Sunday, July 30, 2006


What are your thoughts on Mel Gibson's DUI arrest and reported anti-Semitic remarks?
Gibson's clearly a virulent anti-Semite

The critics of 'Passion of the Christ' were right to be concerned about its anti-Semitic message

He's owned up to his problems with alcohol – now he needs to own up to his problem with Jews

His 'apology' was a feeble attempt to save his Hollywood career – it won't work

I defended Gibson against charges of anti-Semitism by 'Passion' critics and now I feel betrayed

He can't be held responsible for what he said while he was drunk

He said some ugly things, but the main concern should be that he gets treatment for his alcoholism

What he said was outrageous but the bigger issue is that he got behind the wheel drunk and impaired

He's clearly hit bottom – I'll be watching to see if he turns his life and his thinking around



Gibson's Anti-Semitic Tirade -- Alleged Cover Up
Posted Jul 28th 2006 9:15PM by TMZ StaffFiled under: Celebrity Justice
TMZ has learned that Mel Gibson went on a rampage when he was arrested Friday on suspicion of drunk driving, hurling religious epithets. TMZ has also learned that the Los Angeles County Sheriff's department had the initial report doctored to keep the real story under wraps.
TMZ has four pages of the original report prepared by the arresting officer in the case, L.A. County Sheriff's Deputy James Mee. According to the report, Gibson became agitated after he was stopped on Pacific Coast Highway and told he was to be detained for drunk driving Friday morning in Malibu. The actor began swearing uncontrollably. Gibson repeatedly said, "My life is f****d." Law enforcement sources say the deputy, worried that Gibson might become violent, told the actor that he was supposed to cuff him but would not, as long as Gibson cooperated. As the two stood next to the hood of the patrol car, the deputy asked Gibson to get inside. Deputy Mee then walked over to the passenger door and opened it. The report says Gibson then said, "I'm not going to get in your car," and bolted to his car. The deputy quickly subdued Gibson, cuffed him and put him inside the patrol car.
TMZ has learned that Deputy Mee audiotaped the entire exchange between himself and Gibson, from the time of the traffic stop to the time Gibson was put in the patrol car, and that the tape fully corroborates the written report.
Once inside the car, a source directly connected with the case says Gibson began banging himself against the seat. The report says Gibson told the deputy, "You mother f****r. I'm going to f*** you." The report also says "Gibson almost continually [sic] threatened me saying he 'owns Malibu' and will spend all of his money to 'get even' with me."
The report says Gibson then launched into a barrage of anti-Semitic statements: "F*****g Jews... The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world." Gibson then asked the deputy, "Are you a Jew?"
The deputy became alarmed as Gibson's tirade escalated, and called ahead for a sergeant to meet them when they arrived at the station. When they arrived, a sergeant began videotaping Gibson, who noticed the camera and then said, "What the f*** do you think you're doing?"
A law enforcement source says Gibson then noticed another female sergeant and yelled, "What do you think you're looking at, sugar tits?"
We're told Gibson took two blood alcohol tests, which were videotaped, and continued saying how "f****d" he was and how he was going to "f***" Deputy Mee.
Gibson was put in a cell with handcuffs on. He said he needed to urinate, and after a few minutes tried manipulating his hands to unzip his pants. Sources say Deputy Mee thought Gibson was going to urinate on the floor of the booking cell and asked someone to take Gibson to the bathroom.
After leaving the bathroom, Gibson then demanded to make a phone call. He was taken to a pay phone and, when he didn't get a dial tone, we're told Gibson threw the receiver against the phone. Deputy Mee then warned Gibson that if he damaged the phone he could be charged with felony vandalism. We're told Gibson was then asked, and refused, to sign the necessary paperwork and was thrown in a detox cell.
Deputy Mee then wrote an eight-page report detailing Gibson's rampage and comments. Sources say the sergeant on duty felt it was too "inflammatory." A lieutenant and captain then got involved and calls were made to Sheriff's headquarters. Sources say Mee was told Gibson's comments would incite a lot of "Jewish hatred," that the situation in Israel was "way too inflammatory." It was mentioned several times that Gibson, who wrote, directed, and produced 2004's "The Passion of the Christ," had incited "anti-Jewish sentiment" and "For a drunk driving arrest, is this really worth all that?"
We're told Deputy Mee was then ordered to write another report, leaving out the incendiary comments and conduct. Sources say Deputy Mee was told the sanitized report would eventually end up in the media and that he could write a supplemental report that contained the redacted information -- a report that would be locked in the watch commander's safe.
Initially, a Sheriff's official told TMZ the arrest occurred "without incident." On Friday night, Sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore told TMZ: "The L.A. County Sheriff's Department investigation into the arrest of Mr. Gibson on suspicion of driving under the influence will be complete and will contain every factual piece of evidence. Nothing will be sanitized. There was absolutely no favoritism shown to this suspect or any other. When this file is presented to the Los Angeles County District Attorney, it will contain everything. Nothing will be left out."
On Saturday, Gibson released the following statement:
"After drinking alcohol on Thursday night, I did a number of things that were very wrong and for which I am ashamed. I drove a car when I should not have, and was stopped by the LA County Sheriffs. The arresting officer was just doing his job and I feel fortunate that I was apprehended before I caused injury to any other person. I acted like a person completely out of control when I was arrested, and said things that I do not believe to be true and which are despicable. I am deeply ashamed of everything I said. Also, I take this opportunity to apologize to the deputies involved for my belligerent behavior. They have always been there for me in my community and indeed probably saved me from myself. I disgraced myself and my family with my behavior and for that I am truly sorry. I have battled with the disease of alcoholism for all of my adult life and profoundly regret my horrific relapse. I apologize for any behavior unbecoming of me in my inebriated state and have already taken necessary steps to ensure my return to health."
Click to see portions of the original report.
Comments updated 7/30/2006 12:15 pm EST



The Preterist View
Christian preterists believe that the Tribulation was a divine judgment visited upon the Jews for their sins, including rejection of Jesus as the promised Messiah. It occurred entirely in the past, around 70 CE/AD when the armed forces of the Roman Empire destroyed Jerusalem and its temple.
A preterist discussion of the Tribulation has its focus on the Gospels, in particular the prophetic passages in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21, rather than on the Apocalypse or Revelation of John. (Preterists apply much of the symbolism in the Revelation to Rome, the C├Žsars, and their persecution of Christians, rather than to the Tribulation upon the Jews.)
Jesus' warning in Matthew 24:34 that "this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled" is tied back to his similar warning to the Scribes and the Pharisees that their judgment would "come upon this generation" (Matthew 23:36), that is, during the first century rather than at a future time long after the Scribes and Pharisees had passed from the scene. The destruction in 70 CE/BC occurred within a forty-year generation from the time when Jesus gave that discourse.
The judgment on the Jewish nation was executed by the Roman legions, "the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet" (Matthew 24:15), which Luke presented to his Gentile audience, unfamiliar with Daniel, as "armies" surrounding Jerusalem to cause its "desolation." (Luke 21:20)
Since Matthew 24 begins with Jesus visiting the Jerusalem temple and pronouncing that "there shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down" (vs. 3), preterists see nothing in Scripture to indicate that another Jewish temple will ever be built. The prophecies were all fulfilled on the then-existing temple that Jesus spoke about and that was subsequently destroyed within that generation.

BY LINDA: We can relate the Gospels to modern day news reporting. We can perhaps go to CNN and get one account of what is going on with the war, and at one time the reporters are telling about the great mistake made by the IDF when a civilian area is hit with bombs like today in Tyre where so far 37 of the 5o plus dead are children. Then one turns to Fox News, and hears the same horrific news reported that Israel had a reason to hit the area because Hezbollah uses the area for hiding out. Now tomorrow, we will be able to listen to CNN or maybe even this afternoon and find that their reporting is in lockstep with Fox News. So if you read Revelations, you will see John going back and repeating Jesus' preaching that the four Gospels record. But John goes further and talks of visions that he alone experienced with the opening of the seven seals. Why is it that Matthew, Luke and Mark do not also have similar experiences to record in the Holy Bible? Was John under influence by politicians to give a futuristic view of hope for the Jews to make everyone to fall back into the times that preceded Christ to worship the Jews falsely and place them in a position of power as the chosen ones? We will not know the answer, until we are in final judgment with the Lord Jesus Christ.

Yes the Jews where chosen by their King, which was the Lord Jesus Christ. They were chosen to be the ones that denied Christ and to crucify Chirst with the aid of politicians in Rome. I have read some interesting writings about the twelve tribes of Israel online, and have learned that Israel was the name given to Jacob. And Israel means "rebel." One writing talks about the fact that Jew cannot be defined by genetics because of intermarriage with gentiles and other races. The futuristic revelation can be read by clicking anyone of the links above for this Wikipedia writing, but it is advised that one always go to the source the Holy Bible. I have found an online geneology of my own family on my paternal grandmother's side that traces our family back to the 1600s from Germany to Christian Storm, and like an online source said that anyone that can go back 300 years in their family will find enough surnames to fill a telephone book. That is the way my family is of course, just with this one geneology link. My mother's side of the family goes back to the 1600s as well to the Means family that belonged to the Menzies Clan that were Ulster Scotts from the Plantation Era of England when the Ulster Scotts migrated from England to Scottland, to Ireland and then to America for a better life. So just with two branches of my family, I have enough ancestors to fill two phone books. So the purpose of this writing is to point out that we are all seeds of Jews with intermarriage throughout the centuries.

In the futuristic version of Revelation, the twelve tribes that make up the 144,000 will be Jewish male virgins that are never married. Now the current Pope in Rome is said to have been from a Jewish family that resided in Poland. Popes do not marry of course, but Jewish Rabbis are encouraged to marry and have children. So you see this is the controversy that we are all under. If John's futuristic views of Revelation would have not contradicted the other three Gospels, could we have had peace in the world? I see the situation from my humble status, as less than God, that someone had to be chosen to carry the burden of crucifying Christ, and that then the message should have only focused on the Good News that Christ is the Messiah and he arose on the third day according to scripture to reign as our Lord and Savior. I truly believe that Christ's message was meant to be, "love your neighbors as you love yourself," but politicians of the times past, and the times present cannot allow that to be because in order to do that power would have to be given up to God's laws. Those in Jesus times did not understand that those that crucified Christ were chosen to carry out the prophecy, and the conspiracy and coverups were rampant to silence those that saw the tomb empty and saw Christ that had arose. I hope that some see the similarities between times past and times today. We have upteen news channels to watch the events of the world, and those that watch news only occsionally have not a clue of what is going on (the vast majority), and those that watch it regularly have our eyes opened to the revised history that takes place in broad daylight.

I will live my life as a Christian, and will not allow questions of biblical accounts weaken my faith. I know that Christ has blessed me and all those that accept his blessings with the promise of his Kingdom when we leave the Earth.


July 29, 2006
The Lies Israel Tells Itself (and We Tell on Its Behalf)
by Jonathan Cook
When journalists use the word "apparently," or another favorite "reportedly," they are usually distancing themselves from an event or an interpretation in the supposed interests of balance. But I think we should read the "apparently" contained in a statement from the head of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, relating to the killing this week of four unarmed UN monitors by the Israeli army in its other sense.
When Annan says that those four deaths were "apparently deliberate," I take him to mean that the evidence shows that the killings were deliberate. And who can disagree with him? At least 10 phone calls were made to Israeli commanders over a period of six hours warning that artillery and aerial bombardments were either dangerously close to or hitting the monitors' building.
The UN post, in Khaim just inside south Lebanon, was clearly marked and well-known to the army, but nonetheless it was hit directly four times in the last hour before an Israeli helicopter fired a precision-guided missile that tore through the roof of an underground shelter, killing the monitors inside. A UN convoy that arrived too late to rescue the peacekeepers was also fired on. From the evidence, it does not get much more deliberate than that.
The problem, however, is that Western leaders, diplomats, and the media take the "apparently" in its first sense – as a way to avoid holding Israel to account for its actions. For "apparently deliberate," read "almost certainly accidental." That was why the best the UN Security Council could manage after a day and a half of deliberation was a weaselly statement of "shock and distress" at the killings, as though they were an act of God.
Our media are no less responsible for this evasiveness. They make sure "we" – the publics of the West – never countenance the thought that a society like our own, one we are always being reminded is a democracy, could sink to the depths of inhumanity required to murder unarmed peacekeepers. Who can be taken seriously challenging the Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni's assertion that "There will never be an [Israeli] army commander that will intentionally aim at civilians or UN soldiers [sic]"?
Even the minority in the West who have started to fear that Israel is "apparently" slaughtering civilians across Lebanon or that it is "apparently" intending to make refugees of a million Lebanese must presumably shrink from the idea that Israel is also capable of killing unarmed UN monitors.
After all, our media insinuate, the two cases are not comparable.
There may be good reasons why Lebanese civilians need to suffer. Let's not forget that they belong to a people (or is it a race or, maybe, a religion?) that gave birth to Hezbollah. "We" can cast aside our concerns for the moment and take it on trust that Israel has cause to kill the Lebanese or make them homeless. Doubtless the justifications will emerge later, when we have lost interest in the "Lebanon crisis." We may never hear what those reasons were, but who can doubt that they exist?
The "apparent" murder of four UN monitors, however, is a deeper challenge to our faith in our moral superiority, which is why that "apparently" is held on to as desperately as a talisman. No civilized country could kill peacekeepers, especially ones drawn from our own societies, from Canada, Finland, and Austria. That is the moral separation line that divides us from the terrorists. Were that line to be erased, we would be no different from those whom we must fight.
An iconic image of this war that our media have managed to expunge from the official record but which keeps popping up in e-mail inboxes like a guilty secret is of young Israeli girls, lipsticked and nail-polished as if on their way to a party, drawing messages of death and hatred on the sides of the missiles about to be loaded on to army trucks and tanks. In one, an out-of-focus soldier stands on a tank paternally watching over the girls as they address another death threat to Hezbollah's leader, Hassan Nasrallah.
Is this the truer face of Israeli society, even if it is the one we are never shown and refuse to believe in? And are "we" in the West hurtling down the same path?
Driving through the Jewish city of Upper Nazareth this week, I realized how inured I am becoming to this triumphal militarism – and the racism that feeds it. Nothing surprising about the posters of "We will win" on every hoarding. But it takes me more than a few seconds to notice that the Magen David ambulance in front of me is flying a little national flag, the blue Star of David, from its window. I have heard that American fire engines flew U.S. flags after 9/11, but this somehow seems worse. How is it possible for an ambulance, the embodiment of our neutral, civilized, universal, "Western," humanitarian values, to fly a national flag, I think to myself? And does it make a difference that only a few months ago Magen David joined the International Committee of the Red Cross?
Only slowly do my thoughts grow more disturbed: how many hospital administrators, doctors, and nurses have seen that ambulance arrive at their emergency departments and thought nothing of it? And is that the only Israeli ambulance flying the flag, or are many others doing the same? Later, the BBC TV news answers my question. I see two ambulances with the same flags going to the front line to collect casualties. Will others soon cross over the border into southern Lebanon, after it is "secured," and will no one mention those little flags fluttering from the window?
A psychologist tells me how upset she is about a meeting she attended a few days ago of the northern coordinating committee of her profession. They were discussing how best to treat the shock and trauma suffered by Israeli children under the bombardment from Hezbollah. The meeting concluded with an agreement that the psychologists would reassure the children with the statement: "The army is there to protect us."
And so, the seeds of fascism are unthinkingly sown for another generation of children, children like our own.
No one agreed with my friend when she dissented, arguing that this was not the message to be telling impressionable minds, and that violence against the Other is not a panacea for our problems. Parents, not soldiers, are responsible for protecting their children, she pointed out. Tanks, planes, and guns bring only fear and more hatred, hatred that will one day return to haunt us.
The slow, gentle indoctrination continues day in, day out, reinforcing the idea among Israel's Jewish population that the army can do no wrong and that it needs no oversight, not even from politicians (most of whom are former generals anyway, or like Prime Minister Ehud Olmert too frightened to stand up to the chiefs of staff if they wanted to). "We will win." How do we know we will win? Because "the army is there to protect us." Add into the mix that faceless "Arab" enemy, those sub-beings, and you have a recipe for fascism – even if it is of the democratically elected variety.
The Israeli media, of course, are the key to providing the second half of that equation – or rather not providing it. You can sit watching the main Israeli channels all day, flicking between channels 1, 2, and 10, and not see a Lebanese face, apart from that of Hassan Nasrallah, the new Hitler. I don't mean the charred faces of corpses, or the bandaged babies, or the amputees lying in hospital beds. I mean any Lebanese faces. Just as you almost never see a Palestinian face on Israeli TV unless they are the mob, disfigured with hatred as they hold aloft another martyr on his way to burial.
Lebanon only swings in to view on Israeli television through the black and white footage of an aerial gun sight, or through the long shot of a distant urban landscape seconds before it is "pulverized" by a dropped bomb. The buildings crumble, flames shoot up, clouds of dust billow into the air. Another shot of arcade-game adrenaline.
The humanitarian stories exist, but they do not concern Lebanon. Animal welfare societies plead on behalf of the dogs and cats left alone to face the rocket fire on deserted Kiryat Shmona, just as they did before for foxes and deer when Israel began building its mammoth walls of concrete and steel across their migration routes in the West Bank, walls that are also imprisoning, unseen, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.
The rest of the coverage is dedicated to Israeli army spokespeople, including the national heartthrob Miri Regev, and media "commentators" and "analysts." Who are these people? They are from the same pool of former military intelligence and security service officers who once did this job in the closed rooms of army HQ but now wallow in the limelight. One favored pundit is even subtitled "Expert on psychological warfare against Hassan Nasrallah."
And who are the presenters and anchors who interview them? The other day an aging expert on Apache helicopters interrupted his interviewer irritatedly to tell him his question was stupid. "We were in the army together and both know the answer. Don't play dumb." It was a rare reminder that these anchors too are just soldiers in suits. One of the most popular, Ehud Yaari of Channel 2, barely conceals his military credentials as he condones yet more violence against the Lebanese or, if he can be deflected for a moment, the people of Gaza.
That is what comes of having a "citizen army," where teenagers learn to use a gun before they can drive and men do reserve duty until their late 40s. It means every male teacher, professor, psychologist, and journalist thinks as a soldier because that is what he has been for most of his life.
Israel is not unique, far from it, though it is in a darker place, and has been for some time, than "we" in the West can fully appreciate. It is a mirror of what our own societies are capable of, despite our democratic values. It shows how a cult of victimhood makes one heartless and cruel, and how racism can be repackaged as civilized values.
Maybe those UN monitors, with their lookout post above the battlefield where Israel wants to use any means it can to destroy Hezbollah and Lebanese civilians who get in the way, had to be removed simply because they are a nuisance, a restraint when Israel needs to get on with the job of asserting "our" values. Maybe Israel does not want the scrutiny of peacekeepers as it fights our war on terror for us. Maybe it feared that the monitors' reports might help to give back to the Lebanese, even to Hezbollah, their faces, their history, their suffering.
And, if we are honest, Israel is not alone. How many of us want the Arabs to remain faceless so we can keep believing we are the victims of a new ideology that wants only our evisceration, just as the "Red Indians" once supposedly wanted our scalps? How many many of us believe that our values demand that we fall in behind a new world order in which Arab deaths are not real deaths because "they" are not fully human?
And how many of us believe that deliberate barbarity, at least when we do it, is only "apparently" a crime against humanity?

Find this article at:

BY BEEBEE: This morning we learn that an attack was made on a four story building in Tyre that housed the elderly and families with small children. Per CNN, Israel has admitted that they made yet another mistake. But when going to Fox News, and listening to the air head journalist on there on Sunday mornings, the coverup was very APPARENT! I have to agree with this writing that yes, we are treating the Arabs as if they are subhuman. We will face wrath now in the United States in the future for what our derelict leaders failed to stop with this tragic war. If we would have gone along with the international community, we could have gave the word that a cease fire should take place. But you will see if you look at an earlier post that I made, which points out the huge arms deals that we have entered into with Saudi Arabia that will benefit General Dynamics, and other subcontractors that get a piece of the war pie. We are lead by a military complex that has hijacked the American Dream. And yes, I support our soldiers because I am the mother of a Marine and I know my son and I know his compassion for the Lord and humanity. Our leaders have sold the soul of the United States to the devil. Also below, read the quote that I have of President Eisenhower's farewell speech in 1961.


"Necessary Evil" was designated as one of the 7 planes taking part in the Hiroshima mission. Its role was to carry the scientific observer team and photographic equipment and was one of the three B29s of the primary strike force. Piloted by George Marquardt, it departed Tinian Island at approximately 2:50 on the morning of August 6, 1945.

Saturday, July 29, 2006


Rice to Play Piano Piece at ASEAN Dinner
By KATHERINE SHRADER Associated Press Writer
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia —
Colin Powell danced to "YMCA," and Madeleine Albright did an Eva Peron impersonation. But Condoleezza Rice decided to play a classical piano piece.
The annual Association of Southeast Asian Nations dinner, which is closed to the news media, has traditionally given world figures a chance to show a more playful side.
But the current secretary of state said that given world events, a lighthearted skit wouldn't be appropriate.
Instead, Rice, an accomplished pianist who has performed with cellist Yo-Yo Ma, said she'll play a Brahms piece to fit her "serious mood" at the dinner Thursday.
In 2004, Powell performed a "YMCA" routine wearing a hard hat and a hammer tucked in his belt — after the garb of The Village People disco group that had the big hit in the '70s. Albright, dressed as Eva Peron, belted out a reworked version of "Don't Cry for Me, Argentina" in 1997, and the next year sang a duet called "East-West Story" with then-Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov.
Last year, former Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick, attending for Rice, joined other U.S. officials in a rendition of "Oh My Darling, Clementine." They wore jeans and bandanas.
Rice said she had a couple of Brahms works to choose from. It will be "a reflective piece," she said. "It's a serious time."
July 27, 2006 - 7:10 p.m. EDTCopyright 2006, The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP Online news report may not be published, broadcast or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

Find this article at:


US planning $4.6bn in Mideast arms sales Saturday, July 29, 2006-->Web posted at: 7/29/2006 2:39:56Source ::: REUTERS
washington • The Bush administration spelled out plans yesterday to sell $4.6bn of arms to moderate Arab states, including battle tanks worth as much as $2.9bn to protect critical Saudi infrastructure.
The announcement came two weeks after the administration said it would sell Israel its latest supply of JP-8 aviation fuel valued at up to $210m to help Israeli warplanes “keep peace and security in the region.”
The United States also rushed a delivery of precision-guided bombs requested by Israel after launching its airstrikes against Hizbollah fighters in Lebanon 17 days ago, The New York Times reported last week.
In the newly proposed sales to Arab states, UH-60M Black Hawk helicopter gunships worth up to $808m would go to the United Arab Emirates, while AH-64 Apache helicopters worth as much as $400m would go to Saudi Arabia.
Bahrain would also get Black Hawk helicopters, valued at up to $252m. Jordan would get a potential $156m in upgrades to 1,000 of its M113A1 armored personnel carriers.
Javelin anti-tank missiles valued at up to $48m would go to Oman under the deals put forward by the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency, which administers US government-to-government arms sales.
The $2.9bn Saudi deal involves the sale of 58 older-generation US M1A1 Abrams tanks that would be modernized. Also, 315 Saudi-owned, newer-model, Abrams tanks would be improved with such things as air-conditioning and infrared sights for the commanders as well as the gunners.
The project’s prime contractor would be General Dynamics Corp.’s Land Systems business unit of Sterling Heights, Michigan, the Pentagon said in a notice to Congress required by law. Vehicle “teardown” and final reassembly would be carried out in Saudi Arabia, the notice said.

Friday, July 28, 2006


John in Revelations is taken to a great high mountain and shown the holy city of Jerusalem descending out of heaven from God. Jerusalem has a light, precious lke Japser stone and clear as crystal. Within these verses, John sees the twelve apostles names written in the twelve foundations of the wall of the city..."And I saw no temple therein for the God almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it." (Rev. 21:22).

The Lamb is Jesus Christ. Those that are prophecizing that a new physical temple is to built by the Jews in Israel are not following Revelations. Because Jerusalem as scripture says is a new Jerusalem per these scriptures that those that live to see this fulfilled will see come from heaven, and the temple is spiritual not physical. There will be no need of man made temples because Jesus Christ will be the temple in the second coming.

We are following false doctrine in trying to build a temple by forcing innocents off land and waging wars and making enemies amongst other nations. As the scriptures say, he who kills will the sword, shall die by the sword. Much has to be fulfilled before a new Jerusalem comes from heaven. But time can move quickly when Christ returns. I also believe that John was seeing those saved that were beheaded because of their Christian belief to be people of his time when he looked into the book of life. Those were the ones that he knew of that died martyrs like John the Baptist who was beheaded by King Herrod. And there are Christians that are being beheaded by Radical Islams in present day. So John in Revelations may have been seeing these beheadings, too. The main point of this post is about the heavenly being of the new Jerusalem with a temple that is Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior. Beware, as it is those that promote homosexuality, those that promote movies that defame Jesus Christ; those that mock Christians in the media that are beating the drums for us to support a most destructive war. "Beware of wolves in sheep's clothing." Christians are being deceived to take part in slaughters that will bring war against the United States and the rest of the world.


AIPAC has a budget of approximately $47 million with a 100 member staff in Washington DC. Newt Gingrich, when speaker of the House, spoke on the floor about moving an embassy to Israel because he was trying hard to direct Jewish campain money away from Democrats. Bob Dole did the same thing when he was running for President, as did Hillary Clinton when she was running for the Senate. This group is not only a powerful PAC in Washington DC, but it also directs Jews in Israel of who to support for political office, as well as Jews that reside in the United States. Never forget that it is money that buys power and influence for politicians that care about one thing and that is being powerful players in the United States. The Christians are thrown out some pretense that these greedy politicians think about values and morals, as they vote for well-staged publicity stunt bills. But this powerful lobbying has led to the racist genocide that is taking place in the Middle East. Yes there are bad people everywhere, and no doubt they deserve to be captured and punished. But how many innocent people do we have to kill to kill one terrorist? I venture that 99% of the people that have been killed in Iraq were innocent bystanders in this "War on Terror." And there is no doubt in my mind, that the majority of those killed in the last couple of weeks in Lebanon were innocent human beings. Yes, wake up people. It is innocent people that are being viciously slaughtered for the most part. Well, I hope that you click this link and read about AIPAC. It is an eye opener. I did not mention the Democrats that also get funding, as I just focused on the Republicans. (President Bush is also mentioned in this aritcle). Now do you see why anyone that has ambitions of running for President supports Israel because of undue influence from AIPAC?

I want to make the reader aware that I am a born again Christian, and I do believe in the twelve tribes of Jews retuning to Israel in preparation of Christ's return. But I feel that the placement of the European Jews in Israel in 1948 was forceful to the Paletinians that lived in that area. These Palestinians were in some cases killed and some were dropped off in the desert (how many do you think survived this treatment). I feel that Jesus would want his chosen people to return in a peaceful manner to live with those already in the area without bloodshed. I read the Bible and see Jews that move to their homeland to worship God. When I read the Bible, I see Israel in the final days as a nation that cannot defend itself against those that would want to harm them. So here we have the new Country of Israel with a nuclear arsenal, with torpedo boats, with a navy fleet, with F-16s and with financial backing from the United States armed like a monster in the Middle East. The Israel that I envision in the Holy Bible is as weak as a lamb, that others would seek to destroy because of them being unable to defend herself, at which time Christ would return to destroy those that do Israel harm. When a people are transplanted into an area that causes others to be pushed out of land that they have lived on for years, and those new people have an air of superiority over those that they deem less worthy of them is just not what I believe God would condone.

I read the scriptures where Jesus says that no man knows the time of my return, and I feel that our leaders are on a dangerous mission to take prophecy into their own hands. In tying false theology to the day, it allows Christians to be deceived while a whole people are eliminated in what I believe will be a nuclear bomb in the Middle East. Oh, how people forget that 150 million Christians died in World War I and World War II, maybe more. Don't you think that this was also hyped as a biblical prophecy then, too? But Jesus knows well the hearts of men, as he was judged like a common criminal on Earth by politicians, and he says in Matthew that "there will always be wars and rumors of wars." We cannot stop the wars, and we cannot time the second coming of Christ. I want all to be saved, but I know that will never be. And I do know in my heart that Christ is sad to see the innocent children, men and women that are being killed and maimed in this unjust war. You see in Revelations it is Jesus that will return to defend Israel not the IDF that has devasted Lebanon, which is my interpretation of the scripture. Furthermore, Jesus tells the Pharisees that they are not his people and that he did not come to save them, and that they are the seeds of Satan. When Jesus words are written in Matthew, Mark. Luke and John, I have not read anything that says, but I will come back and give you a second chance. This is why I have trouble with Revelations being taken literally. But the bottom line is that we will all have to wait and see when the time comes for us to depart this world what Jesus has in store for us. I cannot in my heart be a cheerleader for the killings of innocent peoples, and be a Christian at the same time. I think this routing out of entire Country to kill a minority of terrorist is the wrong way to solve our problems in the world. Yes, I have flip-flopped back and forth on the war. But when, I view pictures of dead bodies mutulated from bombs my feelings about war change. I pray for peace in the world.


Muhammad also speaks of the resurrection of Jesus:
"Thereupon she pointed to him. They said, 'How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?' Jesus said, 'I am a servant of ALLAH. HE has given me the Book, and has made me a Prophet; 'And HE has made me blessed wheresoever I may be, and has enjoined upon me Prayer and almsgiving so long as I live; 'And HE has made me dutiful towards my mother, and has not made me arrogant and graceless; 'And peace was on me the day I was born, and peace will be on me the day I shall die, and the day I shall be raised up to life again.' That was Jesus, son of Mary. This is a statement of the truth concerning which they entertain doubt." -- Qur'an, Surah 19:30-35

By BeeBee: I am posting this because I am trying to find out why fanatical Muslims hate Christians and Jews and call them "infadels to be killed." I believe that throughout history with the Christian Crusades and with the creation of the Zionist Country of Israel that displaced Arabs that this certainly created hatred for Christians and Jews. Sometimes you must put yourself in the shoes of the oprressed or our new terrorist enemy. It is just like the Indians that we pushed off of land in the United States, and the slaves that were brought here from the West Indes and Africa. Indians still have a distaste for white people (and rightly so), and African Americans still have a distrust and in some cases hatred for white people. The young African American children are being taught to blame white people today for our ancestors faults. Are we also breeding a new form of terrorism in the United States that will create a civil war oneday? Actually, if we take a look at crime that involves blacks against whites, it is often brutal and the main stream press usually glosses over it. (example: Hurricane Katrina's brutal rapes and murders). You know the old saying, "you reap what you sow" is very appropriate. I blame supremacist attitudes on the part of whites and Jewish people for the fact that some Muslims have grown to hate us and wish us to be destroyed. You see, all people's are on the side of a war that will benefit them the most. We have much interest in protecting Israel, and if you believe that the Jews that want to save Israel (the Neocons) are doing it for God then you need to move on and read something else because you are too brain-washed for me. It is KACHING! Watch Larry Kudlow and Jim Cramer on CNBC, and listen to them talking about money, money and more money. You can never make enough of that green stuff. I have an article saved about a comment that Bill Krystol made about evangelical Christians supporting Israel for Messianic reasons, and he said that it was alright with him however they felt because it is his Israel. I am a born again Christian, and I feel that this is the false prophecy that Jesus warns about of how the false Christs will rise and deceive many. By the way where is the ACLU? With all of this government of support of Israel with clear biblical connections, is that not a violation of the separation of church and state?You see the ACLU was founded by Jews so they pick the battles that serve their purposes. Jesus warns that many will be blinded and so they are. I do pray that more Christians will awake to the truth. You see those that worship money and material things will lead the world if they have to into total destructions just to hang on to their wealth and accumulate more because those that worship power and money are not God's chosen people whether they be Gentiles or Jews. Oh there will be Jews saved in the end time, but it will not be the ones that are ordering the firing of bombs on innocent men, women and children in the Middle East. You will see here that I am not saying the soldiers are guilty, as they are following orders from their superiors.


April 1, 2003
To: Officers, Rabbis, Key ContactsFrom: Richard B. Stone, ChairmanBetty Ehrenberg, Director, International and Communal AffairsRe: Loan Guarantees and Supplemental Anti-Terror Aid to IsraelUrge Congress to Support Aid to Israel
The House and Senate recently passed the FY03 Omnibus Appropriations bill. Included in the bill is the FY03 Foreign Operations bill, which funds and earmarks the President’s request for aid to Israel ($2.1 billion military, $600 million economic) and refugee settlements in Israel ($60 million). The bill also contains landmark language codifying the conditions President Bush laid out in his June 24th speech for Palestinian statehood and a provision for requiring a GAO report on UNRWA-related activities. Not included in the bill because of budgetary constraints and the anticipation of a much larger request is $200 million in supplemental aid to Israel that was part of the original House bill.
Since Israel is today facing an unprecedented crisis, both economically and militarily, President Bush has requested Congress to approve a package of $9 billion in loan guarantees for Israel and a $1 billion supplementary package in anti-terror aid. It is important that we urge our members of Congress to support providing Israel the necessary resources to overcome the current overwhelming economic and military crisis.
Urge Congress to:
Support Israel’s expected supplemental package of $9 billion in loan guarantees and $1 billion in anti-terror aid and support the annual foreign aid request ($2.64 billion).
Talking Points:
Israel is today facing an unprecedented crisis both economically and militarily that could have a significant impact on its future security and stability. As a result, Israel has come to the United States to request a special multi-year aid package consisting of loan guarantees and military assistance to help overcome this dual crisis. At present, negotiations are taking place with the Administration and a request, when it is submitted, is expected to be included as part of an Iraqi war supplemental funding bill in the coming weeks.

The Israeli economy is now in a deep recession, facing the third year in a row of negative economic growth. Israel’s per capita GDP has shrunk by 6% in the past two years. The Palestinian war of terrorism, now in its third year, has had a powerful effect on the economy: Israel’s tourism industry has suffered a net loss of $2 billion per year; foreign investment is way down; the unemployment rate is now in excess of 10%. (BY BEEBEE: PROOF THAT ISRAEL IS NOT A DEMOCRACY, AS IT IS SOCIALISM THAT IS FINANCED BY THE TAXPAYERS OF THE UNITED STATES).

Israel is incurring huge additional costs in fighting the war on terror, in addition to preparing for a possible attack from Iraq and the increasing threat from Iranian-armed Hezbollah. Israel has had to increase the intensity of military activities, including expanding the activities of army reserves by 400%, intensifying intelligence operations, and constructing a costly barrier along Israel’s so-called “Seam Line” to reduce terrorist infiltration. Israel is also incurring tremendous costs in preparing itself to defend against the possible attack from Iraq. These homeland defense preparations include gas masks and vaccines, placing missile and air defense units on heightened alert, and boosting the readiness of the Israeli Air Force operations to almost 100%. As a result, Israel’s defense burden has increased from 8.4% of GDP to 10.2% - more than three times ahead of the United States. Because of limited resources, Israel has also had to divert funds from critical long-term defense modernization needs affecting Israel’s defense against future threats from neighboring countries who are accelerating their development of weapons of mass destruction.

The loan guarantees Israel is requesting ($9 billion) are an inexpensive, low-risk way for the United States to help Israel borrow money at affordable rates and for longer periods of maturity. Israel has agreed to pay the budget scoring costs associated with the guarantees, so there would be no cost to the U.S. taxpayer. The guarantees would reduce the other pressure on domestic interest rates, free up funds for investment in the most productive sectors of Israel’s economy, and restore international confidence in the economy, thus helping Israel dig its way out of this recession. The Israeli economy has basically a sound base, its external debt is manageable, and its foreign currency reserves stable. Israel has also recently instituted numerous economic reforms and severe budget cuts to help ease the crisis.

The supplemental military aid request ($1 billion) will help Israel meet the cost of this unprecedented array of security challenges, while ensuring that future defense needs are not compromised. Among the items requested are counter-terror weapons assistance, protected command posts, advanced missiles, and armor-protected vehicles.
Write or call your Representatives and Senators at:
Representative ________________U.S. House of RepresentativesWashington, D.C. 20515Tel: (202) 225-3121(Ask for the name of your Representative)
Senator ___________________United States SenateWashington, D.C. 20510Tel: (202) 224-3121(Ask for the name of your Senator)


Krauthammer’s “Morality”
Friday, July 28th, 2006 in
News by Justin Raimondo
Comparing the capture of two Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah guerrillas to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Charles Krauthammer weighs in on the Israeli reponse:
“Disproportionate? No. When one is wantonly attacked by an aggressor, one has every right — legal and moral — to carry the fight until the aggressor is disarmed and so disabled that it
cannot threaten one’s security again. That’s what it took with Japan.”
Let’s apply the principle enunciated here to everyday human relations. Say I “capture” your wallet on a crowded bus, and make for the back in an effort to evade your attention. In pursuit, you push over a few old ladies, floor a woman carrying a baby, and trample several young and rather small children. Not only that, but you start shooting — and hit five or six people without landing a bullet on me.
According to the Krauthammerian moral doctrine, you are perfectly within your rights. After all, I am “hiding among civilians,” just as Krauthammer alleges is Hezbollah’s favorite tactic. Besides which, those “civiians,” who know perfectly well that I’m a pickpocket — this bus line has been plagued with them recently — have done nothing to stop me. They let me pass, and isn’t this a form of collaboration? As the Israeli ”Justice” Minister Haim Ramon, in advocating that villages under attack by the IDF should be “flattened,” put it:
“Israel had given the civilians of southern Lebanon ample time to quit the area and therefore anyone still remaining there could be considered a Hezbollah supporter. ‘All those now in south Lebanon are terrorists who are related in some way to Hezbollah,’ Mr Ramon said.”
There aren’t “innocent civilians” in the back of the bus, and anyone who gets in your way is fair game. You finally get to the back row, and find I’ve locked myself in the bathroom. You’re out of ammunition, but luckily you remembered to take your switchblade: this is used to persuade the bus driver to hand over the key. You, of course, have a perfect right to hold all the passengers on that bus hostage: after all, you must “carry the fight until the aggressor is disarmed and so disabled that it cannot threaten one’s security again.”
According to the logic of Krauthammer’s moral creed, you have the right to blow up the bus and everyone in it provided the threat to your security, i.e. the pickpocket, is eliminated, which is precisely what Israel is doing to Lebanon.
If individuals engaged in the behavior exhibited by Israel in Lebanon, they would be prosecuted and imprisoned in order to protect the public. No doubt Krauthammer believes Israel’s status as a state grants it transcendence over a legal and moral code meant for mere mortals. But of course a state can be guilty of war crimes, which Israel is surely committing as I write. (Or is Krauthammer now joining the “revisionists” in repudiating the war crimes trials at Nuremberg?)


'Faith Day' Hits The Big Leagues
Atlanta Braves To Become First Major League Baseball Team To Host Religious Event
(Page 1 of 2)ATLANTA, July 27, 2006

storeInfo[1] = 'Atlanta Braves pitcher John Smoltz works in the first inning of Wednesday night\'s game against the Florida Marlins on July 26, 2006,. Smoltz will talk about his Christian faith at "Faith Day" after Thursday\'s game. (AP Photo/John Bazemore)';

Atlanta Braves pitcher John Smoltz works in the first inning of Wednesday night's game against the Florida Marlins on July 26, 2006,. Smoltz will talk about his Christian faith at "Faith Day" after Thursday's game. (AP Photo/John Bazemore)
"In the South, [Faith Day] makes sense because of the very strong historic evangelical culture, but the fact is that [evangelical game-night promotions] are spreading and moving out into other corners of the country." (For full story go to link). In this week of bad news, this is wonderful! God bless American!



wis·dom (wzdm)
1. The ability to discern or judge what is true, right, or lasting; insight.
2. Common sense; good judgment: "It is a characteristic of wisdom not to do desperate things" Henry David Thoreau.
a. The sum of learning through the ages; knowledge: "In those homely sayings was couched the collective wisdom of generations" Maya Angelou.
b. Wise teachings of the ancient sages.
4. A wise outlook, plan, or course of action.
5. Wisdom Bible Wisdom of Solomon.


Wake Up!Opinion; Posted on: 2006-07-28 00:00:25 [ Printer friendly / Instant flyer ]
by Edgar J. Steele Part of a series "The Press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of the government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people." --- Hugo L. Black, U.S. Supreme Court Justice "Our job is to give people not what they want, but what we decide they ought to have." --- Richard Salent, Former President of CBS News "There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it… The business of the Journalist is to destroy truth; To lie outright; To pervert; To vilify; To fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals for rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and or lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes." --- John Swinton, former Chief of Staff, The New York Times (1953) "We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid Galilee of its Arab population." --- David Ben-Gurion, from Ben-Gurion, a Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar (May 1948) I admit it. I'm an Internet news junkie. But it keeps me off the street. Besides, I need something with which to fill my empty hours since I stopped reading newspapers, watching broadcast TV news and listening to broadcast talk radio. Flitting around the Internet globe every morning provides a worldview increasingly different from that afforded by traditional Western media. How do I know that what I read is accurate when it diverges from American news? Honestly, after years of this, I have learned through bitter experience to ask the question the other way 'round. Foreign news sources match up to each other much better and their reporting rings true in a way that Fox News' doesn't. Even the London Times is far more accurate than the LA Times, Washington Post or NY Times these days. Besides, I have repeated experience at being caught up in media events and know from firsthand experience all too well just how much American media twists and distorts, compared to international news sources. There no longer is an American paper worth taking, sad to say. Used to be, the LA Times was dispensed on Washington, DC street corners in those ubiquitous yellow coin-operated boxes ... and for good reason. These days, I'll check the headlines on major American papers via the Internet, but when I read their articles, it really is to evaluate the degree of slant on a particular story versus foreign reporting. Though bad ever since Nixon was taken down, that slant has grown incredibly steep during the current Bush regime. Here are a few examples, just from the past day's news, most of which you probably never will hear about from American news sources and, if you do, will be tightly spun to support the Israeli party line: 1. Two Lebanese Red Cross ambulances, plainly marked and with emergency lights flashing, were shelled and strafed by low-flying Israeli jets. Each took a precision, laser-guided American-made missile through its roof, precisely in the middle of the cross. Your tax dollars at work, folks. (Cross? Reminds me of a joke: Why did the Jew cross the road? You'll find the answer in my most recent column. Coincidence that the cross was holed dead center? Do you believe in coincidence?) The ambulances carried Lebanese civilians (an entire family) seriously injured in a previous attack upon civilian targets. This is a war crime. 2. Israeli Jets "accidentally" attacked a UN observer post, despite flags and markings clearly designating it as UN and despite unequivocal proof that they knew of it beforehand. American media reported it because the UN is making a big deal about it being intentional, but what isn't being reported is how many times that post was attacked: fourteen times. Four UN observers died. A mistake, says Israel. Fourteen coincidental mistakes. Do you believe in coincidence? Like Israel's 1967 repeated attacks upon the USS Liberty, this is a war crime, but America's veto will prevent the UN from lodging even a formal complaint. Also like the USS Liberty: Do you suppose the UN observers were observing something that Israel did not want reported? Or do you believe in coincidence? 3. Israel told Lebanese civilians to get out of harm's way in southern Lebanon, then proceeded to bomb the roads and bridges necessary for that exit. Not satisfied, Israel then fired upon Lebanese families on the open road who were trying to leave, just as they had been told to do by Israel. One of those families was in the ambulances noted above. This is a war crime. 4. One-third of the casualties in Lebanon are children, proving that Israel not only is not attempting to miss civilians, but is actively targeting them (as if the point directly above did not prove that all by itself). This is a war crime. 5. Israel is employing true weapons of mass destruction (banned internationally) - both antipersonnel cluster bombs and chemical weapons that burn people in a way doctors never before have seen. These chemical weapons victims are all civilians, 25% of them children. Go here for some truly grim pictures of what Israel has wrought. This is a war crime. 6. The full extent of Lebanon's destruction by Israel, resulting in the displacement of 800,000 civilians so far, makes plain the intent to extinguish it as a nation, yet another war crime. 7. For sure, you will not be shown this short video made by Iraqi defenders and directed to us, the American people. 8. Supposedly, this is all about two soldiers kidnapped by Hezbollah. However, though initially reported correctly - that the two Israeli soldiers were inside Lebanon when captured - the media spin changed the affair into a kidnapping from within Israel after day one. Here - let me give you a single Internet news amalgamator so you can take a short cut to reality if you so desire: . You will get from that site a smorgasbord of world reporting that has the site owner's slant, to be sure, but notice how he throws in a good deal of American reporting for balance, too. If I had to be marooned on a desert island and could take only one Internet news site access with me, it would be I've noticed a pattern in American reporting: At the outset of any new and startling event, the reporting almost is accurate, if grotesquely incomplete (we never get pictures of dead civilians in Palestine, for example). However, once the party line gets laid down, anywhere from 8 to 24 hours later, the reporting changes and goes into lockstep. For example, during the first 24 hours of the reporting about the Oklahoma City bombing of the Murrah Building (you know - Timothy McVeigh and his incredible plant-food bomb), a lot of truth got reported by local and national news sources. Truth like unexploded bombs being carried out of the building by bomb squad members ... two explosions ... two men in the Ryder rental truck parked in front of the building ... that sort of thing. Then came the lockdown across every single media outlet and the party line emerged: one explosion ... one guy in the truck ... no bombs in the building ... militia bad guys responsible, etc. Early footage that conflicted with the party line went down the memory hole, thereafter accessible only from videotapes made by private citizens from the start of coverage. I mention the OKC bombing for a reason: that was the single event in which I chose to immerse myself so deeply that I could not fail to learn whether or not our government was involved, even if only after the fact. What I learned was to confirm my then-growing suspicions and was, in fact, bone chilling: America's current government gladly will kill its own citizens (that's you and I, boys and girls) in a heartbeat in order to advance a political point or to consolidate and increase its power. A couple of my very earliest Internet essays, back in pre-9/11 2001, concerned OKC, with one presenting an in-depth report and recap of all the evidence supporting my conclusions: Dr. McStrangeveigh - or, How I Learned to Start Worrying and Hate the OKC bomb . I challenge you to read it and not come away with my conclusion, incidentally. Here's how I explained, at that time, why I decided to get involved in that mess in the first place: "For some reason, it has seemed important for my own personal progress to get as close to the bottom of this matter as I could. Not because I could reach any insight that hasn’t already been attained by others with better research skills than my own, but because I seem to have chosen this single event as the one with which to reach a decision about my government … our government, that is. The OKC bombing has drawn me like a magnet and forced me to ferret out as much as I could, with the idea that, once I got to the bottom of things, I finally could choose up sides in this brewing rebellion that seems destined to split apart our country. Not because of OKC itself, you see, but because of it and so many other things to which OKC seems to be related: Waco, Trade Center bombing, TWA Flight 800, Ruby Ridge, Vince Foster and Ron Brown, among so many others. The relationship isn’t necessarily direct, though many of the same faces do seem to be appearing again and again. The appearance of impropriety was passed long ago and the time has come, for me at least, either to put aside all this 'conspiracy theory' crap or to take the red pill and wake up. I have reached my decision and fear that I am lost, never again to be normal." Nor have I been the same since. I already had awakened prior to my OKC investigation, but that investigation provided the bedrock for my new world view. Merely allowing yourself to read this essay indicates that, at a minimum, you are on the cusp of awakening, in case you were wondering. Time now is very short. Already, it is too late to prevent the economic collapse of the American economy. It may be too late to prevent World War III and America's certain destruction. But there still is time to prepare for the recovery. New America. An idea whose time has come.
Source: Author



Edgar J. Steele, Attorney at Law

PO Box 1255Sagle, Idaho 83860
Admitted in Idaho, Oregon, Washington & California
Edgar Steele is an author and trial lawyer who has tried cases throughout the West Coast, being admitted to California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, several Federal District and special courts and the U.S. Supreme Court.
He graduated from the University of Washington with a BA in 1967, then served four years in the U.S. Coast Guard, first aboard ships, then as the Commanding Officer of an East China Sea island LORAN Station during the Viet Nam era.
Edgar graduated from the University of California at Berkeley with an MBA in 1973, then worked for several years in a succession of financial executive positions for corporations, including the Controllership of two companies.
He graduated from the UCLA School of Law in 1982, worked for a couple of years for a small law firm in the San Francisco Bay Area, then struck off on his own.
Today, his law practice is noteworthy for cases that test the limits of constitutional law on behalf of politically-incorrect clients.
Edgar publishes a weekly commentary via the Internet, interspersing observations on the state of American society and politics with reports about aspects of the higher-profile cases he is handling. Free subscriptions are available at
Though Edgar speaks infrequently in public, he has appeared on virtually every national TV network news program and been interviewed repeatedly for Today, Good Morning America, The Early Show, Fox News, Dateline, NBC Nightly News, Court TV (which devoted a full week of broadcasting to one of Edgar's trials recently), Geraldo and CNN, as well as countless local television news programs and radio talk shows throughout America, in connection with both his writing and the high-profile cases he has handled.
Edgar's recent book, "Defensive Racism," an unapologetic examination of racial differences, can be previewed and ordered at
He makes his home in Northern Idaho with his wife of 19 years and their three children on a working horse ranch.
Edgar wants it known that he, himself, is exceedingly politically incorrect.

Wednesday, July 26, 2006


"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. . ."
President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Farewell Speech, 1961


This link will take you to a video about the build up our military, and it is "why we fight." It takes the viewer from World War II up to present day, from the dropping of the atom bomb in Japanese territory and fighting the Nazis to the present day of fighting to spread democracy to the middle east and eliminate the world of terrorism. But, you will see the bigger picture. The bombs made by Raytheon and other defense contractors, where one woman talks about how it bothers her when she sees a bomb dropped and wonders if she helped to produce it. This lady goes on to say that she would "rather be making toys for Santa Claus." The film shows the reality of how defense contractors flood money into congressional districts to make sure that they are awarded contracts.

I was born in 1954, and I like to think of my toddler days as the good ole days, but the film talks about the fact of how dangerous that period really was. This made me remember how my mother purchased extra canned goods, as the household budget would allow because of the "fear" that was pushed in the media that the Soviet Union had all of these weapons headed for our shores. Then I remembered standing in lines at the armory in Madison, Indiana to get the small pox vaccination and everyone in the town seemed to be there in the line. It makes me think of the "bird flu fear" that is now being pushed and hyped. And this leads to drug companies making profits producing vaccines that may be for false threats, but how do we know. Who can we trust? We are supposedly the spreaders of Democracy, but we are forced to live in fear, fear of the boogie man; fear of horrible plagues; fear and sympathy that someone way far away is being mistreated by their tyrannical leader. We were the government at one time, and were never supposed to be reduced to being swept up by fear. Fear allows leaders to mislead and manipulate the public, and we are at a point in history where most people do not know why we are in Iraq. It cannot be tied to 911, but some think that. Some think the war is about oil, and some people hate the government no matter what and burn our flag. But I have figured out that war is our survival because we have allowed the military complex to grow and grow unchecked. Most people vote for a politician to send them to Washington DC to bring back the bacon, and the majority of the bacon is related to defense spending right here in Georgia. The soldiers fight because that is their job, and most go about their daily lives never giving the sacrifice of these brave soldiers a second thought. The soldiers are fighting for freedom in the hearts and minds of most, but in reality they are pawns on the chess board for those of us that live off their sacrifice to gain temporary treasures on Earth.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006


Behind the Headlinesby Justin
April 29, 2002

Socialism is dead everywhere – except Israel
If war is the health of the State, as Randolph Bourne put it, then the Israeli state must be bursting with a monstrous vitality – and so it is. The beleaguered and shrinking private sector groans under the burden of a parasitic state that grows fat on an endless stream of American "aid," both economic and military. As the Israeli economy goes into another of its periodic tailspins, and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's "right-wing" government calls for higher taxes and "belt-tightening," one can almost hear the cry to bail out our good and faithful ally even before it is uttered. Anticipating this, why not examine just what sort of economy we are subsidizing – and ask what we're getting out of it.
Israel was conceived in the minds of its original founders and supporters as an explicitly socialist state. The very idea of private property was anathema to the founders of the state of Israel, who were socialists almost to a man. However, the early success of the Zionist project demonstrated, not the superiority of socialism over capitalism, but quite the opposite. As Alvin Rabushka points out, prior to independence, virtually all investment in the country was private, involving the purchase of land by private individuals and the dispensing of private funds raised by the Zionist organizations abroad. But it wasn't just ideology that prompted the still-birth of the Israeli private sector. After independence, private capital investments in Israel contracted to no more than 15 percent of the total between 1948 and 1990. The reason: German reparations. Rabushka writes:
"In what must rank as one of the great ironies in economic history, German reparations financed the transformation of Israel from a private-investment, private-enterprise, free-market economy to a socialist system that fulfilled the vision of Jewish leftists…. The German government gave $850 million, a huge sum at the time, to the government of Israel as collective compensation for the millions of Jews who died at the hands of the Nazi regime and had their property stolen."
Instead of being used to build the infrastructure so sorely needed by the infant economy, however, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion handed the dough over to the Jewish Labor Organization, the Histadrut, which established a network of state-owned enterprises. No private company or individual was allowed title or access to their own piece of personal "compensation." Instead, in accordance with their socialist ideology, the funds were administered by "the workers" – that is, by their alleged representatives in the Histadrut and the various political parties, who appointed the boards of directors and allocated the cash.
Rabushka minces no words in characterizing the Israeli economy as socialist through and through:
"It is important to point out that the Central Bureau of Statistics describes business activity in Israel under the rubric of the business sector, not the private sector. The business sector in Israel is not really private in the meaningful sense of the word."
Created by German reparations, Israeli socialism quickly strangled any emerging free markets, and, over the long stretch of the Israeli Labor Party's unbroken rule, "a system of almost total identity between political and economic power" – as Israeli economist Yair Aharoni describes it – was created that persists to this day. The defeat of the Laborites by the Likud did not change matters: "This high level of political involvement was a major characteristic also of the governments created by the Likud parties," Aharoni writes, who, if anything, deepened Israel's commitment to the centrally-planned economy:
"Despite a wider recognition that market forces may be a better means for resource allocation decisions, government bureaucracy and politicians found it extremely hard to give up even a little bit of their cherished power. Despite much preaching, government intervention deepened; and the diverse methods of the intervention continued, irrespective of the party of power. Government intervention shifted from rationing, ad hoc decisions and administrative controls to the control of virtually all sources of capital and their administrative allocation at varying rates of subsidy."
The great hope of the Zionist ultras, Bibi Netanyahu, when he was Prime Minister, accelerated the process of complete statization in a "right-ward" direction: handing out hundreds of millions in subsidies to the religious parties, the kibbutzim, and the privileged caste of bureaucrats, their offspring, sycophants, and other socialist spear-carriers. All were allowed by Netanyahu to feed ceaselessly at the public trough. A trough, one notes, that is regularly filled to the brim with over $3 billion per year in American aid (a figure that doesn't include loan guarantees and special financial arrangements that give the Israelis an extra bang for their buck). In a wonderful article by Zev Golan, associate director of the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS) in Jerusalem, the key to understanding the Israeli economy is contained in a single axiom:
"An entire country is on the dole. The huge amount of foreign aid that comes in props up a bankrupt socialist system and prevents Israel's private sector from making any real progress. Those in power live off the money of others and live for it.
"This system is that which keeps the public-sector half of Israelis on top of the other half. This holds for Labor Party officials, or party-appointed officials, as well as Likud, for Jewish Agency officials, as well as state-paid rabbis. This sector's main purpose lies in preserving its domination over the productive sector, over the private sphere, in perpetuating itself. To this purpose it will subsume any other interests – economic growth, moral integrity, political independence."
Well, then, the answer is to reform, to privatize, to institute a free market revolution in the only supposedly Western country left in the socialist camp. But that isn't going to be so easy.
Indeed, it may be impossible, given not only the exigencies of war, but, more importantly, the peculiar imperatives of a settler colony superimposed on the economy by the very nature of the Zionist project. As Aharoni points out, in Israel:
"The criteria for the existence of an economic entity were never its efficiency or its competitive strength. Rather, it was the ability of the unit to create employment. Israel also attempted to shield business firms from competition, thus creating a business culture in which export based on competitive advantage is neither nourished nor preferred."
In short, the Israeli government has, from the beginning, been concerned not with economic efficiency but in winning the demographic battle. The essentially military tasks of pushing the previous inhabitants out and creating a territorially contiguous and defensible state overrode purely economic considerations, as they always do. Given the egalitarian and socialist roots of Zionism, it was only natural for the embryonic Israeli state to offer newcomers generous housing and other subsidies in addition to government-created jobs. But it is difficult to imagine that Israel could have survived otherwise. The Zionist movement could call on the Jews of the world to commit to aliya, and come live in the land God had promised them, until they were blue in the face, but if they didn't offer guaranteed jobs and other inducements, the number of immigrants would have been radically reduced.
Israel, a socialist Sparta, could never adopt radical free market reforms and still retain its identity as a distinctively Jewish state. Multiculturalism – in the truest, and only meaningful sense of that much abused term – is the inevitable result of free commerce: laissez-faire dissolves artificial boundaries of race and religion and divides the world up into natural geographic and economic units. It also tends to wash away irrational prejudices, which soon become economically not viable. In undergoing a free market revolution – not just privatizing garbage collection and legalizing cloning, but unchaining the small private sector, eliminating religious-based immigration, and dismantling the Israeli welfare state, including the settlements – Israel would become something completely other than what its founders envisioned: a free market Athens where religion is entirely a private affair.
Unfortunately, Israeli society is presently headed in the opposite direction, towards Sparta, and is now embarked on a campaign of conquest that aims at driving the Palestinians out of the occupied territories and into Jordan. The recent military operation had all the earmarks of a classic ethnic cleansing operation: or else why level the Palestinian Education Ministry, the Department of Public Works, and physically destroy entire communities?
Jenin exemplified the foreign policy of a national socialist regime in action, but this missive from the IASPS – "Fascism in Israel?" – puts Israeli domestic policy in the proper perspective. IASPS reports on a meeting held late last year where Israel's economic leaders met and established a task force to bail out the sinking economy. The group's prescription: a freeze in public sector wages and a freeze in lay-offs, more inflation, and increased subsidies for the industrial dinosaurs of the state-owned sector. This decision was made by the Finance Minister, the Governor of the Bank of Israel, the head of the Manufacturers Association and the Histadrut labor union boss. In short:
"There it is: money, big government, big business, and big labor, the cornerstones of the fascist economy. But not everyone is equal in the fascist state. Some are more equal than others. In this case, Histadrut rules the roost. Peretz warned that any deal will not be 'on the workers' backs.' 'After all, said Peretz, 'the economy belongs to the workers. Governments rise and fall, but the workers remain constant.'"
The difficulty of being a libertarian or a libertarian sympathizer in the Israel of today is reflected in the bitterly despairing tone of the writer's concluding remarks:
"It's reassuring in this age of globalism, multi-national corporations, capitalism, and markets, that Israel can remain true to its economic heritage: the fascist state led by the workers."
It is surely among the most ludicrous ironies of history that, having defeated two forms of socialism in the past 50 or so years – one on the battlefield, and the other in the hearts of men – the US is now supporting, single-handedly, one of the last socialist regimes on earth. This is particularly odd, coming from a Republican administration that trumpets its desire to spread free markets far and wide. We are often told that the moral superiority of Israel is inherent in its democratic form of government. But there's a slight problem: in a democracy you can vote yourself a guaranteed annual income at somebody else's expense, and, in Israel's case, that somebody boils down to you, the American taxpayer.
Thanks to you, the American taxpayer, the socialist ideal didn't die with the collapse of the old Soviet Empire. You are paying for Israeli socialism, including for the provocative settlements the purpose of which is only to create a pretext for war. You are footing the bill for those American-provided tanks rolling over Ramallah and an army outfitted with the best weapons US tax dollars can buy. US aid to Israel has been increased, yet again, and still it isn't enough. The Israeli economy is on the brink of collapse, and, although Israeli officials are trying to blame skyrocketing deficits on the war, it seems that isn't the whole story, as the Los Angeles Times reports:
"Israeli officials have blamed the nation's economic ills, including a budget deficit of about $2.7 billion, primarily on the latest violence, but other analysts say the conflict is only partly to blame. Several say the government's budget, passed two months late in February, was bloated from the start. Nonetheless, 'wars cost money and a lot of it,' Finance Minister Silvan Shalom said as he urged Israelis to tighten their belts and support the government's proposals for spending cuts, tax hikes and salary freezes. Speaking with Israel Radio, Shalom said the nation needs to embark on an economic 'Defensive Shield' program, akin to the army's just-completed West Bank offensive of the same name."
Oh, yes, that's just what Israel needs – and we know who's going to be paying for it. But it isn't just the cost to the overburdened US Treasury. A larger point needs to be made here by asking: what is it buying us?
The system described by Zev Golan – a self-perpetuating kleptocracy such as existed in the former Soviet Union – is empowered by war, and so the war will continue. As long as Israel is in a state of perpetual conflict with its neighbors, and the US aid machine keeps running, the socialist power elite who run the country will maintain and extend their power. This accounts for the intractability of the Israelis in negotiating a fair peace.
Israel must be geographically contiguous, the early Zionists declared: they would not have been content with disparate Bantustans, broken up by settlements and "Arab only" roads. But the Palestinians are not to be so favored. A peaceful compromise and the evolution of a bi-national solution to the Palestinian question would reduce the rationale for overseas aid, both governmental and private, and threaten the perks and privileges of Israel's state-supported middle and upper classes. Therefore, it will never happen, unless….
Imagine that George W. Bush becomes half the President his father was and decides to play the aid to Israel card. As unlikely as that seems, just bear with me for a moment, and conjure a picture of Dubya getting up there and, instead of begging and pleading and cajoling the Israelis to please, please, pretty please get out of the occupied territories, the President declares: get out, or else the free ride is over.
Don't think he couldn't get away with it. He's given Sharon every opportunity, every benefit of the doubt – and enough rope to hang himself with. The President has allowed the US to be humiliated in the eyes of the world, as the Israeli tail seems to be wagging the American dog, and suddenly George W. Bush seems less presidential. Bush's personal authority has been diminished by Sharon, and there is only one way to reassert it – and, at the same time, assert the primacy of raw American power, i.e. economic power.
He's said "get out" three different times, three different ways. Now is the time to add: or else! The sheer unilateralist verve of such an action would immediately restore his stature, and also mute the protests of the "Israel First" wing of the conservative movement – which would be so stunned, at first, that they wouldn't know how to react.
Congress would never go along with it, you say, but a President emboldened by a steely determination – or a sense of crisis – could simply issue an executive order and assert the vast powers granted to him, purportedly to safeguard the "national security." With the stroke of a pen he could prevent the transfer of any aid to Israel and bend Sharon to his will. Abroad, the American President would be hailed for standing up to the Israelis, while at home he would face a storm of protest – but only from a very small, if quite noisy, minority. The majority of Americans, I believe, would admire the unilateral boldness of such a decisive act, while readily absorbing the lesson that we have to lay down the law to our alleged allies as well as to our adversaries. And if Sharon and his supporters in this country raise too much of a ruckus, if the fight gets particularly ugly, I'm sure the President has at least a couple of dimes he can drop on the Israelis.
It's a fantasy, I admit, but as the President's poll numbers keeping ominously dipping, and Sharon's defiance continues to diminish the American President's stature on the world stage, some in the administration who call for a more even-handed approach to the Middle East may gain Dubya's ear. Perhaps his father can talk some sense into him. An article in Slate reminds us that the elder Bush once openly complained, during a 1991 White House encounter with the press, about the strength of the Israeli lobby on Capitol Hill. "On another occasion," writes Anne E. Kornblut,
"Bush reminded his critics that the United States gives 'Israel the equivalent of $1,000 for every Israeli citizen.'"
Will Dubya listen to the good advice of his father, or will he be bullied into allowing himself to be made into a fool? The education of George W. Bush is looking like it's going to be a long and tortuous procedure, and rather painful for the President as well as the country, but it appears some progress has been made. The Saudi peace plan, a comprehensive framework for ending the stand-off, has been endorsed in principle by the US, and Powell did, after all, meet with Arafat, a symbolic gesture of great import for both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Ah yes, one recalls the first Bush administration, when the President of the United States and his advisors didn't take orders from their satellites, with a pang of genuine nostalgia. Why, I remember that era of legend, when a Secretary of State could get away with cursing out American supporters of Israel – even using the "f"-word! – in what he thought was a private conversation, noting that "they didn't vote for us anyway." Will those halcyon days ever return?
The politics of this issue would seem to dictate it. Since the Democrats, led by Senator Joe Lieberman and Dianne Feinstein, are staking out a position of 100 percent unconditional support for Sharon, James Baker's cold political calculation seems right on the mark this time around, too: those voters for whom support to Israel is the number one priority are already lost to the other party. If and when the President chooses to butt horns with Sharon, the political costs are bound to be manageable. Most Christian fundamentalists, whose allegiance to Israel is based on theology, will grumble, a very few will defect, and the rest will go along with the program, since they have nowhere else to go.
In the end, of course, it all depends on the President of the United States, his personal character, his inner life, his influences, his whims – and his integrity, or lack of it. The fate of the Republic, and the world, rests on the whims, the moods, the knowledge – or lack of it – of a single individual, one elevated to heights of power so dizzying as to drive any ordinary man over the brink of madness. That's what we bought into when we voted to give up our old Republic for an Empire.
Er, uh, but I don't remember voting on that – do you?
Please Support
Antiwar.com520 S. Murphy Avenue, #202Sunnyvale, CA 94086


Justin Raimondo (born November 18, 1951) is a libertarian/paleoconservative author and the editorial director of the website He has been involved in a variety of political efforts from his base in the San Francisco Bay Area.

During the 1960s, Raimondo took a brief interest in the philosophy of Ayn Rand before joining Young Americans for Freedom. In the 1970s, he became active in the Libertarian Party. With Eric Garris, he organized a "Radical Caucus", which brought Raimondo and Garris to the attention of the influential libertarian theorist Murray Rothbard. In 1983, after a schism in the party, Raimondo left the Libertarian Party and attempted to organize a libertarian faction in the Republican Party known as the Libertarian Republican Organizing Committee. After 1989, Raimondo again began working with Rothbard in the anti-war John Randolph Club.

Recent activities
In the 1996 U.S. congressional elections Raimondo ran as a Republican candidate in California's 8th district against Nancy Pelosi. While championing conservative and libertarian causes in general the main emphasis of his campaign was his opposition to the deployment of U.S. troops in the Balkans and, in particular, Pelosi's vote to that effect. Raimondo received 13% of the vote while Pelosi got 85%. [1]
During the 1992, 1996, and 2000 presidential elections, Raimondo supported the campaigns of Pat Buchanan, both as a Republican and in the Reform Party. Being an openly gay man, his support of the social conservative Buchanan attracted considerable attention [2]. In 1995, during the Clinton administration's military interventions into the Bosnian war, Raimondo and Garris launched to provide a platform for their opposition. The site has continued to publish regular columns. Raimondo has been a vocal critic of the invasion of Iraq and the ongoing occupation. In 2004, he supported Ralph Nader for President, and explained his reason for this in an article published in The American Conservative [3].

BY BEEBEE: There are many that will throw daggers at people for reading and listening to other points of view. I know because I was one of those people, and I thought well Fox News is reporting the war this way so it is the gospel. After waking from my stupor, I now know that all media outlets have an agenda. Some may say, I have an agenda, too. But for anyone following me as I wind down the path of more and more knowledge to be gained, they can attest to the fact that I have evolved from a follow the leader mentality to a view the world with great skepticsm blogger. I have had people throw slanders at me on a local blog, that Linda has David Duke as a link. Linda is therefore anti-semitic and a racist. Look what political correctness has created in this world. In the United States, we have the First Amendment and you would think that we were living under the iron thumb of the old Soviet Union. My faithful readers know that I love old 70s songs, and always have a lyric that I dig out of my memory bank. So here is a line from a lyric for the moment, "there ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys...its just you and me...and we got to get along." I think this is the way the song goes, but I will look it up later and the artist that made it a hit. That is supposed to be America, right? United we stand and divided we fall is in our very Pledge of allegiance, but those afraid to challenge the status quo and not fit in will destroy anyone that says anything those in CONTROL rules may not be debated or even read. Do you think that our founders meant for the United States to be this way? Open up your mind, and read different view points. You don't have to believe everything you read, but if you fail to learn on your own, then you become a mere puppet for the puppet masters.