The pursuit of Constitutionally grounded governance, free
markets and individual liberty
"There is but
one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily." --George Washington
To
subscribe, see note below
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
~~~~~~
NSA Collecting Phone Records of Millions of Americans
Daily
Well
here’s another scandal ready for the Obama administration. It was revealed today that the
National Security Agency is currently collecting the telephone records of
millions of US customers of Verizon. This top secret order was issued
in April. The order, a copy of which has been obtained by the Guardian,
requires Verizon on an “ongoing, daily basis” to give the NSA information on all
telephone calls in its systems, both within the US and between the US and other
countries. The document shows for the first time that under the Obama
administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being
collected indiscriminately and in bulk – regardless of whether they are
suspected of any wrongdoing. The secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Court (Fisa) granted the order to the FBI on April 25, giving the government
unlimited authority to obtain the data for a specified three-month period
ending on July 19.
~~~~~~
11-Year-Old Suspended from School for 10 days for saying
“Gun.”
by Gary North
A
principal suspended a student for saying “gun” on a school bus. The
boy had the nerve to tell other students that he thought it would have been a
good idea to have had a gun in the Sandy Hook school where the madman shot
students. That did it. No more Mr. Nice Guy. The principal suspended
him. This is part of a pattern in public schools. This was reported by CNS
News.
o
In
January a Pennsylvania, kindergarten girl was suspended for bringing a Hello
Kitty automatic bubble gun to school. The school called the incident a
“terrorist threat.”
o
In
March, a Michigan school confiscated cupcakes from a third grader because they
had small,
toy army men that were holding guns on them.
o
That
same month, a Maryland school child was suspended for biting a toaster pastry into a
shape that resembled a gun.
o
In
January, a six year-old was suspended from a Maryland school for pointing
his finger in the shape of a gun.
o
Another
Maryland elementary school student was suspended for bringing a toy
cap gun on to a school bus to show his friend.
o
In
May, a Virginia second grader was suspended for pointing a pencil like a gun.
These
are examples of North’s first law of bureaucracy: “Some bureaucrat will eventually
enforce the letter of the law to the point of utter imbecility.” Or consider
the source; extremist acting as teachers and principals!
~~~~~~
Al-Qaeda Weapons Expert: Chris Stevens Died From Lethal
Injection In Benghazi by Tim Brown
In
a shocking claim, Abdallah Dhu-al-Bajadin, who has been identified by U.S.
officials as a known weapons expert for al-Qaeda, said in a recent online
posting that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed by lethal injection after
a botched plan to kidnap him in Benghazi failed on September 11, 2012.
The Washington Free Beacon reports:
“…according
to the March 14 posting on an al Qaeda-linked website, Abdallah Dhu-al-Bajadin,
the al Qaeda weapons expert, stated that Stevens was given a lethal injection
and that the injection was overlooked during the medical autopsy.
According
to Dhu-al-Bajadin, “the plan was based on abduction and exchange of high-level
prisoners.” “However, the operation took another turn, for a reason God only
knows, when one of the members of the jihadist cell improvised and followed
Plan B,” he wrote on the prominent jihadist web forum Ansar al-Mujahideen
Network. Dhu-al-Bajadin’s claim of assassination also stated that it had been
copied to the Ansar al-Mujahidin website from the closed and al Qaeda-accredited
website Shumukh al-Islam. That site is only open to members and was initially
posted by a member identified as Adnan Shukri for Dhu-al-Bajadin.
The
reference to Shumukh al Islam has boosted the credibility of the claim among
some U.S. intelligence analysts. A western intelligence official said
Dhu-al-Bajadin is a well-known jihadist weapons experts and a key figure behind
a magazine called Al Qaeda Airlines.”
While
U.S. officials are not saying that Dhu-al-Bajadin’s claims are true, they aren’t
dismissing them either.
Theories abound about what took place in Benghazi. There have been suggestions
that Benghazi amounted to nothing more than an international Fast and Furious, which
was going to arm the Syrians to overthrow Assad. However, there is also the theory that
Benghazi ended in tragedy as a setup for an October Surprise was to loom just
prior to the 2012 elections. Many have suggested that Benghazi was a botched
effort to kidnap Ambassador Stevens and trade him for the “Blind Sheik” Omar
Abdel Rahman. One such person that put forth that theory was retired Four-Star
Admiral James “Ace” Lyons.
While the
Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) is quite aware of the claim, they are
not commenting because they claim that they are engaged in an ongoing
investigation into the Benghazi attack. However, Stevens’ body was flown back
almost immediately following the attack. I have to ask, was there no autopsy
performed on his body to verify the veracity of the claim being made?
Kathy
Wright, the FBI spokeswoman, said “While there is a great deal of information
in the media and on the Internet about the attack in Benghazi, the FBI is not
in a position at this time to comment on anything specific with regard to the
investigation.”
The
State Department won’t comment either. CBS reported on September 12, 2012 reported:
The
Libyan doctor who treated U.S. ambassador Christopher Stevens says the diplomat
died of severe asphyxiation and that he tried for 90 minutes to revive him. Ziad Abu Zeid told The Associated Press on
Wednesday that Stevens was brought to the Benghazi Medical Center by Libyans
the night before, with no other Americans and that initially no one realized he
was the ambassador. Abu Zeid said Stevens had “severe asphyxia,” apparently
from smoke inhalation, causing stomach bleeding, but had no other injuries.
Catch
that? No other injuries.
This comes from a doctor at a hospital controlled by Islamic jihadists,
according to testimony given to Congress by Benghazi whistleblower Gregory
Hicks. Robert Klein Engler wrote on March 23, 2013 at Canada Free Press
something quite different. In what he labeled as an “internet autopsy,” which
was examining photographic and video evidence, Engler writes, “The photographic
evidence leads us to question the explanation that Stevens’ death was caused by
smoke inhalation. There are just too many possible wounds on Stevens’ body for that
explanation to be the whole story. Smoke inhalation usually does not leave a
wound on the forehead or shoulder that miraculously heals itself in a Benghazi
morgue.”
Engler
says that the rumors surrounding the claims that Stevens was raped and tortured
will continue until they are proven otherwise. “Until the official autopsy
results are released to the public we are left to wonder how Stevens died at
Benghazi,” Engler wrote. “The White House has repeatedly claimed his death was
the result of a protest to a video insulting to Islam. We know this explanation
is a lie.” The Interim Progress
Report submitted to members of the House Republican Conference on the events
surrounding the September 11, 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya, “Libyan doctors
tried unsuccessfully to resuscitate Ambassador Stevens upon his arrival at the
hospital.” No official cause of death for Stevens has ever been made public. According to The Free Beacon’s translation of
Dhu-al-Bajadin’s post in Arabic,
Dhu-al-Bajadin’s claim was
the lethal injection is “more than one place in the human body that autopsy
doctors ignore when they see that the symptoms are similar to another specific
and common illness… Anyone who studied the art of silent assassination that
spies applied during the Cold War would easily identify these parts of the
body.” Pamela Geller comments:
This
is devastating if true and gives legs to previous speculation that Ambassador
Stevens died in an kidnapping gone bad. The savages wanted (and still want) the
Blind Sheik behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing to be released.
Jihadists had stormed the US embassy in Cairo on September 11, 2013 demanding
that very thing. “The plan was based on abduction and exchange of high-level
prisoners.” More proof of an elaborate plan of attack on America while Obama
insisted it was free speech that was responsible for the attack. The FBI has
done nothing to further the investigation and the murderous savages remain
free.
This
new information comes on the day that Obama named Susan Rice, a key player in
the cover-up of the Benghazi scandal, as his National Security Adviser.
America, these are very dangerous and deliberate actors. What is so troubling
is the media’s refusal to ask questions and investigate this bloody and
murderous attack on America on 9/11. It’s been nine months. Are we really to believe that the
United States cannot accurately determine what caused the death of one of our
ambassadors? Or is this just more of the cover-up?
~~~~~~
~~~~~~
Pual Ryan demolishes
Democrats Congressmen Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) Claim!
Rep.
McDermott said that Tea Party groups wouldn’t have been scrutinized if they didn’t apply
for tax-exempt status and engage in the activities they did. No
interpretation, no opinion; watch for
yourself
~~~~~~
Rubio: Obamacare Tax Penalty Unconstitutional
By Todd
Beamon and John Bachman
Sen.
Marco Rubio tells Newsmax TV that he proposed a constitutional amendment on
Tuesday to negate Obamacare's individual mandate because "we want to make
it abundantly clear that it is unconstitutional." "The Supreme Court ruled that under
Obamacare, the individual mandate that basically says if you don't buy health
insurance, you're going to be punished with a tax or a fine -- they argued that
it was legal," the Florida Republican tells Newsmax in an exclusive
interview. "That Congress could pass a law that basically makes you buy
something by punishing you through a tax, that while they can't force you to
buy insurance, they can force you to pay a tax for not buying insurance."
In upholding Obamacare last year, the nation's highest court ruled that the
individual mandate, which requires individuals to purchase health insurance
starting in 2014 regardless of their ability, was constitutional under the
government's taxing authority. Rubio's
proposed "Right to Refuse" legislation would make it unconstitutional
for Congress to enact a law that imposes a tax on citizens who fail to buy
goods or services that Congress has deemed mandatory. "What we're
saying is that should be unconstitutional," the senator tells Newsmax.
"With this amendment, we want to make it abundantly clear that it
is."
~~~~~~
UCLA Study: There is No Recovery by
Stephen Green
So
a bunch of economists looked at a bunch of numbers and came up with this:
“Growth
in GDP has been positive, but not exceptional,” UCLA economists wrote in their
quarterly Anderson Forecast. “Jobs are growing, but not rapidly enough to
create good jobs for all.” The report, which analyzed long-term trends of past
recoveries, found that the long-anticipated “Great Recovery” has not yet
materialized. Real GDP growth — the value of goods and services produced after
adjusting for inflation — is 15.4% below the 3% growth trend of past
recoveries, wrote Edward Leamer, director of the UCLA Anderson Forecast. More
robust growth will be necessary to bring this recovery in line with previous
ones. “It’s not a recovery,” he wrote. “It’s not even normal growth. It’s
bad.”
If
this is news to you, you must live in or around DC.
~~~~~~
52% View WikiLeaks Suspect Bradley Manning As A Traitor
Most
voters believe the WikiLeaks release of classified documents is likely to have
hurt U.S. national security and think the American soldier who helped make the
information public on the Internet is a traitor. But they’re closely
divided over whether that soldier deserves to spend the rest of his life in
prison. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 62%
of Likely U.S. Voters think the WikiLeaks release of classified information is
at least somewhat likely to have hurt U.S. national security. Twenty-four
percent (24%) consider that unlikely. This includes 30% who say it’s Very
Likely that public disclosure of the secrets hurt national security and just
three percent (3%) who say it’s Not At All Likely to have done any damage.
Fourteen percent (14%) are not sure.
~~~~~~~
56% View Feds As Threat to Individual Rights
The
United States was founded on a belief that governments are created to protect
certain unalienable rights. Today,
however,
more voters than ever view the federal government as a threat to those rights.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% of Likely U.S.
Voters now consider the federal government a threat to individual rights rather
than a protector of those rights. That’s up 10 points from 46% in December. While
54% of liberal voters consider the feds to be a protector of individual rights,
78% of conservatives and 49% of moderates see the government as a threat.
Overall,
only 30% believe the feds today are a protector of individual rights. Fourteen
percent (14%) are undecided.
~~~~~~~
The Government is
NOT the United States
Does
this statement shock you? Or, does it make
you think "Of course not".
However, when one examines the facts and circumstances of people's
behavior, it is a reasonable conclusion the U.S. and the Federal Government is
one in the same. The U.S. is the people
(read the Constitution). Further, the
U.S. is a Republic of independent states that FORMED a federal government for
very specific and limited purposes. I
would suggest you listen and observe to determine how you think most people
think. One of my observations was a
"man on the street" type set of interviews. People were simply asked "Are you owned
by the government?" After some contemplation very many answered yes! Pretty remarkable.
~~~~~~
The Rise of Christianity: A Summary of Rodney Stark’s
Proposal
When
we as Christians consider the coming of Christ and the rise of Christianity, we
tend to focus on the spiritual forces at work – the powerful preaching of the
gospel, the apostles’ martyrdom for the faith, and the evangelistic attraction
of the early church’s common life together.
A book like The Rise of Christianity: How the Obscure, Marginal
Jesus Movement Became the Dominant Religious Force in the Western World in a
Few Centuries
(New York: Harper One, 1996) by Rodney Stark may seem
unusual at first, as it traces the sociological factors in the rise of
Christian belief and practice. Today, I’m going to summarize the case Stark
makes for the rise of Christianity and then tomorrow, I’ll offer some points of
application for our churches.
(New York: Harper One, 1996) by Rodney Stark may seem
unusual at first, as it traces the sociological factors in the rise of
Christian belief and practice. Today, I’m going to summarize the case Stark
makes for the rise of Christianity and then tomorrow, I’ll offer some points of
application for our churches.
Summary
Rodney
Stark wisely begins his book by acknowledging the helpfulness and also the
limitations of social science. “No sacrilege is entailed in the search to
understand human actions in human terms. Moreover, I do not reduce the rise of
Christianity to purely ‘material’ or social factors”. Nowhere is Stark
seeking to deny the Christian belief that God was at work in the beginning of
the Christian movement. Instead, he wants to examine the means by which this
rapid growth occurred. He believes social science will put an end to some of
the common, persistent myths about Christianity’s rapid growth.
For
example, examining the constant rate of growth of Christian believers, Stark questions
the often-assumed link between Constantine’s conversion and the Roman Empire
having a Christian majority. “Constantine’s conversion would better be seen as
a response to the massive exponential wave in progress, not as its cause”.
Why Does a Religious Movement Grow?
So
what factors are at play in the rapid rise of a religious movement? There are
certain social dynamics that must be examined.
·
Networks
of family and friends play a huge role in conversion. Stark sees conversion as
being more likely when “people have or develop stronger attachments
to members of the group than they have to nonmembers” (18).
·
Stark
also notes that “new religious movements mainly draw their converts from the
ranks of the religiously inactive and discontented, and those affiliated with
the most accommodated (worldly) religious communities” (19).
·
The
implication of this migration from one religious affiliation to another is that
the middle and privileged classes are more inclined to convert than the lowest
classes. “New religions must always make their way in the market openings left
them by weaknesses in the conventional religion(s) of a society,” Stark writes,
and “religious skepticism is most prevalent among the more privileged” (37).
Why is this the case? Stark believes the class of people most likely to
understand the new religion and see the need for its beliefs will be the most
economically privileged (39).
Christianity and Judaism
Stark’s
sociological study of the rise of early Christianity would be incomplete without
an in depth treatment of the relationship between Judaism and the early church.
Rather than seeing the relationship as inherently hostile, Stark makes the case
for an intertwined Jewish and Christian identity, as large numbers of Jews
converted to Christianity from the first to the fifth centuries. To
make this case, Stark spends an entire chapter sketching the reasons why
scholars have assumed a low rate of conversion among faithful Jews. Then, in
light of new sociological findings, Stark counters the conventional wisdom and
makes the case that large numbers did indeed convert peacefully.
Chaos and the Need for Stability
Another
role in the burgeoning Christian movement was played by social crises, brought
in the wake of disastrous plagues or in the common chaos of urban life. During
the early centuries of Christian growth, a series of natural disasters
(including earthquakes and epidemics) disrupted the Roman Empire. Stark
believes “Christianity offered a much more satisfactory account of why these
terrible times had fallen upon humanity, and it projected a hopeful, even
enthusiastic, portrait of the future”. These explanations helped Christians
cope with the disasters, which in turn helped Christians survive at higher
rates than pagans.
Furthermore,
the massive numbers of those who died disrupted the normal social bonds that
would have attached people to their families and neighbors. Because Christians
were more likely to survive the plagues, pagans found new friendships with
Christians whose faith would have been appealing in the midst of such turmoil.
Stark
also points out the chaos associated with urban living during this period of
history. Life in the city was one of disease, misery and fear, providing
Christians with the opportunity not only to imagine a better world in the
distant future but also solutions for present-day problems.
The Role of Godly Women
Another
factor in the rise of early Christianity centers on the role of women in the
early church. Because of Christianity’s prohibition of infanticide and
abortion, Christian families were more likely to raise up daughters in the
faith. High rates of intermarriage between Christian women and pagan men
brought about “secondary” conversions to Christianity, not to mention the
likelihood of children being brought up in the church.
What about the Martyrs?
Christian
historians often point to the testimony of the martyrs as a major reason for
the rise of Christianity. Stark does not discount the role of martyrdom, but he
puts it into perspective.
For
example, he counters the irrationalist vision of martyrdom that sees persecuted
people as clinging so tightly to their personal faith they make irrational
choices that lead to their demise. Stark believes the martyrs saw their
sacrifice as the best choice, given their belief in the rewards they would gain
in return. Likewise, “martyrs are the most credible exponents of the value of a
religion, and this is especially true if there is a voluntary aspect to their
martyrdom”. But Stark also counters the common Christian perspective by showing
how the number of martyrs was never very large, and the persecutions that took
place broke out intermittently and never focused on all Christians everywhere.
No comments:
Post a Comment