halt at Christ's return.
But this will mark the end of Satan's rule on earth. He will at that time be spiritually shackled, incarcerated so he can no longer deceive and mislead the peoples of earth during Jesus Christ's thousand-year reign (Revelation 20:1-3).
Real peace at last
When the Prince of Peace returns, He will bring crime and violence to an end. “They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain [Christ's Kingdom on earth], for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea” (Isaiah 11:9).
The world will at last experience a peace it has never known. The prophet Micah describes this world, transformed under the rule of Jesus Christ: “Now it shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established on the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and peoples shall flow to it.
“Many nations shall come and say, 'Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; He will teach us His ways, and we shall walk in His paths.' For out of Zion the law shall go forth, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
“He shall judge between many peoples, and rebuke strong nations afar off; they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore. But everyone shall sit under his vine and under his fig tree, and no one shall make them afraid; for the mouth of the Lord of hosts has spoken” (Micah 4:1-4).
In that day, yet ahead of us, man at last will know true peace. All people will be freed from crime and the prison of blindness, and the tyrannical overseer of man's captivity, Satan the devil, will himself be imprisoned.
The peace of God will break out on earth, and humankind will finally be free! God assures us that this hope will one day become a wonderful reality. GN